Network News

X My Profile
View More Activity
Posted at 4:00 PM ET, 12/20/2010

More problems with funding government through a Continuing Resolution

By Ezra Klein

As Pat Garofalo notes, the 2010 budget didn't include new funds for the agencies that have to implement financial reform. And if the Continuing Resolution uses 2010 levels, it won't include those funds, either:

The resolution does not include funding for the implementation of the Dodd-Frank financial reform law. Under the omnibus, the Securities and Exchange Commission would have seen its budget increase to $1.3 billion from $1.1 billion, and the CFTC would have gone from $169 million to $286 million.

Already, the SEC has halted implementation of a variety of measures under the law as it waits for funding. Included in this halt are new regulations for credit rating agencies and an office for financial markets whistleblowers. The Commodity Futures and Trading Commission (which is charged with implementing the derivatives title of the bill) has said that its current funding level “is far less than what is required to properly fulfill our significantly expanded role.” “The implementation of that good and historic law is in jeopardy if the CFTC doesn’t have increased resources,” Bart Chilton, a CFTC commissioner, has said.

I've talked a lot about how the 111th Congress was incredibly productive and passed a lot of important legislation. But that doesn't much matter -- and it might even be a bad thing -- if the Republicans manage to carve up the implementation of those bills. This isn't lost on the Republicans, of course, but it's not something that seems to be figuring prominently in the minds of the Democrats.

By Ezra Klein  | December 20, 2010; 4:00 PM ET
 
Save & Share:  Send E-mail   Facebook   Twitter   Digg   Yahoo Buzz   Del.icio.us   StumbleUpon   Technorati   Google Buzz   Previous: A world with an individual mandate, cont'd
Next: Reconciliation

Comments

Ezra,
You may also wish to do a run down of which recess appointments are getting ready to expire as well. Dr. Berwick's appointment as the Administrator for the Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services (CMS) expires in January, correct?

Posted by: jnc4p | December 20, 2010 4:29 PM | Report abuse

As many of us noted, this is why Obama got rolled on the tax deal. The Rs got everything they want, now they can spend two years blocking everything, aka hostage taking and getting even more

Posted by: fuse | December 20, 2010 4:30 PM | Report abuse

Very concerned about funding agreement.

Very concerned about expiring nominations.

Posted by: paul65 | December 20, 2010 4:39 PM | Report abuse

Those of us who opposed the tax deal for precisely these reasons were told to shut up and clap louder.

Posted by: scarlota | December 20, 2010 4:41 PM | Report abuse

Dems should call the GOP bluff and let them close the gvmt.

No deals of any sort. Just close everything and see how fast people start screaming.

Clinton did that and won several times as the public blamed the GOP.

But expect ConservaDems to suddenly show up yet again saying we need to compromise with the GOP to save poor people.

Posted by: lauren2010 | December 20, 2010 4:46 PM | Report abuse

Ezra:

I hate to say I told you so. (well, no I actually enjoy it if I'm being honest)

While you were touting the achievements of Fin Reg, I told you it was all nonsense. In addition to your story, here's another from CNBC today to back that up:

"The U.S. Federal Reserve does not believe any one hedge fund can topple the financial system and therefore the private pools of capital may escape direct supervision by the central bank, an industry source familiar with the Fed's position said.

The newly created Financial Stability Oversight Council, which includes the Treasury secretary and 14 U.S. supervisors, including the Fed, are in the early stages of determining which non-bank firms pose a threat to the financial system.

Firms labeled as "systemically important" will be subject to rigorous oversight by the Fed but will also have access to the central bank's emergency lending facilities.

The indication that hedge funds might escape this designation is sure to send a huge sigh of relief through the $1.7 trillion industry, which has long avoided the tighter controls imposed on mutual funds, for example."

Posted by: 54465446 | December 20, 2010 4:55 PM | Report abuse

Look, as long as Obama really WANTS it, the Republicans will do whatever he asks. Isn't that what we've been told for the last two years?

Posted by: zimbar | December 20, 2010 4:55 PM | Report abuse

"expect ConservaDems to suddenly show up yet again saying we need to compromise with the GOP to save poor people."

With Barack ("Bush tax cuts help corporations but not middle class.") Obama leading the pack to surrender.

Posted by: jcbarrett44 | December 20, 2010 5:26 PM | Report abuse

This is why Obama is an abject failure. We all know that the Republicans will simply refuse to fund any of Obama's initiatives. This shows no sign of letting up - ever. Having rules on the books is utterly useless.

Posted by: willows1 | December 20, 2010 5:36 PM | Report abuse

Post a Comment

We encourage users to analyze, comment on and even challenge washingtonpost.com's articles, blogs, reviews and multimedia features.

User reviews and comments that include profanity or personal attacks or other inappropriate comments or material will be removed from the site. Additionally, entries that are unsigned or contain "signatures" by someone other than the actual author will be removed. Finally, we will take steps to block users who violate any of our posting standards, terms of use or privacy policies or any other policies governing this site. Please review the full rules governing commentaries and discussions.




characters remaining

 
 
RSS Feed
Subscribe to The Post

© 2010 The Washington Post Company