As we fast approach the unveiling of the Dodd-Corker financial reform proposals for the Senate, it is only fair and reasonable to ask: Does any of this really matter? To be sure, some parts of what the Senate Banking committee (and likely the full Senate) will consider are not inconsequential for relatively small players in the US market. For example, putting consumer protection inside the Fed -- which has an awful and embarrassing reputation in terms of protecting users of financial products -- would tell you a lot about where we are going.
But our big banks are global and nothing in the current legislation would really rein them in -- no wonder they and their allies sneer, in a nasty fashion, at Senator Dodd as a lame duck who "does not matter."
For example, the resolution authority/modified bankruptcy procedure under discussion would do nothing to make it easier to manage the failure of a financial institution with large cross-border assets and liabilities. For this, you would need a "cross-border resolution authority," determining who is in charge of winding up what -- and using which cash -- when a global bank fails.
To be sure, such a cross-border authority could be developed under the auspices of the G20, but there are not even baby steps in that direction. Why?
Part of the answer, of course, is that big cross-border banks know how to play governments off against each other -- dropping heavy hints that "international competitiveness" is at stake. These are empty threats -- if the US, the UK, and the eurozone cooperated on a resolution regime, this would get serious attention. If they went further and truly integrated their regulations -- including communications and practices (and inspections) across regulators/supervisors -- this could have major impact.
But national governments like to run their banks in their own way. In part, this may be sensible public policy -- who, after all, really wants the US to be in charge of deciding how a bank failure (in another country) is handled? (The US and the UK had a major row in the weeks after Lehman failed.) Even within the eurozone, there is a long standing refusal to specify in advance who is responsible for saving what part of which bank -- motivated in part by the desire to protect the bureaucratic turf of national central banks, which ceded power over monetary policy to the European Central Bank.
In part, no doubt, this also reflects varying degrees of "capture" in different places -- sometimes by bankers, but sometimes it's the politicians who do the capturing. As examples, see the work of Asim Khwaja and Atif Mian or Mara Faccio on how political connections really work in and around financial systems.
In any case, hoping that we can constrain banks through some form of international governmental cooperation is a complete illusion. The IMF and the WTO have no mandate on this issue. The Financial Stability Board is a paper tiger -- really just a talking shop between regulators (and the same goes for the Bank for International Settlements more generally).
The big global banks know all this -- and have known it for years. When Jerry Corrigan, former head of the NY Fed, no less, says Goldman did "nothing inappropriate" in arranging Greek debt swaps, he is in effect saying "catch us if you can".
You will never stop the international banks at the international level. You need to curtail them at the national level. And you can't afford to wait for other countries; you have to do it for your own country as a matter of pressing national priority.
Unfortunately, the Dodd-Corker proposals seem most unlikely to move us forward along this dimension.
Cross-posted from The Baseline Scenario.
Why is it in spite of the inflammatory rhetoric of the press, nothing happens?
Why is it the country can’t get legislation that helps the people?
Why is it that President Obama hasn't shut down Backwater contracting services? The answer has to do with power and who really has it.
Historically, there have been two sources of power- the rich and the military
In a democracy, power is supposed to rest with the majority of citizens.
Representative democracy means the majority of people have their voices heard through their representatives. What happens if the Media and political forces present a false impression of what is happening? Answer- the majority of people hear what others want them to hear in lieu of the truth. What about the minority of people with real power? Their intentions are heard and their agenda is followed. Answer. Things do change in Washington to benefit the few who benefit from policies in place. The official military is answerable to the president. The private, heavily rewarded military is answerable to a small number of people with power who consider themselves patriots.
The privileged, the ones who own and operate the very large corporate interests, from big banks, Insurance, Energy, Drug, and military/Industrial complex companies, Investment Houses and Media conglomerates, own and manage government, from the elected to the courts and executive branch. The military, intent to remain in power and control, manage wars, conflicts and domestic disturbance.
Why no AMERICAN financial regulation?
If Team Obama and the Democrats can't get even the most watered down legislation done in the U.S., why would you even ask about international regulations?
Simply put, Team Obama has been an utter failure on this.
And who in the world would accept American style or American sponsored financial regulation that so demonstrably failed in 2008 (and 2001...)? Or regulation for the rest of the world that American banks would not have to submit to?
Take the log out of your eye, America, and fix your horribly broken system before telling the world what THEY should do to clean up the mess YOU started!
"Simply put, Team Obama has been an utter failure on this."
Absolutely. And they were on the ropes for a bit, and we let them go. Not until the next financial collapse will we be in such a good position to force them to submit to some standards of human decency. Of course, since nothing has been learned from 2008, I am confident that next collapse will not be far behind.
Steven Hill
New American Foundation
www.Steven-Hill.org
www.EuropesPromise.org
As most democratic nations keep an eye on the US, if only for amusement, we know the dangers of lobbists and other bottom feeders. There could not be a better example of corruption run rampant than the US.
We Canadians want you to get your act together.
We're tied to you at the hip, so if you go down, so do we.
The biggest difference I see is that our government, whatever party, while no doubt acting to feather it's own nest and the nest of those who gave them the money to get elected, genuinely seems concerned with improving the lot of Canadians. Yours, either party, seem more intent on making the other side look bad and serving the wishes of their masters out in the lobby.
It breaks my heart to see American slowly turning into the country of have and have not and nothing would be better than for it to return to it's previous state.
Americans don't often think about Canada or even give a damn however I think history will prove us to be on the right side in two issues" Bank regulation and universal health care.
Firstly, it was from the US that the derivitives came to life which then were spread internationally. The US has to fix it's own banking before it even thinks about trying to talk regulating anyone else. The fact the fall out happened over a year ago, no international country will listen to the US in that DC has not addressed the US problem. They'll be told to 'truck off' -- deservidly so.
Secondly, having read about Canadian financial institutions, they are well regulated to which the US should look at the Canadian regulations and learn from them. A very small fraction of the derivitives were bought by banks in Canada.
If the US tries to 'direct' international banking, Canada will flip the US off. In Canada, you cannot open up the small corner banks or the ones that we read about closing on a Friday. They're banks were all insured long before the fall out.
Seems the US could learn much from Canada. Financial, healthcare, etc.
Also read where many people who had invested in retirement funds, have fortunately almost recovered their losses they suffered courtesy of the US banking system -- that global thing that caused the global final & market to tank.
Of course those of us with RRSP (401k) lost some money with the market going down.
I just bought a new house and it is not our first we had to provide 3 years of income tax statements, 3 years of and investment statements it was just short of finger printing us.
Now the Govt has stated that all home buyers have to have 20% of the cost of the home for a down payment instead of 5%. The reason speculators who buy and try to flip homes and to protect those who are buying something they cannot afford. And all new homeowners must take mortgage insurance.
We have good incentives to purchase a home you can borrow from your RRSP as we did for our first home and you pay it back every year. It helps those who are looking for a bigger down payment.
Mr Harper is against an international financial regulation and thinks each govt should be responsible for regulating their countries.
These measures that Canada did to protect banks and mortgages might seem like big brother to some but at least we are not in the situation of many countries.
With over $600 trillion in derivative transaction in 2009, that would've generated about $30 trillion to the treasury had a proportional rate system been in place that maxed out at 5%.
dream on...
the second crash is coming and it will be a dooosie!
It is clear that there is a sustained effort by global hedge funds, sovereign funds, financial extortionists and vultures to attack the US once again. We simply must terminate this type of destructive rhetoric. For example Soros put a letter into the financial times that the EU should not bail out Greece and he repeated in CNN that the US should nationalize banks.
There is no other worse situation that can occur in both instances. These vultures want to drive down asset prices and then buy those same assets back at cents on the dollar. This is why Soros and other maintain these positions destructive to society. A speculative raid by definition is temporary. Capitulation is suicide. We must take our time and put in the rules of the road in a common fashion and not rush to any position.
Lastly, all speculators should be put on notice that countries will not play by some made up rules if it means that an attack will succeed. We can and will change rules.
Yep. Many of my friends who worked for BoA, JPM, and GS have already jumped ship to places like Deutsche Bank; more will follow if we put up more regulations. Why? Because the only reason to work in the US as a banker is due to the lack regulations; one can have a far higher QOL over in Europe if we end up lowering profits/bonuses here at home.
What is of terrible concern to me is that a banking institution such as Goldman-Sachs, may have, by virtue of its size and ethics, brought a nation, Greece, to its financial knees. Only speculation, based upon reliable sources, ... undenied by GS at this point.
I suspect the next few years will continue to be terribly painful for all nations, and most individuals, until we boil down the banks into a tastier brew than what we have now.
Grover Norquist's comments upon government, should rightfully have been directed toward the mega-banksters.
We must boil these behemoths down to their viable parts, ... cause them to sell themselves off into edible bites, ... or then decide to whom we feed them. Simple, except to such as Norquist, who believes the governors are the issue, ... while we all know it is the predators of whom we must be wary.
We've a lovely pond here, ... but the piranhas have gotten a bit out of hand. The banksters must be brought to a manageable size, ... whether by the government, or by their reluctant depositors.
This is just another case of special interests having their way over the best interests of the American people. Does that surprise anyone?
The will of the senate is the will of the special interests.
NOTHING will change unless we the people change it.
http://www.fairelectionsnow.org/volunteer/petition (FENA)
http://change-congress.org/
sign the petition
As things stand today, the Europeans regard American banks as untrustworthy and being protected herein by the U.S. Government. Whether this is really so or not, and whether the Europeans are really all that clean themselves is wide open for debate, but it would appear that we have managed to get ourselves on a slippery slope and we're slippin' and slidin' without anybody -apparently - caring one bit about where it will all end.
NOSMAVAN.