No ‘Fat Cat’ Bankers Here, Obama Meets With Community Banks on Economic Recovery
Email ABC News' Sunlen Miller reports: President Obama sat down today with 12 CEOs of small and community banks, a much friendlier meeting, as a follow up to his meeting last week with some of the nation’s top CEOs from the biggest banks. Unlike his meeting with the so-called “fat-cat” bankers last week, the president did not deliver a stern message to these bankers. “I think it's fair to say that most of these community banks were not engaged in some of the hugely risky activities that helped to precipitate the financial crisis,” Obama said today. “At the same time, they continue to try to do their best in their local and regional markets to make sure that businesses who are now being affected by the overall recession are able to pick themselves back up.” Mr. Obama said that community banks serve a “vital function” across the country, as they are “intimately woven into the fabric of the community,” by not only lending money but also providing advice to their customers. “The main message that I want everybody to take away — and certainly, this is the message that I took away from the conversations here — is that there remains enormous opportunities as we come out of this recession for businesses to start growing again and to start hiring again.” The president said that “everything” that is going to be done at the White House over the next several months is going to be geared towards “catalyzing and spurring” additional lending, particularly to small businesses. “We feel very optimistic that the worst is behind us and that now is the time for us to seize opportunities.” During the hour-long meeting, the president spoke to the 12 CEOs and said afterward that there were some general themes heard around the table of the Roosevelt Room. “There are businesses that are looking for loans out there, that are profitable and ready to make money, and the key is to match them up with banks that are in a position to lend. There are some banks that have seen the increase in the savings rate and higher deposits give them a pretty good capital base. But they're still constrained by some regulatory restraints.” The president said they are looking to see if there are some possibilities “to cut some of the red tape,” although adding, “we don’t have direct influence over our independent regulators.” Mr. Obama said there was also a discussion about the prospects for financial regulatory reform and that the government has the obligation to make sure the reforms are streamline and more efficient for smaller banks. “Most of them are very supportive of the idea of financial regulatory reform. I think fairly they just want to make sure that as we regulate better that that doesn't automatically mean that we're just loading them up with more paperwork and more burdens.” — Sunlen Miller
Obama: 'Now Is the Time For Common Sense Action' 
Romney Takes Aim at Conservatives
So Obama would like banks to lend, yet continues to deride them as “fat-cats”.
Great strategy, Barry. Classic Alinsky.
Posted by: tjp612 | December 22, 2009, 1:30 pm 1:30 pm
i wonder if republicans are even capable of doing anything differently from their policies which brought on the economic crash
Posted by: XX | December 22, 2009, 1:54 pm 1:54 pm
tjp612…you have no idea what you are talking about. The people he criticized deserved and still deserve it (they are the ones that are still ripping off their customers with fees, draconian credit card changes etc). The small community banks have two main problems. And yes they are regulatory in nature. When independent and government regulators come and narrowly define to you who you should lend to and who you shouldn’t (regardless of the customer’s long term track record), then that is what stops lending in small communities. For example, any moron should know that cash flows were going to be “declining” in “08. And this
happens to banks like ours even though our “rating” is the best you can have. The other major, major problem is how much clout/say “comparable sales” have on the appraised values of homes. It is a “crutch” that needs to be revised. All we do as a society is subject ourselves to the whims of the “buying public” when we put so much emphasis on them. That is why there are so many “peaks and valleys” in the market. And right now we are in such a “valley”, I do not know how or when we will climb out of it. We need to figure out how to give better “stabilized, consistent values” on properties. What we are currently experiencing is a tremendous “downside” to “free, unregulated market philosophy”. It only works for the “very rich”.
Posted by: CND FOX | December 22, 2009, 1:54 pm 1:54 pm
“It only works for the “very rich”.”
The “rich” make the rules and Obama has cozied up to Wall Street certainly more than Bush did.
You are correct that my comment is misrepresentative of what is really going on: Obama disparages Wall Street in public (for the consumption of the masses) but cozies up to them behind closed doors (I read a comment from one of the “fat cat” bankers who attended “fat-cat” meeting with Obama a couple of weeks ago that he expected the meeting to be “worse” than it was and that overall the meeting was “quite pleasant”).
Thank you for pointing out my error.
Posted by: tjp612 | December 22, 2009, 2:07 pm 2:07 pm
“Most of them are very supportive of the idea of financial regulatory reform…”
Where’s Joe Wilson when you need him?
Posted by: The Audacity of Copenhagen | December 22, 2009, 2:16 pm 2:16 pm
And this
happens to banks like ours even though our “rating” is the best you can have.
Posted by: CND FOX |
Are you a banker? Do you have “toxic” assets are your books? Do you support mark to market? Glass-Steagall?
Posted by: Foghorn Leghorn | December 22, 2009, 2:20 pm 2:20 pm
“no fat cat bankers at this meeting”
No, I suppose there are not-they all left banking and joined the whitehouse staff.
Posted by: david | December 22, 2009, 2:43 pm 2:43 pm
According to the Republican right, President Obama is a socialist, commie, re-distributor of the wealth to the poor – in the pocket of Wall Street, big business and the ‘fat cat’ wealthy.
Posted by: tierra | December 22, 2009, 2:55 pm 2:55 pm
Obama is an elitist snob trying to act like a regular joe!
Posted by: Kelley | December 22, 2009, 2:55 pm 2:55 pm
Obama is an elitist snob trying to act like a regular joe!
______________________________
Better than being an elitist snob from an ultra-rich banking and oil family – lacking the brains of a regular joe – like that last guy.
Posted by: tierra | December 22, 2009, 3:21 pm 3:21 pm
“According to the Republican right, President Obama is a socialist, commie, re-distributor of the wealth to the poor – in the pocket of Wall Street, big business and the ‘fat cat’ wealthy.”
Yep, that’s it. I’m glad you have been paying attention. He’s also gets rolled on a regular basis by the likes of Iran, Putin, Chavez, Pelosi, Ortega, Michelle, the Chinese, etc., etc. …
Posted by: tjp612 | December 22, 2009, 3:26 pm 3:26 pm
Chavez
________________________________
Oh thanks for reminding me of Chavez.
Up until last week, Obama was a big buddy of Chavez and Castro – according to the Republican right – now all of a sudden Chavez thinks Obama is the devil and Castro thinks the United States is actively trying to overthrow his government.
The problem with the Republican right is their entire tactic is to smear the President (and the Democrats) regardless of what they does – it makes their tactics and their agenda obvious and easy to see through.
Posted by: tierra | December 22, 2009, 3:40 pm 3:40 pm
“it makes their tactics and their agenda obvious and easy to see through.”
Was there a point you are trying to communicate? Of course we (conservatives) oppose Obama as almost everything he wants to do is antithetical to our beliefs. Liberals (including yourself) do the same when conservatives are in power. It’s how politics work. Would you rather have a totalitarian, facist government?
Posted by: tjp612 | December 22, 2009, 3:43 pm 3:43 pm
Would you rather have a totalitarian, facist government?
Posted by: tjp612 |
That’s a rhetorical question, right?
Posted by: Foghorn Leghorn | December 22, 2009, 3:48 pm 3:48 pm
“Up until last week, Obama was a big buddy of Chavez and Castro”
Agreed. Obama must be heartbroken that those he thought were his buddies are immune to his charms. Maybe he just didn’t hug them well enough. He wants to be with the “in” crowd but even dictators have standards.
Posted by: The Audacity of Copenhagen | December 22, 2009, 6:26 pm 6:26 pm
He wants to be with the “in” crowd but even dictators have standards.
_________________________________
Weak. You right wing Republicans can’t decide if you’re criticizing him for being a leftist or in the pocket of Wall Street and the health insurance industry.
You need to clarify your ‘criticize Obama regardless of what he does’ thinking.
Your agenda and weak arguments are way too apparent.
Posted by: tierra | December 22, 2009, 7:06 pm 7:06 pm
“Weak. You right wing Republicans can’t decide if you’re criticizing him for being a leftist or in the pocket of Wall Street and the health insurance industry.”
ALL OF THE ABOVE APPLIES TO OBAMA!
Posted by: tjp612 | December 22, 2009, 7:26 pm 7:26 pm
President Obama seems to not understand the difference between investment banking and commercial banking. The “fat cat” bankers that he loves to hate are not the ones who lend money and the community bankers he just met with don’t engage in the high risk activities of Wall Street. I’d feel a lot better if he had even the vaguest clue as to how our economy, the banking system and the markets actually worked. Apparently they didn’t teach any of that in community organizing school.
Posted by: ConservativeWoman | December 22, 2009, 8:14 pm 8:14 pm
Posted by: ConservativeWoman | Dec 22, 2009 8:14:00 PM
you say: “he “fat cat” bankers that he loves to hate are not the ones who lend money and the community bankers he just met with don’t engage in the high risk activities of Wall Street. I’d feel a lot better if he had even the vaguest clue…”
and yet he says (as he’s said much more clearly in the past, and on several occasions– and so have the Dems in Congress) *exactly* that. So what’s up with your analysis?
I think you should read some of the Q & A’s he’s had with these groups, and at the jobs summit. He knows what’s going on.
Posted by: progressive mama | December 22, 2009, 8:20 pm 8:20 pm
As recently as last week he blamed the fat cat bankers of Wall Street for not lending money. That’s not their business so my analysis is correct. He praises community bankers for not participating in certain risky activities that were never their business line to begin with. He does not appear to grasp the basic fundamentals of the banking system or the capital markets.
Posted by: ConservativeWoman | December 22, 2009, 8:30 pm 8:30 pm
“You right wing Republicans”
I am an independent. I gave money to Obama’s campaign early on. I became leery of him when Reverend Wright’s rants and Bill Ayers past came to light. Right or wrong, you are judged by the company you keep.
I became suspicious of the press when they did not ask Obama the tough questions and I became incensed at the MSM’s attacks on Governor Palin.
I became alarmed at Obama’s “spread the wealth” statement.
I am not religious, I am not pro-life but it became apparent that forces were at work in America to influence the election.
My distrust of Obama has been confirmed by his lack of honesty, responsibility and tact.
He promised transparency, he hides behind opaqueness. He promised bipartisanism, he hides behind closed doors. He promised limited spending, he hides behind what he “inherited”.
“My agenda” is to make up for my stupidity in sending this man my hard earned money for his campaign. At least I didn’t vote for him.
Open and believe your eyes. The emperor has no clothes.
Posted by: The Audacity of Copenhagen | December 22, 2009, 9:18 pm 9:18 pm
ALL OF THE ABOVE APPLIES TO OBAMA!
Posted by: tjp612 | Dec 22, 2009 7:26:14 PM
____________________________________
Exactly as I thought. It doesn’t matter what the President does – to the parrots on the Republican right it’s simply an opportunity to attack and smear.
Pathetic.
Posted by: tierra | December 22, 2009, 9:19 pm 9:19 pm
I am sure Obama and his fellow Dem. will achieve big political gain from increased job hiring in the expanse of high risk lending by banking community to small business, which was some painful experience only a year ago .
Posted by: austin | December 22, 2009, 9:26 pm 9:26 pm
“Exactly as I thought. It doesn’t matter what the President does – to the parrots on the Republican right it’s simply an opportunity to attack and smear.”
Not completely true. But you fail to realize (either due to blind partisanship, enslavement to ideology, or sheer ignorance) is that it is very possible to be a leftist, in the pocket of Wall Street and the health insurance industry simultaneously. It is called “state corporatism” (witness the entanglement of GE subsidiaries NBC, GE Energy, GE Medical Systems etc. within Obama’s White House as a prime example). Look it up.
Posted by: tjp612 | December 22, 2009, 11:23 pm 11:23 pm
Right or wrong, you are judged by the company you keep.
Posted by: The Audacity of Copenhagen
that statement is pretty much an indictment of the entire republican party, altho’ I do like your other spot on summation of republican ethos…
right OR wrong
nicely done
Posted by: Oh Yeah | December 23, 2009, 12:05 am 12:05 am
Posted by: tierra | Dec 23, 2009 12:17:26 AM
Much is accurate, but not all.
Posted by: tjp612 | December 23, 2009, 12:24 am 12:24 am
“nicely done”
Can’t see the forest for the trees, eh?
Posted by: The Audacity of Copenhagen | December 23, 2009, 10:27 am 10:27 am