Confused about the Wall Street Reform bill? Here are ten things you need to know about the bill, courtesy of our friends at Americans for Financial Security:

1) End of Too-Big-To Fail: If a big financial firm is failing, it will have only one fate: liquidation. There will be no taxpayer funded bailout. Instead, regulators will have the ability to shut down and break apart failing financial firms in a safe, orderly way – without putting the rest of the financial system at risk, and without asking the taxpayers to pay a dime.

2) Close Loopholes in Regulation of Major Financial Firms: Loopholes that allowed firms like Lehman Brothers, Bear Stearns and AIG to operate without tough standards or oversight were major contributors to the financial crisis. Regulatory reform will close these loopholes, and create accountable regulation for all firms that pose the most risk to the financial system. It will end the ability of financial firms to avoid tough standards by manipulating their legal structure.

3) Bring Transparency to Hedge Funds: Financial reform will require advisers to hedge funds to register with the SEC for the first time, bringing transparency and oversight to these unregulated financial firms.

4) Constrain the Size of the Largest Firms: Financial reform will prevent any financial firm from growing by acquisition to more than 10% of the liabilities in the financial system. This will reduce the adverse effects of the failure of any single firm and prevent the further concentration of our financial system.

5) Reform Executive Pay and Strengthen Shareholder Protections: Financial reform will give shareholders a say in the compensation of senior executives at the companies they own, and require that the compensation committees of corporate boards are independent.

6) Separate Banking and Speculative Trading – the Volcker Rule: Financial reform will protect taxpayers and depositors by separating risky, speculative “proprietary trading” from the business of banking.

7) Strongest Consumer Protections Ever: Instead of seven federal agencies with only partial responsibilities for consumer protection, there will be one agency with the sole responsibility of establishing clear rules of the road for banks, mortgage companies, payday lenders, and credit card lenders and other financial service firms and for enforcing these rules. From now on, every consumer will be empowered with the clear and concise information they need to make financial decisions that are best for them.

8) Crack Down on the Abuses in the Mortgage Markets at the Center of the Crisis: Financial reform will ban abusive practices in the mortgage markets, like those where brokers got paid more to put families into higher priced loans than those they qualified for, and require mortgage brokers and banks to consider a family’s ability to repay when making a loan. The reforms will also require lenders and Wall Street loan packagers to keep skin in the game when selling off loans to investors and make full disclosure so investors know what’s in those packages. Reforms of credit rating agencies will help make sure investors do not rely unwisely on their ratings on these packages.

9) Safer, More Transparent Derivatives Market to Help Main Street Businesses: By bringing the derivatives markets out of the shadows, reform will benefit those businesses that use derivatives to manage their commercial risks. Reform will benefit Main Street companies at the expense of Wall Street’s hidden fees. That’s good for every farmer and every manufacturer that uses derivatives the way they were meant to be used. Derivatives reform also means the taxpayer won’t be on the hook for reckless risks of an AIG.

10) Support Long Term Job Growth by Helping Prevent Future Crises: By making the financial system safer and stronger, reform will reduce the chances that a financial crisis deprives businesses of the credit they need to grow and to create jobs. Financial reform will ensure businesses a more stable and predictable source of credit through the business cycle and reduce the risk of a sharp and sudden cut-off because of financial panic.

Pass this post on.

House Republican Leader John Boehner and his party are carrying water for the Wall Street banksters, and, the Washington lobbyists couldn't be happier. Roll Call reports:

K Street is starting to see red.

With House Republicans poised to make major gains in November and Minority Leader John Boehner working to become the next Speaker, lobbyists are not-so-quietly cozying up to the Ohio Republican...

“I think his presence for some people carries more gravitas than it used to,” said Altria’s top lobbyist, Bruce Gates, who is close to Boehner. “The guy you hung out with at the club, golf course or legislative coalition meeting, suddenly you look at him a little differently...”

A regular on the cocktail and fundraising circuit, Boehner has long been friendly with a number of corporate and contract lobbyists — a network that he is increasingly relying on now as he eyes the Speakership. Altria’s Gates, along with his wife, Joyce Gates, who once served as Boehner’s chief of staff, and Quinn Gillespie’s Lampkin are considered key members of Boehner’s inner circle, as are Gary Andres of Dutko Worldwide, Terry Holt, a former Boehner aide who is now with the Republican lobbying firm HDMK, and John Fish, an in-house lobbyist with R.J. Reynolds Tobacco Co.

Ohio native Steve Clark of Clark, Lytle & Geduldig, his partner Sam Geduldig, who was Boehner’s political director, and Glover Park Group’s Brian Gaston, another one-time Boehner staffer, are also tight with the top House Republican.

“I think that he has an excellent relationship with a lot of people on K Street,” Rep. John Kline (R-Minn.) said. “He raises a lot of money through the Freedom Project, and of course, he transfers a lot of money to the team, to the [National Republican Congressional Committee] and to Members.”

Boehner buddies around with K Street Lobbyists. And, they make handsome contributions to his campaigns. Follow the money and the friendships. It's clear who John Boehner is working for.

A roundup of editorials from across the country clearly demonstrate that the opponents of reform are on the wrong side. Americans for Financial Security reports:

Cleaning up Wall Street: Las Vegas Sun Editorial, May 25: “It is notable that Republicans continue to raise a fuss about the legislation… [Their] comments are also disingenuous. There is no government takeover. Nor is there some “superbureaucracy” in the works to manipulate the way financial institutions lend money. The legislation in Congress would help protect investors and taxpayers from the egregious actions of financial firms, which — as the nation learned — can be calamitous to the economy. The Republicans might remember that millions of Americans were badly burned…Republicans have misplaced their disgust. While they are upset at regulation, Americans are calling for it.”

There's hope for a good financial reform bill to emerge on Capitol Hill: New Jersey Star-Ledger Editorial, May 24: “As the Senate measure is merged with one the House passed last year, compromises will be made and certainly the final bill won’t be ideal. But the signs are good that it will contain some key fixes for our troubled financial system.”

The Springfield Republican (MA) Editorial, May 23: “Passage of the regulatory reform bill is just the beginning of the financial reform process, but it represents a victory for Americans who have suffered because of Wall Street’s excesses…passage of this bill is an important insurance policy against another catastrophic financial disaster.”

Congress correct to move while Wall Street frets: Palm Beach Post (FL) Editorial, May 23: “The bills are similar enough to ensure that the compromise bill will contain solid, beneficial reforms…Most Republicans have opposed the bills even while insisting that they don't want to coddle Wall Street. That tactic isn't working for them, and shouldn't.”

Shorter reins on Wall Street: Cape Cod Times (MA) Editorial, May 23: “In the end, the bill, though not the best it could be, is generally worthwhile…perhaps fewer of those risks will be taken with consumers' money and problems will be detected earlier. If Congress abstains from a new period of deregulation, the next crisis could indeed be comparatively small.”

Chattanooga Times Free Press (TN) Editorial, May 22: “The GOP propaganda against a "government takeover" of the banking industry aside, the bill offers many useful and desperately needed rules to insulate the general economy and innocent consumers from the risks of the banking industry's casino market trading. It would force big banks to spin off some of their lucrative trading businesses into separate subsidiaries, and it would require registry and full market transparency in most trading in derivatives and swaps.”

Wilmington News Journal (DE) Editorial, May 22: “The bill now goes to a conference committee with leaders from the U.S. House of Representatives. The House passed a much more lenient bill in December. That reverses the usual order of things. But the Senate bill is better. It will give consumers better protection and it eases the threat of another "too big to fail" financial collapse.”

Fixing the financial flaws: Los Angeles Times Editorial, May 22: “On Thursday, the Senate passed a bill that would set important new regulatory boundaries for financial companies…One of the Senate bill's biggest contributions would be the creation of a new agency designed to protect consumers of financial products. Existing regulators' prime responsibility is to monitor the safety and soundness of banks, and they've proved that they can perform that task while remaining indifferent to how banks treat their customers…The Senate measure also includes several provisions to avoid future bailouts. It calls for new rules to deter large, interconnected institutions from posing a risk to the entire financial system.”

St. Louis Post-Dispatch Editorial, May 21: “The bill is the most assertive reform of the banking and financial industry since the New Deal. It reforms banking practices. It gives government regulators broad powers to monitor systemic risk to the financial system and wind down troubled financial firms without taxpayer bailouts. It creates a Consumer Financial Protection Agency to police the credit card, auto loan and mortgage industries.”

Trying to tame the financial system: The Oregonian Editorial, May 21: “This is change that most Americans have hungered for…Banks are no longer too big to fail. Hedge funds will be out in the open. Derivatives will be traded on exchanges or markets, where they can be more clearly valued. Insurers will still be regulated by the states, but also overseen by a federal agency that will assess their operations for signs of systemic risk. And consumers will have a new advocate in the form of a federal agency that will oversee mortgages and household credit and debit instruments.”

Grim experience invites the toughest federal financial reforms: Seattle Times Editorial, May 21: “Reconciling the legislation, with an eye toward getting it to President Obama by early July, requires vigilance and care. The wailing echoing from Wall Street and the banking industry over new regulations suggests lawmakers are headed in the right direction. As a rule of thumb, where the bills differ, go with the strictest enforcement…Anyone shocked by rigorous federal oversight, ought to be equally dismayed it is so obviously needed.”

We're on the verge of real Wall Street Reform. While there's certainly more to be done, it's clear that this reform will be historic. History will prove that those who stand with Wall Street are standing on the wrong side.

USA Today called Wall Street Reform a good start, but, noted that there is still work to be done. USA Today notes what the bill does:

The Senate bill would produce the most significant changes to the nation's banking laws since the Great Depression, making this a moment that should not go unnoticed. Among other things, the measure — which must be blended with one passed by the House in December— would require major banks to set aside more cash to cover potential losses. It would put much of the risky, secretive trade in the financial instruments called derivatives onto open markets.

It would create an agency to protect consumers against the kind of predatory lending practices at the heart of the subprime mortgage crisis. And, perhaps most important, it would set up a process for the government to swoop in and liquidate major banks that are failing, much as the Federal Deposit Insurance Corp. does now with regional banks.

They go on to combat the GOP's misinformation campaign:

The measure is not, as some of its critics assert, a vast overreach on the part of government. Nor does it call for future bailouts, as claimed by some Republicans. Perhaps the best evidence of this is that four GOP senators —Susan Collins and Olympia Snowe, both of Maine, Scott Brown of Massachusetts and Charles Grassley of Iowa — supported final passage. That's not a huge number, but it's four more than the number of Republicans who voted for President Obama's health care overhaul.

As they note in the editorial, there's certainly more work to be done. But, this reform is indeed historic and the fearmongering used to attack it just isn't true.

Heather Booth of Americans for Financial Reform called the passage of the Senate bill a "major step forward." We agree. Heather Booth:

Today the Senate took a major step forward on this historic Wall Street reform bill that will hold big banks accountable for costing 8 million Americans their jobs and bringing our economy to the brink of a collapse. The big Wall Street banks are fighting every step of the way to weaken and defeat this bill. Even as the big banks and their buddies in the Senate see the train is leaving the station on Wall Street reform, they are lying down on the tracks, trying to block the engine. While their appalling defense of the big banks has become a predictable pattern, it’s no more tolerable each time it happens.

The Senate bill stops banks from recklessly gambling with our money and sheds light on the behind-the-scenes deals that went on at places like Goldman Sachs.

The bill needs to be further strengthened in negotiations with the House. There are still important issues to be addressed. These changes include Senator Cantwell's language on derivatives and the Reed-Grassley language to make sure private equity managers are regulated. These measures are important to make sure that reform will function as it needs to and loopholes are completely closed. We need the strongest bill possible. We applaud our Senate champions who are fighting for reform.

There's always more work to be done. But, the passage is a major step forward.

As usual, Paul Krugman is spot on:

What’s good? Resolution authority, which was sorely lacking last year; consumer protection; derivatives traded through clearinghouses; ratings reform, thanks to Al Franken; tighter capital standards for big players, although with too much discretion to regulators.

What’s missing? Hard leverage limits; size caps; not much in the way of restoring Glass-Steagall. If you think that too big to fail is the core problem, it’s disappointing; if you think that shadow banking is the core, as I do, not too bad.

There's still work to be done, but, as Krugman wryly notes, thanks to Lloyd Blankfein, we've taken a major step forward:

I think Ed Andrews has it right: not all it should have been, but better than seemed likely not long ago, thanks to a changed climate. Wall Street in general, and Goldman in particular, provided scandals at just the right time. Thank you, Lloyd Blankfein.

People are angry. And, rightfully so. Wall Street is spending millions on well-heeled lobbyists to advance an agenda that puts profits over people.

Late Sunday afternoon, the well-heeled residents of Chevy Chase, Maryland, a bucolic suburb northwest of Washington, DC, witnessed a commotion rare for their neighborhood. Toting signs and megaphones, fired up and chanting at the top of their lungs, some 700 demonstrators from around the nation paid a visit to two residents who work as powerful lobbyists for the United States' biggest banks: Gregory Baer, a deputy counsel for Bank of America, and Peter Scher, a high-ranking executive and lobbyist for JPMorgan Chase.

Bussed into Washington by the Service International Employees Union (SEIU) and National People’s Action (NPA), a community organzing network, the protesters visited Baer's and Scher’s homes as part of a multi-day stand in Washington. On Monday, SEIU and NPA will lead a series of protests on K Street in Washington—a street synonymous with influence and lobbying. The groups are pushing for strong new financial reforms (as teh Senate continues debating legislation to bolster the rules governing Wall Street) and urging banks to stop foreclosures and to promote job creation.

The video from the event is already going viral:

These despicable lobbyists deserve to be called out for selling out the American people to the Wall Street banksters who pay their hefty salaries.

Something strange is happening in Washington. As the Senate haggles over Wall Street Reform, it's getting stronger, not weaker. That's not how Washington usually works. Usually, a stronger bill is introduced and as the lobbyists and special interests poor millions into Capitol Hill, the legislators cave in. It's not happening this time.

Consumer advocates have scored some surprising victories in the overhaul of financial regulations that's gaining momentum in Congress, but amendments to be considered in the coming days will go a long way toward shaping the sweeping measure...

So far, Wall Street's formidable lobbying power has not weakened the bill, as some observers expected. The Senate, for instance, soundly defeated a move by Republicans to limit the powers of a proposed Consumer Financial Protection Bureau.

Meanwhile, lawmakers approved an amendment that would allow the Federal Reserve to cap debit card fees that big banks charge merchants.

"We're winning more than we're losing," says Ed Mierzwinski of U.S. Public Interest Research Group. He partly credits a recent Securities and Exchange Commission lawsuit that accuses Goldman Sachs of failing to disclose key information about an investment it sold in 2007.

It's not just conditions, it is your pressure. So, keep it up. Keep calling your Senators and demanding that they continue to stand up to the Wall Street lobbyists and produce a strong bill that helps working families.

A simple case for the CFPA:

So long as Congress keeps allowing institutions to shop around for the regulator that regulates least -- rather than applying across-the-board rules for each product type regardless of who issues it -- there will be no agency that provides real accountability over the consumer practices of the big banks. The agencies that do have consumer protection authority will continue to chip away at rules in order to attract institutions to regulate and preserve the fees that come with them.

That is why a strong Consumer Financial Protection Agency is crucial. We need an agency that sees consumers, not banks, as its constituents. It also needs enough power to prevent financial institutions from leaving its jurisdiction in search of fairer regulatory pastures.

And, guess who is trying to water down real consumer protections and carry water for the banks?

The amendments proposed by Senate Republicans would fail to accomplish these goals. The details have varied from bill to bill, but the ideas remain the same.

The GOP wants to put the agency under the thumb of existing regulators who have already shown how seriously they take consumer protection. And the Republicans want to dilute the agency’s mission to protect consumers with an obligation not to interfere with bank “safety and soundness,” a phrase that has been manipulated by Wall Street and its allies to exclude meaningful reform.

Fortunately, the Senate has rejected these proposals so far. But the GOP and Wall Street lobbyists will keep trying. Senate Democrats must ensure that good sense prevails.

If the Republicans successfully dilute the power of the consumer financial protection body in this way, we will end up with more of what we have always had: regulators who lack either the appetite or the authority for reining in the risky lending practices that got us into the current financial crisis.

The Republicans are standing with Wall Street and the banksters. Is that where you stand?

Goldman Sachs and other Wall Street fat cats are engaging in a terrible practice: they're creating products, selling them to their consumers and then betting that those products fail. When they fail, the fat cats make out like bandits and their customers are holding the bag. Senator Carl Levin wants to protect consumers from this disturbing practice.

Lawmakers are considering legislation that would ban investment banks from betting against their customers in many circumstances, in a further ripple effect for Wall Street from Goldman Sachs's troubles.

In a statement to The Wall Street Journal, Sen. Carl Levin (D., Mich.) said he is drafting legislation to prevent conflicts of interest by "prohibiting companies from taking the opposite side of the deal for their own account," at least when they are marketing investments they have created themselves.

Mr. Levin and his co-sponsor, Sen. Jeff Merkley (D., Ore.), are aiming to propose an amendment as soon as Monday to the financial-overhaul bill being debated in the Senate.

At a Senate hearing last month in which senators grilled Goldman executives, Mr. Levin focused much of his scrutiny on a handful of deals where he said that Goldman was both constructing subprime-mortgage securities and effectively betting they would fall in value.

Those deals, which carried names like Timberwolf and Hudson, are somewhat different from a 2007 transaction called Abacus that is the subject of civil-fraud allegations by the Securities and Exchange Commission. In Abacus, a hedge fund, rather than Goldman itself, took the "short" side of the transaction, betting the mortgages would decline.

In all of the transactions, a fundamental issue is how much obligation Goldman had—or should have had—to protect its customers' interests. At the Senate hearing, Goldman witnesses frequently spoke in general terms of the firm's role as a "market maker," someone who matches buyers and sellers and can take positions on his own. A market maker's duty to customers is limited.

Mr. Levin says that despite the firm's rhetoric, Goldman's role in the deals under scrutiny was as a securities underwriter or "placement agent," which carries a broader obligation to disclose details about the product. Goldman Sachs doesn't disagree that it was a placement agent in those transactions.

In Timberwolf and similar deals. Mr. Levin says Goldman failed to provide a "full, fair and honest" accounting of its interests.

Corrupt practices by banksters are bringing our economy to it's knees. It's time to pass legislation to bring transparency to the market and protect consumers from these predatory tactics.

Look who wants you to oppose real Wall Street reform:

Payday lenders and check cashers blanketed Capitol Hill last week to challenge the scope of the financial reforms under debate in Congress and combat the industry's reputation as the pariahs of the financial system.

That's right, predatory lenders: the people who prey on the most vulnerable in our society and contribute to our country's personal debt crisis just so they can make a quick buck. They're against real Wall Street Reform because they know what's good for consumers is bad for their predatory business.

Where do you stand? With the predatory lenders? Or, with the consumers?

Wall Street is pouring millions into the coffers of our politicians. But, the voice of the people is stronger than their cynical dollars. We're winning, but, we need to make sure the legislation is as strong as possible.

he Senate on Wednesday approved two amendments to the financial regulatory bill that both Democrats and Republicans claimed would end the prospect of taxpayer-financed bailouts for companies deemed “too big to fail.”

The votes broke a logjam that had paralyzed the Senate floor for much of the last week, and Senate leaders said they were working on an agreement that would allow debate on the regulatory legislation to proceed at a quicker pace.

Let's finish the job. Contact your Senators and urge them to stand with Main Street, not Wall Street.

A few weeks ago, Mitch McConnell didn't have a firm position on the bailout. So, he took a trip to New York. He met in secret with 25 top banksters. He came out of that meeting with a commitment to two the line of the banksters in exchange for far in excess of 30 pieces of silver. Harry Reid called him out for it:

Majority Leader Harry Reid (D-Nev.) threw his attack on the GOP into high gear Wednesday afternoon, accusing Republicans of "making love to Wall Street."

Reid has been slamming Republicans for obstructing progress on financial regulatory reform legislation for as long as its been debated, but Wednesday's move was the most blatant shot at the GOP's motives.

"The Republicans are having difficulty determining how they're going to continue making love to Wall Street," Reid said.

And, Main Street is getting screwed:

Jim Manley, Reid's spokesman, took the description one step further.

"What can I say? It's true," Manley said. "Republicans are making love to Wall Street while main street is getting screwed.”

The American people need more of this tough talk from the Senate Majority Leader. We're sick and tired of our elected officials bowing before the tycoons of Wall Street. We want leadership that stands up for us. More, please.

Wall Street Reform is down to the wire. It's time to take action. Contact your Senators. Visit their office. The push is on!

Chris Cox was head of the SEC when the economy came crashing down. And, he's little more than a Wall Street shill:

THE lawyer solemnly told regulators it would be far too costly for a mutual fund to seek appraisals of its assets, and no appraisals were made. When employees of the investment firm suspected something was amiss, they were reassured when a government auditor pored over the books and concluded that all was well.

And so the fraud continued for more than a decade. It later turned out that the assets sold to investors were largely fictitious, and that the supposed auditor, who presented credentials showing she worked for the California Department of Corporations, was in reality an actress hired by the man running the fraud.

The lawyer who argued that it would be a waste of money to require appraisals is about to be inundated with appeals to reduce the cost of regulation. That lawyer was Christopher Cox, who is likely to be confirmed today as chairman of the Securities and Exchange Commission. Mr. Cox did not know he was representing a crook at the time he wrote the letter. It was years later that William Edward Cooper, whose investment firm Mr. Cox was representing, pleaded guilty and was sentenced to 10 years in prison.

Then, there was a 1985 letter on behalf of the fraudsters. This letter speaks to Mr. Cox's disdain for rules to rules and regulations to keep mortgage brokers honest:

It was on Feb. 22, 1985, that Mr. Cox sent his letter to regulators at the California Department of Corporations arguing that any appraisal of the value of mortgages in the proposed fund would be subjective and worthless, and that the expenditure of fund assets for an appraisal ''would unfairly and unreasonably harm the investors' rate of return.''

INSTEAD, Mr. Cox said, regulators and investors should assume that the mortgages were worth their face amount.

Had appraisals been required for the mortgage pools Mr. Cooper had already sold, a fraud that began in 1982 might have ended. Instead it continued until 1994. More than $100 million was stolen from people who had sought safe investments for their individual retirement accounts.

''There were always red flags, but Cooper was a master at deflecting questions,'' said Roger Rauch, who worked for Mr. Cooper for six years, including a stretch as president of the company's brokerage subsidiary. ''The audit,'' Mr. Rauch said in a telephone interview this week, ''was done to alleviate suspicions, not just mine but those of the salespeople.''

The 1990 report by the fake auditor, in reality an actress who spent three weeks apparently reviewing the books, was a masterpiece. It found a few problems but concluded nothing was really wrong. The employees were reassured.

The 1985 letter Mr. Cox sent on behalf of his client also insisted that regulatory standards for the suitability of investments should not apply because the fund was so safe: ''Because all of the trust fund loans are secured and over-collateralized, there is relatively low risk,'' Mr. Cox wrote. It turned out that no investment sold by Mr. Cooper was safe.

As chairman of the S.E.C., Mr. Cox will have to decide whether to seek a weakening of rules stemming from the Sarbanes-Oxley Act that have forced companies to assure their internal controls are adequate. He will hear that the rules are too expensive and are therefore hurting the investors they are supposed to protect.

This is the real Christopher Cox. This story gives an insight into the character of the man who was at the helm of the SEC during the crash. Tomorrow, Chris Cox testifies before the Financial Crisis Inquiry Commission (FCIC). He needs to be asked the tough questions.

Warren Buffet has a novel plan for banksters who begged Congress for a bailout:

"I think it's disgusting that you've got all of these failures of major institutions that the government has had to step in for society reasons to help and, basically, all the CEOs that caused all the trouble went away rich."

Buffett suggested new policies that would require "the CEO and his wife go broke" if a company needs help from the federal government.

"That would change behavior."

Buffet voiced his support for real Wall Street Reform because he knows that Wall Street has turned into a dangerous casino that is designed so that it wins, even if we lose.

The Republicans' idea of financial reform is to give the banksters what they want. It provides no regulation or oversight of "shadow" banks and even protects predatory payday lenders and check cashing outlets. The Hill:

"We've been waiting to see if they would come forward with their own plan to determine whether or not it would be as tough on the banks on Wall Street as the bill that is on the floor," (Senator Dick Durbin) said. "The verdict is in: it's not even close."

Reviewing a summary of the Republican bill, Durbin said it lacks adequate capital requirements for banks and provides no oversight of "shadow" banks that operate outside the reach of regulators.

"They actually weaken not only the requirements on banks, but certainly don't have a level of protection when it comes to shadow banks," he said.

On consumer protections, Durbin claims the Republican alternative maintains the same "fractured" system that exists where oversight is split between a number of regulators.

The Republican proposal also gives regulators the power to veto new consumer protections and exempts institutions like used car dealers, payday lenders, check cashing outlets and debt collectors from following those protections.

"This may be good news for these special interests, but it isn't to consumers across America," Durbin said.

There's real Wall Street Reform - and, then there's this plan that keeps our regulatory agencies weak and fractured, protects predatory lenders and lets 'shadow' banks continue to operate in the shadows. The Republicans aren't offering real reform. They're offering little more than a giveaway to the banksters.