Special Interests

Special Interests

Sue Lowden: Loves Bailouts, Opposes Real Wall Street Reform

By Team at April 21, 2010 - 9:31am

Nevada politician Sue Lowden's casino corporation received a $29 million line of credit from her failed bank - a bank that was bailed out by U.S. and Nevada taxpayers. It's all in the family. Here's the sordid story:

Sue and her husband Paul Lowden are top executives at Archon Corporation, a casino holding company. Paul Lowden is the President and CEO. Sue Lowden is the Executive Vice President, Secretary, Treasurer and Director of Archon. They control the company. And, when the company needed a line of credit, they knew where to get one.

Sue Lowden was a founding member of the Commercial Bank of Nevada, which was acquired by Colonial Bank in 1998. She sat on the Board of Directors of Colonial Bank of Nevada until June 2009. While Colonial Bank was set to receive a $550 million bailout thanks to TARP, the bank failed before it received the funds. Soon after it failed, it was taken over by BB&T which received over $3.1 billion in taxpayer bailouts thanks to TARP. One day after BB&T took control over Colonial Bank, on August 18, 2009, it extended to the Lowden's casino company, Archon, a $29 million line of credit.

Sue Lowden benefited from a bailed out bank and received the credit line she wanted.

After benefiting from the taxpayer bailout, politician Sue Lowden refuses to support Wall Street reform that gets tough on the cheating banksters and protects consumers. As the Las Vegas Sun reports, "In an interview, she went further, saying that the financial meltdown was the result of too much government regulation, not too little." She's clearly out of touch. It's not regulations that allowed banksters to create exotic financial instruments that allowed the super rich to gamble with our economy. It was the dismantling of rules that protect consumers that turned Wall Street into a dangerous casino. If Sue Lowden had her way, Wall Street rules would be further dismantled to allow the banksters to mislead investors and take riskier bets that benefit them. That's exactly the wrong approach.

We need real Wall Street reform. Call Sue Lowden at 702-302-4097, and tell her Nevadans need leaders who will crack down on predatory CEOs, and Wall Street Ponzi schemes; not politicians that profit from bank bailouts.

Special Interests

The Banksters Are Never Wrong... Right?

By Team at March 17, 2010 - 4:10pm

How wrong could they be? Americans for Financial Reform lays to waste some promises made by the chief banking lobby in Washington, The American Bankers Association:

ABA’s Account: The subprime mortgage market collapse does “not warrant a fundamental overhaul of the basic regulatory structure. Banking regulators... have since responded in a coordinated and measured way to preserve both confidence and liquidity in the banking system.” – American Bankers Association President Ed Yingling, November 20, 2007

How wrong could they be: Mass foreclosures will continue until 2013.

Washington, DC – As the American Bankers Association swarms Capitol Hill this week in yet another attempt to avoid accountability for the financial crisis, Americans for Financial Reform is asking Members of Congress to consider what past statements from the groups’ president Ed Yingling reveal about how he has fundamentally misunderstood the role the big banks he represents have played in this financial crisis.

Heather Booth, Executive Director, Americans for Financial Reform: “Why would you even entertain advice from an Association who represents those who created this financial crisis and is led by someone who has – time and time again – been fundamentally wrong about the how unchecked greed made possible by lack of regulation has led to the near collapse of the banks he represents? The American Bankers Association can continue to profess they have all the answers in solving our economic woes, but the record speaks for itself. We need real financial reform that will crack down on greedy and abusive behavior by banks to prevent another financial crisis. Clearly, because it might cut into their million dollar paydays, that’s not going to be the talking points for those ABA members on the Hill this week.”

FLASHBACK: ABA’s Account vs. Reality

ABA’s Account: In April 26, 2007, ABA President Ed Yingling, commenting on why there’s no need to reform credit card companies practices, said, “…the highly competitive nature of the [credit] card market puts consumers in the driver's seat. For example, we have seen that features that are unpopular with consumers often are competed away.”

How wrong could they be: As the public knows all too well, the credit companies continue with outrageous fees, stopping only where specifically prohibited by law, like the CARD Act that Congress that went into effect last month.

ABA’s Account: On September 27, 2006, when discussing expanding accountability of big banks ABA President Ed Yingling said, “Congress [should] permit the regulators to continue doing what they do best, namely, rigorously apply safety and soundness principles in an environment that permits banks to grow and serve their communities.”

How wrong could they be: The banks reckless behavior and the regulators’ failure to act caused the largest financial collapse since the Great Depression.

Where do you stand? With the banksters who oppose financial regulatory reform to protect their profits? Or, with people committed to putting responsible policies in place to protect Main Street against Wall Street's excesses?

Special Interests

What's Obstructing Financial Reform?

By Team at February 9, 2010 - 10:41pm

Senator Richard Shelby is making a play to be king of the obstructionists in the Senate. First, he holds up 70 nominees because he wants more pork for his state. And, now, he's doing Wall Street's bidding and trying to scuttle real financial regulatory reform:

HuffPost asked Shelby if Dodd had confirmed to him on the floor that he was moving ahead with an independent Consumer Finance Protection Agency.

"Well, that's been our biggest split, okay, and it's still at impasse there," Shelby said. "But we're talking."

Yup, that's right - Shelby is holding up financial regulatory reform because he doesn't think there should be an organization whose mandate will be to protect consumers. It's been over a year since the collapse that brought about the worst economic crisis since the Great Depression and, so far, no meaningful reforms have been passed to make sure it doesn't happen again. This is our opportunity to pass reform and all Shelby and his Republican pals can do is say no to meaningful reforms.