>"and the commenter I was responding to was focused on the role of Presidents, not Congress."

Yes, and you both focus on people who did not create the legislation that shipwrecked the economy. That was conservatives in Congress and the banking industry. Carter and Clinton had no hand in drafting legislation. Clinton was culpable also, having not vetoed it, but it may have been overridden. Not likely, but possible. He made a bad decision, working with the GOP. It ruined us.

You don't support my well reasoned conclusion that the GOP were responsible for the repeal of Glass-Steagall, but you're not correct in that, and the vote shows the truth of it. Had Democrat controlled the Senate, the repeal effort would certainly have been defeated, and therefore there would be no bill for Clinton to sign or not sign. A president cannot veto a bill that does not exist. This is why voting for Democrats matters, because the banking collapse of 2008 was disastrous, and it could have been prevented.

>"Glass-Steagall was repealed by Clinton"

Clinton signed the law, but he didn't create the Gramm-Leach-Bliley Act of 1999 that repealed Glass-Steagall. That was three republicans who created the bill and got it passed in a republican controlled Congress in both houses. Banks had wanted to deregulate their activities since at least the 1980s. Republicans gave banks the deregulation that they so desperately wanted. It was a disaster.

Yes, there was bipartisan support, but the ratio was more like 2 republicans to one democrat voting in favor in the House, and nearly 90% of democrats in the Senate voting against.

Had democrats controlled the Senate, it would likely have failed, and we would not have had the huge mergers that happened or the resulting "too big to fail" problem where the failure of those financial institutions brought down the entire economy.

​

>"During debate in the House of Representatives, Rep. John Dingell (Democrat of Michigan) argued that the bill would result in banks becoming "too big to fail." Dingell further argued that this would necessarily result in a bailout by the Federal Government."

This will be vetoed by the governor who is a republican. as he has done before, or killed by republicans in the NH senate. The only way that this will become signed into law is for New Hampshire voters to elect a governor who will sign the bill, and elect legislators who will pass it in the Senate.

Republicans in NH want tax revenue to go to ME and MA, not to the people of NH. It's not like the people of NH are going to stop buying cannabis from other states anytime soon. it's just dumb.

>sad laugh of resignation

Trauriges lachen des Rücktritts

How about a can of dis Canadian cannabis?

The Toronto Maple Leafs after hours logo.