Financial Overhaul Passes the Senate

Friday, May 21, 2010

Sen. Richard Durbin (D-IL) hugs Sen. Blanche Lincoln (D-AK)as Sen. Barbara Boxer (D-CA) and Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid (D-NV) stand nearby after voting to pass Wall Street reform, May 20, 2010. (Mark Wilson/Getty)

After months of debate and attacks from both sides of the aisle, the Senate passed a financial regulatory bill by a 59-39 vote, Thursday. The biggest change in the bill is the creation of an agency whose sole job is to monitor fairness of any product that is bought by the consumer. Next, the Senate and House versions of financial reform have to be reconciled and combined before heading to the president's desk, perhaps as early as the Fourth of July.

The Takeaway's Washington correspondent Todd Zwillich and Newsweek columnist Dan Gross share some of the key aspects of the bill.


Daniel Gross and Todd Zwillich

Produced by:

David J Fazekas

Comments [2]

Jerome Levitt from South Florida

I am a regular listener during my morning commute.This is about the story on how listening to one side of a cell phone conversation is more distracting than listening to both sides. Mr. Hockenberry made a flip comment that was something like, "some scientists have a lot of time on their hands." I realize this was off the cuff but it reiterates the idea that basic research is wasteful unless it has an immediate payoff. In this particular instance I think it is important to know that you might be less distracted while driving, talking to your passenger then listening to your passenger talk to someone on their cellphone. But beyond that basic research and scientific exploration is for creative scientists to follow their interests in discovering bits and pieces of data that eventually can be woven into larger frameworks of knowledge.

It might be of interest to know that the mathematical underpinnings of compressing information and data checking that made compact discs/digital music possible was developed years ago with no practical application by a mathematician with "too much time on his hands."

Please be more careful about characterizing scientific research without knowing the theoretical framework from which it springs and its possible contribution to our knowledge.

May. 21 2010 10:01 AM
Angela from Middle Village, NY

can you please try not to keep misusing the word "hopefully". I don't know if it was Todd or Richard...but "hopefully" is an adverb and although I constantly hear it misused by people in general, I expect more from those who wokr for Public Radio. In case you don't know, an adverb modifies how something is done, so you can think hopefully, you can look up to the stars hopefully but you cannot say, "hopefully things will get better." Thanks, it's driving me nuts!

May. 21 2010 08:17 AM

Leave a Comment

Email addresses are required but never displayed.