War On Wall Street

It's obvious that President Obama and Democrats have decided that one of their best election year gambits is to get tough on Wall Street and big financial insitutions that they believe are to blame for the financial collapse of 2008.

Last week, the President rolled out plans for a tax on the 50 largest banks, to raise over $100 billion to pay off the full cost of the Wall Street bailout.

"We want our money back," was the President's line, even though the banks have already paid back almost all of their bailout money, with extra interest.

Now the President has unveiled plans for new government powers to limit the size of big banks and financial institutions and to crack down on some of their high flying trades.

"If these folks want a fight, it's a fight I'm ready to have," the President said flatly, again trying to pick a direct battle with Wall Street fat cats.

This latest broadside on Wall Street by the Obama White House is clearly an effort to try to harness voter anger in this election year, and swing some angry voters back to the Democratic side.

The problem is that this administration has done its share of work to prop up some of the same financial and corporate interests, which has led to voter anger against the federal government in general.

And right now, Democrats are the ones running the show, and therefore the most likely target of those voters who are literally seeing red.

So what are the chances of this getting approved?  It is not going to be easy.

Already key Senators have made it clear that they won't include in a Wall Street bill a White House plan that would set up a Consumer Financial Protection Agency, because it just plays into the narrative that Democrats are just growing the size of government every chance they get.

Last week Democrats tried to use Scott Brown's opposition to the bank tax plan against him in the Massachusetts Senate race.  That didn't work.

We'll see if the Wall Street financial regulation bill gets any traction with voters in coming months.  It could be another piece of legislation where the White House doesn't get what it wants.