Senator Franken's Small Victory on the Bond Rating Agencies
There are many issues in the financial reform debate that are hard. For example, breaking up the "too big to fail" banks, as proposed in the Brown-Kaufman amendment to the Senate bill, is really hard. This would have meant taking away implicit government subsidies worth tens of billions of dollars annually to the nation's biggest banks. They kill in Washington to prevent things like this.
But Senator Franken had one that in principle was very easy. One big piece of the financial mess was the fact the bond rating agencies blessed every piece of garbage coming out of Wall Street as investment grade. This blessing allowed packages of extremely questionable subprime mortgages to be sold all over the world at top prices.
The bond rating agencies either had no clue of what they were rating, or worse, knew that they were giving investment grade ratings to junk. The reason that they were not doing their job was that they were being paid by the issuer.
This meant that their paycheck depended on keeping Goldman Sachs, Citigroup and other big issuers happy. If Moody's or Standard and Poor's rated their junk as "junk," they would likely lose their Wall Street business to their competitors.
This is a problem that is painfully easy to solve. You still have the issuer (Citigroup, Goldman Sachs, etc.) pay for the rating, but you have some independent body pick the agency. This would take away the obvious conflict of interest. Giving bogus ratings will not improve your probability of being picked next time. (In fact, it could reduce the probability of getting work if the selection of a rating agency was made conditional on the past track record.)
Some of us had been floating this idea for a long time as Congress genuflected over various convoluted ways to address the conflict of interest in the current system. Finally, Senator Al Franken (a man who knows a joke when he sees one) proposed the obvious fix: have the Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) pick the rating agency.
Remarkably, this piece of common sense sailed through the Senate with broad bi-partisan support. But, nothing is easy in this town.
When the financial reform bill got to the conference committee, Barney Frank, the chairman of the House Financial Services Committee, decided that Franken's solution was too radical. He wanted it stripped from the bill. How could anyone want to tamper with our perfect system?
Fortunately, Franken held his ground. The conference committee agreed on a two-year long study by the SEC. Studying a proposal is usually a way to kill it in Washington. (A two-year study of the invasion of Iraq would have been a great idea.) However, the wording requires that at the end of this two-year period the SEC implement the Franken proposal unless they've come up with a better solution. No one can take for granted that the SEC will be straight in its study, but at this point the odds are probably better than even that the Franken amendment will be put in place two years from now.
This should provide some comfort. There are many things to complain about with the financial reform bill - it does not fundamentally change the way that Wall Street does business - but this is a step forward. In this case, the fire department has shown up at the scene. They have discovered the source of the smoke. They have hooked up their hoses and they have decided that in two years they will start spraying the water. In Washington, that counts as success.

















How about The Fed does the rating itself?
June 18, 2010 8:31 AM | Reply | Permalink
What's the difference who does the rating? Any rater can be influenced by the issuer. And any rater can make assumptions that turn out to be too optimistic or too pessimistic and the original ratings won't reflect the future outcomes.
June 20, 2010 12:10 PM | Reply | Permalink
Dean Baker says:
"The bond rating agencies either had no clue of what they were rating, or worse, knew that they were giving investment grade ratings to junk. The reason that they were not doing their job was that they were being paid by the issuer."
Go back to ENRON and the outside auditors from Arthur Anderson and you see the same thing; people who could have made a difference didn't because they were making too much money.
I can't understand why there aren't multitudes of stories in the news of fraud investigations into the Wall street buccaneers, the mortgage brokerage business and the credit reporting agencies.
June 18, 2010 9:59 AM | Reply | Permalink
The rating agencies' assumptions on the future of housing prices was wrong. Lots of other people also did not correctly predict what would happen to the housing market as it came off its highs and the number of future defaults. But I don't see that as an apples-to-apples comparison to Enron and Arthur Anderson were there was outright fraud.
June 20, 2010 12:14 PM | Reply | Permalink
Wall Street will not be forced to change until it causes a complete and total global meltdown. We came to the brink this time around, but apparently the "Great Recession" wasn't bad enough.
June 18, 2010 11:13 AM | Reply | Permalink
Better -- demand that investors of Other People's Money perform their own "due diligence."
If they can't because they don't understand the financial product or aren't competent to analyze it, they shouldn't be buying it. Yes, once the suckers have been removed from the so-called sophisticated investors class (90%) the market for abstruse investments designed not to be understandable will wither -- an excellent result.
June 18, 2010 12:51 PM | Reply | Permalink
I second this suggestion, but....
What likely would happen next is someone would sell these sophisticated investors some fool proof ratings software that Wall Street wizards would quickly figure out how to game.
Ob-La-Di, Ob-La-Da, life goes on...
June 18, 2010 1:46 PM | Reply | Permalink
Or in the immortal words of Kurt Vonnegut or was that Lloyd Dobyns or maybe Linda Ellerby, "And so it goes."
June 18, 2010 7:15 PM | Reply | Permalink
What the hell is Barney Frank's angle on this? He's been doing this shit on financial reform over and over again.
June 18, 2010 5:45 PM | Reply | Permalink
Careful or you'll be on the receiving end of Barney Frank's "On what planet do you spend most of your time?" comeback.
Remember! On his planet Barney Frank knows all -- especially when it comes to banking and finance.
June 18, 2010 7:07 PM | Reply | Permalink
Prosecute where proper, upon conviction force them to return, totally, their ill gotten gains, fine them, and put them in jail for 5 or 10 years. Anything less is useless.
June 19, 2010 12:21 PM | Reply | Permalink
I have never been a fan of Mr. Franks. It appears when people oppose his position, it gets back to him being gay.
He is the guy that cried gay. He use to do it so often, it was sickening.
June 19, 2010 8:01 PM | Reply | Permalink
welcome to our website:
========== http://www.fashionclothe.com =======
50%off ca,ed hardy t-shirt$15 jeans,coach handbag$33,air max90,dunk,polo t-shirt$13,,lacoste t-shirt $13 air jordan for sale,l nba jersy for sale sale,$35,nfl nba jersy for sale
and so on..
if you like to order anything you like.
More details,
please just browse our website Quality is our Dignity;
Service is our Lift.
enjoy yourself.
thank you!!
June 20, 2010 10:41 PM | Reply | Permalink
Old Barney is the best reason the "Term Limits" I can think of, and in the case of Mr. Smally one term might be one too many.
June 21, 2010 1:03 PM | Reply | Permalink