Don’t 'Screw Joe the Plummer': The Sausage-Making of Financial Reform

K. Krawiec
{"title":"Don’t 'Screw Joe the Plummer': The Sausage-Making of Financial Reform","authors":"K. Krawiec","doi":"10.2139/ssrn.1925431","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"This article employs section 619 of the Dodd-Frank Act, popularly known as the Volcker rule, to examine agency level activity during the pre-proposal rulemaking phase – a time period about which little is known, despite its importance to policy outcomes. By capitalizing on transparency efforts specific to Dodd-Frank, I am able to access information on agency contacts whose disclosure is not required by the APA and, therefore, not typically available to researchers. I analyze the roughly 8000 public comment letters received by FSOC in advance of its study regarding Volcker rule implementation, and the meeting logs of the Treasury Department, Federal Reserve, CFTC, SEC, and FDIC prior to the Notice of Proposed Rulemaking. This analysis reveals significant public activity, but also a stark difference in investment by financial institutions versus other actors in influencing Volcker rule implementation. It also reveals a greater unity of interest among financial market participants than would be suggested by press reports and the provision’s legislative history. Finally, the data shed light on the efficacy of the notice and comment process as a means for federal agencies to engage the general public.","PeriodicalId":112302,"journal":{"name":"LSN: Legislation (Public Law) (Topic)","volume":"10 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2013-01-25","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"49","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"LSN: Legislation (Public Law) (Topic)","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.1925431","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 49

Abstract

This article employs section 619 of the Dodd-Frank Act, popularly known as the Volcker rule, to examine agency level activity during the pre-proposal rulemaking phase – a time period about which little is known, despite its importance to policy outcomes. By capitalizing on transparency efforts specific to Dodd-Frank, I am able to access information on agency contacts whose disclosure is not required by the APA and, therefore, not typically available to researchers. I analyze the roughly 8000 public comment letters received by FSOC in advance of its study regarding Volcker rule implementation, and the meeting logs of the Treasury Department, Federal Reserve, CFTC, SEC, and FDIC prior to the Notice of Proposed Rulemaking. This analysis reveals significant public activity, but also a stark difference in investment by financial institutions versus other actors in influencing Volcker rule implementation. It also reveals a greater unity of interest among financial market participants than would be suggested by press reports and the provision’s legislative history. Finally, the data shed light on the efficacy of the notice and comment process as a means for federal agencies to engage the general public.
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
不要“操乔的Plummer”:金融改革的香肠制作
本文采用《多德-弗兰克法案》(Dodd-Frank Act)第619条,也就是众所周知的沃尔克规则(Volcker rule),来考察提案前规则制定阶段的机构层面活动——尽管这一阶段对政策结果很重要,但人们对其知之甚少。通过利用《多德-弗兰克法案》的透明度措施,我能够获得APA不要求披露的机构联系人信息,因此,研究人员通常无法获得这些信息。我分析了FSOC在研究沃尔克规则实施之前收到的大约8000封公众意见信,以及财政部、美联储、CFTC、SEC和FDIC在拟议规则制定通知之前的会议记录。这一分析揭示了重要的公共活动,但也揭示了金融机构与其他行为者在影响沃尔克规则实施方面的投资存在明显差异。它还揭示了金融市场参与者之间利益的更大统一,而不是新闻报道和该条款的立法历史所暗示的那样。最后,这些数据揭示了通知和评论程序作为联邦机构与公众接触的一种手段的有效性。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
期刊最新文献
Applying Insider Trading Law to Congressmen, Government Officials, and the Political Intelligence Industry Review of Economic Legislation in March 2015 British Columbia's New Family Law on Guardianship, Relocation, and Family Violence: The First Year of Judicial Interpretation Higher Education and Research (Consolidation and Improvement) Bill 2014 Legislating Unorthodox Taxes: The Hungarian Experience
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1