gov.ca.gov • September 26, 2011
AB 750 was vetoed today by Gov. Brown. Brown does not want a Blue Ribbon Commission – he wants the Assembly and Senate Banking and Finance Committees to study the formation of a state-owned bank on their own. The veto letter says that the matter is “within the jurisdiction and competence of the Assembly and Senate Banking Committees, and we should use our existing resources.”
Governor Brown’s letter is here.
Filed under: Uncategorized |
Public Banking 
it might be a good thing. didn’t mass botch it up with a selected commission that had biased bankers on it?
Where it will die…
Gov. Moonbeam is bought and paid for like the rest.
It’s difficult to fault our governor kicking back the legislature’s less than courageous referral to Brown’s desk. It would be nice if Mr. Brown would indicate whether he was supportive of their efforts, i.e. would he sigh a real bill creating the proposed bank.
I have talked with Jerry Brown directly and he is not supportive. It was at a house party and that was my one question to him. His reply was something like- I don’t think it would make a difference and it would be a waste of energy.
It appears that the Governor supports this type of legislation and realizes that the time is now to draft and pass it.His veto is actually a slap in the face of the private banking interests who attempted to delay this legislation with their unnecessary Blue Ribbon Panel.CHEERS for GOV BROWN !
Is this bad? What does it mean?
Gov Brown just passed it back to Assembly and Senate Banking Commission without a signature. Does it mean that it needs to be revised or does it mean that he doesn’t believe on another task force but still believe on having a state bank?
John, We’re “banking” on what you’ve posted — that it’s time to draft and pass a bill that creates a state-owned bank instead of one that just studies it and creates delay.
You can still have a “blue-ribbon commission” with a voluntary group who is willing to do a feasibility study free of charge. Otherwise the Assembly and Senate will just sit on it.
What does this mean? Are they going to write a new Bill to just start a Bank of California instead of studying the feasibility of a state owned bank?
Bryan, Yes, I believe the folks that were behind the bill to study the feasibility of a state-owned bank will now work to submit one on establishing a state-owned bank in CA.
Someone has to write up this study. Let’s hope they’re not hired by the TBTF banks to work “for free”. Let’s look into who’s on the banking committee that might take the lead on this and stay in touch with them.
AnnT…Let’s hope so. What can we do to encourage them and keep track of their progress?
Good question, Gerald… Suggestions?
Public banking is an idea whose time has come. A state bank (cities can have them also) would operate on behalf of the residents of the state of California. North Dakota, the only state that has a state bank, has had a budgetary surplus every year since 2008, partly because its state bank has contributed part of its earnings to the budget. A state bank, such as North Dakota’s, operates cooperatively with private banks and finances a state’s infrastructure.