Posts Tagged ‘Glass-Steagall Act’

Anthony Downs On Financial Reform

Tuesday, August 31st, 2010

Anthony Downs discusses the ins and outs of financial reform.  The nation’s financial system needs significantly more regulation than exists now.  The lack of tough regulatory powers strongly impacted the recent financial crash and the Great Recession that ensued.  The good news is that the Obama administration is moving firmly in this direction with financial reform legislation a critical item on its agenda.  This is the opinion of Anthony Downs,  a senior fellow with the Brookings Institution and former President of the Real Estate Research Corporation.  In a recent interview for the Alter NOW Podcasts, Downs said that between 1980 and 2007, the value of international capital markets – including bank deposits, assets, equities, public and private debt – quadrupled relative to the world’s GDP, lifting millions of people out of poverty.  Although unprecedented, this growth relied heavily on borrowed money to finance higher living standards and highly leveraged loans with limited reserves backing them.  In the end, the growth was unable to be sustained.

The financial reform legislation currently undergoing reconciliation by a Senate-House conference committee is not a reinstatement of the 1933 Glass-Steagall Act – which separated investment and commercial banking — because banks will still be allowed to deal with securities.  Under the new law, banks will have to register derivatives with some type of formal exchange and maintain records on who is borrowing money and under what terms.  This marks a significant change from before the Great Recession, when derivatives were traded with virtually no oversight.

Downs believes that former Federal Reserve Chairman Alan Greenspan contributed to the financial crisis in two ways.  In 2001, when Greenspan was informed that there was fraud in the subprime housing market and that he should do something about it, he refused to take action because he didn’t believe in regulation.  According to Downs, “that was a terrible mistake and meant that all the horrible loans made in the subprime market could continue unchecked.”  Greenspan’s second error was to maintain low interest rates for as long as he did at a time when an enormous amount of capital was coming into the United States economy from overseas.  Because investors were avoiding the stock market, they put their money into real estate.  That drove the price of properties sky high and destroyed the concept of intelligent underwriting and evaluating the risk before approving the loan.

 
icon for podpress  Anthony Downs On Financial Reform: Play Now | Play in Popup | Download

Repealed Glass-Steagall Act Played a Role in Financial Meltdown

Tuesday, November 24th, 2009

Glass-Steagall repeal helped bring on the great recession.  When President Bill Clinton signed legislation to repeal the Depression-era Glass-Steagall Act in 1999, he handed Wall Street  a victory that likely contributed to the recent financial meltdown. Glass-Steagall’s repeal eliminated barriers between normal banking activities – deposits and lending – and riskier areas such as derivatives trading.

“The capital-market rules are going to change,” says Brad Hintz, an analyst at Sanford C. Bernstein & Company in New York.  “It’s going to be much more difficult to trade in the illiquid parts of the market” beyond corporate and government bonds, as well as to finance investments.

President Barack Obama is working with his advisors and Congress to fill the regulatory void that Glass-Steagall’s repeal left.  Former Federal Reserve Chairman Paul Volcker, now a financial advisor in the Obama administration, prefers a “two-tier” financial system that limits risk taking.  Current Fed Chairman Ben Bernanke has increased surveillance of the systemically important firms and believes that these companies require “especially close oversight.”

To quote then-candidate Obama in a spring of 2008 speech, “A regulatory structure set up for banks in the 1930s needed to change.  But by the time the Glass-Steagall Act was repealed in 1999, the $300 million lobbying effort that drove deregulation was more about facilitating mergers than creating an efficient regulatory framework.”

The result?  Commercial banks seeking to compete with investment banks took on significant trading risks and created off-balance-sheet financing methods to reduce the capital they required to avoid loan losses.  At the same time, investment banks started lending more aggressively to companies and increased their own borrowing to purchase securities or real estate.

All that has occurred clearly demonstrates the need for effective new regulation.