Reinventing Glass-Steagall

With Congress already debating a sweeping overhaul of financial regulation, perhaps the most enduring regulatory stricture of the Depression era is again getting an airing in Washington. The venerable Glass-Steagall laws that barred large banks from affiliating with securities firms and engaging in the insurance business were repealed in 1999. Now, as the banks try to move on from the dreaded salary caps and the humiliation of TARP, lawmakers are wondering whether getting rid of Glass-Steagall was such a good idea.

Financial giants such as Goldman Sachs could be broken up under two bills introduced in Congress on Wednesday, one with the backing of former Republican presidential nominee John McCain. Both would reinstate Glass-Steagall. Passage of the Cantwell-McCain bill would force firms at the center of last year’s financial crisis — such as Goldman Sachs, Morgan Stanley, Citigroup, JPMorgan Chase and Wells Fargo — to spin off investment and insurance operations, according to Demos, a progressive think tank in New York. A similar measure was offered on Wednesday by six Democrats in the House of Representatives.

To be fair, many have wondered whether dumping Glass-Steagall was such a good idea. What’s odd is that the discussion about bringing it back comes as almost an afterthought to the massive regulatory reform bill now before Congress. Rather than start from scratch, it may have made more sense to try to reinstate laws that the marketplace was already familiar with, and add new bits around the edges.

While the banks may think they are strong enough to shed TARP, it’s hard to see how they would survive the cleaving of Glass-Steagall at this stage of their recovery. Perhaps by forcing the sector to resplit itself, the remaining banks would be forced to go back on TARP. While that might have some political appeal, analysts say restoring Glass-Steagall is probably a non-starter because it would be seen as stoking unemployment. Going back to more Depression-era regulation would also be difficult to sell as a progressive approach to modern day problems.

Obama Campaign Attacks Romney’s PE Resume

romney.jpegPE Hub’s Dan Primack writes:

Mitt Romney is probably just days away from being named John McCain’s running mate, and the Democrats are already taking shots based on his time running Bain Capital. During a press conference earlier today in Denver, Obama campaign manager David Plouffe referred to the former buyout kingpin as a “job killing machine in business” who “has been proficient at using tax havens in places like the Cayman Islands that Americans have become increasingly tired of.”

It’s certainly true that Bain laid off portfolio company employees during Romney’s tenue. It’s also certainly true that Bain hired portfolio company employees during Romney’s tenue (particularly at the earlier-stage companies).

So Plouffe was only telling a half-truth, although it’s one we should expect to hear over and over again. This will be particularly true if Romney’s people keep avoiding any actual discussion of Bain Capital, as his spokesman did in response to Plouffe’s comments.