Do the Dem's really hate the speculators? I don't think so.

[Fieldmouse]

http://online.wsj.com/article/SB121573640282644435.html?mod=todays_columnists

On his left is his party, wild to find a villain on whom to blame high gas prices, intent on deflecting attention away from its own antidrilling policies. It has settled on those unfortunate traders who deal daily in contracts for the world's short supply of oil.









It's a "carnival of speculation," howled North Dakota Sen. Byron Dorgan, who introduced a bill to "shut down casino-like betting." His colleague Maria Cantwell decried the "dark" market and demanded "rules." "We are putting oil speculators on notice," intoned House Speaker Nancy Pelosi, who wants to "investigate all energy contracts." Mr. Durbin's local airline, United, has also joined in, looking for a scapegoat for its own financial woes.
On Mr. Durbin's right is that financial engine of Chicago, the futures industry. Among Washington's least-kept secrets is that no Chicago politician -- right, left or agnostic -- would knowingly let anything harm that hometown gravy. And towering over the futures industry is the Chicago Mercantile Exchange, which, incidentally, is bidding $9 billion to buy Nymex -- the world's largest oil futures market and home to all of those nasty "speculators."
Give Mr. Durbin credit: He's a main reason the Chicago futures markets have continued to thrive. It was Mr. Durbin who only recently helped ensure the CME-Nymex deal passed antitrust muster. It was Mr. Durbin -- along with Rep. Rahm Emanuel, a Chicagoan, former CME board member and House Democratic Caucus Chair -- who in February sent a public screed to both Treasury and Justice, incensed that Justice would even suggest changes in the structure of the futures markets. It was Mr. Durbin who at that time praised the Commodity Futures Trading Commission for its "vigorous oversight" of the futures markets. That would be the same CFTC that his colleagues are now bashing as an ineffective regulator.
Given this awkward position, it should have come as no surprise when Mr. Durbin recently made clear he was taking over the "speculation" debate. Brushing aside bills that would raise margin requirements for futures trades or ban pension funds from the market -- measures that would send the futures business fleeing overseas -- Mr. Durbin in June introduced his own legislation to "reform oil market regulation" -- which has since become the most popular bill in town.
What is this tough new oversight of the futures industry? Mr. Durbin's bill calls on the CFTC to do more "investigation" of the market, and (bonus!) offers to supply that agency with the funds to hire a whole 100 new employees.
As one Republican put it to me: "It's fabulous. We call it the 'Just Keep Doing Exactly What You're Doing But With A Little More Money Act.'" GOP senators were so thrilled with the Durbin nonbill that they incorporated it into their own energy legislation, robbing opponents of a key talking point.
What we have here, in short, is Congress's most fraudulent debate since Chuck Schumer saved private equity from his own party's tax grab. Mr. Durbin's Democratic colleagues know exactly what he's doing, and are winking and nodding all the way. If they really meant what they said, they'd be slamming him and his bill, while moving forward with their worst regulatory impulses.
Instead, under the Durbin strategy, they can continue the sham of getting tough on speculators, all the while knowing he will see to it they aren't allowed to wantonly destroy U.S. financial markets. As a bonus, Mr. Durbin can privately take credit for rescuing his hometown industry, sucking up its support and donations for his re-election bid this fall. The only losers are voters, who've yet to be let in on the joke of this "speculation" farce.

[DougMD]

Well, it appears some are smarter than I gave them credit for. I thought they were simply ignorant about how the market works and needed a boogeyman to blame. Turns out some are secretly on the right side of this issue, albeit for a wrong reason.