Share

Wednesday, October 14, 2009

Guest Post: Congress Removes Authority to Ban Riskiest Derivatives Trades Because “There Was Concern That A Broad Grant To Ban Abusive Swaps Would Be UNSETTLING”

By George Washington of Washington’s Blog.

According to Bloomberg, the original draft of Barney Frank’s derivatives legislation:

would have given the Securities and Exchange Commission and Commodity Futures Trading Commission joint authority to “prohibit transactions in any swap” that they determine “would be detrimental to the stability of a financial market or of participants in a financial market.”

Frank has now stripped that provision because it would be “unsettling”:

“There was concern that a broad grant to ban abusive swaps would be unsettling,” Frank, chairman of the House Financial Services Committee, said today as the panel began action on his measure.

Unsettling to the economy?

No.

Unsettling to the 5 banks which comprise the lion’s share of the derivatives business.

Frank’s revised bill fails to address the many concerns raised by the head of the CFTC (see this and this), and really does nothing to fundamentally reign in the credit derivatives which were largely responsible for crashing the economy.

Change?

Nope, nothing but hot air.

Topics: Banking industry, Derivatives, Guest Post, Regulations and regulators

Email This Post Email This Post Posted by George Washington at 3:12 pm

8 Comments » Links to this post

Share

8 Comments:

  • Lavrenti Beria says:
    October 14, 2009 at 4:27 pm

    The maggot, Frank, epitomises the ruling clique. Always the showman extraordinaire, you can put this prevaricating sack of crap down as the Congressional version of the very same prevaricating sack of crap in the White House.

    Anyone with half a brain knew what efforts to reform the financial system would come to: Precisely this. Here is the fate of the Elizabeth Warrens and all of the other well meaning if-only-President-Obama-knew-what’s-going-on-he’d-change-it crowd. Here you have the reforms of the Obama era, and here is all you’re going to get. And here’s why making things over will require a good deal more than another election in this awfully corrupt country.

  • DownSouth says:
    October 14, 2009 at 4:29 pm

    Barney Frank and Barak Obama are living proof that Hannah Arendt got it right one more time:

    [N]either the people in general nor the political scientist in particular have left much doubt that the parties, because of their monopoly of nomination, cannot be regarded as popular organs, but that they are, on the contrary, the very efficient instruments through which the power of the people is curtailed or controlled.
    –Hannah Arendt, On Revolution

  • Gordo says:
    October 14, 2009 at 8:03 pm

    Wonder if Barney will find Auditing the Fed “unsettling” as well?

    Sell out. What defines treason today anyways?

  • Justicia says:
    October 14, 2009 at 10:20 pm

    What do you expect from the Dumbublicans.

    All they ever wanted was to get as much campaign cash as the Republocrats. And they’ve succeeded. Obama took in more from the banksters than he did from the “netroots” so do you really expect real financial reform from them?!

    • Lavrenti Beria says:
      October 15, 2009 at 12:37 am

      “Obama took in more from the banksters than he did from the “netroots” so do you really expect real financial reform from them?!”

      What a knee-slapper, “netroots”! A year ago howling about war. Today, as a Democratic president is expected to authorise a 45,000 troop increase for the agression against Afghanistan, utter silence. Perhaps its not a question of who gave more, the financial interests or netroots, but rather which is certifiably dumb enough to understand present realities in left-right terms.

  • Disaster Capitalism Institutionalized « Volatility says:
    October 15, 2009 at 9:05 am

    [...] Consumer Financial Protection Agency has already been gutted in principle.   On Wednesday Frank went further to declare that he wouldn’t tolerate anything which might even be “unsettling” in the eyes [...]

  • pbecke says:
    November 1, 2009 at 11:17 am

    What a hilarious title! UNSETTLING!!!!

  • pbecke says:
    November 5, 2009 at 9:03 am

    By George Washington of Washington’s Blog.

    According to Bloomberg, the original draft of Barney Frank’s derivatives legislation:

    would have given the Securities and Exchange Commission and Commodity Futures Trading Commission joint authority to “prohibit transactions in any swap” that they determine “would be [i]detrimental to the stability of[/i] a financial market or of participants in a financial market.”

    Frank has now stripped that provision because it would be “unsettling”:

    “There was concern that a broad grant to ban abusive swaps would be unsettling,” Frank, chairman of the House Financial Services Committee, said today as the panel began action on his measure.”‘

    To paraphrase Franks, “It would be unsettling to a financial market to prohibit swaps that were determined to be unsettling ([i]detrimental to the stability of[/i]) for a financial market!”

    I see….

    If only Barney realised how “unsettling” to the hoi polloi, the thought an economic catastrophe is.


    • Subscribe to: Post Comments
    | Subscribe | Blogroll | Topics | Archives | Videos | Contributors | Search |