Home
Archive
Columnists
Video
Blogs
Discuss
About
Search
Donate
Advertise
100 words for 100 days: submit your 100 word essay and get published on AlterNet
Advertisement
Advertisement
Advertisement
Advertisement
Advertisement
  • AlterNetYour turn

Support AlterNet
Do you value the information you're getting from AlterNet? Please show your support with a tax-deductible donation.


Feedback
Tell us how we're doing.

Advertisement
Advertisement

Corporate Accountability and WorkPlace

Financial Crisis: Deep Down, We All Knew This Was Coming

By Robert Bryce, CounterPunch. Posted October 10, 2008.


Given the countless warnings that came via Bush's decadent approach to government and regulation, there should be zero surprise we'd be robbed blind.
Advertisement

The question that keeps coming to mind amidst the current financial meltdown is this: why is anyone surprised?

I take no pleasure in asking that question. Along with lots of other people, I've watched over the past few weeks as my modest stock holdings shrink into nearly meaningless positions.

But the question remains: given the myriad warnings that came via Enron -- and the years-long neglect of any meaningful efforts to have serious policing of Wall Street -- why are we surprised to find out that the financial engineers have robbed us blind? The warnings from the Enron meltdown could scarcely have been more clear. Indeed, two key lessons were obvious: financial regulators needed lots more funding, personnel and support; and derivatives markets that operate without proper regulatory oversight and reporting pave the way for financial engineers to privatize profits and socialize costs.

First, the lack of regulators. A key problem with today's financial markets, as it was when Ken Lay and Jeff Skilling were piloting Enron into the dirt, is simple: we have too few cops patrolling Wall Street. That lack of oversight can most easily be understood by looking at the budget of America's single most important financial regulator, the Securities and Exchange Commission.

In 2001, the SEC's budget was $437.9 million. In March 2002, the General Accounting Office issued a report which said that the shortage of money and manpower at the SEC had forced the agency to "be selective in its enforcement activities and have lengthened the time required to complete certain enforcement investigations." So what has happened since then? Precious little. Yes, the agency has a substantially larger budget today than it did during the Enron era. For 2008, its spending authority is $906 million. And for 2009, the agency's budget is projected to increase slightly, to $913 million.

But here's the number that defies explanation: this year, the number of enforcement personnel, the people who go after the financial engineers, is expected to decline. You read that right. Despite the trillion dollar meltdown now underway, the number of SEC enforcement personnel will decline from 1,209 in fiscal year 2008 to to 1,177 in 2009. In all, the SEC expects to have 3,771 employees for 2009.

How does that compare to other federal agencies? Well, for comparison, the Smithsonian Institution budget for 2009 includes funding for 4,324 employees. That's not a slap at the Smithsonian. It houses a myriad of the nation's most treasured objects. But the SEC actually guards the nation's treasure. And yet, Congress treats it like a bastard stepchild. Congress currently doles out more than five times as much money for corn subsidies ($4.9 billion in 2006, the most recent year for which data is available) as it does for the SEC.

It's not just about funding. It's also about rigorous accountability for the regulators themselves. Over the past few weeks, it's become obvious that the SEC was largely co-opted by the companies it was supposed to be regulating. On September 25, the agency's Inspector General, David Kotz, issued a report which that it is "undisputable" that the SEC "failed to carry out its mission in its oversight of Bear Stearns" -- the investment bank the collapsed earlier this year and was taken over by JP Morgan. The report said that the agency missed "numerous potential red flags" prior to the company's collapse and failed to require the investment bank to rein in its risk taking. (The full text of the report is available at: http://www.sec.gov/about/oig/audit/2008/446-a.pdf.)

But what's more telling, according to the report, is the lax approach the SEC had in its handling of what was known as the Consolidated Supervised Entity program, a system set up to oversee the biggest Wall Street firms. There were six holding companies in the program: Bear Stearns, Goldman Sachs, Morgan Stanley, Merrill Lynch, Lehman Brothers, Citigroup and JP Morgan. The report found that the SEC approved the inclusion of Bear Stearns in the program "prior to the completion of the inspection process." Thus, the SEC agreed to regulate Bear Stearns before it even knew if the company was in compliance with the standards it was supposed to enforce.

Perhaps even more unsettling is a new report from Kotz, reported on this week by the New York Times and ABC News, which concludes that the top enforcement officials at the SEC quashed an investigation into possible insider trading at Pequot Capital Management, a big hedge fund. Kotz's report sides with Gary J. Aguirre, a former SEC employee, who was fired in September 2005 after he tried to get testimony from John J. Mack, the current CEO of Morgan Stanley. Aguirre wanted to talk to Mack about the Pequot investigation. (In 2007, Mack's compensation totaled $41.7 million even though Morgan Stanley's earning fell by 57 percent.) Kotz's report makes it clear that Aguirre was wrongly dismissed for being too vigilant in his investigation of Pequot and it says that the SEC gave "preferential treatment" to Mack during the investigation. It further recommends that the agency's chief of enforcement, Linda Thomson, as well as two other top regulators at the agency, face "disciplinary and/or performance-based action" for their role in the tawdry affair.


Digg!

See more stories tagged with: enron, crisis, economic meltdown

Robert Bryce is the author of Pipe Dreams: Greed, Ego and Enron and Gusher of Lies: The Dangerous Delusions of "Energy Independence."


Advertisement
Advertisement

 

Comments Turn comments off sitewide Give us feedback »
Comments closed.
The comments for this story have been closed. Thank you to everyone who participated.
View:
Most People ...
Posted by: mmckinl on Oct 10, 2008 12:22 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
have jobs and families and busy lives to lead. They don't have time to check and see if derivatives are being handled properly ...

My clue came when I showed my wife a flyer that came in our mail about 3 years ago. Just a normal flyer to occupant. The flyer promised a $1 million loan for $2500 a month to purchase real estate for anyone with a FICO of 700 ...

Let's see ... $2500 a month, $30,000 a year on one million ... that's 3% ... oh the flyer also said that the balance of the loan would be $1,200,000 after 3 years!

That was it for me, I sold all my real estate, several properties, all my stocks and parked my money in Treasuries. Most people don't have a degree in accounting with a minor in econ. I wouldn't expect them to understand what was then about to happen ... How do you ?

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» "Treasuries" ??? Posted by: Last Chance
» RE: "Treasuries" ??? Posted by: mmckinl
It's like this...
Posted by: Bobsays on Oct 10, 2008 9:22 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Your crazy uncle in Miami asks you to come down and condo sit for two weeks. Crazy Mike is a sworn bachelor and lives in a penthouse near South Beach. The pad is very moderne.

When you arrive, Mike is already gone and has left the keys with the super. You go up and open up the door: all you can do is just stare. Wow! It is one cool pad: you drop your bag and walk to the window. It stretches the length of the pad, and has a full view of the beach: the sun is just starting to set, but you can see the babes out there still playing volleyball.

You close the door and walk to the island kitchen. On the counter is a note from Crazy Mike, and beside the note is a big bag of coke and the phone number to a highly recommended escort agency. What do you do?

Crazy Mike clearly wants you to have a GOOD time while condo sitting.

Crazy Mike is Bush. And you, well, you are the American people. We know what you did. That bag was gone by the second day there, and that escort agency? You are still paying off the credit card, because, yeah, those chicks were HOT, but damn, I never knew Russian girls would be THAT expensive!?

So, it was fun at Crazy Mikes, but the bill? Ouch!

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» RE: It's like this... Posted by: Crazy H
» RE: It's like this... Posted by: Bobsays
CommonDreamer
Posted by: CommonDreamer on Oct 12, 2008 7:27 PM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Well, totally correct. Why it this a shock at all - indeed. The new economic math is garbage, period. It says you can have regressive taxation via supply sider policies (complete dreck)....then you can suppress wages, suppress market regulation, send all of the money to the top, have them run up the prices of everything and then have the poor hapless consumer, driven mad by ridiculous wealth envy and media saturation, go out and try to buy this life style...that is only meant for the very wealthy (or at least $150K plus income people) anyway.

This had to happen. You can only blow so much hot air into a balloon before it pops. And these policies (or lack of them) are so much hot air with no substance. Finally, enrichment from the bottom up is the only fair and sane thing to do....because it works for everyone. Enrichment from the top down never gets down, as we have seen. So it's back to regulation and common sense. Stop coddling investors and masters of the universe by indulging their every crazy whim to make obscure financial instruments which only serve one purpose: rip offs - period. They knew there was nothing behind the credit swaps...the derivatives (because there were no solid wages for these buyers to purchase homes in this price range). They knew but they wanted to inflame the market - and spread the bad instruments around so when the bottom fell out, Europe and other countries - and worse - the American median and under income citizen held the bag. A great article. May we never forget that this is the third time they've gotten away with the great train robbery (#1 is the Great Depression, #2 was the '80's crash of S&Ls)...and hopefully this third time (not being the charm) will end the domination of "free market" ideology and sink the supply side koolaid back into the swamp where it belongs.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]