Like Chris Brummer, I think the government will look to foreign agreements to get things done in financial regulation.  There will be plenty of domestic rulemaking as well.  But otherwise, I've predicted gridlock on legislative fronts, and it's not hard to see it coming if the Senate minority leader is already calling for the president's ouster.

What could happen?  Dodd-Frank could be fixed a little.  Maximally this might include a reorg that coordinated the SEC and CFTC more (merging them seems like a pipe dream at this point), minimally Congress could give American regulators a more definitive agenda for their international agreements, rather than simply asking them to pursue them (which to be sure, counts for some legitimacy).

I think the challenge for the House will be oversight.  Congressional oversight usually looks terrible, with yelling Congressmen and bland administration officials, and it all looks rather pointless blamepointing.  It's a bit less - if only a bit less - pointless when you can threaten the appropriations of the agency you are yelling at.  But when you can't really pass legislation, and when you can predict that the agencies will be active on the rulemaking front, managing oversight it tricky.  If the House has committee leaders who can sound smart, make their points, and do some dry eviscerating, then it will have learned some elegant new tricks.  But if it becomes the simple House of no, I find it hard to see how that will be appealing.

Masters: Agenda | Bookmark

TrackBack URL for this entry:
https://www.typepad.com/services/trackback/6a00d8345157d569e20133f59e9528970b

Links to weblogs that reference Agenda for the 112th: Can The House Do Oversight?: