March 31, 2008
Too Big To Succeed? Washington Weighs in on Paulson's Plan
Posted by David Zaring

The Washington Post reports on opposition to the big financial institution reorganization.  Is this thing already dead?

Maybe, but the jury is still out.  As we told you yesterday, bureaucratic reorganizations turn on the ability of affected agencies to mobilize the lobbyists of regulated industry and, to a lesser extent, the chairs of affected congressional committees.  Today, the Post says that "[f]ew leaders of these agencies -- and the associations that work with them -- welcomed such radical transformation."  (It also says that "[b]efore the plan takes hold, however, lawmakers would have to sign off. This would be a challenge given that the CFTC and the SEC report to two different congressional committees, setting up the prospect of a turf battle.")  But other than the American Bankers Association, no industry group was willing to go on record opposing the plan - even though regulators from the CFTC, FDIC, and NCUA did.   In fact, the hedge fund and securities industry lobbyists expressed cautious support for it.

We disclaim political expertise at the Glom, but to our untrained eyes, much of the fate this plan depends on whether it means the end of the credit union.  Thrifts, especially now that they look exactly like banks, fine.  State-chartered banks, ditto, okay.  But credit unions?  Consumers, voters, and unaligned Congresspeople love their credit unions.

The Fed, by the way, is telling the Post that it would be sharing just a bit of the reorg pain, giving up its banking supervisors to the new financial institutions supervision agency.

Administrative Law | Bookmark

TrackBacks (0)

TrackBack URL for this entry:
http://www.typepad.com/t/trackback/38673/27645770

Links to weblogs that reference Too Big To Succeed? Washington Weighs in on Paulson's Plan:

Comments (3)

1. Posted by Ginny Brady on April 1, 2008 @ 6:44 | Permalink

I don't think you have your facts correct. CUNA's (Credit Union National Association) Dan Mica sent a letter to Paulson opposing the plan.


2. Posted by David Zaring on April 1, 2008 @ 7:10 | Permalink

I relied entirely on the Post's survey. And that didn't include CUNA one way or the other.


3. Posted by Jake on April 1, 2008 @ 22:04 | Permalink

Get real, folks. Paulson's reorganization plan for Federal regulation of financial markets is dead on arrival, not because it is a bad plan, but rather, due to unfortunate timing. This is a policy proposal by a lame duck Administration.

Even more unfortunate is any person who would rely on the Washington ComPost for business news, a topic on which that newspaper has a poor track record.

Post a comment

If you have a TypeKey or TypePad account, please Sign In

Bloggers
Papers
Posts
Recent Comments
Random Walk
Search The Glom
The Glom on Twitter
Archives by Topic
Archives by Date
December 2008
Sun Mon Tue Wed Thu Fri Sat
  1 2 3 4 5 6
7 8 9 10 11 12 13
14 15 16 17 18 19 20
21 22 23 24 25 26 27
28 29 30 31      
Syndicate The Glom
Subscribe

The Glom's Blog Network on Facebook:

Miscellaneous Links