So where do the candidates stand when it comes to what's happening on Wall Street? This article from the New York Times seems to lean left, but that boils down to the left's candidate being the only one with a trackable stance on Wall Street. It's worth noting the Times hasn't come out with an endorsement for the general election yet, but did endorse Clinton and McCain in the primary - never Obama.
Article basically says:
Senator McCain says we need additional oversight on Wall Street, but he has no history prior to the presidential campaign of advocating steps to tighten standards on investment firms.
He has often taken his lead on financial issues from two outspoken advocates of free market approaches, former Senator Phil Gramm and Alan Greenspan, the former Federal Reserve chairman. Individuals associated with Merrill Lynch, which sold itself to Bank of America in the market upheaval of the past weekend, have given his presidential campaign nearly $300,000, making them Mr. McCain’s largest contributor, collectively.
Senator Obama set out his general approach to financial regulation in March, calling for regulating investment banks, mortgage brokers and hedge funds much as commercial banks are.
On Wall Street’s Republican-friendly turf, Mr. Obama has outraised Mr. McCain. He has received $9.9 million from individuals associated with the securities and investment industry, $3 million more than Mr. McCain, according to the Center for Responsive Politics, a watchdog group. His advisers include Wall Street heavyweights, including Robert E. Rubin, the former treasury secretary who is now a senior adviser at Citigroup, another firm being buffeted by the financial crisis.
Both candidates quickly released statements yesterday morning, as the Dow dropped drastically in the opening minutes of trading.
McCain called for change and reform, and....gasp!....regulation. So he wants things to be different than what they've been under Republican control. He wants regulation, which is typically something Republicans would rather not have. Typically, Republicans believe regulation stifles natural progression.
Obama doesn't have much of a track record when it comes to reforming Wall Street, obviously. A year and a half ago, he did warn of the coming housing crisis...and he earlier this year laid out six principles of overhauling financial regulation.
One reason for both men’s sketchy records on financial issues is that neither has been a member of the Senate Banking Committee, which has oversight of the industry and its regulators. Under both parties’ leadership, the committee often has been a graveyard for proposals opposed by lobbyists for financial institutions, including Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac, which last week were forced into government conservatorships.
Industry lobbyists’ success in killing such regulations meant senators outside the banking panel did not have to take a stand on them
Which is why there's little or no track record for either of these men on how they'd vote on financial issues, reform, and regulation. Which....is why it's impossible to say who you'd vote for when it comes to this issue.
A clean slate, if you will. Let's watch what each candidate does. And then watch and read what the pundits say so we aren't just drinking up exactly what's served. We need to know for sure.
------
Here's a link to the NBC Action News story on weathering the financial storm, advice from local financial experts.