Perhaps no issue defines who Carper represents in the Senate and who he doesn’t represent in starker terms than his leadership in screwing families down on their luck in favor of the big banks and credit card operations. MBNA, to be more specific.
In Carper’s world, any feigned empathy consistently takes a back seat to the banking and financial interests who fund his campaigns. While there is so much to dislike about his record, this issue, in my opinion, is the clarion call for his replacement in 2018.
You see, Charles Cawley and MBNA had a dream. A dream that came to them almost every day and night. They dreamt of a world where down-on-their-luck folks could no longer get out from under huge credit card balances by declaring bankruptcy. No exceptions.
The dream was funded by campaign contributions. Huge sums of money dating back to the early 1990’s. One of the earliest beneficiaries of MBNA’s largesse was then-Sen. Joe Biden.
But MBNA was just getting started. The company went all-in on electing George W. Bush, who had expressed a willingness to sign the bill:
Last week, MBNA’s investment began paying off. The company, one of the nation’s three largest credit-card issuers, has been pushing for years to tighten bankruptcy laws that allow certain consumers filing for court protection, in effect, to disregard obligations to credit-card companies and other unsecured lenders. On Wednesday, the White House announced that President Bush would sign a bill now moving through Congress that would make it tougher for consumers to escape such debts. If enacted, the measure could translate into an estimated tens of millions of dollars in additional annual earnings for each of the big credit companies.
It wasn’t until 2005, however, when Republicans gained control in entirety of the legislative and executive branches, that MBNA’s dreams became reality. During the previous cycle, MBNA had been the single largest corporate donor to Bush and to R legislators on Capitol Hill.
In March of 2005, the Senate passed the so-called Bankruptcy Abuse Prevention and Consumer Protection Act of 2005, with the House soon to follow. MBNA and its brethren spent over $100 million in lobbying for the bill.
Among the bill’s 12 co-sponsors, there were two Democrats: Tom Carper and Nebraska’s Ben Nelson. Joe Biden was a strong supporter of the bill as well. Barack Obama opposed it, and Hillary Clinton skipped the vote on passage.
Now, here’s where we learn just how little Tom Carper cared for anyone who could suffer consequences due to this bill (you simply must read this article). It is written by Maryscott O’Connor, and I am quoting liberally from it because it’s simply the best analysis I was able to find.
There were a series of amendments proposed that would have lessened the hardship on specific groups. When it came to protecting the vulnerable or backing MBNA, Tom Carper chose MBNA every single time:
On the Democratic-sponsored amendments discussed below (you can learn a lot from the Role Call Vote Summary, which lists each Amendment to S.256), the voting was consistent. Not even one Republican voted against party lines. Three Democrats consistently voted with the Republicans:
Sen. Nelson (D – Nebraska)
Sen. Johnson (D – South Dakota)
Sen. Carper (D – Delaware)Also frequently voting with the Republicans:
Sen. Biden (D – Delaware).
This means that Carper voted against the following amendments:
Schumer Amdt. No. 42; To limit the exemption for asset protection trusts.REJECTED
What does that mean? Here’s the translation: Sen. Schumer (D) wanted to limit the free ride given in this Republican-sponsored legislation to people who are rich enough to put their assets in a “protected trust”.
Laws inspired by the Enron debacle may hold the officers of a corporation personally liable for the deceptive financial practices, and ensuing disasters, of their corporation. However — luckily for prospective corporate criminals — there are in the United States a handful of states, such as Utah, where you may stash your assets in a “protected trust” and render them untouchable by bankruptcy laws — and you don’t have to be a resident of those states to take advantage of those laws.
The Bankruptcy Abuse Prevention and Consumer Protection Act of 2005, while purporting to strenghen bancruptcy laws against abuse, specifically provides exemptions for those asset protection trusts. Schumer’s Amendment 42 was an attempt to close that loophole.
It was rejected. Not only rejected, but every Republican voted against it. The Republicans were joined by Democrats Nelson, Johnson, and Carper.
That’s right. Although the bill purportedly is designed to prevent scofflaw bankruptcies, the R’s, with the aid of Tom Carper, made sure that there was a loophole that only the very wealthy could use to avoid the bill’s requirements.
Thank you, Tom Carper.
Durbin Amdt. No. 38; To discourage predatory lending practices.REJECTED
You know those credit card offers you get? The ones with the huge limits that make no sense in relation to your income? The ones with the 21% interest and the late fees and the renewal fees and the arbitrary increases in interest? They’re called Predatory Lending Practices. Banks can’t do it; ask the S&L’s. Better yet, ask the taxpayers who bailed out the S&Ls after they were driven into the ground by corporate managers writing deeply questionable loans to unqualified borrowers.
Credit card companies, however, can, and as a cursory glance at the terms provided by those innumerable junk-mail credit card offers that regularly appear in your mailbox show, they do.
Sen. Durbin proposed an amendment to the bill that — since the purpose of the Republican bill is to make it more difficult for consumers to gain bankruptcy protection from predatory lenders — would help curb those predatory practices, since those practices lead to major debt, increased bankruptcies and eventually — in the case of the S&L crisis, when those bankruptcies in turn forced the lenders themselves into insolvency — costly taxpayer bail-outs.
Democrats voting against the amendment, joining every single Republican Senator, were again Senators Nelson, Johnson, and Carper.
Nothing curbs bankruptcy more than encouraging predatory lending practices by credit card companies and only credit card companies.
Thank you, Tom Carper.
Nelson (FL) Amdt. No. 37; To exempt debtors from means testing if their financial problems were caused by identity theft.REJECTED
Again, if the purpose of the Republican bill was indeed Consumer Protection, this seems pretty straightforward and sensible. Why would we want to make life even more difficult for victims of identity theft by making the last resort of personal bankruptcy difficult or unavailable to them?
Nevertheless, the amendment to provide consumer protection for identity theft victims was defeated: all Republican Senators voted against the amendment, along with Democrats Nelson (NE), Johnson, and Carper.
If you’ve ever been victimized by identity theft, be sure to thank Tom Carper the next time the Great Man seeks to shake your hand.
Corzine Amdt. No. 32; To preserve existing bankruptcy protections for individuals experiencing economic distress as caregivers to ill or disabled family members.REJECTED
Again, this one is a simple effort to not strip away existing protections for people who are struggling to stay alive, housed, and fed while taking care of ill or disabled family members. It would seem uncontroversial in the extreme, right?
Not to Tom Carper or Joe Biden, who voted no. And then we come to:
Kennedy Amdt. No. 28.; To exempt debtors whose financial problems were caused by serious medical problems from means testing.
Kennedy Amdt. No. 29; To provide protection for medical debt homeowners.
Both amendments were sponsored by Sen. Kennedy, and had the simple goal of consumer protection for individuals whose medical debts are the reason they’re filing for bankruptcy.
All Republican Senators voted against these amendments. Democrats voting against Amendment 28 were Biden, Carper, Johnson and Nelson. Democrats voting against Amendment 29 were Bingaman, Carper, Johnson and Nelson. Republican Sen. Santorum was absent from the votes.
Tom Carper to the infirm: Drop dead.
Akaka Amdt. No. 15; To require enhanced disclosure to consumers regarding the consequences of making only minimum required payments in the repayment of credit card debt, and for other purposes.REJECTED
Again, this Amendment was a Democratic attempt to balance the aggressive protections given by the bill to predatory lenders by simply requiring credit card companies to give people more prominent warnings about what will happen if they only pay the minimum required payments on those cards. This is a significant problem for many consumers, who do not understand that making the minimum allowed payments on credit cards actually increases their debts on those cards.
All Republican Senators voted against the amendment. They were joined in rejecting it by Democrats Baucus, Biden, Carper, Johnson and Nelson.
No truth-in-advertising for predatory lenders. In a bill with ‘consumer protection’ in its title.
Just two more, I promise. I warn you. You. Will. Be. Outraged:
Feingold Amdt. No. 17.; To provide a homestead floor for the elderly. REJECTED
This is a truly outrageous rejection. Allow us to explain as succinctly as we can:
Each and every Republican Senator, along with Jeffords (I) and Democrats Biden, Carper and Nelson, voted to reject a provision that would ensure that no elderly people in enough financial trouble to seek bankruptcy protection would lose their homes.
Can you imagine any true Democrat voting to throw the elderly out onto the street because MBNA says so? You don’t have to imagine it. It’s reality in Carper’s World. Be sure and thank him the next time he shows up at your senior center for lunch. Oh, and no AARP discount for him.
Have I mentioned how Tom Carper always calls attention to his military service?:
Durbin Amdt. No. 16, As Modified.; To protect service members and veterans from means testing in bankruptcy, to disallow certain claims by lenders charging usurious interest rates to servicemembers, and to allow servicemembers to exempt property based on the law of the State of their premilitary residence.REJECTED
You read that one right. The amendment was a Democratic request to protect servicemen and women from bankruptcies by predatory lenders charging usurious interest rates, and to allow them the protections of their own state laws in potentially keeping their properties.
All Republican Senators voted against. Democrats Baucus, Biden, Byrd, Carper, Johnson and Nelson joined them.
It would seem that in a choice between supporting the troops, and supporting lenders, the decision wasn’t very hard at all.
I don’t give a bleep how big MBNA is/was. The very notion that anyone calling himself a Democrat could provide cover for the most predatory lenders in the country at the expense of the elderly, the infirm, victims of identity theft, and service members and veterans does not belong in any Democratic Party I would care to join. And, yes, Joe Biden is equally culpable. This is a side of Biden that rarely gets highlighted and needs to be brought out if he considers resuming his political career.
But it’s Tom Carper who is up for reelection in 2018. We don’t have to guess what Carper will do when a decision between his corporate benefactors and just plain citizens has to be made. He’ll go where the money is, he’ll screw the elderly, the infirm, victims of identity theft, servicemen and veterans and anyone else who gets between him and his campaign cash. He’s already done it. Over and over again.