The "Comprehensive" Problem with Derivatives Regulation
By Dave Mason
Persuaded that lax regulation of financial derivatives contributed to the 2008 financial crisis, policymakers in Congress and the Obama Administration have adopted a knee-jerk solution: regulate everything.
The Obama Administration has proposed and the House Financial Services and Senate Banking Committees have each approved schemes for regulating derivatives that differ in many details. But the proposals agree on the most significant point: that derivatives regulation must be "comprehensive." By "comprehensive," regulators mean that every financial product, every buyer, every seller, every intermediary, and every transaction must be regulated unless expressly exempted by statute or decree.
The premise supporting the blanket regulatory diktat—that every derivative contract poses systemic risk to the financial system—is unproven, the application overly broad, and the resulting bureaucratic burden excessively heavy.
>> Click here to read the full report
For more information, visit Heritage's Enterprise and Free Markets webpage, which features research, commentary, blog posts, charts and additional policy resources.
The regulatory burden on Americans continued to surge during 2009, with record increases in costs thanks to both the Bush and Obama Administrations. Given ongoing regulatory initiatives at several agencies, it is very likely that this surge will continue.
Click here for more information
The Heritage Foundation | 214 Massachusetts Ave NE, Washington, DC 20002 | 202.546.4400
Wednesday, April 21, 2010
Fwd: Enterprise Update: The "Comprehensive" Problem with Derivatives Regulation
Fwd: Morning Bell: The Crony Capitalist Threat to Our Economic Freedom
04/21/2010
The Crony Capitalist Threat to Our Economic Freedom
The Obama administration's game plan for passing their financial regulatory reform plan is clear: ignore the details of their bill, demonize Wall Street, and cast conservatives as the pawns of big bankers. But as Politico reports today, there's a complication in their battle plan: "The Democratic Party is closer to corporate America — and to Wall Street in particular — than many Democrats would care to admit."
Politico should be commended for acknowledging the left's cozy ties with corporate America, but then they go on to write: "Some Democrats acknowledge that the legislation — and the harsh anti-Wall Street rhetoric — could cost them campaign contributions from the financial services sector in what is already shaping up to be a tough election year." This is just flat wrong. As evidence and logic clearly demonstrate, the left's harsh anti-business rhetoric and glee for expansive regulation is a boon to their campaign coffers. As USA Today reports, Goldman Sachs alone has given nearly $900,000 since January 2009 to congressional candidates, and according to the non-partisan Center for Responsive Politics, 69% of the firm's contributions went to Democrats while 31% went to Republicans.
In fact, Goldman is not opposed to Obama's Wall Street Bailout Bill at all. As a Goldman official told Politico Monday: "We're not against regulation. We're for regulation. We partner with regulators." This echoes reporting done by The Huffington Post on loopholes in the banking bill. HuffPo was told by a financial services lobbyist: "Obtaining a carve-out isn't rocket science. Just give Chairman Dodd (D-CT) and Chuck Schumer (D-NY) a ****load of money." And loads of money is what Wall Street has been giving to the authors of the Wall Street Bailout Bill. The Wall Street banker at the center of Goldman's SEC fraud complaint recently solicited money from his banker friends for Sen. Schumer describing him as "one of the few members of Congress that has consistently supported the hedge fund industry."
Fwd: MRC Alert: ABC Self-Generates 'Controversy' Over Palin's Innocuous 'Christian Nation' Remark
A daily compilation edited by Brent H. Baker, CyberAlert items are drawn from daily BiasAlert posts and distributed by the Media Research Center's News Analysis Division, the leader since 1987 in documenting, exposing and neutralizing liberal media bias.
Tracking Liberal Media Bias Since 1996
Wednesday April 21, 2010 @ 09:27 AM EDT1. ABC Self-Generates 'Controversy' Over Palin's Innocuous 'Christian Nation' Remark
Horror of horrors, at least to ABC, last week Sarah Palin suggested the U.S. is a "Christian nation," hardly an unusual presumption, but the network discovered "controversy" as anchor Diane Sawyer announced: "Tonight, a question about religion and America, occasioned by comments by Sarah Palin that are getting a lot of attention." A lot of attention from liberal groups with a specific agenda on the subject, a fact left out of the World News story, but revealed in an ABCNews.com article which led with how "two groups dedicated to the separation of church and state are now speaking out against her, arguing that she is misreading the founders' intent." Dan Harris began his Tuesday report: "This latest Palin-provoked controversy is the result of these comments on YouTube." Palin, in poor-quality bouncing video, could be heard saying "God truly has shed his grace on thee, on this country." Harris quoted Palin as asserting it is "mindboggling to suggest that America is not a Christian nation." He countered: "Mainstream historians say no, that if you look at the early documents, including personal letters, it's very clear that the founders did not want to make Christianity the official religion."2. Matthews: Republicans Like Rubio Taking Part in 'Stalinesque' Purge of GOP
Chris Matthews -- who was offended by Rush Limbaugh calling the Obama administration the "regime"-- claimed the Republicans were engaged in a "Stalinesque" purge. On Tuesday's Hardball Matthews charged that conservatives challenging moderates within the Republican Party (like Marco Rubio versus Charlie Crist in Florida) was akin to Joseph Stalin's violent purges in the 1930s, as he teased an upcoming segment this way: "Coming up what happens to Republicans who don't march to the right wing tune? Well they're getting purged. This is Stalinesque, this stuff."3. ABC's Ashleigh Banfield Frets Over War of Words Between Clinton and 'Right-wing Polemics'
Good Morning America's Ashleigh Banfield on Sunday spun Bill Clinton's continuing attack on talk radio as a "war of words" between the ex-President and the "right-wing polemics [sic]." The former MSNBC host joined ABC in 2009 after a bitter departure from that cable network.4. CNN's Brown Touts 'Rise in Right Wing Extremism;' Guest: SPLC 'Exaggerates'
On her CNN program on Monday, Campbell Brown forwarded one of the Left's talking points about the tea parties by stating that "it does appear that we are seeing a rise in right wing extremism recently." However, her guest, historian Robert Churchill of the University of Hartford, downplayed her claim and claimed that groups like the Southern Poverty Law Center were "exaggerating" the threat. Brown brought on Churchill at the bottom half of the 8 pm Eastern hour. Midway through the interview, she made her "right wing extremism" claim and cited "a number of studies that have looked at this. The Department of Homeland Security came out with a study last year saying that, perhaps, it's the economy, or possibly the President's race." The anchor then asked, "What do you see as driving recruitment right now, beyond just sort of the generic more- or not generic, but more general libertarian view?"5. Olbermann: Limbaugh 'Hate Radio' Has 'Blood on Your Hands' for Oklahoma City Bombing
On Monday's Countdown show, MSNBC's Keith Olbermann used his regular "Worst Person" segment to accuse Rush Limbaugh of having "blood on your hands" for the Oklahoma City bombing in response to the conservative talk radio host pointing out that, while some liberals have tried to blame talk radio for inspiring Timothy McVeigh to commit mass murder, McVeigh himself actually admitted to being motivated by the 1993 raid on the Branch Davidian compound in Waco, Texas, and even perpetrated the attack in Oklahoma City on the two-year anniversary of the disastrous event.6. Bloomberg Editor Al Hunt Attacks Tea Partiers: 'That's Not America'
Bloomberg Washington Editor Al Hunt appeared on the web-only section of Sunday's This Week and dismissed the idea that the Tea Party movement has broad appeal. He derided, "They love Glenn Beck and they're skeptical of John McCain. That's not America."7. Today Ignores Pew Poll on Less Trusted Government, Publicizes Pew Results on Teen Texting Instead
A new Pew poll that shows just 22 percent of respondents trust the government was actually covered by NBC Nightly News on Monday night but for some reason NBC's Today show didn't find that news interesting as they failed to report on the results. However, on Tuesday's Today, they did find a Pew poll they did like, their results on teen texting, as Today co-anchor Ann Curry relayed: "The study by the Pew Internet and American Life Project says that texting is now the main way that teens communicate."
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)