Prep for 1PM Call

[Nish Suvarnakar]

Just wanted to put all thoughts from staff on one email rather than chain and send out to other staff (Kate & Eric).  Brian, can you bulletpoint three short sentences you want to talk about? 

Kate & Eric, 

If either of you have anything you think might be beneficial to include in our discussions today (see below), please send them to this email.  

Eric is working on two projects right now: 

1.  Comparison memo of investigations (S&L/Enron/RMBS) which is attached.  I think there is a longer piece here somewhere. My initial thoughts: a.  one of Eric's findings is that criminal prosecutions did not change bank behavior or diminish criminality but rather gave the political will for regulatory reform.  This helps make the argument that its time for OWS to get political.  b.  If criminality is still unabated, what legislation has greatly diminished the level of criminal prosecutions (good and bad).  c.  S&L and Enron were highly targeted investigations while we are really pushing for systematic change, yet the regulatory reforms led other investigations and reform in other sectors.  If you all can read this memo and give (over this email your thoughts).  

2. Building out enforcement and 1st settlement research via the Google doc of state diversions we put together with AFR's help.  Don't know what the next step here is but thoughts leaning toward getting point person in target states to convene similar state calls (PA, AZ, FL, etc) who are all mulling the use of 2.5 Billion and tracking whether PR is actually happening as Joe Smith and the Federal Monitoring seems to move slower than the investigation

Kate: 

1.  Helping buildout the web site for both press and new media purposes.  We should have shell for staff to look at this week. 

2.  I've asked her to take on more direct state media (bloggers, local press outreach) and approach our Twitter/Facebook pages a little more targeted: Twitter is will essentially be our news feed high lighting interesting numeric facts (when thinking about possible content (Dan & Ben) its the stats and numbers that generates the most followers per post.  For Facebook: facts don't move anyone to share but personal stories do.  That is right now how we are deciding what content goes up and where.  

 

From Ben: 

On the report-back, I'll note that we did get some press from the action last week, and that there was, via Netroots Nation and the Dayen panel, some pressure on Schneiderman last week. On the web ad buys, not much traction there to report in terms of media. 

For discussion, I would welcome a conversation about any steps/engagement we should be taking around principal reduction broadly (the Konzcal report, possible press calls or op-eds, etc.) and specifically around the discussions and motions of Fannie & Freddie (new CEO … sell-off of some mortgages) http://www.nytimes.com/2012/06/09/business/to-stem-foreclosures-federal-housing-agency-to-sell-off-loans.html?ref=shailadewan

We haven't talked through the email below but we're moving ahead with this as our work plan – so I can speak to any of the pieces below.

From Nish: 

-Spoke with Erica Payne: She is very excited about webinar idea (we discussed on Damon Silver call).  She thinks she can get Simon Johnson to do it and I think I have a frame to work on (will send memo later today).  

-Great conversation with Corporate Action Network.  They seemed very keen on working with us as they want to have something involving the financial sector in their portfolio.  I was suggesting a number of topics but as shop, they would support, litigation, investment (largely around, building target investor support in our activities), application (i.e. online), research, and strategy (chinks in armor of big banks).  Intriguing pitch. Think there is real opportunity for solving our Solomon/enforcement dilemma.  

-FTB is planning the Obama fundraiser action.  Would like to have a broader discussion about OWS partnerships. There seems to be internal tension within OWS affiliates about level engagement in politics and political organizations. 

From Dan:

I don't know that this is quite the time/place for it, but I've been wondering if we're making a strategic error by letting Romney & Rs off the hook.  Here's why I say that:

This has been an awful period for Obama. The economic numbers were terrible, and just as he's trying to sharpen the contrast with Romney & Bain on terms that are advantageous for us, he gets slammed by the Wall Street wing of the party.  Then Walker prevails in WI.

My sense is that this will buttress what seems to be the campaign strategy of essentially writing off low-income & white working class voters -- moving away from a more populist message towards one that plays to more affluent constituencies and to appeals that aren't based on economic framing (war on women, LGBT issues, etc.).  Add to that the fact that, unlike in the fall, OWS has now essentially vanished from the scene, and doesn't appear to be re-emerging at scale.

In other words, the dynamics aren't ones that seem to be showing him a wind he can tack into. We've tried to show just from the polling that public sentiment is there, and the initial HDL actions were a spark -- but unlike New Mexico the sparks haven't yet ignited a major wildfire.

We can - and should - keep targeting Obama (and DOJ, etc.) - but I also wonder if we shouldn't open up a front on Romney as well, with the purpose of showing his vulnerabilities if pursued on this. Undoubtedly the WH has those numbers, which is why they went strong on Bain -- but I don't see that Romney's been pressed on how repealing Dodd-Frank, Sarbanes Oxley, etc. makes sense -- or slammed for comments to the effect that the solution for homeowners is to let the housing market hit bottom & let the chips fall where they may.

The strategy here would be to demonstrate how this line of attack throws Romney off balance -- remembering how, for example, it was Iowa CCI's bird-dogging that generated the "corporations are people too" line.

[Dan Petegorsky]

I like the way this is shaping up. Some further edits/suggestion
attached - and I'll think more about what we want to do with it. If
nothing else it's a resource we can put on the web as a reference/link.

[Ben Wyskida]

I could definitely use this as a resource with press - its very useful. One thought is some more bolds, bullet points, etc. the press could be an audience so we should make sure it's accessible

* mobile *

> --
> You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "CFS_staff" group.
> To post to this group, send email to cfs_...@googlegroups.com.
> To unsubscribe from this group, send email to cfs_staff+...@googlegroups.com.
> For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/cfs_staff?hl=en.
>
> <Financial Investigation Comparison Memo dp.doc>

[LCCG Policy Staff]

I can make a version that is targeted for press with bullets, key points, etc.

- Erik

[Dan Petegorsky]

Also - I think I forgot to say we should definitely link to Bill Black's Bloomberg interview if it's not already in the notes (it starts with the "exception that proves the rule" Abacus bank indictments)

[LCCG Policy Staff]

Here is a more press-friendly version with bullets and some bold facts.  I can condense and shorten even more if that would be helpful.

- Erik

[Dan Petegorsky]

Thanks, Erik.  FYI, we just pinned down Bart Dzivi to write us a paper (on the Konczal model) outlining possible paths for prosecutions; he'll be sending me an outline next week.

Content-Type: application/msword;
         name="Financial Investigation Comparison Memo_press.doc"
Content-Disposition: attachment;
         filename="Financial Investigation Comparison Memo_press.doc"
X-Attachment-Id: f_h3eldb340