I've not had the time to dig into the financial regulation bill that emerged from conference committee this morning as deeply as I'd like, and I'll try to rectify that Monday. For now, Pat Garofalo's chart comparing the House, Senate and final versions of the bill is a good resource. I'm very glad to see that derivatives regulations remained strong, and surprised that Blanche Lincoln's spin-off idea made the cut. I'm also glad, and surprised, to see that a semi-robust Volcker rule survived.
The big disappointment is that capital requirements, which I think to be the most important part of the bill, didn't end up in the final legislation. Instead, that's left to regulators, although it's hard to imagine that anything in the bill will stop regulators from getting caught up in bubble-mania. Still, this is an ambitious, thoughtful piece of legislation that addresses some of the system's worst failings (like the unregulated derivatives market) and adds a raft of protections. The work of financial regulation is trying to draw out the time between the last crisis and the next one, and this bill does seem likely to do that.
June 25, 2010; 5:45 PM ET
Save & Share: Previous: The pitfalls of leaks
Next: Wonkbook: Robert Byrd dies; G-20: Prelude to Depression or wise turn from spending?
Posted by: dscline99 | June 25, 2010 7:20 PM | Report abuse
Posted by: marde1 | June 25, 2010 8:28 PM | Report abuse
Posted by: slag | June 25, 2010 10:16 PM | Report abuse
Posted by: pj_camp | June 26, 2010 10:45 AM | Report abuse
Posted by: Kevin_Willis | June 26, 2010 11:34 PM | Report abuse
The comments to this entry are closed.