In addition to asking Jeff Merkley about filibuster reform, I sought his reaction to the Fail Whale trades that have racked up massive losses at JPMorgan Chase. Merkley, along with Carl Levin, authored the Volcker rule, the ban on most types of proprietary trading, that made its way into the Dodd-Frank financial reform bill. There has been a lot of slippage on the rules, however, once they left Congress and made their way through the regulatory gauntlet.
“Sen. Levin and I were very specific on risk management, that it had to apply to a specific identified risk,” Merkley said in an interview. “You can have hedges, but on a position-by-position basis. The risk was not identified for any of the multitudinous moves in the London Whale’s strategy. Even Jamie Dimon agrees with that. But he said it’s part of some vast portfolio hedge. The concept of a specific risk and a specific hedge does not fit with a portfolio hedge.”
Merkley chalked it up to two years of lobbying by Wall Street, including from Dimon and JPMorgan Chase, chipping away at the rule he authored, whittling it down to practical irrelevance. “If portfolio hedging stays in the rules, it guts the Volcker rule,” he said.
He then listed all the reasons you would want to put up a firewall between bank deposits and what amount to hedge fund trades. “If you allow hedge funds to operate inside of banks, you subsidize them with taxpayer money through the discount window and other lending facilities. You subvert the funds that should be used for lending to small businesses into this trading activity. And if the risky trades go bad, they melt down the system of credit in this country. The business community should be 100% behind the Volcker rule firewall because it sustains a reliable supply of credit.”
Indeed, one of the reasons that JPMorgan Chase had the ability to make these massive trades was because of a windfall of taxpayer-insured excess deposits. They took the money and, instead of using it to stimulate more lending or economic activity, decided to gamble with it, secure in the knowledge that, even if they lost, they would make it up or get the government to give them a fresh set of chips. This is no different from the kinds of risky practices we have seen in the financial sector since before the financial crisis.
The critique falls in line with the calls by many financial reform advocates and pundits to “make banking boring,” so that everyone stays in their lane, with the banks providing credit and the allocation of capital, and hedge funds doing the high-risk trading outside of the commercial bank framework. “I have no objection to Jamie Dimon being the head of a hedge fund,” Merkley said. “I object to having him run a hedge fund inside a large bank.”
This has led to some calls for rules stronger than what we see in even a restored Dodd-Frank. Merkley doesn’t see much hope for passage there. “I seriously doubt that any bill will get to the President’s desk that fundamentally moves in that direction,” he said. As for what it would take to get the debate going that way? “It will take another crisis to move the debate. We’ll hopefully avert much of the crisis with the rules we have in place now.” Merkley reasoned that the Volcker rule’s firewall would limit systemic risk by farming it out to hedge funds and less systemically important institutions. “You can start a fire on your patio, so nothing in the house is injured,” Merkley said by way of analogy. “If you set your living room on fire, you burn down your house.”
But this all assumes that the Volcker rule, and the other parts of the as-yet not fully implemented financial reform (including derivatives rules, which Brooksley Born called attention to today), get implemented properly. That’s not what we’re seeing right now. So Merkley and others will have to use this event as a pressuring mechanism to get the federal regulatory apparatus back on track with the language and the spirit of the law. Even then, nobody would suggest that the post-Dodd-Frank landscape is perfectly safe compared to the landscape before the legislation.
“There is still systemic risk,” Merkley said.




13 Comments

Support this site!
Subscribe to the newsletter
Advertise on Firedoglake
Send
us your tips
Make us your homepage
About FDL News Desk
The chance to get rid of these “savvy businessmen” who are in fact the biggest losers in American business history, break up their TBTF casinos, and restore a healthy and boring banking system has been lost. Perhaps forever. We had a severely undereducated clown in the WH who turned the job over to a bought-and-paid-for Goldman plant who was asleep at the wheel when it all went down.
Now that nothing whatsoever is possible, the heroes and heroines (yeah, you, Liz) are coming out of the woodwork to point their fingers at the bad guys. Where were these liberal champions when we really needed them? The same place they’ll be the next time we need them. Hiding, guarding their bank account and life of privilege.
Fuck all of them.
great interview
“
shows how messed up things are.
I wonder what “another crisis” would lead to. Does anyone have any idea? do these people care? I guess they think they can buy their way out of anything that comes along.
they might be right. But they might not be.
Like the lunatics in the oil business, these people don’t seem to realize the dangers of the game they are playing.
23,0000,0000.00 dollars a year?
surely they have enough money. wake up.
No matter where you look, it is reasonable to conclude that the people who are controlling things short, medium, and long term,
are nuts.
At least during the Gilded Age there were some richy richies who actually did stuff, like steel, oil. Now, nadda.
You are sooo polite.
Merkley could be wrong, ya know. It could take another 2, or 3, or more crises…
The banksters are like termites. As soon as you get rid of them, another group makes a try at eating your walls. Its not a one time fight and the termites know this and don’t rest till they die or eat your house. Now that doesn’t necessarily mean all the termites have a conspiracy, all it means is that termites like wood and if you live in a wood house and you give them access to it they are likely under the right conditions to eat it. By removing the firewalls between the Comm. banks and the brokerages we’ve essentially invited the termites in, why should anyone be surprised that they are now doing what termites do?
What is this “federal regulatory apparatus” that gets to rewrite legislation to suit its future employers on Wall Street? Names, please.
These termites had a plan. They have executed it flawlessly.
“And now that JP Morgan has proven that even ‘the best’ banks haven’t the faintest idea what they’re doing (or don’t care), it’s time for Congress to finally make it happen.”
http://www.businessinsider.com/and-now-we-know-the-truth-about-wall-street-its-kids-playing-with-dynamite-2012-5#ixzz1uzMOIaAC
And, now JP Morgan is sending their man, Zames to fix it (so to speak):
“In September 2008, Jamie Dimon dispatched Zames to Bear Stearns to put that bank under, which Zames did by immediately calling the Fed and insisting that Bear Stearns ‘would not last another day,’ leading to the Fed giving Bear Stearns to JPM Chase virtually for nothing with a $30 billion infusion from the Fed buying Bear’s bad assets.”
http://larouchepac.com/node/22697
God help us because “frankly [TBTF banks] own the place.”–Sen. Dick Durbin
what you said.
The State of Nevada has better controls on their casinos than NY has on their Wall Street casinos. Merkley is right, inside bank portfolio hedging may “break the banks”. An audit will show they are already in the tank when the unregulated trading that is leveraged risk is included.
The US banks are one element in the “Global” economy, the European banks are looking for state rescue as well. That requires states fund banks without owning them.
Greece, Spain. Italy, Portugal, Ireland and the Eastern European countries have bonds that are upside down. Their is not enough capital to pay the losses. Europe is in recession we are close behind. California faces yet another huge budget shortfall with more job losses the ninth largest economy in the world. China’s growth is cooling fast. The band aids aren’t working austerity is choking growth.
The government needs to use one of Ron Paul’s ideas and pull all support, let them and all their customers know that there will be no rescues of anyone at all next time. No FDIC for gambling with savers money either. The customers would seek safe places to store their cash.
Liberals need to stop defending the nanny state for the banks. let them walk off the cliff.