July 5, 2020
  • 8:47 am John Zaring | The Rational Center: Why Trump Will Lose in a Historic Landslide!
  • 5:25 pm
  • 10:10 am From the Publisher: A Quick Anniversary Update
  • 10:30 am Coast Guard veteran Eric Ohlsen to challenge Assemblymember Tom Lackey
  • 11:00 am Black ‘N Blue fights to break The SCV Curse

Perhaps he thinks corporations have our best interests in mind.

Maybe reelection is more important than his constituents’ well-being.

Congressman Steve Knight, who represents the 25th Congressional District, recently voted against ordinary folks — Republicans, Independents and Democrats. Congressman Knight voted against taxpayers.

Knight voted to get rid of the Orderly Liquidation Authority, which requires all financial firms associated with a financial failure to pay back the costs and immediately fire their banks’ managers. It forces employees to pay back bonuses.

Essentially, this vote means that when a big corporation goes down and the government bails it out, we —  the taxpayers — now have to pay for it.

“If JPMorgan is on the verge of going bankrupt, the federal government can declare an emergency and essentially take control of it overnight, to make sure its collapse doesn’t spread throughout the financial sector,” wrote economics writer Jeff Stein, Vox, June 8, 2017.

By voting against OLA, Knight wants to allow the same conditions that caused the Great Depression (1929) and the Great Recession (2008). He did so by voting for the Financial Choice Act.

There’s nothing fair about the legislation. There is no choice involved either.

With that vote, Congressman Knight kissed our economy with a monster death wish. Whether he understood what he was doing or because he needed money from the Koch Brothers for his campaign against Katie Hill, he voted for the irresponsible Financial Choice Act of 2017.

This vote was damaging and irresponsible.

“There isn’t a straightforward constructive provision to be found in it,” wrote Robert Hocket for Forbes magazine.

There are many destabilizing aspects in the Fair Choice Act. For example, we would no longer be able to ferret out worldwide non-bank financial institutions for extra scrutiny and regulation.  Rather than be proactive, we would become reactive like we were during the MetLife and AIG meltdowns.

Before OLA, chaos erupted when Bear Stearns’ and the Lehman Brothers’ failed. With the advent of OLA in 2010, Washington Mutual’s looming failure was resolved proactively, leaving not a blip on the economy.

Finally, Congressman Knight wants to allow mortgage, banking and other types of fraud to reemerge in the American economy. Financial white collar thievery was the blight of average citizens before the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau. The Countrywide and Wells Fargo scandals are good examples of what to expect when there are no regulations.

Knight would take protection from financial fraud away from his constituents by undermining and taking away the authority of the CFPB, which has protected consumers from deceptive business practices.

Fortunately, when the Financial Choice Act came to the Senate, it was dead on arrival. Wise senators watching Steve Knight and his cronies pass the destabilizing bill decided to write a replacement that preserved most of the Dodd-Frank protections that Rep. Knight sought to eliminate.

However, the failure of the Financial Choice Act does not lessen criticism of Rep. Knight’s vote. If the vote was not because of his own poor judgment, then it was because of his ignorance. It must be one of these — or both.

Sign up for our Newsletter

Jim Harris: Rep. Knight fiscally irresponsible
Article Name
Jim Harris: Rep. Knight fiscally irresponsible
Columnist Jim Harris argues that Rep. Steve Knight's vote to repeal financial regulations is fiscally irresponsible.
Publisher Name
The Santa Clarita Valley Proclaimer
Jim Harris

%d bloggers like this: