Democrats & Liberals: Archives

I had no idea about this- yikes!
“To limit the amount of interest that can be charged on any extension of credit to 30 percent.”

Why exactly should our service members be more limited in terms of what they can borrow from lenders than regular civilians? are the proponents of these bills saying somehow that our servicemen and women are too stupid or weak to resist taking out “bad” loans.

Whoever proposed this amendment should he ashamed of themselves. Our servicemen and women should have the same rights as every other adults to borrow money, at whatever terms they agree to. I praise the republicans, and the limited number of independent-minded democrats, who see that this was just paternalistic legislation paraded around as “patriotism.” This is just a cynical a ploy as calling a bill “the patriot act.” Yikes.

Why exactly should our service members be more limited in terms of what they can borrow from lenders than regular civilians? are the proponents of these bills saying somehow that our servicemen and women are too stupid or weak to resist taking out “bad” loans.

Whoever proposed this amendment should he ashamed of themselves. Our servicemen and women should have the same rights as every other adults to borrow money, at whatever terms they agree to.

To clarify, there are three independent amendments, Misha. Only the first pertains to the military. The 30% interest cap, and identity theft provision, were for everyone.

The Republicans are just being loyal to their Core Supporters, Banks and Corporations. As for the Reserves, they knew what they were getting into when they joined. They can always leave if they disapproved. Besides, there can’t be that many of them anyway.

“As for the Reserves, they knew what they were getting into when they joined. “

Oh yeah, Aldous. Except for the fact that they aren’t being allowed to get out of the reserves now. And people who thought they had retired from the reserves suddenly find themselves called up. And the reserves were never intended to have to be called up for more than about 6 months. And not intended to have to be sent back over and over.

So yeah, Aldous. They sure did know what they were getting into, didn’t they? Especially since many of them believed the Pres when he said we would be in and out of Iraq. That the Iraqis would fall down and worship us and throw flowers on us.

So why should we bother about supporting the troops? Support the fat cats who don’t have any children fighting in Iraq. Give them tax breaks so we have to borrow the money to pay for the war. Support the troops. What a joke! Support the president, to h—- with the troops. Right on, Aldous. You tell ‘em.

Aldous said:
“The Republicans are just being loyal to their Core Supporters, Banks and Corporations.”

And the Democratic Politicians are all as innocent as the day they were born.

Right on, Lynne! You go girl!

IT DOES NOT HAVE ONE THING TO DO IF THE POLITICIAN IS REPUBLICAN OR DEMOCRAT. (BUGCRAZY). THEY ONLY DO THINGS FOR THE ONES THAT HAVE THE MONEY. THROW
THEM ALL OUT OF OFFICE AND THROW ALL THOSE MONEY DEALERS (LOBBYISTS) OUT WITH THEM. GET SOME REAL MEN IN THERE.

Some companies have been supportive of their deployed gaurdsmen and have continued to pay the differences in their salaries but many have not. Yes these men and women knew what they were signing up for but did they really? When not at war the National Guard does one weekend a month and one or two weeks a year for training and deployment. They get called up to help domestically when there is a natural disaster. Many join to help suppliment their income so that they can pay their bills. Remember this is in addition to their everyday 9-5 jobs. When, as is happening now, they get deployed over seas for many months they obviously cannot continue at their 9-5 job, they loose the differences in pay. This is a definate hardship on their families. If a deployed guardsman’s family cannot make a mortgage payment or is overcome by debt they should recieve extra protection. Even though I disagree with this war I respect those who have enlisted and think they deserve better. These republicans and any democrats who voted against this bill should be ashamed.

Hey… Its not their children in Iraq so why would they care? You notice those bumper stickers Republicans have on their SUVs? Not a one of them are going to enlist.

I really hope there will be a Draft soon. It will be funny watching all those Moralistic Bush Voters head north to Canada. You know they are cowards when they have George “Daddy got me in” Bush and “I don’t have the Time” Cheney leading them.

Misha—you need to learn to read. The amendment states “To limit the amount of INTEREST that can be CHARGED on any extension of credit to 30 percent.” In other words, this would stifle the creditors ability to charge interest on the entire amount a person owes. Since the Marines and National Guard are having such difficulty in finding new recruits, I think all the Congressmans’children and the President’s daughters should have to enlist. War would definitely be the last resort, if that was the rule of law. And, since someone brought it up, anyone with those pathetic ribbons on their cars should be next. How can the American people feel comfortable with the sheer hypocrisy of these ribbons? If they cared that much, they’d be lining up to replace the exhausted soldiers over in Iraq and Afghanistan, wouldn’t they?? They’d be out in the streets protesting to make sure our young men and women were protected to the fullest extent possible. They’d be outraged to know that our tax dollars are filling the pockets of well-connected corporations instead of protecting our military overseas AND here at home, in every way possible. People need to open their eyes and start thinking about what is going on in this country. Anyone who believes that this administration cares one bit about our soldiers, the middle-class, the working poor and the children are either dense or in denial. Get a grip, folks. Our president and his cronies are the real elitists and could not care less about any of us. America needs to wake up, FAST.

Barb- while you may think I need to learn to read, you need to take a course in econ 101. If you tell a creditor he cannot charge X ammount of interest to some category of individuals, and the only way the creditor would have found it profitable to give a loan to that individual is at X level, the creditor will not extend that money to the individual. So you are effectively limiting the choices of the individual who seeks the loan.

So, Misha, you feel that 30% interest is fine, if the borrower is aware. Interestingly, 19 Democratic Senators also voted against it, so maybe this was a bad example.

Are you still defending the rejection of the other two amendments? On what grounds?

30% interest is usury. Some loansharks probably charge less than that. Anyone who can’t get credit for a lower interest rate than that most likely can’t pay it back anyway.
This kind of usury is usually not what people signed up for. People are often persuaded to transfer their balance at 0%, not noticing a clause that triggers 30% or more on the ENTIRE balance if you miss one payment. We need credit reform much more significant than these amendments. The fact that our own party can’t get behind these is a failure of leadership.

Who were the Democratic Senators?

I HERE YOU TNJ

Jeff Wiley, it is no a missed payment that triggers increases exclusively. I had a few credit card companies go from 7% or less to 29.9%. According to them it was because the amount of outstanding credit card debt I held was more than they found acceptable, despite the fact that I had never missed a payment and have an excellent credit record otherwise.

So what sense does that make? A credit card company determines that your debt load may be more than you can honor, so they raise you rate from 7% to 29.9% and your monthly payment from $70 per month to $300 per month on your remaining balance. Does this action not simply push consumers into bankruptcy?

And here is the catch. Under the new bankruptcy laws, you or I with low wages and 45 thousand in credit card debt will not be absolved if you can’t afford to pay. What will happen is a kind of debtors servitude to the credit card companies that will insure that unless you inherit a large sum of money, you will live in poverty paying off the debts for as much as the rest of your life.

Instead of saving for your kids, buying insurance, buying a home, putting away for retirement, such an individual will be paying as much as half their earnings in structured settlement back to the credit card companies, who likely got most of the original debt back in high interest rates charged consumers in the first place.

As a service member currently deployed to Afghanistan, I can attest to the hardships that being deployed can impose. It puts strain on families as well as on wallets. Having said that, I think that the proposed ammendments will provide a level of protection not normally afforded to service members that will go a long way towards easing financial burdens. Not to mention the benefits to the average American consumer. I agree with what has been said before, in that these politicians who do not have children who serve need to put up or shut up. Its too easy to stand on a soap box and preach when one has not been to the desert thousands of miles away from the comforts of home and family. I am there right now, and can confidently say that we in the armed forces will take any support where we can get it.

David,
I got hit with an interest rate increase on an account, as you did. I had decided not to use credit cards except for an emergency and I was paying off my balance in large amounts each month. The bank raised my rate from 7.99% to 27.98%. Their excuse was that I hadn’t used my card for some time (it had been about 2 years). That’s it. I also paid on time and I may be paranoid, but I couldn’t help but think that they were squeezing every last cent before I closed the account. Needless to say, I paid it off immediately and did, indeed, close the account. I will never do business with them again. The middle-class and working poor are in the crosshairs of the powers-that-be and most of us will not survive another 4 years of this.

Steve,
I can’t even begin to pretend to know what it is like for you and all our soldiers in Afghanistan and Iraq. It was insensitive of me not to think that one of our bravest would be reading these posts. I know that all Americans are united in our support for your safe return back home. You are on our minds and in our prayers, every day. And, I think many changes must be made to ease the tremendous burden of serving, both for the soldiers and their families. I have difficulty in understanding how its not the first priority.

Steve,

Ditto what Barb said from me. One of the many things that ticks me off about this war is the huge burden that’s been placed, almost exclusively, on the relatively small number of people. Our soldiers are taking a heavier hit now than anyone expected, not only in terms of casualties, but financially, careerwise (esp for those that are not career soldiers). And their families are suffering too. Your kids only grow up once, fellows - how many of you would want to be gone for two years while that’s happening?

There are lots of yellow stickers but no real shared sacrifice, and (as the Senate vote, and the armor fiasco showed) not enough real committment to support the troops concretely. We need to support you guys with more than just yellow stickers.

I agree with David. 30% interest is so beyond what should be the maximum legal variable rate on unsecured credit. Misha, it is true that a lower limit would cause some creditors to refuse to extend credit in some instances, but I don’t see that that would be such a bad thing. On the contrary, it would be a good thing.

It is insane how we enslave ourselves to credit. Even more insane is how avidly it is promoted as the way to a happy life. Everytime I see companies setting up booths on college campuses to entice students into opening up charge accounts, with a free teeshirt or a bag of M&Ms as an incentive, it makes me mad. It’s like offering free crack to kids. The majority of these students are financial babes in the woods, and don’t realize that whatever it is they’re buying may end up costing them twice as much in the end.

The regulations for bank and credit card companies are far too lenient. I shouldn’t have to pay a higher interest rate on items previously purchased just because the company that provided me the credit now thinks that I have too many charge accounts or too high an overall credit limit, even if the amount of credit outstanding is extremely low, and I have been faithful in making payments.

As a rule, I do not use credit cards, and only rarely have I been inconvenienced by it. I haven’t studied economics, but it seems to me that living within your means, on a pay as you go system, is the best approach, with the exception of really large ticket items, like houses and automobiles.

I should kick Richard Burr in the balls and crack Elizabeth Dole in the head with a pipe. Thanks Mr. Cohen. I will call these chumps up and blast them. This is a travesty. Too bad Erskine Bowles didn’t win. It shows how stupid people on Eastern NC really are, by the majority. Interesting post. It seems obvious to me that as time goes on, the more people are drinking the kool-aid. Atleast it is a good time now. Bush has one more term and the people who are politically adept will pay attention to garbage like this and hopefully vote for the Democrats in the 2006 Senate and Congressional races. I am just disappointed Eric hasn’t commented yet. I would love to hear his perspective on this. The fact remains that voting is just overrated. Petition, campaigning, and getting the public informed every single day like on Watchblog is what will drive changes in this country; rather than punching a hole in a ballot box. One of my brother’s best friends joined the National Guard. The good thing he is only 20 without a family but still. A lot of people are in worse situations than him.

Steve,
Good to hear from you on this post. I hope you can convince a lot of your friends to join the Democratic Party. Bingo. I sense a comeback by 2012.

CB,
Yeah, like seriously. Have you heard about the many college students who commit suicide over college dept? I hope I am not one of those people who will be driven to that.

What does anyone think can be done in proposal to fix this problem? I have to hear your perspective David.

I read just the title to this post and I must respond. when is the democratic party going to ever learn not to let the republicans frame the debate. it is foolish to try and out-republic the right wing by trying to imply the republicans are not supporting the troops. remember, that the democrats voted to put them in Iraq without first making sure they had what they needed. democrats could have objected but they are so busy trying to out do the republicans that they dared not interfere when the administration wanted to invade Iraq. why didn’t the democrats at least insist on what the constitution requires, a declaration of war. I’m NOT a republican, but you people need to take responsibility for whimping out all the time. You never present a serious challenge to republicans on anything, instead you always seek a middle ground, you have no core principles, that is one reason we are in this mess. take responsibility. Admit you never should have sent troops to Iraq. the democrats like nothing better then to blame others “it’s ralph naders fault gore couldn’t win his own state”, “it’s republicans fault our soldiers are getting shot at”, “it’s bushes fault democrats overwhelmingly voted to make a man who wrote a torture memo attorney general.” I’ll bet FDR is turning in his grave. stop whining and show some leadership, oppose the republicans for real for once in your lives. Clinton got impeached over a blow job, but despite the fact bush took us to war based on false information and refuses to fire a secretary of defense who made prisoner abuse synonymous with U.S. policy in the minds of many in the mid-east are the democrats even bothering to discuss if those actions are impeachable? No of course not. Republicans may be idiots, but at least they stand up for what they believe in….

-Fed Up

Art,
Your frustration at the Democratic Party is shared. If I had to come up with a reason for the Dems backing the Iraq invasion, I’d say that 9/11 created a psychic wound in our nation and emotions fueled our actions. I think that America rested on its imagined invulnerability and as with any kind of tragic, sudden disaster, whether on a personal or national level, people have to deal with the after-effects of shock. The Democratic leaders failed in that they were reluctant to step outside of what was expected as the only “patriotic” response to the attack and they failed to replace fear and strong emotion with reason and sound leadership. Although many Americans, including myself and I’m sure many Congressmen, believed the Iraq invasion was not for American defense, but to achieve far-fetched ideological visions of “global leadership” and unsurpassed possibilities to reap huge profits in a destroyed, but resource wealthy Iraq, our leaders were reluctant not to trust the “evidence” of WMD in Iraq, as another attack in the US due to inaction would have destroyed this country. Who would dare to take a chance to be wrong? Rumsfeld, Cheney, Wolfowitz, John Bolton, William Kristol, Richard Perle, Richard Armitage, almost all the Bush administration’s cabinet members and policy makers, believed that Hussein should have been taken out during the Gulf War. In fact, they believed this so strongly, they formed a group in 1997, The Project for the New American Century (newamericancentury.org) and sent a letter to Clinton in 1998, urging him to consider a strategy to remove Saddam Hussein from power. If you read their Statement of Principles, and check the PNAC’s membership, (if you are so inclined, you can find many interesting facts about these individuals at sourcewatch.org), it clearly defines their ideology and purpose. Most of these people had some role during the first Iraq war and strongly disagreed with Bush, Sr to leave Baghdad intact and Saddam Hussein in power. What I find particularily disturbing about these people is that it seems they used 9/11 as a platform to launch their plans for a “New America”, without the consent, and perhaps, at the expense of the American people. Clearly, they are passionate about their beliefs and goals and will do what’s necessary to achieve their objectives and I fear that no price may be considered too high to do so. I pray to God that I’m wrong.

“when is the democratic party going to ever learn not to let the republicans frame the debate. it is foolish to try and out-republic the right wing by trying to imply the republicans are not supporting the troops”

Maybe you’re right, Art - but I’m not really trying to out-red the reds, I’m trying to point out the obvious - that they’re all hypocrites. They’re all willing to chant “support the troops”, and then turn around and screw them over. (And it’s not just Republicans doing this - Dems voted against this amendment also.)

Maybe this is a better “frame” for discussion: the current government is in the pocket of big business like no recent government has been. The bankrupcy bill might have been written by credit card companies, the energy policy was written by energy companies, the environmental policy, tort reform, privatizing social security, all heavily favor business and cost the little guy. That’s the current Republican “core value” - at least as far as the laws they pass.

You are so right, William. Corporations are heavily invested and have given unprecedented amounts to Republicans since 1998 (opensecrets.org, buyblue.org) and we don’t have to go too far back in history to remember why protections under the law were written. It’s a shame and it’s sad, but big money runs American policy, not the American people. Unfortunately, to a large extent, it has always been this way, the only difference now, is that the middle-class have built power for themselves as our standard of living was increasing and our likelihood to invest in the market became the norm, instead of the exception. They simply can’t allow the middle-class to become too powerful, or we will start to actually determine the policies of our nation. That is why we are being attacked. But, America is slow in realizing this. I believe it was Truman who said (and I’ll paraphrase here) that it’s a recession when it affects your neighbor, and a depression when it affects you.

hey Leon. I, too, live in Eastern NC, and you are totally right. The rednecks outnumber the democrats, and I voted for Bowles. Most people here cannot have a discussion about Bush’s bad sides, why its not right to have a crowd of hand-picked invites only for his SS reform speech. I thought I was going to choke on my own bile when a guy in the audience said ‘God bless you, GWB, and thank god for you” or something to that effect. My dad is firmly convinced that all spending is actually four years old, and Clinton’s, not Bush’s fault. Ugh. Theres no talking to these people.
Steve, thank you. I hope you can come home soon. I hope my co-workers husband comes home to their young son too. This war is needless and makes me more sad every day. Good luck to you.

“Misha, it is true that a lower limit would cause some creditors to refuse to extend credit in some instances, but I don’t see that that would be such a bad thing. On the contrary, it would be a good thing.”

This quotation posses the challenge to all of you who support this ammendment. Why do you think that armed services members need MORE protection from creditors than regular civilians. Generally, I support laws to limit the choices of individuals only if I believe that they are truely less capable of making those decisions than adults. For example, young children cannot agree to certain contracts.

on the other hand, i see no reason to think that military members are individuals who are less able to decide whether to take out loans at any particular rate. In my view, military members are equal to all adults in their ability to refuse or accept loans at rates offered by creditors- and I think this is why this was a fringe measure, that was supported by relatively few senators (like 1/3, if i count correctly).

I am all for raising the pay for our armed services, but limiting their borrowing option doesnt help anyone other than democratic senators trying to look “tough on evil creditors” and “in support of our military” all in one measure.

Misha,

Maybe if you signed up for the national guard (or reserves) and got sent away to a far away land earning far less money for not months but years; and at the same time were trying to support a spouce and a couple of young children….Maybe, just maybe you would understand the delima many of these folks find themselves in. BUT…May not.

Our national guard and reserves are being used far differently than they ever have been before. None, and I repeat NONE, of these fine young men or women could have forseen what our President was getting them in to.

If you can’t understand that taking a very large paycut and at the same time being in an entirely different continent than your family creates financial hardships (not to mention emotional hardships)…then you don’t understand the affects of this war on our military personnel. They deserved the ammendment!

I am sorry Tom, but your argument is nothing but an emotional appeal without intellectual content. If the problem is the ammount of money they are making, then the government should increase their salary- I support that 100%. but this is not an ammendment that helps any troops, it is a cheap political ploy- and a patronizing one at that. Those who actually care about the welfare of people in the armed services should spend their political capital fighting for pay increases, not meaningless political gestures that help Democrat politicians.

Aldous said:

You notice those bumper stickers Republicans have on their SUVs? Not a one of them are going to enlist.

Aldous, that’s bullcrap and you know it. Of all the Republican families I know with “support the troops” bumper stickers, probably 1/2 to 1/3 of them have at least one family member who’s been in Iraq. My Republican friends have been enlisting left and right since the war started. How many friends do you have in the armed forces?

I really hope there will be a Draft soon.

How old are you, Aldous? Are you hoping to join up? I don’t hope for a draft, but if there is one, I will enlist on the first day possible, and I’ll have the full support of my millionare parents. I expect to see at the recruiting station too.

William, I don’t see a link in your post to any sources for the bill, so I’m a little suspicious of a bill that not a single Republican supported. I suspect that there are other additional small clauses and ulterior motives (as Misha touched on) not being mentioned. Sounds reminiscent of the 98-0 Kyoto vote. Can you find us the Senate minutes and recorded transcript for the bill?