How did Scott Brown get to be the financial reform "decider"?

Salon asks the "duh" rhetorical question column of the week, and never even mentions the Obama-Dodd-Schumer troika's refusal to deal with Russ Feingold. (Which is, of course, the non-rhetorical answer to the rhetorical question.)

NYT a bit confused about Obama's "financial reform"

First, contrary to its claim that he has a lot to offer Europe on financial reform, vs. their not listening to him on fiscal stimulus issues, he actually has bupkis to offer.

First, let's look at Senate dealings. Bottom line is, top Senate Democrat money-market-lusters Chris Dodd and Chuck Schumer had their choice: Deal with progressive Democratic Russ Feingold to get something more reformative, or deal with faux Tea Bagger, new GOP Sen. Scott Brown.

And, they chose Brown.

And, they chose Brown with the benign, silent blessing of Obama, who claims what's coming out of House-Senate conference has most of what he wants.

If that's true, that's the clearest sign yet of his neoliberalism on fiscal policy.

If it's false, that's the clearest sign yet of his Kumbayahism on fiscal policy.

Second, because of Reason No. 1, there is not real financial reform. Bankers' taxes and other ideas like that are mainly coming from the other side of the pond, not here.