Next News Network

 Possibly surprising no one more than members of his own party, one prominent Democrat lawmaker has shockwaves rippling through the political landscape after making a what would be considered conservative comment although fairly common sense. Was this a slip of the tongue or does he actually mean this.

Breitbart reports, in Bloomberg’s “Balance of Power” broadcast Friday, Rep. According to Brad Sherman (D-CA), the FDIC insurance used to backstop depositors at Silicon Valley Bank (SVB) and that federal officials have indicated will be used in the future to backstop depositors is not free and that it is passed on to the depositors in the end.”

Let’s hear it from the man himself.

Sherman said that he supports increasing the deposit insurance limit, and “If you’re using the bank as a utility, as a system to pay your bills, then you shouldn’t have to check to see whether that bank is strong or very strong, you should be able to use it as a utility. A million or even higher might be in order. Whereas, if you’re making a million-dollar investment, there’s some onus on you to determine that you’re investing in a sound bank.”

After what happened to SVB, CNBC reported, Signature Bank customers frightened by Silicon Valley Bank’s collapse withdrew more than $10 billion in deposits.

As a result of the deposit run, that U.S. bank failed for the third time in its history. The Federal Reserve announced late Sunday that Signature was being taken over to protect its depositors and the stability of the U.S. financial system.

According to board member and former Rep. Barney Frank.Executives at Signature Bank, a New York-based institution with deep ties to the real estate and legal industries, were shocked by the move.

At the end of 2022, Signature had 40 branches, assets of $110.36 billion, and deposits of $88.59 billion.

Honestly the biggest take away here isn’t the fact that he stated the obvious about depositors having to front the bill. The interesting thing here is now all lawmakers who hold more than two hundred thousand at banks are looking to increase the amount so they won’t lose all the money they have “made” behind closed doors at the luncheons with their lobbyists. The main reason banks like SVB are getting  bailed out is because of all the powerful people at these banks. Whatever happened to the left wanting the rich to pay their fair share? 

Let’s continue this conversation, in the comments below.