|
U.S. PIRG Consumer Blog
« Consumer groups petition FTC on gift cards |
Main
| Does behemoth law firm Jones Day suppress speech unfairly? »
September 13, 2008
Financial meltdown roundup-- Call for a "financial supercop"
We joined leading consumer and community groups in a statement yesterday urging the government not to forget Fannie and Freddie's "fundamental purpose, as chartered by Congress, to expand homeownership opportunities and promote access to credit to under-served markets. This purpose continues to be of vital importance." This weekend's financial meltdown highlight is government pressure on the big players in the financial system to solve the pending collapse of Lehman Brothers without another sweetheart government bailout, as they got in a heavily-criticized deal when Bear Stearns crashed and burned in March. Treasury Secretary Paulson, SEC chair Cox and Fed officials met last night and today with some 30 heavy hitter Wall Streeters. From the New York Times: One observer briefed on the situation described the session as a “game of chicken” between the government and the heads of the major banks. Not surprisingly, the bankers who got us into the mess like the notion that they are all too-big-to-fail.Meanwhile, over at the Times' editorial page, Professor William R. Gruver has an interesting column. A Big Regulator for the Little Investor calls for (among other ideas) creation of a "financial supercop" agency but wisely says: We must avoid simply merging regulators and hoping for synergies. We need a system that focuses on the prevention of crimes and crises... He also calls for restoration of financial walls, but not the same walls as those created by the 1933 Glass-Steagall Act that were broken down by the 1999 Gramm-Leach-Bliley Act.
He makes the interesting proposal of walls between classes of customers. We are not sure that will be enough of a solution to address the meltdown that has been created by numerous factors ranging from the too-big-to-fail doctrine that placed deposit insurance and taxpayers at risk and the interconnections that created flashpoints and accelerants instead of fire breaks, but it could be a part of a solution. Excerpt: Seventy-five years later, instead of trying to limit what products innovative financial firms can offer, it would be more prudent to limit the markets to which they can sell their wares. In other words, the customers, not the companies, should be divided. This could be accomplished by extending the current system of government classification of “qualified investors,” used to limit who can invest in things like hedge funds. By demonstrating expert knowledge or the ability to absorb loss (because of high net worth), qualified investors could be given a pass into the caveat emptor world of modern Wall Street. Those without the inclination, the sophistication or the deep pockets to qualify would be limited to the more closely regulated menu of stocks, bonds and mutual funds.
Posted by Ed Mierzwinski at September 13, 2008 03:16 PM
Post a comment
|