The Fed’s former chairman, Alan Greenspan, for years praised the growth in the derivatives market as a boon for market stability, and resisted calls to use the Fed’s power to increase regulation of the mortgage market.
On the right, some were appalled by the decision by federal regulators to intervene to keep Bear Stearns from collapsing. “I want market discipline, too, but you don’t do it by empowering the Fed,” said Representative Scott Garrett of New Jersey, a Republican on the House Financial Services Committee. “We’re trying to get transparency for the market from an institution that’s not transparent in its own workings.”
Under the Treasury proposal, while the Fed would have some authority to stop financial institutions from taking on too much risk through the use of exotic financial instruments, it appears that little would be done to limit the flow of such new products.
The Treasury says that it and other federal regulators still believe a principle it enunciated a year ago, “that market discipline is the most effective tool to limit systemic risk.”
That discipline was largely lacking when the problems were being created, but now has returned with a vengeance, leaving banks with securities of dubious value that cannot be sold at any price that even approaches what they were thought to be worth only months ago.
Dems have to be cautious not to be duped. The Times reports,
Democrats reacted with some praise. “It’s a recognition, maybe a reluctant one, that you have to enhance regulation,” said Rep. Barney Frank, a Massachusetts Democrat who is chairman of the House Financial Services committee.
Frank should know better. This is not enhancing regulation. There are no teeth to this proposal. It is impotent.
Here's an example of how Paulson's plan opens new doors and cuts regulations:
Arthur Levitt, a former chairman of the S.E.C., ...said he was concerned by proposals to expand the authority of self-regulatory organizations, like stock exchanges. As an interim step, Mr. Paulson proposed allowing those organizations to change their rules without seeking explicit approval from regulators.
“They have acted in their own self interest too often to allow them to get out from under the oversight process,” Mr. Levitt said.
We should assume this is the tip of the iceberg in the 200 page document.
And we should assume that Bush has no intention to clean up this disastrous, mega-destructive mess, just as he has no intention to clean up the Iraq Occupation mess. Paulson is engaging in delay tactics, as the NY Times reports:
Mr. Paulson, in the speech to be delivered Monday, says the long-term proposals he is making should not be acted upon while the current market stresses remain severe. Instead, he says, no final decisions should be made “this month or even this year.” Next year, of course, a new president will take office.
Here's what mediachannel's Schechter has to say on delay,
This is one more effort to appear to at least be doing something, as the blog Naked Capitalism explains:
(Note: You can view every article as one long page if you sign up as an Advocate Member, or higher).
