The Conservative Case For Bank Break-Ups – The Dish
The Daily Beast
Reading Mr. Sullivan this morning, there appears to be a growing conservative groundswell behind the idea of breaking up America’s “too-big-to-fail” mega-banks, specifically BankAmerica Corporateion, JPMorgan Chase & Company, and Citigroup Inc. Not only does Sullivan like the idea, proposed by MIT professor Simon Johnson at Bloomberg, but also Erick Erickson from The Red State endorses it, as does Michael Brendan Dougherty at The American Conservative.
Where I part ways with these gents is that they are approaching this more as a campaign tactic than a matter of principle. And a matter of principle it is (or should be) for every Republican with a functioning cerebral cortex.
The case, as I see it, is this:
1. The mega-banks have become so large that they stifle competition in the marketplace. That’s monopolistic, and that’s not legal.
2. The mega-banks have become so large that they have the ability to manipulate policy. That’s anti-democratic.
3. The mega-banks have become so large that they operate above market forces. This explains why they can charge high fees and behave in a way that earns them preposterously low consumer satisfaction ratings.
Republicans are pro-business. This is not the kind of business I think most of us signed-up to get behind. The simple reason to break up these banks is to make them subject to market forces, customer demand, and the rule of law.
Surely we can all get behind that?