Two sides to the Fed-as-Regulator debate

Lee C. Bollinger, president of Columbia University in New York, says the U.S. needs a "First Amendment for the economy" after a failure of regulation that could be fixed by giving the Fed more responsibility. Bollinger called the economic crisis a “huge failure of public regulation”, and proposed an independent regulator based upon the judicial system which could issue written rulings and change precedents. Bollinger said the Fed had the capacity to stand outside the system as an independent regulator to monitor risk.

On the flip side, Harvard professor and author Amar Bhide says in a WSJ opinion piece that the Fed has done such a terrible job at financial regulation it would be unthinkable to give it more power, and goes so far as to say we should be talking about dismantling the Fed, not increasing its power. Bhide goes on to write that Fed's regulatory mission has become so big as to be unmanageable and proposes a minimum of splitting the monetary policy and regulatory functions of the Fed as was done with the Maastricht Treaty that established the European Central Bank.

Also in the news...

CFTC Chairman Gary Gensler said he believes the agency must seriously consider setting stricter limits on traders who place bets on energy contracts. His remarks are the just the latest example of a shift in tone for the commodities regulator vis a vis trading curbs and other regulatory measures. Gensler went on to say that "every option must be on the table to curb "excessive speculation", which the WSJ called out as politically expedient remarks in its editorial on "The Politics of Speculation". In addition, Goldman Sachs talked its own book by saying attempts to curb speculation may prove "disruptive" to markets.

Regulatory Turf Wars Gaining Steam

Lots of buzz this week about future oversight of the financial markets. While GlobalRiskJobs and GlobalComplianceJobs have been anticipating significant changes in the regulatory landscape, the political landscape has thus far provided more of a speed bump to true reform than initially thought. The Obama Administration is (finally) expected to finish up a plan to present to Congress by the end of June, but the timetable for any reform plan to be approved by Congress looks like the end of this year. The Obama administration has been pushing a more radical reform agenda, while existing regulators naturally have sought to defend their existing turf. As a result, no firm regulatory structure has yet to emerge. The primary issue seems to be whether to reorganize the basic structure of oversight, or whether to implement new rules at existing agencies that would accomplish the same end. It would seem that, given the scope of this crisis, if there was ever a time where legislators and te public would be willing to accept a radical overhaul, now would be it. The adminsitration has had its hands full with the issue of bank supervision, and the Office of Thrift Supervision (OTS) which has come under fire for its seeming impotence in the AIG, WAMU and IndyMac fiascos is likely to be sacrificed first in the name of reform. Also on the table is a merger of the SEC and the CFTC, although House Financial Services Committe Chairman Barney Frank is not a supporter of such a move. Another political sticking point surrounds the idea of a systemic risk regulator. Treasury wants the Fed to become a financial market uber-regulator responsible for systemic risk, although many politicians and regulators are reluctant to concentrate so much power at the Fed. As mentioned last week, a new Financial Products Safety Commission has also been proposed, although Mary Schapiro naturally opposes any threat to diminish SEC power and lashed out against the idea. Another battle on the Hill is brewing between Frank and House Agriculture Committe Chairman Collin Peterson surrounding who will get authority to regulate credit default swaps. The Ag Committees in Congress traditionally oversee the CFTC and oppose any challenge to their authority.

The Links:

• The FT details some of battles being fought over bank regulation.
  
• Bloomberg's Alison Vekshin has written a good profile of FDIC Chief Sheila Bair.
• Wall Street is having its say in the battle over derivatives regulation. Banks want to preserve the intra-dealer market and raise barriers to new entrants to keep the OTC business as compartmentalized as possible.
• The FT believes regulatory authority in the US should be assigned by function, not product.
• EU banking regulators may get the power to overrule national banking authorities under new plans in the works as a response to the financial crisis.
• The WSJ comments on the derivatives PR war going on inside the Beltway.
  

Another investment fraud comes to light, RBS sets dubious record

Another day, another investment fraud for newly energized regulators to sink their teeth into. Paul Greenwood and Stephen Walsh were arrested by the FBI yesterday and will face criminal charges. High profile victims include Carnegie Mellon University, The University of Pittsburgh, and the Iowa Public Employees Retirement System. So, the initial perceptions are looking correct, that Madoff was, if not the tip of the iceberg, the glacier that was poking above the surface. So what is going on here? Were these "money managers" simply taking advantage of years of lax oversight coupled with investor hunger to be part of the sexy alternative investment universe? The one thing that seems to be certain is that the laissez faire regulatory environment for hedge funds will come crashing down soon. Many of these "proprietary models" (Enhanced Stock Indexing, split-strike conversion, etc.) have proven to be little more than hot air used to hide behind a cloak of secrecy offered in large part by QIB and AI rules. Prepare for change.

News links:

• RBS appears to be on the brink of Nationalization as it announced a £24B net loss for 2008. The UK government has agreed to inject up to £25.5B into the poster-child for troubled banks. And news that the Scottish behemoth could close its leveraged finance buisness as part of the pressure to refocus on UK retail and commercial customers.
  
• The EU has laid out its guidelines for toxic banks. European countries have been told to watch the total cost of bailouts and focus on banks of "systemic importance".
• Bloomberg's Jonathan Weil writes that it isn't easy getting a good estimate of what a bank's assets are worth. He cites recent disclosure by Regions and Huntington that dispute the value of loans on their books.
• Geithner laid out details of the bank stress test. The doomsday scenario includes a jobless rate above 10% and another 25% drop in home prices. Once inconceivable, those guidelines don't appear to so remote today...Click here for the Bank Stress Test FAQ.
  
• The Treasury has put out a white paper on its new Capital Assistance Program (CAP).
• Peter Wallison has some advice for Geithner on pricing troubled assets.
• Gary Gensler, Pres. Obama's choice to head the CFTC promised to act forcefully as a regulator in confirmation hearings.