TPM LiveWire

Obama To Banks: 'We Want Our Money Back, And We're Gonna Get It'

Spread the word. Share this article on Facebook!

Share

Share

Twitter Facebook Fark Reddit Send to a Friend

Send to a friend!

To email:    Your Name:    Your email:

President Barack Obama had some tough words for banks this morning as he unveiled a fee on the country's major financial institutions -- a fee that the president said will recover the estimated $117 billion that the TARP program is expected to cost American taxpayers.

"My commitment is to the taxpayer," the president said. "My commitment is to recover every single dime the American people are owed."

Obama said the fee will be imposed on major financial firms -- only those with more than $50 billion in assets -- and would be in effect for 10 years "or as long as it takes to cover that taxpayer loss."

If these companies are in good enough shape to afford massive bonuses, they surely are in good enough shape to afford paying back every penny to taxpayers.

Obama stressed that the majority of the $700 billion in TARP money that was originally dished out has been recovered, though the program is still expected to cost taxpayers roughly $117 billion.

"We've now recovered the majority of the funds provided to banks," Obama said. "As far as I'm concerned however, that's not good enough."

That's especially true, Obama said, because of reports of "massive profits and obscene bonuses at some of the very firms who owe their continued existence to the American people."

"We want our money back," Obama said. "And we're gonna get it."

Comments (50) | Join the Conversation!

Recommend Recommend (0)

January 14, 2010 12:19 PM   

Mr President if you're really serious about making Wall Street behave a good way of sending that message would be to fire Geithner and Summers. Just sayin'...

Reply | Flag Abuse

Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?

January 14, 2010 12:22 PM    in reply to agio

Seconded.

Reply | Flag Abuse

Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?

January 14, 2010 12:25 PM    in reply to ohyeathatsright

Thirded... Now enact term limits and revoke the personhood status that these corporations enjoy allowing them to give outrageous amounts to campaigns of criminals. Any politician that takes money from lobbyists amounts to bribes and is a sellout. They should be removed from office by their constituents.

Reply | Flag Abuse

Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?

January 14, 2010 12:37 PM    in reply to hologram5

Yes Obama, just get out your magic wand and fix everything yesterday . What the fuck is wrong with you? You lazy ass, you came into office with a perfect economy, no wars, no problems and you haven't been able to fix the little problems??

Oh my!

Reply | Flag Abuse

Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?

January 14, 2010 12:38 PM    in reply to lousgirl84

They previous posters weren't asking for him to "fix" everything. Just fire Geithner and Summers.

Reply | Flag Abuse

Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?

January 14, 2010 1:08 PM    in reply to terricon

Yeah right. They want him to fix everything yesterday. I am in these forums everyday. They complain about everything.

I've read biographies of Lincoln and FDR and LBJ--three presidents who accomplished so much. But during their presidencies, supporters were furious at them because "they weren't doing enough" or "they weren't going far enough". The criticisms they faced were EXACTLY like the ones Obama is facing. That's what happens when you're trying to judge a presidency by the daily occurrences. You have to pull back and look at the big picture. Social security was a joke when it first began! Had you been around, you would have been cursing FDR!!

But go ahead and keep hoping for your pony.

Reply | Flag Abuse

Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?

January 14, 2010 1:28 PM    in reply to lousgirl84

Where did Terricon ask for a pony (or anything else)?

Reply | Flag Abuse

Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?

January 14, 2010 2:14 PM    in reply to lousgirl84

Are you serious?

The economic team Obama campaigned with was entirely replaced by the old guard that got us into this mess. I don't think asking for those people to be replaced is too much to ask.

Your one-sidedness is analogous to the Tea Partiers.

Reply | Flag Abuse

Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?

January 14, 2010 4:24 PM    in reply to ohyeathatsright

and your insensitivity and lack of perspective is one with Pat Robertson. He couldn't put that team in with a free falling economy. The idea was to save our ass first and for most. Man we forget so quickly how bad it was. Honestly I think that is the point that is lost in this debate. Where were we in December 08? Again we are shooting each other. If you're going to criticize do it with a bit of balance so that you don't sound like you're on Fox Business News.

Reply | Flag Abuse

Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?

January 14, 2010 4:56 PM    in reply to dnolands

Thank you Obama for making a speech about getting us paid back.

Thank you banks for paying us back so you don't have to fall under compensation rules and you can continue to rake in record profits on our dime.

Now, Obama how about replacing those crooks that you hired to run all of this stuff?

Reply | Flag Abuse

Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?

January 14, 2010 5:36 PM    in reply to ohyeathatsright

That's better

Reply | Flag Abuse

Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?

January 14, 2010 5:02 PM    in reply to dnolands

Oh, one other question about that.

Why "couldn't" he put in a new team? Was his campaign team not smart enough to deal with it? I don't understand this argument. When a company is failing, they kick out the CEO and try for a new direction. Why couldn't we take the same approach?

Reply | Flag Abuse

Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?

January 14, 2010 2:20 PM    in reply to lousgirl84

For my part I was simply expressing the observation that, if you're going to present yourself as standing up for Main Street against the excesses of Wall Street, maybe you should find some people without the long-standing connections to Wall Street investment firms to be your chief regulators?

So I guess that makes me one of "them" who "complain every day" and "want him to fix everything." Apparently extremism in the defense of Obama is no vice, in your book.

Reply | Flag Abuse

Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?

January 14, 2010 2:24 PM    in reply to lousgirl84

Good grief.

You're lumping together two utterly different criticisms of Obama into one phony straw man.

This tax is a HOLLOW P.R. STUNT. There is nothing stopping banks from recouping this $$$ from their customers through user fees, etc.

If Obama wants to stand up to the banks, he'll stop kowtowing to their every whim. Right now the banking industry RUNS D.C.

Reply | Flag Abuse

Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?

January 14, 2010 2:29 PM    in reply to de TOQUEville

Even if the banks recoup the funds by creating more fees for their customers, the point is, the US Treasury will have been repaid. Which is the point. If customers get tired of getting squeezed, after all, they can switch banks. (And get squeezed more. Yay!)

Reply | Flag Abuse

Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?

January 14, 2010 3:09 PM    in reply to jfields

In the scenario you describe, this new 'fee' is effectively a tax on bank customers... even though it's described as a "tough" measure against banks.

Reply | Flag Abuse

Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?

January 14, 2010 4:14 PM    in reply to de TOQUEville

Canada must be nice this time of year. At least he is getting the taxpayers money back. No proprs for that of course. Unless he pulls a Chavez I guess he's not liberal enough. HOw many years was Bush president? Obama in office 1 year and he obviously doesn't know how to lead this country (sarcasm). Get a grip and lets whatch this play out. Obama is playing 3d chess. We are playing tic tac toe. Patience

Reply | Flag Abuse

Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?

January 14, 2010 4:54 PM    in reply to dnolands

Yeah, who better to take on the bad ol' banks... than a couple of bankers who helped cause the problem in the first place??

And what better solution to a debt-and-credit bubble... than a massive increase in borrowing and printing money??

If Obama's prescriptions really will make the problems worse (hint: they will), then Obama supporters should be sounding the alarm. If O. screws it up, it will damage the Dems' electoral chances for years.

Folks, try and curb your reflex for getting so knee-jerk defensive any time someone offers a criticism of the prez... a reflex developed from years of reacting to right-wing spin-meisters on Fox or something, I guess. I'm a liberal who rooted for Obama from day 1, and I think it is very important to hold his feet to the fire. If you really care about the success of the admin., you'd agree.

I'm not a concern troll, and no I didn't expect O. to have solved all the world's problems by now. Just for the record.

Reply | Flag Abuse

Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?

January 14, 2010 4:58 PM    in reply to de TOQUEville

Seconded. ;)

Reply | Flag Abuse

Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?

January 14, 2010 5:43 PM    in reply to de TOQUEville

Have you ever heard that it takes a wolf to catch a wolf? Or in this case it takes a thief to catch a thief. Yes they caused it. Who better to quickly come in and fix the crumbling system. No they will not be the people who reform. They both need to go I agree. Hindsight is 20/20 and I'm sure you would have done it in a different way. The Tarp is almost paid back and he wants to tax their ass for the rest. What in Gods name is wrong with that?

Reply | Flag Abuse

Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?

January 14, 2010 5:50 PM    in reply to dnolands

By the way. I'm going to defend Obama because there is an all white party that will destroy him and they are plotting every day to do so. If the political environment wasn't so crazy I wouldn't have to defend like this. He needs his base. So yes hold his feet to the fire but in a constructive way. He also needs us to defend him out in everyday life. We voted him in and we owe him more than 13 months of support. So go ahead critique. Be my guest. Just make sure youre giving the love. Because i don't hear it coming from progressives right now. To say the least it is disappointing. When you look at the alternative it;'s down right frightening. The media is worse. I thing that Jon Stewart is the only one in the media that has his back right now other than MSNBC.

Reply | Flag Abuse

Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?

January 14, 2010 3:17 PM    in reply to lousgirl84

I'm going to agree that the patience with Obama wore out ridiculously early. It isn't just that the health care bill is still a huge achievement. I put together a timeline of Roosevelt's achievements, and noticed how he needed the whole of his first two terms. http://www.mnprogressiveproject.com/diary/4148/fdr-and-a-plea-for-patience

Notice how social security wasn't until his third year, and it took most of the year from introduction to signing. Despite the Depression, the SEC and FHA weren't created until the second year. So if we get the CFPC in Obama's second year, that should be pretty good.

Reply | Flag Abuse

Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?

January 14, 2010 3:25 PM    in reply to ericf

Be that as it may it has little to do with the fact that Obama appears to be far too cozy with Wall Street for my taste.

Reply | Flag Abuse

Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?

January 14, 2010 4:18 PM    in reply to agio

Yea he is totally in bed with wall street. That is stupid. Wall street hates OBama. This is the stupidest argument on the internet right now. 4 more years of Bush anyone? If you spent this kind of energy attacking the right we might be in a better place. The right does a better job of sticking together. We could learn something from that.

Reply | Flag Abuse

Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?

January 14, 2010 8:00 PM    in reply to dnolands

I;m with you to dnolands. I believe we are on the same page. Wall Street hates his guts and I fear they might try to have him offed they hate him so much. For posters here to imply he's in bed with them is beyond assinine.


BTW thanks for your support.

Reply | Flag Abuse

Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?

January 15, 2010 5:20 PM    in reply to lousgirl84

Well its my pleasure. We are a nation of fast food, xbox, facebook and reality TV. We want everything yesterday and all of the arguments I've hear on this string have been very shallow and quite frankly childish. The notion that taxing the banks isn't at least a step in the right direction is ignorant. Do you have a twitter or blog I can follow?

Reply | Flag Abuse

Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?

January 14, 2010 4:50 PM    in reply to ericf

Firing his campaign's economic advisers (you know the people that crafted his economic message BEFORE we elected him) and hiring the same people that got us into this trouble was something Obama did on his first day in office. Saying that he can't be criticized for this blatant bait-and-switch is short sighted.

I'm all for giving Obama a long leash and some time to get things done, and I still support him on most of his stated initiatives, but that doesn't mean that I have to be complacent with things that he DOES that I don't agree with. He never campaigned on 'more of the same', quite the opposite, yet his actual economic team embodies that approach.

Reply | Flag Abuse

Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?

January 14, 2010 5:29 PM    in reply to ohyeathatsright

ohyeathatsright, If thats true then what has he done that you support? Anything? I know it's hard to sit in our underwear and figure out the issues of the world. I guess someone has to do it. Obama didn't start this crap. I back him for more than a year. I'm not 100% behind everything he has done with the bank situation but I'm not sure he isn't trying. He didn't casue the bank collapse. The notion that he had all this time to bring in the right team to reform is crazy. We were loosing over 700,000 jobs a month. Large corporations were filing bankruptcy or needing this bailout. We all don't like it. Do you think he had the time to implement strong regulatory reform before his stimulus? Hell no he didn't. THat will not be fixed even if he threw his entire weight behind the problem for his entire presidency. It will take years to reform wall street and the banking system. Last time I heard that's on his agenda this year. You can criticize all you want. I don't give a !@$%&. Can you at least try to sound like you support him. It sounds like an effing Tea bagger website. My mane concern is getting him elected for 4 more years and then getting someone even more progressive after that for 8 more. Baby steps. Again I'll say this one more Effing time, the republicans have been in power 30 of the last 43 years. You could say 34 if you count the last four of Clintons presidency. Did you attack Clinton when he rolled over for the banks. It took the GOP 43 year to completely destroy our social and economic infrastructure. Its going to take Obama and two more 8 year terms from a liberal to fix it. I think there is a ton of juvenile disappointment in the air that the country hasn't been turned around in 1 year.

What it reminds me is when my 15 year old son gets disappointed that I took his XBOX away and he expected to get it back before the next report card. He whines and cries too. I'm glad Obama is level headed and patient. Because he needs it. With a political base like this who needs enemies.


Reply | Flag Abuse

Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?

January 14, 2010 4:10 PM    in reply to lousgirl84

I agree 110% with lousgirl84. Has Obama done a damn thing right? We all know Geitner has to go. That's no new thought or even a profound one. The reason him and Summers are in there is because we were free-falling and he needed to act swiftly. He put people in there who new what they are doing and could fix the issue of falling into a great depression. Now it is time to review the treasury secretary again.

lousgirl84 point about everyday she is on here and listens to this negative whining from the left is true. Some of it is needed but most of it is childish and really sounds immature. We've had 40 years of republican rule and it isn't going to change over night because Obama is president. I'll tell you what is going to happen. If we keep damaging this president over and over in accord with the right we will have 40 more years of republican rule. This is a very important time and perspective is a must. We should be attacking the right not Obama. Good grief! Do you want Sarah Palin as president? Keep it up.


Reply | Flag Abuse

Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?

January 14, 2010 5:17 PM    in reply to dnolands

Geithner and Summers "know what they're doing?" That's hysterical. If by "know what they're doing," you mean "caused this mess in the first place," then yes, yes they do. And you might want to ask Harvard if they think Summers knows what he's doing after what he did during his tenure there.

Reply | Flag Abuse

Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?

January 14, 2010 5:35 PM    in reply to terricon

Have you ever heard that it takes a wolf to catch a wolf? Or in this case it takes a thief to catch a thief. Yes they caused it. Who better to quickly come in and fix the crumbling system. No they will not be the people who reform. They both need to go I agree. Hindsight is 20/20 and I'm sure you would have done it in a different way. The Tarp is almost paid back and he wants to tax their ass for the rest. What in Gods name is wrong with that?

Reply | Flag Abuse

Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?

January 20, 2010 12:09 PM    in reply to lousgirl84

What's wrong with me? I'm tire of being lied to by BOTH parties. They are all lying POS's and worthless. They don't give a rat's behind about you or I. What's wrong with you in defending lies?

Reply | Flag Abuse

Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?

January 14, 2010 12:25 PM   

Does he think by "talking tough" he's fooling us into believing he's actually going to hold the bankers accountable? I'll believe this when I see it.

Reply | Flag Abuse

Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?

January 14, 2010 12:31 PM    in reply to terricon

Um, is the imposed decade (+) long fee not enough for ya?

Reply | Flag Abuse

Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?

January 14, 2010 12:34 PM    in reply to ayastrow

He "unveiled" this fee. I'll believe it when it actually goes into effect and I'm not holding my breath.

Reply | Flag Abuse

Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?

EH

user-pic

January 14, 2010 1:12 PM   

I'm left wondering why the taxpayers aren't receiving a good bonus for saving these companies and giving them record profits, all in a single year.

Reply | Flag Abuse

Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?

January 14, 2010 1:19 PM   

Good Deal!

It seems changes and restriction imposed by the Obama has done an excellent job and recovered close to $600 Billion of the $700 Billion the Bush administration gave to the banks with NO plan for repayment.

Now Obama is set to balance the 'account' with a fee on those banks who benefited the most by the bail-out.

This actual reality of Fiscal Responsibility in action, is exactly what the GOP is fighting so hard against.

Along with those few really unhappy Americans who will find something to 'complain' about no matter what happens.

Reply | Flag Abuse

Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?

January 14, 2010 1:54 PM   


The new fee should go over smoothly, since asking bankers for responsibility is a lot like asking hobos for change.

TheWeekinRebuke.com

Reply | Flag Abuse

Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?

January 14, 2010 2:22 PM    in reply to Weitberg

♫ Nothin' beats the hobo life,
Stabbin' folks with my hobo knife... ♫

Reply | Flag Abuse

Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?

January 14, 2010 2:29 PM   

I like this idea. What are the details? Is it only for those banks that took taxpayer $$$?

Reply | Flag Abuse

Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?

January 14, 2010 2:34 PM   

The proposed fee would be 15 bps of covered liabilities per year.

That is an effing joke.

Did Rahm just get a fax from Jamie Dimon and just sign his name at the bottom when he proposed this to Obama?

What a joke.

Reply | Flag Abuse

Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?

January 14, 2010 3:20 PM    in reply to rbeats

Obama admin. gets to look tough.

Banks take a small hit... cost of doing business ya know... and they continue to have their gambling losses bailed out by the gov't, and they get to dictate policy.

Everyone wins.

Except the taxpayers and their great-grandchildren.

Reply | Flag Abuse

Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?

January 14, 2010 3:53 PM    in reply to rbeats

The financial sector has too much power:

http://www.pbs.org/moyers/journal/01082010/profile.html

Reply | Flag Abuse

Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?

January 14, 2010 4:05 PM    in reply to de TOQUEville

I saw that show and of course - they have the money and money is power. They control the message because they can buy our senators and congresspersons and that's what they have done so to blame this President for not getting things done is assinine

Reply | Flag Abuse

Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?

January 14, 2010 4:10 PM    in reply to lousgirl84

???

Who (re-)appointed Summers and Geithner to their posts? Who decides the policy priorities for this administration?

The prez, right?

Doesn't "the buck stop" at the president's desk?

I'm not blaming Obama for the culture of Washington, I'm blaming him for the policy decisions made by HIS administration.

I can only assume by your cynical, resigned stance that you no longer "believe in" Obama's capacity to "change." Was it only a year ago that you were chanting that slogan?? Time flies.... I weep for your lost innocence.

Reply | Flag Abuse

Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?

January 14, 2010 7:54 PM    in reply to de TOQUEville

HE hasn't even had a chance take this issue on. It was plug the holes and try to start an agenda. Not to mention the time he took on the 2 wars were battling. If you weren't so effing cynical you could look over the last year and you would see a plethora of fires he had to put out not to mention he was able to tackle his agenda with significant achievement. I'm not sure you're the person on this string to throw out accusations of cynicism. Maybe next year cancer will be cured, there will be peace in the middle east, all kids off drugs, republicans will admit there is global warming...

My point here is today is that the tone after one year from his base blows my mind. I've heard just on this string that he's a sell out,cozy with wall street, he's fooling us by talking tough, bait-and-switch, he's into HOLLOW P.R. STUNT's from your own words. That's just this string. I hear far worse on other sites. When the public option was dropped I couldn't tell who was the GOP and who was his base. He new, because he's been in the Senate what he could pass and what would get killed. But no, it was lets run a primary candidate against him. Madness!

Are you from Canada? Just want to make sure your opinion matters.

Reply | Flag Abuse

Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?

January 14, 2010 5:04 PM    in reply to lousgirl84

Enjoy the show.

Reply | Flag Abuse

Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?

January 14, 2010 5:09 PM    in reply to lousgirl84

No one here has blamed Obama for "not getting things done". You keep repeating that, but no one ever said it. We're blaming him for something he DID.

Reply | Flag Abuse

Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?

January 14, 2010 5:54 PM    in reply to ohyeathatsright

Really? Go back and read the string again

Reply | Flag Abuse

Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?

January 14, 2010 10:24 PM   

So...the banks, who are ALREADY paying the TARP money back have another tax applied. Fannie, Freddie...nothing. General Motors, er...Government Motors, no tax (to be fair, there is no profit there either, thank you Government)...Chrysler, no tax. AIG, no tax. So...the banks who have paid the money back with interest and a profit are penalized...the failures of Fannie, Freddie, AIG and the car companies are not. Typical.

Reply | Flag Abuse

Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?

Leave a comment

Your response:

Follow us!

Most Popular

TPM Stories Now Surging on