{"id":528949,"date":"2010-04-15T17:36:58","date_gmt":"2010-04-15T21:36:58","guid":{"rendered":"http:\/\/washingtonindependent.com\/?p=82461"},"modified":"2010-04-15T17:36:58","modified_gmt":"2010-04-15T21:36:58","slug":"a-repeal-of-the-repeal-of-glass-steagall","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/mereja.media\/index\/528949","title":{"rendered":"A Repeal of the Repeal of Glass-Steagall?"},"content":{"rendered":"

The Huffington Post has two stories on various politicians and policymakers warming to the idea of breaking up big banks and possibly bringing back parts of Glass-Steagall, an act that prohibited companies from mixing insurance, commercial and investment banking functions that Congress repealed<\/a> in 1999, making way for today’s megabanks.<\/p>\n

Shahien Nasiripour reports<\/a> that three Fed governors — heads of three of the Federal Reserve’s regional banks — support ending too big to fail by breaking banks up. “If there was a good way to do so, if you had a clear road map about how you were going to go about it, and why you were going to break them up in this particular way,” James Bullard, the head of the St. Louis bank, said he would support it.<\/span><\/p>\n

And Ryan Grim reports<\/a> that Republican legislators mentioned they might support the “Volcker Rule<\/a>,” an proposal by former Fed President Paul Volcker to restrict proprietary trading<\/a>, where banks make speculative bets for themselves rather than on behalf of customers:<\/p>\n

\n

“Sixty percent of all the banking assets are concentrated in ten banks in the country,” said [Sen. John Cornyn (R-Texas)]. HuffPost asked if he’d support what’s known as the Volcker Rule, an administration plan to split off risky trading done by banks for their own gain from standard commercial banking activities.<\/p>\n

“Yes,” he said, “I think that’s one approach.”<\/p>\n

\n