Jun 17 2009

Obama’s regulatory reform faces fight in Congress

By Thomas Ferraro

WASHINGTON (Reuters) – President Barack Obama‘s proposed financial regulatory overhaul could face big changes in Congress, where over the years members of both parties have permitted lax controls blamed for the U.S. economic meltdown.

Democratic and Republican lawmakers found fault with at least some of the ideas put forward in the president’s proposal, which seeks to clamp down on the country’s biggest financial firms in the hope of preventing another economic crisis.

The biggest sticking point may be the role of the Federal Reserve, the U.S. central bank. Obama envisions the Fed overseeing the largest financial firms to ensure that they are not taking excessive risks that could destabilize the economy.

But several top Democrats and Republicans questioned whether that would vest too much authority in an agency that has already drawn the ire of many lawmakers for its role in the costly bailouts of Bear Stearns and AIG.

“There’s not a lot of confidence in the Fed at this point,” Senator Christopher Dodd, chairman of the Senate Banking Committee, said on Wednesday.

Senator Richard Shelby, the committee’s ranking Republican, said the Fed had “utterly failed” as a regulator and putting it in charge of regulating systemic risk would be piling on too many responsibilities.

Still, Obama’s fellow Democrats, who control Congress, vowed to move ahead on legislation that aims to reduce risks and increase stability in financial markets rocked by scandals, incompetence and corporate failures.

It was unclear how quickly they could act with a number of lawmakers raising concerns and promising change.

Representative Louise Slaughter, a member of the House Democratic leadership, complained that the proposal needs to be tougher to prevent another financial crisis from wreaking havoc on the broader economy.

“It’s important that President Obama show the American people he is serious about clamping down on the financial industry, which has been far too loosely regulated for too long,” Slaughter said. “I will follow this legislation closely and intend to seek opportunities to further strengthen it.”

CONSUMER PROTECTIONS

Assistant Senate Democratic Leader Dick Durbin, however, hailed creation of a Consumer Financial Protection Agency, a centerpiece of Obama’s proposal, saying: “It’s time we put the needs of American families above the interests of Wall Street.”

House Republican Leader John Boehner, a frequent Obama critic, said, “There are clearly some ideas that we agree with” in the legislation, which include steps to streamline U.S. bank oversight and put the Federal Reserve in charge of monitoring big-picture economic dangers.

“But I do think that this idea of having this consumer board is very cumbersome, will limit the number of new financial products that come to the market and will give the government an awfully strong presence in an industry that’s been very creative,” Boehner said.

Ethan Siegal of The Washington Exchange, a private firm that tracks Congress for institutional investors, said the administration had put forward a pragmatic, reasonable plan. However, he said he was skeptical that Congress would pass any significant reform this year.

“Instead, in the near-term I think that oversight and regulatory changes will be implemented as best as possible at the agency and regulatory level by the Obama administration and the regulators themselves,” he said.

Since shortly after the Great Depression, there have been a number of drives to tighten regulation of the financial system. But they have been shot down by lawmakers in both parties who favored having the industry essentially regulate itself.

“Everyone has skin in this blame game,” said Siegal.

Obama wants to enact the plan into law before the end of the year. Its main components must be approved by Congress, and some preliminary language has been delivered.

The House is likely to move within months, but the outlook in the Senate, now busy with healthcare reform, is unclear.

Senate Judd Gregg, ranking Republican on the Budget Committee, said there is plenty of work to do.

“Today’s announcement by the White House is only a first step in starting the overdue improvements in monitoring America’s financial services industry,” Gregg said.

(Additional reporting by Jeremy Pelofsky, Susan Cornwell and Richard Cowan; Editing by Dan Grebler)


Jun 17 2009

New financial rules: Major changes for big, small

WASHINGTON (AP) — From simple home loans to Wall Street’s most exotic schemes, the government would impose sweeping new “rules of the road” for the nation’s battered financial system under an overhaul proposed Wednesday by President Barack Obama.

Aimed at preventing a repeat of the worst economic crisis in seven decades, the changes would begin to reverse a determined campaign pressed in the 1980s by President Ronald Reagan to cut back on federal regulations.

Obama’s plan would do little to streamline the alphabet soup of agencies that oversee the financial sector. But it calls for fundamental shifts in authority that would eliminate one regulatory agency, create another and both enhance and undercut the authority of the powerful Federal Reserve.

The new agency, a consumer protection office, would specifically take over oversight of mortgages, requiring that lenders give customers the option of “plain vanilla” plans with straightforward terms. Lenders who repackage loans and sell them to investors as securities would be required to retain 5 percent of the credit risk — a figure some analysts believe is too low.

In all, the Obama’s broad proposal cheered consumer advocates and dismayed the banking industry with its proposed creation of a regulator to protect consumers in all their banking transactions, from mortgages to credit cards. Large insurers protested the administration’s decision not to impose a standard, federal regulation on the insurance industry, leaving it to the separate states as at present. Mutual funds succeeded in staying under the jurisdiction of the Securities and Exchange Commission instead of the new consumer protection agency.

Obama cast his proposals as an attempt to find a middle ground between the benefits and excesses of capitalism.

“We are called upon to put in place those reforms that allow our best qualities to flourish — while keeping those worst traits in check,” Obama said.

The president’s plan lands in the lap of a Congress already preoccupied by historic health care legislation, consideration of a new Supreme Court justice and other major issues. Still, Obama has set an ambitious schedule, pushing lawmakers to adopt a new regulatory regime by year’s end.

“We’ll have it done this year,” pledged Sen. Chris Dodd, D-Conn., chairman of the Senate Banking Committee.

“Absolutely,” agreed Rep. Barney Frank, D-Mass., chairman of the House Financial Services Committee.

But fissures quickly developed.

Dodd, who had been at Obama’s side in the East Room of the White House for the announcement, raised questions about one of the plan’s key features — giving the Federal Reserve authority to oversee the largest and most interconnected players in the financial world.

“There’s not a lot of confidence in the Fed at this point,” Dodd said.

Obama’s proposal would require the Federal Reserve, which now can independently use emergency powers to bail out failing banks, to first obtain Treasury Department approval before extending credit to institutions in “unusual and exigent circumstances,” a change designed to mollify critics who say the Fed should be more accountable in exercising its powers as a lender of last resort.

But the proposal also would do away with a restriction imposed on the Fed in 1999 when Congress lifted Depression-era restrictions that allowed banks to get into securities and insurance businesses. The Fed, as the regulator for the larger financial holding companies, had been prohibited from examining or imposing restrictions on those firms’ subsidiaries. Obama’s proposal specifically lifts that restriction, giving the Fed the ability to duplicate and even overrule other regulators.

Fed defenders argue that none of the major institutional collapses — AIG, Bear Stearns, Lehman Bros., Merrill Lynch or Countrywide — were supervised by the Federal Reserve. Critics argue the Fed failed to crack down on dubious mortgage practices that were at the heart of the crisis.

Administration officials concede their plan responds to the current crisis– in national security terms, it prepares them to fight the last war. But they also insist that a central tenet of their plan is a requirement that from now on financial institutions will have to keep more money in reserve — the best hedge against another meltdown.

That may appear to be a no-brainer: If banks and other large institutions have more money, they won’t be vulnerable if their risky bets go bad.

However, banking regulators have been arguing for years over implementation of an international standard for bank capital. Geithner said Wednesday hoped to move on enhanced capital standards “in parallel with the rest of the world.”

Obama’s overall plan, laid out in an 88-page white paper, was the result of extensive consultations with members of Congress, regulators and industry groups and represented a compromise from bolder ideas the administration ended up abandoning because of heavy opposition.

The plan had its share of winners and losers, both inside and outside government.

Sheila Bair, the chair of the Federal Deposit Insurance Corp., lost her campaign to have a regulatory council, not the Fed, regulate large firms whose failure could undermine the entire system. SEC Chairman Mary Schapiro also had expressed support for Bair’s push for a more powerful risk council.

The regulatory overhaul ended up eliminating only one agency, the Office of Thrift Supervision, generally considered a weak link among current banking regulators. The OTS oversaw the American International Group, whose business insuring exotic securities blew up last fall, prompting a $182 billion federal bailout.

The failure to merge all four current banking agencies into one super regulator could open the door for big banks to continue to exploit weak links in the current system. Sen. Charles Schumer of New York, a leading Democratic voice on Wall Street issues, praised the administration’s plan but said he would consider further consolidation.

“We’re removing one major agency-shopping opportunity, but there’s a real potential for others,” said Patricia McCoy, a law professor at the University of Connecticut who has studied bank failures.

Associated Press writers Marcy Gordon, Anne Flaherty, Jeannine Aversa and Stevenson Jacobs contributed to this report.

Copyright © 2008 The Associated Press. All rights reserved. The information contained in the AP News report may not be published, broadcast, rewritten, or redistributed without the prior written authority of The Associated Press.