Posted on 06/29/2010 9:23:41 AM PDT by NormsRevenge
Sen. Scott Brown (R-Mass.) said Tuesday that he would oppose the Wall Street overhaul bill as it stands because of the $19 billion in fees it would place on big financial firms.
In a letter to Rep. Barney Frank (D-Mass.) and Sen. Chris Dodd (D-Conn.), Brown expressed "strong opposition" to the fees that were added in the conference process between House and Senate lawmakers last week.
"If the final version of the bill contains these higher taxes, I will not support it," he said.
The letter is the strongest indication yet that Brown will vote against the Wall Street overhaul bill. Brown had voted for the Senate's original version of the legislation before the fee was added.
The conference bill cannot be amended on the House and Senate floor. House and Senate lawmakers were planning to pass the overhaul bill this week.
Sen. Robert Byrd's (D-W.Va.) death on Monday has sent Senate Democrats scrambling to shore up votes for the financial overhaul.
Sen. Russ Feingold (D-Wis.) said Monday he would oppose the bill. That is putting pressure on Senate Democrats to win over the votes of Sen. Maria Cantwell (D-Wash.) and at least one other Republican.
It's possible that Byrd's appointed successor, to be named by West Virginia's Democratic governor, would vote with Democats, which would put off a vote on the conference report until he is seated.
But Brown's defection may create a much bigger problem.
"It is wrong to impose higher taxes and ignore the impact it will have on our economy without considering other ways we might offset the costs of the measure," Brown said. "I am asking that the conference committee find a way to offset the cost of the bill by cutting unnecessary federal spending. There are hundreds of billions in unspent federal funds sitting around, some authorized years ago for long-dead initiatives. Congress needs to start to looking there first, and I stand ready to help."
Obama will meet with him and make him an offer he can't refuse. SOP for this administration.
Yeah, I saw her comments to the Press the other day too. Made me chuckle!
Interesting because I was just told by a caterer that if I used a “rewards” credit card, I would hae to pay a 4% surcharge as the credit card companies are now passing along these extra costs to vendors. This started in April and I wondered if it was some consumer bill of rights fallout...
No he didn't. He barely lost it.
Right you are. I was misinformed.
Right you are. I was misinformed.
Right you are. I was misinformed.
In some states that little move is illegal.
HE has to pay up to 4% to the credit card processor (he should be able to do MUCH better than that). AND there are some card companies that charge an outrageous fee if you are not a high volume company.
For example, I was taking only two or three discover card transactions per month. A vast majority were V/M/Amex. The Discover card people hit me with a $9.95 per month fee to accept their card. This amount to a very high percentage of my income on those sales.
Guess who dropped DC like a bad habit.
I am very close to dropping AMEX as well—they take forever to pay and their fees are high too.
I live in Illinois and have never heard of it, but the caterer is in Iowa, so I am guessing it is legal there :(.
Thing is, I don’t think I am getting 4% back on any of my “rewards” cards.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.