Reader Posts
« previous | TPM CAFÉ READER POSTS HOME | next »
Obama, Clinton, and the 2005 Bankruptcy Law
I heard someone on the radio recently claim that Sen. Obama supported the 2005 Bankruptcy Law that was written for credit card companies and by credit card companies. I remembered differently, so I thought I'd check the roll call vote.
Why is this important? Given that we're in an economic downturn, many middle class families are going to be hit hard by this law. Furthermore, Republicans blocked any exemptions for military families and those going into bankruptcy because of health care costs. They also blocked limits on predatory lending. You would think that a contender for the Democratic nomination who was looking out for the economic justice would have voted down this abomination of a bill.
The roll call vote is here.
Obama- NayClinton- Not Present (The only NP vote in the Senate)
Please pass this information along to voters in Texas and Ohio.







Comments (23)
Thanks for posting this! Obama supports regular people; Clinton triangulates.
February 24, 2008 10:15 PM | Reply | Permalink
Thanks for that. I had been under the impression that Clinton voted against it. Was this another weaselly contrivance on her part to help her image with credit card companies when she ran for president?
I hate the so-called Bankruptcy Reform Bill with every bone in my body. Congress was bribed to strip me of a right that I had all of my life, the right to a fresh start.
February 24, 2008 11:14 PM | Reply | Permalink
Nelly,
Where in the US Constitution is there a "right to a fresh start"?
Also, who pays for your delinquent bills?
I'm not unsympathetic, but personal responsibility has to play in here somewhere.
February 25, 2008 3:48 AM | Reply | Permalink
Responsibility is a 2 way street. Banks charged high interest rates to high risk customers, to account for what the risks were. When the rules changed and the risks went down, these banks got a huge windfall from the change.
February 25, 2008 1:57 PM | Reply | Permalink
The day of the vote, Bill Clinton had open heart surgery and Hillary was at the hospital with him.
That is why she didn't vote on the bankruptcy bill.
It's too bad you interpret everything as proof that Hillary is evil. She's not.
February 25, 2008 12:15 AM | Reply | Permalink
Thanks for the heads up, Joel. However, I did not intend to paint Senator Clinton as evil, nor do I believe she is (I'll gladly vote for her if she is the nominee). Obviously I can't speak for other commenters. I wanted to communicate some facts about a serious piece of legislation where Senator Obama cast a moral for economic justice.
BTW, President Clinton didn't have open heart surgery, it was a follow-up surgery to clean up fluid and scar tissue. Nevertheless, it was still a serious procedure.
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/7127096/
February 25, 2008 1:07 AM | Reply | Permalink
I meant to say:
"I wanted to communicate some facts about a serious piece of legislation where Senator Obama cast a moral vote for economic justice."
February 25, 2008 1:13 AM | Reply | Permalink
Hillary's 'excuse' for not voting on the bill was that she was faithfully by her husband's 'awake' elective surgery side --
A surgery that had been put off at least a month because Bill was going to go flying with Bush I.
February 25, 2008 2:48 PM | Reply | Permalink
This is a very important myth about Obama. He did vote against a particular amendment that would have limited interest rates. he voted against it because he thought the limits were too high. Hillary made a point of that vote in some snippy debate awhile back. But when it came to actually voting on the bill, Hillary did not vote. And Obama voted against it.
So there. This misinformation has to be corrected.
Gee -- he should do a flyer about it!
February 25, 2008 11:39 AM | Reply | Permalink
I did not know about Bill's surgery keeping her from voting. I'll accept that, certainly.
But Obama did vote against the bill, and the misconception is out there that he voted for the entire bill. Hillary has helped to fuel that misconception by fuzzying the amendment he voted against and the bill itself.
So there.
February 25, 2008 11:41 AM | Reply | Permalink
This is a great post.
How individual congresspeople knuckle under to the financial services industry is a barometer both on whether or not they are doing the people's work, and to what degree they have been individually coopted. To me, it remarkable they got to Stabenow, that both moderate Florida senators were taken in, and that Clinton chose to sit on her hands.
Remember that no bankruptcy doesn't mean the banks get paid after foolishly or maliciously extending too much credit. But it does mean they will try to ruin the lives of these people. Will they succeed?
The next big crisis will be in student loans.
February 25, 2008 12:11 PM | Reply | Permalink
I believe Obama voted for cloture after voting against the bill. I found out about this the hard way, getting flamed for my mistake.
The usurers' victories go far beyond exorbitant rates - they've truly scored with writing various stealth presumptions (hostile to debtors) into law.
Also, the "fresh start" basis for the law is part of its legislative history, not - of course - part of the Constitution.
February 25, 2008 3:39 PM | Reply | Permalink
Clinton 'recovering normally' after bypass
Monday, September 6, 2004
"Former President Clinton successfully underwent a quadruple coronary artery bypass operation Monday, his doctor said."
http://www.cnn.com/2004/ALLPOLITICS/09/06/clinton.bypass/
Senate Passes Bill To Restrict Bankruptcy
Friday, March 11, 2005;
The Senate approved a measure yesterday backed by the credit card industry that would make it harder for people to wipe out debt through bankruptcy, setting a path for quick passage of the bill by the House within weeks.
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/articles/A24940-2005Mar10.html
Clinton's surgery called success
Friday, March 11, 2005
"Former President Clinton yesterday underwent a nearly four-hour operation to remove what was described as a "thick, rubbery, plaque-like ... peel" from the surface of his left lung."
http://seattletimes.nwsource.com/html/nationworld/2002203787_clinton11.html
February 25, 2008 3:48 PM | Reply | Permalink
This bankruptcy legislation is a disgrace. Regardless of pary affiliation, this legislation is designed to punish the middle class and drive them further in debt and depression.
How can any members of Congress tell their constituents with a straight face that this abomnible legislation is designed to encourage cardholders to become more responsible?
February 25, 2008 3:58 PM | Reply | Permalink
Also from the Seattle Times article:
"Fluid accumulated around the base of his left lung, compressing it and reducing his breathing capacity by about 25 percent. It caused him slight discomfort while walking up hills, which he is doing as part of a post-bypass rehabilitation program. It also made him somewhat winded.
The condition was not life-threatening. His doctors diagnosed it before he went to South Asia last month with former President George H.W. Bush to meet victims of the Dec. 26 tsunami and raise money for relief efforts.
Clinton, 58, is expected to be in the hospital up to 10 days."
But then we have this:
Clinton and the Bankruptcy Law;
"In the late 1990’s, as first lady, Mrs. Clinton became deeply involved in the issue, her first real foray into legislation since the collapse of her health-care effort in 1994. She sought a private tutorial (from Elizabeth Warren) on the subject, worked behind the scenes with members of Congress, wrote public newspaper columns and spoke out against it.
She helped kill one version of it, then another version passed, which her husband vetoed. As a senator, in 2001, she voted for it, but it did not pass.
The bill popped up again 2001, which was Mrs. Clinton’s first year in the Senate. She worked with Republicans on it and was one of 36 Democrats who helped it pass the Senate, saying it had been improved from when she opposed it. Still, this version was vigorously opposed by consumer groups and unions, and ultimately did not become law."
Explaining Senator Clinton’s support for the bill in 2001, Phil Singer, a campaign spokesman, said, “She helped forge a compromise in the 2001 bill intended to ensure that custodial parents got child custody payments.” She opposed the bill later, he said, because “unfortunately, that provision was stripped from the 2005 legislation.”
The bill was always tricky for her because it divided her party as well as two opposing constituencies in New York: banking interests and the unions.
http://thecaucus.blogs.nytimes.com/2007/08/08/clinton-and-the-bankruptcy-law/
February 25, 2008 4:05 PM | Reply | Permalink
Bankruptcy has to do with more than predatory credit. A majority of personal bankruptcies in the US are due to medical crises and the ensuing exorbitant bills. It is especially likely to happen with the uninsured -- hospitals routinely charge uninsured patients anywhere from four to six times what the hospitals would receive for the same service from insurance companies. And they do not "write off" the charges if you don't have the money -- they sue. And yes, "not for profit" hospitals are among the worst. The idea that the working poor get "free" medical care in emergency rooms is an most outrageous lie.
February 25, 2008 6:03 PM | Reply | Permalink
It seems to me you ought to add UPDATE to your post and prominently mention why Hillary wasn't present.
February 25, 2008 6:13 PM | Reply | Permalink
Alas, we mere mortals can't edit our posts, so he can't add the "update". Otherwise, I'm certain he would. (Seriously.)
February 25, 2008 8:36 PM | Reply | Permalink
The best I could do was add a corroborating link and thank the commenter who brought it to my attention. You'll see it is the sixth comment from the top. It is as prominent as I could make it.
February 25, 2008 10:31 PM | Reply | Permalink
Where is the right to privacy in the Constitution?
The 2005 Bankruptcy Abuse Prevention Consumer Protection Act is another one of those creatively named Republican laws that does the opposite of what it sounds like. It protects lenders, not consumers.
As to Nelly's comment, the "fresh start" is one of the cornerstone policies of U.S. bankruptcy law, and the 2005 BAPCPA made it much harder for individuals to file and thereby discharge their debts and get that fresh start. While you are correct that the fresh start is not a Constitutional right, it used to be a statutory right to which most of us were entitled. But individuals must now have so little disposable income to file that almost no individuals qualify and those that can qualify must overcome other procedural hurdles that are beyond the ken of most low-income, usually low-educated debtors, which has led some to argue that BAPCPA returns us to the days of indentured servitude. My .02.
February 25, 2008 6:13 PM | Reply | Permalink
Actually with respect to the 2005 bankruptcy bill, the crucial vote in moving the legislation forward was the cloture vote. Both Clinton and Obama voted "Nay" along with the bulk of progressive Senators.
Once cloture passed the eventual passage of the bill was pretty much a forgone conclusion.
February 25, 2008 9:15 PM | Reply | Permalink
Without deciding whether the BK bill was a good thing or not, I will note that NP is a standard practice used by many politicians; ask Senator Obama he used it many times during his time as a state senator for Illinois.
February 27, 2008 1:46 PM | Reply | Permalink
Without deciding whether the BK bill was a good thing or not, I will note that NP is a standard practice used by many politicians; ask Senator Obama he used it many times during his time as a state senator for Illinois.
February 27, 2008 1:46 PM | Reply | Permalink
Post a Comment