Power of Story
Send a Tweet        
- Advertisement -

Share on Google Plus Share on Twitter 1 Share on Facebook 1 Share on LinkedIn Share on PInterest Share on Fark! Share on Reddit 1 Share on StumbleUpon Tell A Friend (3 Shares)  

Printer Friendly Page Save As Favorite View Favorites (# of views)   No comments
OpEdNews Op Eds

Romney vs. Obama on Regulation and Big Money

By       Message Russ Baker     Permalink
      (Page 1 of 1 pages)
Related Topic(s): ; ; ; , Add Tags Add to My Group(s)

View Ratings | Rate It

opednews.com Headlined to H2 7/19/12

- Advertisement -
This article cross-posted from WhoWhatWhy

from Romney campaign site

Note this headline: "Obama Trails Romney Again in Battle for Campaign Cash"

Now, if like me, you are wondering: what causes this? And what's specifically so attractive about Romney compared to Obama, and how, practically speaking, is one of these centrists more attractive to certain donors than the other? One answer can be found in this headline: "Consumer Bureau Proposes New Mortgage Disclosure Rules"

- Advertisement -

According to the article, the objective of these steps from Obama's new Consumer Financial Protection Bureau is "to bolster fairness and clarity in residential lending, including requiring a good-faith estimate of costs for homebuyers. The proposed rules have two central elements -- the loan estimate and the closing disclosure -- that would provide would-be homebuyers with a simple accounting of likely payments and fees to prevent costly surprises."

Now, who could be against truth and openness? Actually, a lot of people. First of all, the lenders themselves -- and they're a giant and highly profitable industry -- benefit when the public does not fully understand how a loan will affect them. The less we know, the worse decisions we make, and the better they do. If you don't think that's the case, then you have never accidentally incurred a late charge or seen your interest rate suddenly leap.

Second of all, there are the people (you know who you are) who are so sclerotically angry at the very idea of government that any kind of government activity -- even of this sort, that really does benefit the average person -- is seen as more unwelcome intrusion.

- Advertisement -

Those of us who benefit from the new disclosure rules, by and large, are people without a lot of money. We're people who can't afford to hire lawyers to sort out the fine print, and we're usually the ones who get the worst deals. We can't and generally don't donate to candidates.

Romney consistently criticizes regulatory moves that the Obama administration makes, so when it comes to the cash sweepstakes, he's the winner.

As much as Romney and Obama are similar on so many of the biggest issues, it's usually in matters like this -- that represent at least a partial amelioration of the way that the powerful can and do repeatedly hoodwink the rest of us -- where we can see a difference.

Even those who make loans will, in private, admit as much.


But don't look to Obama to go too far. Here's an example: His administration has come up with measures, designed to prevent another financial crisis, that place controls on risky derivatives trading. However, by the time the Commodity Futures Trading Commission worked out its final rules, a number of significant exemptions had been built in.

- Advertisement -

The bottom line is that there really is a substantive difference between the two candidates--only it's much, much smaller than one might hope for in a truly competitive, vibrant democracy.

Those differences don't seem like much to most of us, but they do to the folks with the big bucks. While many of the biggest firms hedge their bets, and give heavily to both men, enough of the wealthiest will give only to Romney to put him well ahead. And when you take into account the unlimited spending of SuperPACS and the new breed of nonprofit outfits that don't have to name their donors, the difference can be decisive.

You don't have to be a partisan to recognize the point. And that's at least one of the reasons Romney can outraise Obama. And with all the extra cash, he can run lots of ads about how, when he beats Obama, he will eliminate "unnecessary regulation." As for the president, he has to hope that he has enough money to tell people how and why the relatively tame sort of regulation he proposes actually benefits them.



- Advertisement -

View Ratings | Rate It

Author, investigative journalist, editor-in-chief at WhoWhatWhy.com

Share on Google Plus Submit to Twitter Add this Page to Facebook! Share on LinkedIn Pin It! Add this Page to Fark! Submit to Reddit Submit to Stumble Upon

Go To Commenting
The views expressed in this article are the sole responsibility of the author and do not necessarily reflect those of this website or its editors.

Writers Guidelines

Contact AuthorContact Author Contact EditorContact Editor Author PageView Authors' Articles
Related Topic(s): ; ; ; , Add Tags
- Advertisement -

Most Popular Articles by this Author:     (View All Most Popular Articles by this Author)

The Real Reason For The Afghan War?

The Military and Those Strange Threats to Obama

CloseReading: Are Joe Biden's "Gaffes" Accidental? Or Brilliant?

Tea Party Types say: Next Overboard, Lifeguards!

NY Times' Umbrella Man Exposed

JFK Umbrella Man -- More Doubts