President Donald Trump pledged on the campaign trail to “do a big number” on the Dodd-Frank Act.

And now a Republican bill that offers the most sweeping changes to rules crafted following the 2008 financial crisis is now headed to his desk for his signature.


Democrats who supported the bill crafted by Senate Banking Committee Chairman Mike Crapo, an Idaho Republican, have drawn backlash from more progressive members of the party, who argue that a regulatory rollback would make the financial system more vulnerable to another crisis.

Continue reading:  House sends bill loosening banking regulations to Trump’s desk

10 thoughts on “House sends bill loosening banking regulations to Trump’s desk

  1. Regulations are already looser. My credit limits on my cards have jumped up into a range that is literally insane for someone as dirt poor as I am. If I weren’t so anal about not running my cards up to much, I could be bankrupt within a year. This will cause another ’08 all over again, only this time, it will be worse. Democrats who support this shit are worse than the Republicans. Thy infuriate me.

    Liked by 1 person

  2. What keeps smaller banks from doing the same thing…risky ventures…if Dodd Frank is done away with? And if I’m under this article, small banks aren’t even protected now? I’m confused about which type of bank, assuming these rules will go away, will be best to keep your money. I assume FDIC will still apply. And why credit unions over banks? Help😮

    Liked by 1 person

    • This is very complicated, but I’ll try to explain.

      In the 2000s, the real estate market was hot – very hot. The dotcom boom of the 1990s made a lot of middle class folks want to buy their own house. As with all economic booms, profiteers seek to exploit it. Real estate salespeople, mortgage lenders, and others, jumped on the bandwagon – often ignoring rules and guidelines so they could make more money. When mortgage lenders (i.e. banks and other financial institutions) began lending to home buyers who had marginal credit ratings, the problem began.

      Property values soared. To keep the hot market going, credit rating agencies fudged the numbers. A large amount of loans were bad risks and deemed as “subprime” quality. The big Wall Street banks got into the picture by bundling these subprime loans into financial products which they could sell to various investors (e.g. firms who manage employee pension plans). The problem spread.

      These bundled subprime loans were virtually worthless. Property values (i.e. housing prices) eventually collapsed in 2007. The stock market crashed in 2008. Companies went out of business, and workers were laid off. The Great Recession hit hard. Worst of all, the big banks, the insurance industry, and the federal programs intended to back them up had insufficient funds to pay off all claims. It became a worldwide economic catastrophe.

      * * * * *

      The scale of this problem is directly attributable to the huge size of the big Wall Street banks. Smaller banks couldn’t have bundled and sold those worthless subprime mortgages. Dodd-Frank imposed regulations on the big banks intended to keep them from doing similar things in the future. Now that it’s gone, the speculative practices of Wall Street have been unleashed once more.

      If another crisis occurs, it won’t really matter where you keep your money. It will all be vulnerable. I prefer local credit unions (they are generally federally insured also through the NCUA) because I don’t want to support the big banks in any way. They are way too big. They got too big because President Clinton and Republicans destroyed the Glass-Steagall Act of 1933 – in 1999 – which had limited their size and kept their customer deposit accounts separate and protected from their investment banking activities.

      Liked by 3 people

Comments are closed.