Barney Frank Still Believes in Dodd-Frank
In April, regulators charged with making official rules to govern the financial system under Dodd-Frank, last year's financial overhaul bill, had 26 rulemaking deadlines. They missed all of them.
Since the law's passage last year, regulators have completed just 24 of the 387 rules the law requires be drafted and implemented by at least 20 seperate government agencies, according to a report published by non-profit journalism outfit ProPublica. The legislators behind the law outlined broad principles but left much to the discretion of regulators. Regulatory discretion, though, seems to have morphed into regulatory delay, thanks in part to interest group politics: "The Byzantine, tedious rulemaking process has occasionally pitted regulator against regulator and proved a bonanza for lobbyists," the report says.
A sign the law has gone predictably bad? Not at all. Barney Frank (yes, that's his name on the bill) is super stoked about the first wave of regulations. No, there's nothing to worry about, according to federal officials. They're just polishing the rules until they're perfect:
Treasury officials are sanguine about the delays. "If we have to sacrifice a little bit of time to get to the right answer, that's the right thing to do," said Mary Miller, the assistant secretary for financial markets.
…"The first set of rules are going to be good ones," said the law's namesake, Rep. Barney Frank, D-Mass. "These regulators are on the right side."
Sorry, Barney. The confidence is nice, but there is no "right side" here. Nor is there any "right answer" when it comes to the sort of financial regulation Dodd-Frank attempts. Congress didn't want to hammer out the arbitrary details required to regulate the financial system, so it wrote a law requiring regulators to hammer out those arbitrary details for them. But it turns out the regulators are having just as much trouble as Congress did, and provoking just as much attention from financial sector lobbyists.
Given the law's scope, complexity, and vague directives, neither the sluggish pace of implementation nor the lobbyist bonanza are at all surprising: Any law governing minute details of the financial system is bound to be a target for high-dollar lobbying campaigns. The more influence the government claims over Wall Street, the more Wall Street will seek to influence the government.
Editor's Note: As of February 29, 2024, commenting privileges on reason.com posts are limited to Reason Plus subscribers. Past commenters are grandfathered in for a temporary period. Subscribe here to preserve your ability to comment. Your Reason Plus subscription also gives you an ad-free version of reason.com, along with full access to the digital edition and archives of Reason magazine. We request that comments be civil and on-topic. We do not moderate or assume any responsibility for comments, which are owned by the readers who post them. Comments do not represent the views of reason.com or Reason Foundation. We reserve the right to delete any comment and ban commenters for any reason at any time. Comments may only be edited within 5 minutes of posting. Report abuses.
Please
to post comments
Alt text - I'd rather be smoking something else
"Sometimes a cigar is just a cigar. This is not one of those times."
To bad smoking isn't part of the gay agenda, then I'd be able to smoke at work.
http://libertarians4freedom.blogspot.com/
Are you allowed to suck dick at work?
You have a nasty mind, cynical.
GREGOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO!
Bite my cwank.
Pwease!
Too Big To Suck
Missing a statutory deadline for a rulemaking action is no big deal. It's a very common occurrence. I know, I practice administrative law. Agencies miss rulemaking deadlines all the time - ones set by Congress in legislation, as well as their own deadlines.
Congress often is unrealistic about deadlines. 6 months to complete some big study and report back to Congress; 2 years to develop and implement some big regulatory scheme.
This stuff takes time, you know...
It's meaningless until some aggrieved party sues - and then the plaintiff has to convince the court it has standing to sue.
If we only had more rules... then life would finally be perfect!
Regulatory discretion, though, seems to have morphed into regulatory delay
Woooooooo!
"The more influence the government claims over Wall Street, the more Wall Street will seek to influence the government."
Over the long run? Yes.
They'll use the government, over the long run, as a barrier to entry, to protect their scale, etc.
Over the short run?
Our economy is growing at a remarkably sluggish pace right now--over the short run--specifically because of government regulation of finance.
I guess the good news is that regulation moves in cycles along with the business cycle. Somebody will eventually see the light. Ultimately, we cannot have a strong economy AND a financial sector that's crippled by stupid regulation...
The real crime about the financial regulation was that it shot our economy in the foot all as an excuse to paper over what our politicians and our presidents did.
Barack Obama may complain that Wall Street made him do what he did with TARP, but the fact of the matter is--that's what he chose to do. Wall Street didn't vote themselves all that TARP money--Congress did.
...and no amount of regulation on Wall Street will ever shift the responsibility for TARP from where it belongs--with the politicians who voted to squander our future paychecks on TARP and with the President who squandered our future paychecks on TARP.
P.S. TARP.
I guess the good news is that regulation moves in cycles along with the business cycle.
Really? While occasionally the economy shrinks, and deadweight businesses are shut down, the Regulatory State never shrinks, and deadweight regulations are never shut down.
Never's an awfully long time.
The government can throw tiny little monkey wrenches in the business cycle, but when credit starts expanding again, ultimately the credit cycle will have its way with legislators and regulators--just like it always does.
We've been through these boom/bust credit cycles before. A couple times ago, it was under the guise of the S&Ls;.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/S.....oan_crisis
The government is as inept at managing credit expansions as it is at managing credit contractions.
No government has had the spine to stand between finance and Americans who want credit for very long--and why would we want a government like that anyway?
There have been credit expansions and busts throughout American history. If there's any more widely held fallacy--or more destructive too--than the weird belief that the credit cycle is somehow beholden to government regulators over the long run?
I'd like to hear it.
That's what's so absurd about this. When the government needed to restrain credit? They did nothing. Once the damage was done--and the economy started starving for lack of credit? They piled on whole new agencies to restrain credit.
The good news is? That's typical. We've done almost all of this before. All hail the Mighty Credit Cycle--laying regulators low since at least the 18th Century.
We won't see strong growth in the economy until the onerous regulations have either been innovated around or simply watered down. And when there's more credit than eligible borrowers out there, entrepreneurs will drop their lending standards, just like they always do. There's nothing the government can do to stop that.
The regulators are hurting us now, but during the next credit expansion, when it comes--God willing--the regulators will be as ineffective as always.
"There's nothing the government can do to stop that."
That's why what Obama and Barney Frank did was ridiculous--if you take what they did at face value.
Barney Frank isn't an idiot--he knows his regulations will only be effective at restraining credit when the economy needs it most.
Barney Frank knows that when credit availability expands, it'll find its way to "subprime" borrowers again.
But the purpose of this legislation wasn't to make sure that credit bubbles will never happen again--the purpose of this legislation was to shift blame for TARP away from Congress and President Obama.
That's all it was. A short term prescription--for last year's congressional election. This was Barack Obama's feeble attempt to respond to what became the Tea Party.
The only people who really believe this legislation does anything beneficial over the long run are your salt of the earth dupes--and some people who make their living on television.
I guess the good news is that regulation moves in cycles along with the business cycle. Somebody will eventually see the light.
Only like 367,000 years till the cycle that's a libertarian utopia. That's after the next 367k years of progressively more-oppressive progress. Unfortunately the libertopia will last only 42 years before being conquered by a resurgence of the Somali Libertine-Intervention Pirates (SLIP).
This is what I'm talking about.
Don't believe the hype!
Frank's regulations may be stupid and harmful, but long term? They have no more control over the credit cycle than you do!
The credit cycle survived Andrew Jackson, Teddy Roosevelt, FDR, the S&L crisis, the Asian Contagion--and it will survive Barney Frank too.
It's bad enough that this legislation is stupid and harmful to the economy--there's no reason to compound that by making people think it's somehow more powerful than market forces too.
The Soviet Union wasn't more powerful than market forces. Communist China wasn't more powerful than market forces. It's frightening, the depths we can go to before we finally succumb to reason. But if we learned anything from the experiences of China and the USSR, it should be that all the regulators in the world don't have a snowball's chance in hell against market forces over the long run.
Barney Frank's legislation will get run over sooner or later--hopefully sooner if we want to minimize the damage.
Yum, tasty cock, yum, yum, yum, yum, yum!
Get in there Barney, get in there! Yeah, fuck that shit Barney, fuck it!!!! YEAH!
Regulations that further enshrine "Too Big Too Fail"? That's just what I expect from these 2 pieces of shit.
Dodd-Frank will probably end up protecting Wall Street's profits, but it massively screwed the little guy raising private equity.
Statist insanity continues...
Statist insanity continues...
Statist insanity continues...
Americans facing foreclosure want to know when Barney Frank and Dodd are going to be convicted.
Frank is a chiseling, Marxist crook from Jersey City who learned his dirty politics from Frank Hague's people, one of the most corrupt machines in American political history.
Anything put forward by Barney Frank will only lead our country further down the path of ruin.
Stop giving Frank a platform for his arrogance and corruption.
how did Dodd/Frank cause foreclosures now? I'd like to hear this one.