As a candidate for U.S. Senate, Elizabeth Warren’s campaign is running a lot of ads on TV. But if you want, skip those 30-second spots and watch this six-minute clip of Warren in 2009, in her previous role on the Congressional panel overseeing the Wall Street bailout, hammering Treasury Secretary Timothy Geithner on how favorably the way banks were treated during the process.
Geithner and Warren are both Democrats. But partisanship goes out the window as Warren asks question over question. Why did so much money go to AIG? Why was this process so different from that of the auto industry? And overall, why are these enormous, reckless financial institutions, whose very actions made the costly taxpayer bailout necessary, being coddled while middle class families suffer the consequences?
This is why working families need Elizabeth Warren in the U.S. Senate: because she has the experience, knowledge, and passion to take Wall Street to task – in stark contrast to all too many current members of Congress, regardless of party, who think it is their duty to do Wall Street’s bidding.
For Massachusetts families, Warren is a worthy successor to the Ted Kennedy legacy in that she fearlessly prioritizes working class families above all else. But she would also be a senator for a new era, one in which “corporate personhood,” eroding worker rights, and yawning inequality threaten our country in ways Kennedy could not have predicted.
And we don’t have to imagine the kind of tenacity Elizabeth Warren would bring to the U.S. Senate. We’ve already seen it in her fight to create the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau (CFPB), which pitted Warren and her allies against the greatest lobbying force the financial industry has ever assembled. She succeeded, and in its initial months the CFPB has an impressive record of accomplishment: keeping credit bureaus honest, protecting consumers from being harassed by debt collectors, and the remarkable collection of $425 million in unfair credit card fees from American Express, Discover, and Capitol One.
While Warren’s work even outside the Senate has already resulted in $425 million back in the pockets of consumers, incumbent Scott Brown’s work in the U.S. Senate has resulted in more obstruction and unemployment. Promising to be an independent voice during his last campaign, Brown voted with fellow Republicans to block three different jobs bills: the comprehensive American Jobs Act, a bill to create infrastructure jobs, and a bill to help states rehire public workers like teachers and first responders. Had they passed, 11,000 unemployed Massachusetts workers could have jobs right now.
The greatest point of contrast, however, comes back to Wall Street. While Warren has committed to protect consumers from Wall Street’s recklessness and abusive behavior, Scott Brown is their faithful servant. He has received over $3.3 million in campaign contributions from the financial sector this cycle, more than any other member of Congress or Congressional candidate. He has repaid them by voting for tax breaks for millionaires and against tax cuts for those making less than $250,000. In the process of passing the 2010 Wall Street reform bill, Brown slipped in an exemption to allow banks to continue to invest in risky hedge funds and private equity firms.
The contrast is clear: A crusader for Wall Street and the financial industry, or a crusader for Massachusetts working families. We wholly endorse the latter, Elizabeth Warren, for U.S. Senate. Plan your vote now.