Obama Proposes New Agency to Fight "Era of Irresponsibility"

Amanda Carey | June 22, 2009

President Barack Obama is tackling special interest groups with renewed zest and determination, and that can mean only one thing: a new federal agency. Announced June 17, the proposed Consumer Financial Protection Agency would heavily regulate banks and lending firms. Specifically, the agency would exist to protect consumers against shady practices when doing mortgage and credit card business with banks during our current "era of irresponsibility."

From Obama's Saturday address:

Some argue that these changes—and the many others we’ve called for—go too far. And I welcome a debate about how we can make sure our regulations work for businesses and consumers. But what I will not accept—what I will vigorously oppose—are those who do not argue in good faith....We’ve already begun to see special interests mobilizing against change. That’s not surprising. That’s Washington.

You know what else is typically Washington? Assuming bad faith on the part of pro-business interest groups (in this case, the banking industry). Obama's reaction certainly isn't surprising.

Pre-housing collapse, consumers were accepting unsuitable loans just as fast as the banks could issue them, so the whole "era of irresponsibility" is really a two-way street here. It's nice that he welcomes debate, though. Obama's chosen method of fixing a problem caused by government regulation with even more unnecessary regulation certainly deserves to be questioned.

Read here for more details about the new agency.

Comments

</|6.22.09 @ 7:20PM|#

Needs a pic

|6.22.09 @ 7:24PM|#

What does "I welcome debate" mean? I had no idea that there was a forum for debating an elected president on the kinds of bills he is willing to write into law. Typical bullshit Obama rhetorical device so people can point and say, "wow, look how open and transperant the new president is."

Mister DNA|6.22.09 @ 7:30PM|#

#:

Needs a pic

Here ya go.

BakedPenguin|6.22.09 @ 7:32PM|#

He's fighting the "era of irresponsibility?" That can only mean he's going to stop spending more money than the government takes in, ending governmental fiscal irresponsibility once and for all, right?

Right? right?

George W. Busho|6.22.09 @ 7:41PM|#

We don't need no stinkin' regulations!

George W. Busho|6.22.09 @ 7:43PM|#

Well, regulations are Gawd's will when it comes to drugs, sex, science, and personal behaviors!

|6.22.09 @ 7:44PM|#

I believe open for debate means, "You guys argue about it all you want and I'll just go ahead and get as much implemented as I can while you're not looking."

Rich|6.22.09 @ 7:50PM|#

Silentz nailed it. Another version for fun: I welcome a debate about how we can make sure our regulations work for businesses and consumers. And I see that a debate has just occurred at reason.com. So, I now continue giving arbitrary power to unelected officials.

|6.22.09 @ 8:11PM|#

I'm _really_ getting tired of "its up to me, one of the Elite, to make your decisions because of my superior responsible-ness, which is in addition to my moral and intellectual superiority, you bunch of farm animals".

hmm|6.22.09 @ 8:16PM|#

Look on the bright side. If he holds true to form they will be hiring all of the morons that failed in the open market. This means the guys regulating will be a clueless bunch of dipshits, kind of like before, that can be easily gotten around. This of course has the down side of exacerbating the business cycle so generate your wealth while you can and get out before the collapse.

Michael Ejercito|6.22.09 @ 8:17PM|#

How about just permitting the irresponsibility and letting the irresponsible reap what they sew?

hmm|6.22.09 @ 8:27PM|#

How about just permitting the irresponsibility and letting the irresponsible reap what they sew?

But what will all of the failures from the last irresponsibility do if they can't get a job with the newest and greatest agency? You heartless bastard! What about those poor people?

|6.22.09 @ 9:31PM|#

Will this be the Czar of Responsibility?

jkp|6.22.09 @ 10:24PM|#

So the Head of State, who has brought us a $1,800,000,000,000.00 annual deficit is lecturing us about irresponsibility?

Hopey McChange|6.22.09 @ 10:37PM|#

jkp, you aren't supposed to pay attention to what I DO, you're supposed to listen to what I SAY. Because I'm, uhh, articulate and uhh, a great speaker.

24AheadDotCom|6.22.09 @ 11:06PM|#

You know what else is typically Washington? Assuming bad faith on the part of pro-business interest groups (in this case, the banking industry).

Has there ever been even a single case where assuming good faith worked out? I mean, worked out for the rest of us, not those taking a taste.

P.S. Up with corporations!

P.P.S. In case anyone replies to this, their responses will almost assuredly be ad homs delivered through sockpuppets, thereby conceding my points and showing the cowardly, childish, anti-intellectual nature of libertarians.

Strat|6.22.09 @ 11:45PM|#

Isn't "articulate" a "codeword?"

You're in trouble now...

Well if his enforcement of "responsibility is some fuzzy bunny _ kinder..oops...I mean "empowering" type...perhaps they won't use SWAT teams when they come to force us to take subprime mortgages and no-doc loans on GM cars.

|6.22.09 @ 11:54PM|#

Jesus-Tapdancing-Christ

All this BS is just baffling. There is not much I can state or argue. It is just that blatantly stupid, ass-backward and big government.

Obama says that we need to be babysat because we (the consumer and citizen) are too irresponsible for spending money we do not have. Talk about the pot calling the kettle black (oh, was that racist?)


24AheadDotCom: Good faith worked for the first 3/4 of our country's existence. It was only recently that the average consumer is to have become this dim-witted, slobbering water head that we are supposed to be.

When I first read that article about seastedding and micronations, I thought the idea was rather stupid. Now I am beginning to think I may be better off braving the ocean on a man-made island. Now all I need is a crap load of 2 liter soda bottles.

mike farmer|6.23.09 @ 12:42AM|#

I hope he starts with the irresponibility of Fannie and Freddie and the special interests which have defended them. Watch out, Barney -- Obama is coming.

|6.23.09 @ 12:59AM|#

I couldn't help myself. The Devil made me do it.

|6.23.09 @ 1:13AM|#

24AheadDotCom says: "P.P.S. In case anyone replies to this, their responses will almost assuredly be ad homs delivered through sockpuppets, thereby conceding my points and showing the cowardly, childish, anti-intellectual nature of libertarians."

Nice Ad Hominem attack yourself, 24. Note: libertarians had NOTHING to do with either this current economic problem (they -- and only they -- have been warning about this for years), nor for the bogus way the government is trying to "fix" it. If you recall, Libertarians were not even allowed into the more important Presidential debates. So go blame someone else, okay? Like maybe your own party. Because it was that party, along with the other major party, that have caused all of this crap.

As for the people who bought homes being responsible for this mess... wait just a minute. Certainly they deserve some of the blame, but it was the financial corporations, the ones who are supposed to be the "experts" on the matter, who were CONVINCING people that they could, indeed, buy homes when in fact their income was insufficient. So way more than half the blame is on their side. They were in fact the experts, and they led many, many people astray.

hmm|6.23.09 @ 1:15AM|#

Does this mean when I procrastinate the honey-do-list and go blow a few hundred dollars on guns, or brewing crap, or other irresponsible activities that I will have to file out a government form? Or will they just send a courtesy SWAT team to alert me of my altercation with the law?

Kyle Jordan|6.23.09 @ 1:21AM|#

"All this BS is just baffling. There is not much I can state or argue. It is just that blatantly stupid, ass-backward and big government."

The sad thing is I've felt like thise for a while and it's only gotten worse. I have no idea how much further it will go. Kind of scary.

Oh btw, shut the fuck up lonewhacko.

The Angry Optimist|6.23.09 @ 1:43AM|#

In case anyone replies to this, their responses will almost assuredly be ad homs delivered through sockpuppets, thereby conceding my points and showing the cowardly, childish, anti-intellectual nature of libertarians.

I just want it on the record that I, a cowardly, ad-hom slingin' libertarian, substantively responded to Chris Kelly aka Lonewacko here by simply asking him what was wrong with remittances. He claimed that they are bad public policy.

He has thus far refused to respond.

LarryA|6.23.09 @ 2:14AM|#

But what I will not accept-what I will vigorously oppose-are those who do not argue in good faith...

those who do not argue in good faith = those who come up with answers I don't like

We've already begun to see special interests mobilizing against change. That's not surprising. That's Washington.

We've already begun to see special interests mobilizing for change. That's not surprising. That's Democrats. (And Republicans.)

Announced June 17, the proposed Consumer Financial Protection Agency would heavily regulate banks and lending firms.

I could get more worried about this if I thought Americans were going to have diddly-squat to save, or (given that government's going to provide everything we need free) any reason to borrow.

|6.23.09 @ 3:35AM|#

--== Cougarster.Com ==-- Best Cougar dating site in the world!
It's where cougars and younger men can meet(Cougar is the slang for woman who is mature, experienced and want to date with a younger man). No matter you are looking for a NSA or serious relationship, please do check it out!!

Clinger|6.23.09 @ 4:05AM|#

Obama reserves the right to dismiss anyone with an ad hominem argument should it prove necessary.

Rich|6.23.09 @ 8:28AM|#

From the address: "We will do what is necessary to end this crisis." See, no fine print!

|6.23.09 @ 8:58AM|#

*sigh*

Looks like it's up to me this time.

Shut the fuck up, LoneWhackoff.

|6.23.09 @ 9:01AM|#

*swats at the spambot*

Oh, forget it. Whole country's going to hell, anyway... carry on, spambots and LoneWhackoffs. Looks like the world is yours.

*grumble*

I could probably convince my family to go seasteading. My dad is an old salt, after all. Hubby's in pizza, and everyone likes pizza, right? I don't suppose anyone would want a molecular biologist, but I can always just homeschool the kids.

Who wants to be neighbors on the high seas?

Xeones|6.23.09 @ 9:16AM|#

Who wants to be neighbors on the high seas?

Ooh, ooh! My hand is raised so hard right now.

Alternately, since i don't have a boat, i'm working on increasing my self sufficiency on land to the point that i'll have skills and stuff to barter duty-free on the grey market. Hey, Barack Obama, i pledge to fight irresponsibility -- by undermining the federal gubmint every chance i get.

Scott|6.23.09 @ 9:30AM|#

Oh great. So does this mean that Obama will be taking responsibility for his administration's corruption, creating structural unemployment, and for generally screwing the economy?

Brett Stevens|6.23.09 @ 9:32AM|#

Obama's proposals all seem to fall under a certain heading:

Penalize the successful so that more people can participate.

Since those people are also irresponsible -- after all, banks don't become irresponsible unless their audience is equally clueless -- nothing will change.

hmm|6.23.09 @ 9:53AM|#

Spread the fail. It's the government way.

alan|6.23.09 @ 11:41AM|#

Mr DNA -- is that pic fo' real? You have found my weakness.