Single-Regulator Plan for Banks Now Close

Source: WSJ

MAY 28, 2009

By DAMIAN PALETTA

WASHINGTON -- Top Obama administration officials are close to recommending that Congress create a single regulator to oversee the entire banking sector, people familiar with the matter said, a departure from the hodgepodge of federal agencies that failed to contain the financial crisis as it ballooned out of control last year. The new agency is expected to be a major plank in a proposal that Treasury Secretary Timothy Geithner and White House officials send Capitol Hill in a few weeks with the goal of overhauling supervision of financial markets. Other components under consideration are an agency to police financial products offered to consumers and a beefed-up investor protection regulator. People involved in the process said much is still in flux and could change before a formal recommendation is made to Congress in mid-June.

The new bank regulatory agency could prove controversial because it would consolidate the Office of the Comptroller of the Currency and the Office of Thrift Supervision and strip supervisory powers from the Federal Reserve and the Federal Deposit Insurance Corp. The Fed and the FDIC would gain other powers, though, as White House officials want the Fed to be able to oversee systemic risks in the economy. They also want the FDIC to have new powers to take large financial companies that aren't banks into receivership.

(snip)

Still, administration officials in recent weeks have suggested that they might decide not to pursue a major consolidation of the bank regulators and push for a more streamlined approach to supervision instead. Government officials have been even less clear about how to handle a potential merger between the Securities and Exchange Commission and the Commodity Futures Trading Commission. Some Obama administration officials believe the agencies should be consolidated into one, but it would likely elicit a huge jurisdictional fight on Capitol Hill. Banks are overseen by a patchwork of state and federal regulators, and the Obama administration isn't expected to propose getting rid of the so-called dual banking system.

Instead, the new regulator would serve as a secondary set of eyes for the more than 5,000 state regulated banks and the primary regulator for the nationally chartered banks and thrifts. The objective is to streamline supervision of banks and make it harder for banks to game the system by shopping for the lightest form of oversight. Each of the banking agencies has dug in for a fight in recent weeks, and it is unclear how willing Congress will be to go along with a dramatic administration request. Senate Banking Committee Chairman Christopher Dodd (D., Conn.) has signaled that he is reluctant to give the Fed sweeping new powers to oversee systemic risks to the economy.



Read more: http://online.wsj.com/article/SB124347634088461159.html

banks have too much ability to skirt the system by cherry picking regulators.

Corporations can play one against the other much easier, because there are so many of them.

Yes, most voters are still covered by their employers and most like what they have and are frightened by the testimonials now running on TV about the "horrible" medical care in England and in Canada.

That is, most voters like what they have now... until they do no.

Who would that one guy be? Another full fledged republican, or perhaps another GOPer Lite/Dino with a large finger still in the pie?

"Yes We Can" buy one dude cheaper than several...the greed driven bankers/money changers are probably saying.

The "Change" is what's left of your 401 K and your paycheck after you fill up this week at EXXON.

Can you say Same Old Shit? Maybe Chris Cox is still looking for a job?

:kick:

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

(for the banks)

What with only one regulator to buy off! :eyes:

Now, how about some regulations? When do we get to that part?