Mike Castle Shows True Colors: A Shill for Wall Street, Corporate Interests
Castle Voted For $700 Billion For Banks, Has Taken $412,000 From Special Interests, Now Opposes Any Attempts At Regulation
[Courtesy of the DSCC, contact Eric Schultz at 202-485-3129]
Today, Congressman Mike Castle gave a big wet kiss to Wall Street by voting against a financial regulatory reform and consumer protection bill in the U.S. House of Representatives. The bill, the Wall Street Reform and Consumer Protection Act of 2009, will hold banks and financial firms accountable, strengthen consumer protections, and end taxpayer-funded Wall Street bailouts. The bill, which was opposed by special interest groups looking out for Wall Street, will result in commonsense measures that will strengthen Delaware’s Main Street and protect Delawareans against unfair financial practices. Despite Castle’s no vote, the consumer protection bill passed and will now go to the Senate.
“Mike Castle voted to give billions to the banks, takes their contributions and then opposes attempts to regulate them,” said Democratic Senatorial Campaign Communications Director Eric Schultz. “Today’s proposal includes common-sense, pragmatic steps to protect consumers and Mike Castle owes the people of Delaware an explanation of why he opposed it. Mike Castle opposed the stimulus, opposed health care reform, and now opposed financial regulatory reform. Congressman Castle is standing in the way of every common sense measure to turn the Delaware economy around and protect consumers.”
The Wall Street Reform and Consumer Protection Act of 2009 will:
- Put consumers first by creating a Consumer Protection Agency designed to protect Americans from abusive financial practices
- Help avoid future financial crises by giving regulators the authority to deal with failing financial institutions in a way that doesn’t threaten the entire financial system and doesn’t require taxpayer bailouts
- Regulate risky financial products like derivatives in order to put a check on banks’ hunger for profit and ensure the security and health of the American economic system, so that average Americans don’t pay for Wall Street greed
- Create a Financial Stability Council that looks at the overall picture of the economic system in this country, comprised of the relevant agencies of jurisdiction, that will identify and regulate firms that are so large or risky that their collapse would put the entire financial system at risk
Castle Has Received More Than $412,000 From Securities and Investment Industry. According to campaign finance records, Castle has received $412,732 from the securities and investment industry over the course of his career in Congress. [Center for Responsive Politics, Accessed 11/12/09]
CASTLE RECOGNIZED AS “SYMPATHETIC TO BANKERS CONCERNS” AND “USEFUL FOR THE INDUSTRY”
Castle “Generally Sympathetic to Bankers’ Concerns About Regulatory Burden.” In a 1993 profile on the new members of the House Banking Committee, Castle was described as sympathetic to bankers’ concerns about tight regulations. As reported by the ABA Banking Journal, “Castle is generally sympathetic to bankers’ concerns about the regulatory burden. When he closed a mortgage recently, he was amazed at the number of papers he had to sign, even though as an attorney he used to do real estate settlements. However, Castle adds that unless the industry can clearly demonstrate that regulatory reform will free up more loan funds, banks will have an uphill fight.” [ABA Banking Journal, April 1993]
Lobbyist for American Bankers Association: Castle Has Been Leader, Useful for Banking Industry to Have Castle on Banking Committee. As reported by The American Banker, “‘[Castle] has been the leader in the past decade in the area of authorizing underwriting of insurance products for banks,’ said Philip S. Corwin, lobbyist for the American Bankers Association. ‘It is extremely useful for the industry to have him on the [House Banking] committee.’” [American Banker, 9/8/95]
Forbes Magazine: Castle Has A “Deregulatory Bent” On Finance. In 1996, Forbes Magazine praised Castle for taking a deregulatory approach to electronic banking and finance. The publication reported, “Castle has a deregulatory bent on finance. He believes the market should settle most questions before government gets involved. In fact, Castle, who has held hearings on the implications of e-money, is not considering legislation. He prefers to let companies like CyberCash, DigiCash, Mondex and American Express work out the market through competition.” [Forbes Magazine, 8/26/96]
IN THE 1990s, CASTLE PUSHED FOR WEAKER FEDERAL BANKING REGULATIONS
Castle: Banking Industry “Constantly Beaten Upon” as Government “Constricting Them To The Point That They Can’t Do Anything.” In a 1993 hearing of the House Banking Committee on “Thrift Insurance Board Oversight,” Castle accused the federal government of constricting banks through regulations “to the point that they can’t do anything.” According to hearing transcripts, Castle said, “But I see banking and the thrift industry as really being sort of constantly beaten upon, whereas some of these other competitors are not quite as regulated and seem to be able to do all right, but people invest in them because the — they have confidence in them after investigating how their finances are, and so they tend to continue to do well…But are we going to be here three or four years from now with further bank problems, because frankly, we’re just constricting them to the point that they can’t do anything.” [Federal News Service, Hearing of House Banking Committee on Thrift Insurance Board Oversight, 3/16/93]
Castle Called for Reduced Regulatory Burden, “Big Government Off [American People’s] Backs.” During a 1995 hearing on the effect of government regulations on small businesses and the American workforce, Castle said regulations often led to business closings. Castle also promised to get the government “off the backs” of the American people. “‘While the regulations we’ve heard about today were designed to protect our nation’s workforce, if commented Congressman Mike Castle (DE), ‘they have had the unintended consequence of closing the door of many legitimate businesses and supplying the pink slips for some of our most dedicated workers. The American people want big government off their backs, and we’re going to work hard to deliver the baggage they’ve demanded. For our country’s future competitiveness and for the good of our workers, we’ll keep our promises.’” [Congressional Press Releases, 2/2/95]
Castle Proposed Expanding Bank Opportunities, Merging Financial Interests. During a 1995 hearing of the House Banking and Financial Services Committee, Castle asked Federal Reserve Chair Alan Greenspan to comment on his premise that banks were losing business to other lending entities and needed “consolidation and other opportunity changes” to compete. According to hearing transcripts, Castle said, “My impression is that if the banks are not given additional opportunities as interest rates turn down again, et cetera, that it’s going to be very hard for them to compete with some of the other lending that goes on by other financial institutions. And for that reason, we need to look at merging some of these interests and providing opportunities.” [Federal News Service, House Banking and Financial Services Committee Hearing, “Financial Services Competitiveness Act of 1995, 2/28/95]
Castle: I Feel That Banking and Financial Sector Need to Be Opened Up in This Country. In 1995, Castle called for a more flexible regulatory system for banks and other financial service industries. As reported by The American Banker, “Now that he ranks among the leaders of the House Banking Committee, [Castle] wants to extend his vision of a modern financial services industry to the national arena. ‘As a result of my experiences at the state level, I feel that banking – actually, the management of finances in general – needs to be opened up in this country,’ said the second-term Republican, who heads the House Banking subcommittee on domestic and international monetary policy.” [The American Banker, 9/8/95]
