Ok, I admit it, I am partisan!

Financial Reform legislation is on the brink of passage. As one might expect, the bill is less than perfect, as some of the worst practices permitted during the Bush "market-based" years have survived the push for new regulatory powers for the people of this nation. I haven't read the bill, but only press reports, and I can't pretend that I would have understood much of it anyway. However, I do think I understand the partisan politics associated with the negotiations.

The Boston Globe reported today that our junior Senator, Scott Brown, is withholding support, "citing $19 billion in new bank taxes inserted at the last minute". As far as I knew, the bill always included some kind of attention to revenue, but I suppose it was a surprise to him. With this in mind, I fired off the following missive to him this morning:

I am displeased with your opposition to taxing big banks and hedge funds. Do you recall that taxpayers bailed out the former? Is it possible that your ties to Mitt Romney, and by extension to Bain Capital, might have something to do with your desire to protect hedge funds? Were I to run against you in 2012 I would certainly make that charge.
I know that you and your party are deficit hawks. But how can we reduce the deficit to pay for your party's 2 wars and 8 years of lax regulation unless revenue is raised? With this opposition you once again confirm what I have believed about you all along: you are a doctrinaire, conventional Republican. I am not disappointed, however, as this is what I expected from you.

Let's see: a tax on hedge funds - does the average middle-class voter care about a tax imposed on an industry that serves the interests of the richest of the rich, the group who most benefitted from the Bush tax cuts? I doubt it, but nice try, Sen. Brown.