I Approve of this Filibuster Threat

Byron Dorgan, who has not only been a strong advocate for financial reform, but predicted 15 years ago the clusterf%$# that would occur from Robert Rubin's vision of finance, has proposed an amendment to the finance reform that would ban Naked (i.e. an insurance policy in which you bet on your neighbor's house burning down) Credit Default Swaps.

It appears now that the Senate leadership will not allow this amendment to be voted on, so the distinguished gentleman from North Dakota is threatening a filibuster:

In the Senate Democratic Caucus meeting today, Dorgan and other progressive senators pressed the leadership to allow their amendments to strengthen the bill to come to a vote. According to Dorgan, the leadership relented and said his amendment would be one of the ones to come to a vote.

But tonight, as Brian Beutler reports, when the list of amendments to be voted on was released, Dorgan's was not among them. A frustrated Dorgan approached Dodd and Majority Leader Harry Reid on the floor this evening and told them he would filibuster financial reform if his amendment doesn't get a vote. "I understand everybody thinks their amendment's important, but the question of the unbelievable speculation in credit default swaps that have no insurable interest -- if we can't vote on something like that, given what we've seen in recent years, then it's not really financial reform," Dorgan told us.

I keep quoting the same article, which notes that specuilative insurance was recognized as a very bad thing 3264 years ago:

In 1746, Parliament passed the Marine Insurance Act, requiring anyone seeking to collect on an insurance contract to have an interest in the continued existence of the insured property. Thus was born the insured-interest doctrine. The indemnity doctrine, which precludes a buyer from insuring property for more than it’s worth, soon followed. The point of these rules is to limit insurance contracts to trading existing risks and not to create new risks by giving buyers of insurance incentive to destroy property. The doctrines have been part of insurance law in both England and the United States (which in 1746 were colonies under English common law) ever since.

But the masters of the universe who nearly killed us all insist that they know better.

Well, they don't and they should not be listened to, because their interest is purely in their creating ways for them to make money, and if they crash the financial system every 20 years, well, they've got theirs.

The reason that Dorgan is not getting his vote is because the reform is so transparently the right thing to do: Just ask the average voter if their neighbor, the creepy one who seems to have strange visitors, should be able to take out insurance on that average voter's house, so that the creep gets paid when the voter's house gets burnt down mysteriously.

They won't allow the vote because the bankers do not want it, and because if it comes up for a vote, they will have to pass it, because it is so transparently the right thing to do.

It's enough to make me root for the "medicine for chickens" lady to beat Harry Reid in his reelection bid.