Its not the default that strikes the most fear in the White House and Congress these days. Its the downgrade As Robert Reich notes, Standard and Poors is the biggest driver in the deficit battle. Why would anyone care what the corrupt and disgraced organizations who quite nearly brought down the world economy think about anything at this point? And yet, that is where elite opinion is focused right now:
[W]hat really haunts the administration is the very real prospect, stoked two weeks ago by Standard & Poors, that Barack Obama could go down in history as the president who presided over his countrys loss of its gold-plated, triple-A bond rating.
[]
Financial analysts say such a move would hit Americans with more than $100 billion a year in higher borrowing costs, but its not just that. It would be a psychic blow to a nation that already looks over its shoulder at rising economic powers like China and wonders, whats gone wrong? And it would give the presidents Republican rivals a ready-made line of attack that hes dragging the country in the wrong direction.
This rumbling has been coming from Capitol Hill for a while, which made us start asking questions about what was really going on with Standard and Poors. It felt like theres a story-behind-the-story driving S&Ps actions in the debt ceiling debate, which appear inexplicable at face value and go way beyond what Moodys or Fitch have done. And the more we looked at the timeline of events, the more we wondered how the intertwining dramas of a) S&P downgrade threats, b) the liability that the ratings agencies may have for their role in the 2008 financial meltdown, and c) the GOPs attempts to insulate the ratings agencies from b) are all impacting each other.
Timeline of Events
On July 21, 2010 President Obama signs Dodd-Frank into law. Prior to Dodd-Frank, the courts found that credit ratings are expressions of opinion that were protected under the first amendment, subject to a demonstration of actual malice:
The Dodd-Frank Financial Reform Act stripped away those protections, so that CRAs were now subject to the same expert liability as an auditor or securities analyst, and required only a knowing or reckless state of mind for liability, rather than proof of scienter. It also repealed Section 436 of the Securities Act of 1933, which granted safe harbor for ratings, which were part of a prospectus.
Click for Full Text!