Outrage: Some Banks Are Too Big to Prosecute
Photo Credit: Shutterstock.com
Alternet, March 7, 2013 |
For
years, the Obama Administration has been pummeled for failing to bring
criminal charges against a single major Wall Street bank or a single
leading Wall Street banker for what the FBI termed an “epidemic of
fraud” that blew up the entire economy. Investigations revealed the
banks committed routine fraud in peddling mortgage securities they knew
were garbage, trampled basic property laws, laundered money from Iran,
Libya and Mexican drug lords, conspired to game the basic measure of
interest rates and more. Yet, time after time, the Justice Department
and regulatory agencies settled for sweetheart deals, with no admission
of guilt, no banker held accountable, and fines that were the equivalent
in earnings of a speeding ticket to the average family.
Yesterday
Attorney General Holder stated openly what was already apparent. The
Justice Department believes that Too Big to Fail Banks are Too Big to
Jail. Criminal indictments against banks or leading bankers might
endanger the economy and thus were too big a risk.
Here’s what Holder said
“I
am concerned that the size of some of these institutions becomes so
large that it does become difficult for us to prosecute them when we are
hit with indications that if you do prosecute, if you do bring a
criminal charge, it will have a negative impact on the national economy,
perhaps even the world economy,” he said. “And I think that is a
function of the fact that some of these institutions have become too
large.”
Holder
was responding to questions by Republican Senator Charles Grassley
about why the Justice Department brought no criminal charges against the
large British bank HSBC after it admitted laundering money for parties
in Iran, Libya and Mexican drug lords. The Attorney General
acknowledged that the sheer size of the big banks “has an inhibiting
impact on our ability to bring resolutions that I think would be more
appropriate. That is something you (members of Congress) all need to
consider.”
Foam the Runway
Allowing
the big banks to operate above the law is at one with the philosophy
that guided both the Bush and the Obama administrations during the
financial collapse. Tim Geithner, former head of the New York Federal
Reserve bank under Bush and Treasury Secretary under Obama, would preach that
it was necessary to “foam the runway” to protect the banks from total
crackup. That “foam” included literally trillions in the backdoor
bailout of banks organized by the Federal Reserve, abandoning the
underwater homeowners who were victimized by Wall Street’s wilding,
while neutering any regulatory or criminal accountability.
Above the Law
Holder’s
outrageous admission means that bankers operate – and know they operate
– above the law. That renders all the argument about regulations and
legal limits risible. Bankers spend tens of millions lobbying to weaken
regulations and starve regulators of authority and resources. But when
the action gets hot, the bubble starts to build, the music keeps
playing, they can trample the laws, mislead the regulators and defraud
their customers, bolstered by the confidence that the laws will not
apply to them.
Holder’s
argument, however, is indefensible. There is no reason a bank with
billions of assets could not survive the indictment of its CEO or CFO.
If the Fed and Treasury can “foam the runway” to protect otherwise
insolvent banks from collapse, they surely could insure that a bank
survives while its executives are held personally responsible for their
crimes. Putting a few bankers in jail and holding them personally
accountable for their frauds would do much to bring sobriety back to
Wall Street.
The
Campaign for a Fair Settlement, of which the Campaign for America’s
Future is a partner, has called on the president to repudiate Holder’s
statement, and to direct the Justice Department to prosecute those who
violated the law. But Holder’s position forces a bigger issue.
Too Big to Be
So
big banks operate above the law. And as the conservative head of the
Dallas Federal Reserve Bank Richard Fischer and many others have argued,
they are not disciplined by the market. They know their losses are
covered, while they pocket their winnings. They have multi-million
dollar personal incentives to leverage up, use other people’s money to
make big bets on high risk operations that offer big rewards. Their
excesses blew up the economy, but they got bailed out and emerged bigger
and more concentrated than ever.
And,
of course, since investors know the big banks can’t fail, the big banks
can attract money at much lower rates than smaller banks, a subsidy
worth about $83 billion a year according to recent calculations by Bloomberg News.
Clearly,
institutions that are above the law and beyond the discipline of the
market cannot exist in their current form. The Congress has only two
choices. The big banks can be nationalized and treated as public
utilities. The public would pocket their profits and cover their
losses. Or the big banks can be broken up, and be accountable to both
the law and the market.
Senators
Sherrod Brown and Jeff Merkley have spearheaded the drive to break up
the big banks. This takes remarkable courage. Brown had to overcome
torrents of big money poured into the effort to defeat him when he ran
for re-election last year.
Now they are gaining unlikely allies. George Will has called on conservatives
to follow Brown to the barricades. Republican Senator David Vitter has
joined in calling for study of the subsidy big banks enjoy. Retired
bankers like John Reed, former president of Citibank have joined with
Dallas Fed President Fischer and others to call for breaking up the
banks.
Can
the big banks be held accountable? Wall Street is a leading source of
funds for both parties. The revolving door between Wall Street and
Washington spins no matter what administration is in power. The Obama
administration has opposed every effort to break up the big banks.
Republicans in Congress have shamelessly offered themselves as Wall
Street’s protectors in exchange for campaign money.
But
Holder’s admission makes action – however improbable – imperative. A
nation of laws and markets cannot abide huge private financial
institutions that are accountable to neither.
Nessun commento:
Posta un commento