Obama Calls on Banks to Make “Extraordinary Commitment” to Rebuild the Economy
EmailFrom Jake Tapper and Sunlen Miller report:
President Obama emerged from an hour-long meeting with bank executives at the White House and said his main message to the heads of the nation’s top financial firms was, “that America's banks received extraordinary assistance from American taxpayers to rebuild their industry and now that they're back on their feet we expect an extraordinary commitment from them to help rebuild our economy.”
Mr. Obama outlined, as communicated to the bankers, how he believes it is their responsibility to help: by increasing lending and stopping their opposition to financial regulatory reforms.
“That starts with finding ways to help credit-worthy small and medium-size businesses get the loans that they need to open their doors, grow their operations and create new jobs,” Obama said.
The president said that he hears that bankers are willing to lend but face a shortage of credit-worthy individuals and businesses. He said that while “no one wants banks making the kinds of risky loans that got us into this situation in the first place,” he expects banks to explore every responsible way to help get our economy moving again.
“Given the difficulty business people are having as lending has declined and given the exceptional assistance banks received to get them through a difficult time, we expect them to explore every responsible way to help get our economy moving again.”
The president said he is getting too many letters from small businesses who say they are credit worthy, but they are still having problems getting the loans.
“I urged these institutions here today to go back and take a third and fourth look about how they are operating when it comes to small business and medium-sized business lending.”
The president said that there was broad support around the table about the need for financial regulatory reform to update the rules of the road for the financial industry.
“The problem is, there's a big gap between what I'm hearing here in the White House and the activities of lobbyists on behalf of these institutions or associations of which they're a member up on Capitol Hill. I urged them to close that gap, and they assured me that they would make every effort to do so.”
The president said it is not his intent to vilify one person or industry — to not dictate to them or micromanage their compensation practices.
“My job is to ensure that consumers and the larger economy are protected from risky speculation and predatory practices, that credit is flowing, that businesses can grow, and jobs are once again being created at the pace we need.”
In working together towards a lasting recovery, Mr. Obama said, “we rise and fall together: banks and small businesses, consumers and large corporations. And we have a shared interest in working together to ensure a lasting recovery that will benefit all of us and not just some of us.”
Those in today’s meeting were: Ken Chenault, President and CEO, American Express, Richard Davis, Chairman, President, and CEO, US Bancorp, Jamie Dimon, Chairman and CEO, JP Morgan Chase, Richard Fairbank, Chairman and CEO, Capital One, Bob Kelly, Chairman and CEO, Bank of New York Mellon, Ken Lewis, President and CEO, Bank of America, Ron Logue, Chairman and CEO, State Street Bank, Gregory Palm, Executive Vice President and Chief Counsel, Goldman Sachs, Jim Rohr, Chairman and CEO, PNC, and John Stumpf, President and CEO, Wells Fargo.
Due to inclement weather in Washington, D.C. Lloyd Blankfein, Chairman and CEO, Goldman Sachs, John Mack, Chairman and CEO, Morgan Stanley and Dick Parsons, Chairman, Citigroup were connected to the meeting via conference call.
-Jake Tapper and Sunlen Miller
Sen. DeMint: GOP Race Could Go Until Convention 
Obama Avoids Questions on Contraception Rule
If you are not going to micrmanage then fire your Czar that micromanages salaries bonusses ete.etc.etc.
Posted by: earl | December 14, 2009, 2:29 pm 2:29 pm
Sounds like a waste of an hour…
BTW – What is the difference between “what Obama hears in the WH” and “what the lobbyists are saying on Capitol Hill”? Aren’t these messages the same?
Anyone who is paying attention knows that Obama and the “fat-cats” on Wall Street are tight (well, at least those who have cozied up to The One: Goldman Sachs, GE, etc. – Bank of America not so lucky).
Posted by: tjp612 | December 14, 2009, 2:36 pm 2:36 pm
“The president said that he hears that bankers are willing to lend but face a shortage of credit-worthy individuals and businesses. He said that while “no one wants banks making the kinds of risky loans that got us into this situation in the first place,” ”
———————————–
January 31 2008
Robert Rubin: What meltdown?
In a talk on Wednesday, the Citigroup director said the current financial upheaval is just cyclical. And none of the blame that there was to assign went to Wall Street. – Fortune via CNNMoney
In January 2009, Rubin was named by Marketwatch as one of the “10 most unethical people in business”.
“There are four main ways to be connected to Bob Rubin: through Goldman Sachs, the Clinton administration, Citigroup and, finally, the Hamilton Project, a think tank Rubin spearheaded under the auspices of the Brookings Institute to promote his philosophy of balanced budgets, free trade and financial deregulation. The team Obama put in place to run his economic policy after his inauguration was dominated by people who boasted connections to at least one of these four institutions — so much so that the White House now looks like a backstage party for an episode of Bob Rubin, This Is Your Life!” -Matt Taibbi, 12/9/09, Rolling Stone
Posted by: Live! From DC! It's Sat Night! | December 14, 2009, 2:40 pm 2:40 pm
Posted by: tjp612 | Dec 14, 2009 2:36:52 PM
[False] Hope & [Nothing's] Change[d]
Posted by: Live! From DC! It's Sat Night! | December 14, 2009, 2:42 pm 2:42 pm
The only thing that will temper the Banks’ greed is fear. “We prefer cooperation, but we will settle for fear.”
After the Banks, the Health Insurance needs the same fear. “Change or we will change you.”
As we all know, “Fear is the Beginning of the Knowledge of God.” Maybe some well-timed fear will help some of these greedy capitalists find God.
Posted by: Doppelganger | December 14, 2009, 2:50 pm 2:50 pm
Glass-Steagall cures a great deal of what ails us but the banks and their lackeys in congress will never allow it to be brought back.
Posted by: Foghorn Leghorn | December 14, 2009, 2:57 pm 2:57 pm
As we all know, “Fear is the Beginning of the Knowledge of God.” Maybe some well-timed fear will help some of these greedy capitalists find God.
Posted by: Doppelganger | Dec 14, 2009 2:50:09 PM
That would require a President who is not beholden to “these greedy capitalists.” There is no fear here. They just switch sides and find the connections they need to do it all over again.
“Leading the search for the president’s new economic team was his close friend and Harvard Law classmate Michael Froman, a high-ranking executive at Citigroup. During the campaign, Froman had emerged as one of Obama’s biggest fundraisers, bundling $200,000 in contributions and introducing the candidate to a host of heavy hitters — chief among them his mentor Bob Rubin, the former co-chairman of Goldman Sachs who served as Treasury secretary under Bill Clinton. Froman had served as chief of staff to Rubin at Treasury, and had followed his boss when Rubin left the Clinton administration to serve as a senior counselor to Citigroup (a massive new financial conglomerate created by deregulatory moves pushed through by Rubin himself).
“Incredibly, Froman did not resign from the bank when he went to work for Obama: He remained in the employ of Citigroup for two more months, even as he helped appoint the very people who would shape the future of his own firm. And to help him pick Obama’s economic team, Froman brought in none other than James Rubin, who happens to be Bob Rubin’s son. At the time, Jamie’s dad was still earning roughly $15 million a year working for Citigroup, which was in the midst of a collapse brought on in part because Rubin had pushed the bank to invest heavily in mortgage-backed CDOs and other risky instruments. – Matt Taibbi, 12/9/09, Rolling Stone
Posted by: Live! From DC! It's Sat Night! | December 14, 2009, 2:57 pm 2:57 pm
Did Obama say he doesn’t have a clue what to do? Except make threats and blame others
Posted by: welcome to Obamaville, fastest growing homeless community | December 14, 2009, 3:04 pm 3:04 pm
Matt Taibbi, 12/9/09, Rolling Stone
Posted by: Live! From DC! It’s Sat Night! | Dec 14, 2009 2:57:33 PM
I’d also recommend the critiques of Taibbi’s article by Matthew Yglesias, Tim Fernholz, and Patrick Appel as the issue with Taibbi’s take is that it ignores Congress.
I agree with the comment that said:”Glass-Steagall cures a great deal of what ails us but the banks and their lackeys in congress will never allow it to be brought back.”
I also recommend Elizabeth Warren at the Fed or Treasury in a position of power!She gets it.
Posted by: Don't ever want to go back to the GOP-driven dark ages! | December 14, 2009, 3:05 pm 3:05 pm
It’s perfectly understandable that the president wants to take a populist tone on an issue seen with so much anger by the public.
Posted by: Matt | December 14, 2009, 3:09 pm 3:09 pm
I recall a bit of dialog from a movie called Flesh Gordon where the monster had been machine gunned from his perch on a tall tower. As he fell, he murmured: “Up yours Gordon!!!” I expect the folks who have the money to lend who are expected and exhorted once again to lend it to those who cannot or will not repay to say something like this….
Posted by: Randy | December 14, 2009, 3:21 pm 3:21 pm
“I’d also recommend the critiques of Taibbi’s article by Matthew Yglesias, Tim Fernholz, and Patrick Appel as the issue with Taibbi’s take is that it ignores Congress.”
Admittedly, I don’t read much of these guys, but it is interesting reading…
Taibbi’s article could have been split in half IMO opinion. At this point, I am concerned with Obama’s Sellout which has nothing to do with Congress. The Yglesias opinion I read seems to ignore “the players” and shifts to a discussion of how Congress writes bills. I’ve seen this before from him and it usually involves defending Obama and blaming Congress, including the minority party (which currently has little if any say in anything).
Posted by: Live! From DC! It's Sat Night! | December 14, 2009, 3:30 pm 3:30 pm
“I’d also recommend the critiques of Taibbi’s article by Matthew Yglesias, Tim Fernholz, and Patrick Appel”
I would recommend reading KARL in the Green Room at HotAir dot com who points out the areas where these guys agree rather than disagree.
Posted by: Live! From DC! It's Sat Night! | December 14, 2009, 3:43 pm 3:43 pm
Lets see. He first tries his liberal thug tactics by calling them names and trying to pubilicly humiliate them and then wants them to help him out? Then today he punked out and tried to appoligize to them by saying no single institution is to be blammed but now is not the time for big bonuses? This guy is too much.
Posted by: Sam | December 14, 2009, 3:45 pm 3:45 pm
The criticism of the Bush Doctrine came from candidate Obama, a guy who didn’t have the experience of running a Dairy Queen. My, hasn’t his viewpoint changed since he now has the reins! Yes, Bush wasn’t as glib as the “messiah” but he ACTED correctlly. Matlin is spot on. The best thing that President Teleprompter can do is stay with the Bush Doctrine until his sad term of office is over.
Posted by: talk from sf | December 14, 2009, 3:51 pm 3:51 pm
Matt, I agree with your statement but perhaps not in the way you mean. The Public Anger I think is directed toward this populist President who is giving away the store and putting us all in debt for many years to come.
I am thinking about what happened in
Thailand when a populist Prime Minister was giving away the country to the poor folks purely to attract votes. The normal people rebelled against this give away policy and as a result, a Military Coup canned his sorry butt. He is as of now a convicted felon and is pretty much a man without a country. The United States of America seems to be having much the same problem.
Posted by: Randy | December 14, 2009, 3:52 pm 3:52 pm
He is a perpect community organizer. He is a perfect salesman. He is a perfect teleprompter. He is not a good president.
Change + Hope = More Welfare + Bigger Government + Corruption.
ACORN. SEIU. AMERICORP …
Posted by: talk from sf | December 14, 2009, 3:55 pm 3:55 pm
The normal people rebelled against this give away policy and as a result, a Military Coup canned his sorry butt. He is as of now a convicted felon and is pretty much a man without a country. The United States of America seems to be having much the same problem.
Posted by: Randy
so you ‘think’ there’s going to be a military coup in the US ?… I love right wing paranoia & fantasy…will the not ‘normal people’ all be placed in secret FEMA re-education camps?
Posted by: OMG | December 14, 2009, 4:05 pm 4:05 pm
And the right wing smear campaign against the President continues . ..
Posted by: tierra | December 14, 2009, 4:14 pm 4:14 pm
He says that the banks should lend more,
So we Americans cans spend more,
Go grab your plastic,
Let’s do something drastic!
Go buy a GE or a Kenmore.
Posted by: nothingbutlimericks | December 14, 2009, 4:37 pm 4:37 pm
OMG, I am not clairvoyant. I see certain similarities in these two sets of circumstances. Looks like a good definition of Populist is someone who plays to the common folks. Do you not remember the lady who opined that her new president was going to pay her house payment and buy her a new car? Something for everybody. A give away in my book. Good thing the money supply is not inexhaustible.
On the subject of a Military Coup, that depends on what your definition of a Coup is. This administration continuously calls the Constitutional Crises in Honduras a Military Coup when it was anything but. A military coup in the United States is unthinkable I would say.
But then who could have ever envisioned a President who does not seem to have a birth certificate and there still seems to be some question as to where he was born. A president who denigrates our great country at every turn. And then there are those who put down and ridicule the very folks who provide the jobs and supply the money to make it possible to be successful in this Great Country of ours.
That enough for you to reply on?
Posted by: Randy | December 14, 2009, 4:48 pm 4:48 pm
will the not ‘normal people’ all be placed in secret FEMA re-education camps?
Posted by: OMG |
Can’t they use the secret global warming re-education camps for that?
Posted by: Foghorn Leghorn | December 14, 2009, 4:55 pm 4:55 pm
Can’t they use the secret global warming re-education camps for that?
Posted by: Foghorn Leghorn | Dec 14, 2009 4:55:48 PM
Yes. On form 2959-GW, just cross out “global warming” and write in “pizza oven.” The government will know what to do.
Posted by: Live! From DC! It's Sat Night! | December 14, 2009, 5:28 pm 5:28 pm
But then who could have ever envisioned a President who does not seem to have a birth certificate and there still seems to be some question as to where he was born.turn.
Posted by: Randy
A certified BIRTHER… I rest my case
btw: making random comparisons & associations of political circumstances in other countries. esp. ones like Thailand which in no way resemble America is foolish at best and demonstrates a genuine lack of understanding
Posted by: OMG | December 14, 2009, 5:52 pm 5:52 pm
Posted by: Randy | Dec 14, 2009 4:48:54 PM posted “who could have ever envisioned a President who does not seem to have a birth certificate and there still seems to be some question as to where he was born.
Who told you there still is “some question as to where he was born”?
Conspiracy theories (like Obama’s hidden birth certificate) are often caused by the information people use to formulate their conclusions.
I’m curious. Were you aware that the US Supreme Court dismissed a lawsuit seeking to bar Obama’s inauguration due to “questions” over his actual citizenship?
Posted by: CenterOne | December 14, 2009, 5:52 pm 5:52 pm
Mr. Limerick. I liked your limerick.
I think the fed is putting together a program, in windows I think, that should pinpoint exactly who to give the money to to buy that washing machine to get the ball rolling again. Remember that science fiction story? Unfortunately it looks like the programmers they hired to write the code are the same ones who screwed up the raw climate data. They got a negative number!!!! So they decided to just give everybody some money so they could be sure to get the right person. Turns out I think that guy they were aiming for is on a long journey to the South Seas and hasn’t read his email for a long time…. We may see some results in 2012…..
Far fetched? Not so much…. Believe me when I say, the fed is really looking for that guy….
Posted by: Randy | December 14, 2009, 5:55 pm 5:55 pm
a guy who didn’t have the experience of running a Dairy Queen.
Posted by: talk from sf
if not for his family, buying his way into everything, yer boy W would have ended up a druggie alcoholic lying in an alley somewhere in Texas
Posted by: Yowsa | December 14, 2009, 5:55 pm 5:55 pm
Yes. On form 2959-GW, just cross out “global warming” and write in “pizza oven.” The government will know what to do.
Posted by: Live! From DC! It’s Sat Night! |
Yippee! I like pizza!
(lol, btw)
Posted by: Foghorn Leghorn | December 14, 2009, 6:00 pm 6:00 pm
On form 2959-GW, just cross out “global warming” and write in “pizza oven.” The government will know what to do.
Posted by: Live! From DC! It’s Sat Night!
form 2959-GW George W?
isn’t that the same form the Bushies used to alter the reports on science that they didn’t like,
Posted by: OMG | December 14, 2009, 6:01 pm 6:01 pm
Yes indeed. Banks need to make more bad loans so Democrats can increase population dependency on government.
Yet there is no money for worthy borrowers to invest.
Try to get one and see.
Posted by: drjohn | December 14, 2009, 6:07 pm 6:07 pm
“form 2959-GW George W?
isn’t that the same form the Bushies used to alter the reports on science that they didn’t like,”
No I think that was the directive to delete all incriminating emails.
Did not work
See article 22 Million Bush White House Email found.
Posted by: Ryan C | December 14, 2009, 6:15 pm 6:15 pm
“Were you aware that the US Supreme Court dismissed a lawsuit…”
As I recall the dismissals were due to technicalities and not based on the merits of the case. I believe one before President Obama was sworn in was dismissed because the plantiffs either didn’t have standing or were not harmed by the election of Barack Obama. However subsequent to President Obama’s swearing in, only Congress can impeach a president. No court, including the U. S. Supreme Court, has the Constitutional authority to remove the president. Therefore all cases, regardless of the merits of the plantiffs’ arguments, will be dismissed.
Posted by: James Danley | December 14, 2009, 7:34 pm 7:34 pm
Yet there is no money for worthy borrowers to invest.
Try to get one and see.
__________________________________
“The president said he is getting too many letters from small businesses who say they are credit worthy, but they are still having problems getting the loans.
“I urged these institutions here today to go back and take a third and fourth look about how they are operating when it comes to small business and medium-sized business lending.”
Posted by: tierra | December 14, 2009, 9:10 pm 9:10 pm
James Danley | Dec 14, 2009 7:34:40 PM posted “As I recall the dismissals were due to technicalities and not based on the merits of the case…..regardless of the merits of the plantiffs’ arguments, (the case) will be dismissed.”
On November 12, 2009 the US Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit dismissed the Berg v. Obama et al. case “because there is no case or controversy”.
There are NO “merits” to the question of our President’s birth certificate. It is ludicrous to continue promoting this conspiracy theory.
Posted by: CenterOne | December 15, 2009, 1:04 pm 1:04 pm
CenterOne, first of all your original comment referred to the U. S. Supreme Court dismissing a lawsuit. That was based on the technicalities not the merits. Now as for the ruling by the U. S. Court of Appeals for the 3rd Circuit, they went into great length about Philip J. Berg’s lack of standing and harm before their opinion that “there is no case or controversy.”
It may well be “ludicrous to continue” but it certainly is futile to continue to pursue the issue since the courts have no Constitutional authority to invalidate Obama’s presidency.
Posted by: James Danley | December 15, 2009, 3:01 pm 3:01 pm