There are an array of reports today outlining the steps that the banking and financial services industries are taking to gum up various aspects of the plan to beef up Wall Street regulation.
There’s a new industry group — the Financial Instruments Reporting and Convergence Alliance (FIRCA) — fighting an accounting rule change meant “to end a practice that contributed to the risky lending that set off the financial crisis.” Hedge funds, organized into the Managed Funds Association, are mobilizing “money and power to fend off tougher oversight, higher taxes and much greater transparency.”
And of course, banks are continuing to raise a stink about the Obama administration’s plan to create a new consumer protection agency. All of which makes this report from the Research Department at the International Monetary Fund (IMF) (via The Stash) extremely timely.
The paper shows that the financial firms that did the most lobbying from 1998 to 2006 also had lower lending standards, a greater tendency to securitize, a larger presence in areas that are suffering the most from loan delinquencies, and ultimately lost the most money during the financial implosion. The researchers concluded that financial sector lobbying of this sort poses a threat to economic stability and increases systemic risk:
[The results] tend to support a theory of “moral hazard” whereby financial intermediaries lobby to obtain private benefits, making loans under less stringent terms not because they have better capacity to evaluate risks associated with the loans, but because they expect short term gains from these loans during the boom phase, and to be bailed out when losses amount during a financial crisis. These results…provide indirect evidence that lobbying might have the potential to threaten financial stability and contribute to systemic risk.
In those same years, financial firms increased their lobbying by 25 percent, while the average increase in other industries was 10 percent. Meanwhile, in the last two years, hedge funds have quadrupled the amount that they spend on lobbying (see graph at right).
So the moral of the story is that financial firms lobby to make the rules fit the tactics that they want to use, and lawmakers respond accordingly, instead of creating a system that forces firms to use more due diligence and employ more caution. This is worth knowing, since the Obama administration’s financial regulation plan likely won’t start moving until the fall, giving the financial industry lots of time to work its magic.


The incredible number of moving parts of this crisis is amazing–especially because so many of them were moving in the same way. Lobbyists and corporations try to avoid the rules. Government fails to stop them. Over, and over, and over again.
So you’d hope that in a piece like the one the Times ran this weekend, about financier Bill Gross, there’d be more analysis of the conflicts of interest involved in Gross’ being “on speed dial” for Obama, as the Times put it. But instead, we have to go to the web for that. NewDeal2.0 had a great analysis of this TimesFail.
June 24th, 2009 at 12:21 pmWhy
June 24th, 2009 at 2:30 pmhaven’t these firms been plowed under and the earth salted so that nothing will ever grow there againdo these criminals even still have a seat at the table?It seems a real pity that, having paid Congress a mint to make the bed precisely the way they wanted it, the financial services industry was not given enough time to lie in it. When the banks got into trouble in 1907, JP Morgan put them in a room and told them to work it out themselves. There are no Morgans now. Not even a Walt Wriston. Just a bunch of second-raters more interested in their own perks than in banking. Of course now, when a banker talks about “sending my man to talk to your man,” he is talking about the same man. The regulators have been suborned and we are so much poorer for it.
June 25th, 2009 at 9:33 amPerhaps you people should look at the real culprit here, and how he’s doing exactly the same thing now, as he did then. Let’s also note the lobbying by Fannie and Freddie to have loan restrictions loosened as well.
Meanwhile, Barney Frank apparently doesn’t have the mental capacity to understand that lowering standards for lending is what got us into this mess originally. Or just doesn’t care.
June 25th, 2009 at 3:12 pm