Clinton Says She Would Break Up ‘Big Banks’ If Needed

Democratic presidential candidate Hillary Rodham Clinton speaks during the Iowa Democratic Party's Jefferson-Jackson Dinner, Saturday, Oct. 24, 2015, in Des Moines, Iowa. (AP Photo/Charlie Neibergall)
Start your day with TPM.
Sign up for the Morning Memo newsletter

NORTH CHARLESTON, S.C. (AP) — Hillary Rodham Clinton says she is willing to split apart big financial institutions should the need arise.

The Democratic primary front-runner told Democrats gathered in North Charleston on Saturday that she has the “toughest” proposals for dealing with Wall Street. She says would “break up the big banks” if necessary and hold top financial executives accountable.

The issue of Clinton’s ties to Wall Street is getting a fresh look after last weekend’s Democratic presidential debate.

Both of her primary rivals back reinstating the law known as Glass-Steagall, which once separated commercial and investment banks.

But Clinton and her advisers argue that Glass-Steagall would not have prevented the failure of large financial institutions, such as investment bank Lehman Brothers and insurer AIG, during the Great Recession.

Copyright 2015 The Associated Press. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten or redistributed.

Latest News

Notable Replies

  1. When I read the heading, somehow I heard this in my head:

    “It depends on what the meaning of the word ‘needed’ is…”

  2. Hillary Rodham Clinton says she is willing to split apart big financial institutions should the need arise.

    538Liberal, your comment is more subtle and, therefore, better, than what I would say…which is:

    Dammit! The need is HERE!!!

  3. Avatar for darcy darcy says:

    Exactly. And it would be her own definition of ‘needed’.

    Her high unfavorables are mostly her own doing.

  4. I’ve heard her answer several times that Glass-Steagall would not have prevented the 2008 meltdown. Have I missed it where she has described how we might avoid it in the future? Other then the general clichés about tougher regulations which usually means nothing?

  5. With 60% of the voting population choosing the identical franchise status of slaves, I am a little jaded about this business of “what it takes” to be elected.

    The 40% who normally DO vote tend white, racist, Reactionary and OLD.

    Bernie is making a stab at animating the so-called “people who normally do not vote”

    Or is it possible?

    Hillary is looking over her shoulder at

    Irene Independent and Umstead Undecided

Continue the discussion at forums.talkingpointsmemo.com

47 more replies

Participants

Avatar for system1 Avatar for the_scarlet_pimpernel Avatar for srfromgr Avatar for mymy Avatar for leftflank Avatar for trnc Avatar for squirreltown Avatar for randyabraham Avatar for darcy Avatar for 538liberal Avatar for dadzilla Avatar for occamsrazor2 Avatar for emilianoelmexicano Avatar for beattycat Avatar for earthquakeweather Avatar for tcamp52 Avatar for tiowally Avatar for jeffreybruner

Continue Discussion
Masthead Masthead
Founder & Editor-in-Chief:
Executive Editor:
Managing Editor:
Deputy Editor:
Editor at Large:
General Counsel:
Publisher:
Head of Product:
Director of Technology:
Associate Publisher:
Front End Developer:
Senior Designer: