Obama uses JPMorgan loss to defend Wall Street regulations
Taking aim at Republican opposition, he says Congress must back oversight to avoid another financial meltdown.
By Lisa Mascaro, Washington Bureau, LA Times
10:08 PM PDT, May 19, 2012
WASHINGTON — Aiming squarely at GOP critics of Wall Street reform, President Obama said Saturday that investment bank JPMorgan's stunning $2-billion loss serves as a reminder of the importance of Washington's role in preventing another financial crisis.
The 2010 financial overhaul law counts among Obama's signature legislative achievements, but it continues to come under attack by Republicans in Congress and on the campaign trail, including likely presidential nominee Mitt Romney, as an example of government overreach.
"It's so important that members of Congress stand on the side of reform, not against it, because we can't afford to go back to an era of weak regulation and little oversight, where excessive risk-taking on Wall Street and a lack of basic oversight in Washington nearly destroyed our economy," Obama said in his weekly radio address. "We can't afford to go back to that brand of 'you're-on-your-own' economics."
The losses announced by JPMorgan Chase & Co. have reignited debate over the government's role in regulating the financial industry.
Republicans have sought to delay or dismantle key provisions of the 2010 Dodd-Frank law, calling it a prime example of this White House's over-regulation of private markets. Romney has said he would repeal the law and replace the new regulations with a more streamlined approach.
(More here.)
1 Comments:
Both the SEC and the ratings agencies (moody's, s&p, etc...) should be abolished and the oversight should become the responsibility of the Fed. How can the SEC do its job when its regulators seek to be employed on Wall Street. Cox at the SEC was completely clueless to regulate Wall Street. But, you will recall that in the last crisis, the government dropped the ball at every turn when the crisis was staring them right in the face. The government regulators allowed these 'too big to fail' enterprises to come in to existence and they let the business model or risk and leverage replace the traditional business model of advisory efforts. Alas, Geithner did nothing at the New York Fed and Bernanke and Paulson only acted when it was already too late. Chris Cox was just a figurehead with no knowledge of the risk and leverage Wall Street was operating under.
The esoteric bonds cobbled together by Wall Street over the last 30 years was simply too complex for the regulators to understand. The government failed to recognize the S&L crisis in 1989, the bond crisis of 1994, the russian debt crisis of 1998, the dot-com bubble of 1999/2000, Enron in 2001 and the housing crash in 2007/2008. Do more laws really make the government wiser to predict the next crisis? If you are going to have government oversight, you need to have the pit bosses in the government be smarter than the gamblers on Wall Street.
Good luck with that.
The government should just induce the moral hazard and break up 'too big to fail' institutions and never bail out another Wall Street firm ever again. All the Wall Streeters as the 2008 crisis unfolded were waiting around for the government to bail them out.
Post a Comment
<< Home