http://abcnews.go.com/…

The Securities and Exchange Commission today unanimously proposed new measures to make it tougher to profit by short selling stocks, including reinstating the uptick rule, although it will be months before any changes take effect.

Short selling is commonly defined as the practice of selling borrowed stocks, and then attempting to purchase them later at a lower price, thereby profiting from the drop in price.

SEC chief Mary Schapiro warned at this morning’s open meeting in Washington that “Short selling may also be used to illegally manipulate stock prices. … In addition, unrestricted short selling can exacerbate a declining market in a security.

“In the past 18 months, we have seen every major stock market around the world experience steep declines and extreme volatility in securities prices,” she said. “Although we are not aware of specific empirical evidence that the 2007 elimination of short sale price tests contributed to this volatility in the U.S. markets, many members of the public have come to associate short selling with that volatility, and with a loss of investor confidence.”

I believe it was Ludwig von Mises who when asked what was it that kept an economy from being socialist replied a functional exchange market. Looks like they are futher taking that away from us. Note how she says “specific empirical evidence.” Of course there isn’t. We are living in the times of the ban. There is evidence and plenty of theory regarding short selling but they really couldn’t care less. As is pointed out in the last sentence quoted above: “many members of the public have come to associate short selling with that volatility, and with a loss in investor confidence.” And why have they come to that conclusion? Perhaps it’s because the bureaucrats and central bankers use speculators as scapegoats for their own economic mistakes? Take a look throughout history. Every time there is a crisis, panic, resession, depression, what have you… those in power, those who created the problem, blame it or try to blame it on others. Nothing more than a distraction. For every short seller there is a buyer.  Why not blame those who buy from short sellers?

http://www.reuters.com/…

Under fire for regulatory missteps, top U.S. securities regulator Christopher Cox defended his agency’s record but acknowledged some regrets over how he handled the worst financial crisis in decades.

The Securities and Exchange Commission has been lambasted by lawmakers and others for not doing enough to prevent the 2008 collapse of Bear Stearns and Lehman Brothers, interfering with markets and failing to detect the alleged $50 billion fraud at Wall Street financier Bernard Madoff’s firm.

Cox, a Republican and former California congressman, said the SEC’s focus has been customer protection and broker dealer regulation and that the agency “performed that traditional role superbly.”

However, Cox said he had some regrets over a drastic action the agency took as markets were hurtling downward in September. For a few weeks, the SEC stopped investors from making bearish bets on financial stocks like Morgan Stanley and Citigroup.

The SEC’s office of economic analysis is still evaluating data from the temporary ban on short-selling. Preliminary findings point to several unintended market consequences and side effects caused by the ban, he said.

“While the actual effects of this temporary action will not be fully understood for many more months, if not years, knowing what we know now, I believe on balance the commission would not do it again,” Cox told Reuters in a telephone interview from the SEC’s Los Angeles office late on Tuesday. “The costs appear to outweigh the benefits.”

The SEC imposed the temporary ban under intense pressure from the Federal Reserve and Treasury Department which insisted it was crucial to the short-term survival of these institutions, Cox said.

A few weeks after the temporary ban was lifted, global markets were again dropping precipitously, U.S. banks were begging the SEC to reinstate its short-sale ban and there was talk of shutting the markets down.

Cox said the chief executive of one major U.S. investment bank even urged suspension of normal trading rules across the entire U.S. market, likening the situation to how Abraham Lincoln suspended habeas corpus during the Civil War and Franklin Roosevelt sent Japanese-Americans to internment camps during World War Two.

The chief executive said, “that is how America made it through such crises, and we couldn’t be too focused on maintaining the rule of law,” Cox said. “That was advice we rejected.”

Wonderful. Comparing his their actions to that of outright tyrants. In one respect I agree. What was done was but a difference of degrees and not kind. But the level of degrees is so great it’s a bit of an insult to those who suffered as a result of Lincoln’s and FDR’s actions.

This was completely predicted by anyone with half an economic brain. The ban was obviously pushed for by John Mack of Morgan Stanley, Lloyd Blankfein of Goldman Sachs along with other major bank players. No net good can occur due to government interference. Only relative to the bad they caused prior.

firstdraft.pdf

http://money.cnn.com/…

Among the provisions of the draft bill:

• The $700 billion would be disbursed in stages, with $250 billion made available immediately for the Treasury’s use.

• Curbs will be placed on the compensation of executives at companies that sell mortgage assets to Treasury. Among them, the bill would limit golden parachutes to executives at companies that participate; they will not be able to deduct the salary they pay to executives above $500,000.

• An oversight board will be created. The board will include the Federal Reserve chairman, the Securities and Exchange Commission chairman, the Federal Home Finance Agency director and the Housing and Urban Development secretary.

• Treasury is allowed the option to take ownership stakes in participating companies under certain circumstances.

• Treasury may establish an insurance program – with risk-based premiums paid by the industry – to guarantee companies’ troubled assets, including mortgage-backed securities, purchased before March 18, 2008.

I’m going to look through it tonight. See what they have snuck in. Some at DailyPaul.com have taken chunks of the bill to scan it quicker.

UPDATE from LewRockwell.com/blog:

New debt limit: $11,315,000,000,000.

That’s $38,000 per capita.

Update: Michael Hall writes:

Section 128 changes effective date from Oct 1 2011 to Oct 1 2008 for this section of current law:

SEC. 202. INCREASED FLEXIBILITY FOR THE FEDERAL RESERVE BOARD TO ESTABLISH RESERVE REQUIREMENTS.
Section 19(b)(2)(A) of the Federal Reserve Act (12 U.S.C. 461(b)(2)(A)) is amended–
(1) in clause (i), by striking `the ratio of 3 per centum’ and inserting `a ratio of not greater than 3 percent (and which may be zero)’; and

(2) in clause (ii), by striking `and not less than 8 per centum,’ and inserting `(and which may be zero),’.

TITLE 12 > CHAPTER 3 > SUBCHAPTER XIV > § 461
Amendment of Subsections (b) and (c)
Pub. L. 109–351, title II, §§ 201–203, Oct. 13, 2006, §§ 201–203, 120 Stat. 1968, provided that, effective Oct. 1, 2011, this section is amended— (1) in subsection (b)(2)(A), by striking “the ratio of 3 per centum” and inserting “a ratio of not greater than 3 percent (and which may be zero)” in clause (i) and by striking “and not less than 8 per centum,” and inserting “(and which may be zero),” in clause (ii); (2) in subsection (b)

This will allow banks to hold zero reserves if the fed says so.

http://www.lewrockwell.com/…

Today, the Wall Street Journal reports that the ban on short selling is “casting a very wide net.” I just downloaded, into a spreadsheet, the list of companies on the short-sale ban list. There are about 1,000 listings. Is anyone surprised that GM and Ford were added to the list this week? Since the SEC has turned over the job of determining who gets on the list to NYSE and Nasdaq, listed companies are pounding on the doors of NYSE and Nasdaq to be put on the list of “protected companies.”

The original concept supporting the placement of the ban has already been blown to bits. Without setting any formal rules (read: arbitrary rules), the ban was supposed to “protect” banks, savings associations, broker-dealers, investment advisers, and insurance companies. One out of seven of all companies listed on US exchanges are now on The List. Libertarians always know that creeping interventionist tactics, rationalized by authorities, central planners, and the recipients of the intervention as being necessary to quell immediate crises, are always a precursor to long-term (and often permanent) takeovers, by government, of market processes. But occasionally, there is a bright light in this swelling tide of statism:

American Physicians Capital Inc., a provider of medical-malpractice insurance, opted off the list, too. CEO Kevin Clinton said in a statement: “We also believe in free and fair markets.”

Also opting out: Greenlight Capital Re Ltd., a Cayman Islands-based reinsurance company. Vocal short seller David Einhorn is chairman of Greenlight.

“We believe it is in the long-term interest of our company to have the market set an appropriate price for our shares,” the firm said in a statement. “We also do not want investors to feel our stock is the beneficiary of any artificial price support.”

Here is the direct link.

Why is Zale Corp on the list? Is the jewelry market really that fragile?

http://www.nytimes.com/…

Goldman Sachs and Morgan Stanley, the last big independent investment banks on Wall Street, will transform themselves into bank holding companies subject to far greater regulation, the Federal Reserve said Sunday night, a move that fundamentally reshapes an era of high finance that defined the modern Gilded Age.

The firms requested the change themselves, even as Congress and the Bush administration rushed to pass a $700 billion rescue of financial firms. It was a blunt acknowledgment that their model of finance and investing had become too risky and that they needed the cushion of bank deposits that had kept big commercial banks like Bank of America and JPMorgan Chase relatively safe amid the recent turmoil.

It also is a turning point for the high-rolling culture of Wall Street, with its seven-figure bonuses and lavish perks for even midlevel executives. It effectively returns Wall Street to the way it was structured before Congress passed a law during the Great Depression separating investment banking from commercial banking, known as the Glass-Steagall Act.

By becoming bank holding companies, the firms are agreeing to significantly tighter regulations and much closer supervision by bank examiners from several government agencies rather than only the Securities and Exchange Commission. Now, the firms will look more like commercial banks, with more disclosure, higher capital reserves and less risk-taking.

I’m fine with this outcome in that the Glass-Steagall Act has been effectively nullified as far as I can tell. However, it makes me wonder if this was all part of some plan. Yes these firms will become more regulated in some ways but in what way does it harm them vs harming smaller firms. Morgan Stanley has had its Utah based industrial bank and word is they have been looking at the benefits of becoming a bank holding company for a while now.

So now they are a net less risky. They claim revenue will be down as a result as will bonuses and perhaps pay. We shall see. How long till the government forgets what led us here and creates the environment for a bubble again? If we make it out of this one… likely not long.

http://www.reuters.com/…

A meeting between top government officials and the heads of some of Wall Street’s biggest financial firms over the fate of Lehman Brothers broke up on Saturday but was set to resume on Sunday, a spokesman for the New York Federal Reserve Bank said.

“Senior representatives of major financial institutions reconvened on Saturday with U.S. officials at the New York Fed. Discussions are expected to continue tomorrow,” the spokesman said. Small groups were continuing to work into the night on unspecified issues that were raised at the meeting.

Efforts are under way among Lehman executives, potential buyers and government officials to craft a buyout plan for beleaguered Lehman, possibly before the weekend is over.

Lehman has become the latest victim of the global credit crunch but Treasury and the Fed have made clear they do not want to see taxpayer funds committed to any deal involving Lehman.

Among government officials at the meetings were New York Fed President Timothy Geithner, U.S. Treasury Secretary Henry Paulson and Securities and Exchange Commission Chairman Christopher Cox.

I wasn’t able to pay attention to the market the 11th and 12th as a result of attending the Service Nation Summit so I missed the Lehman Brothers and Merrill Lynch stock plunge. (Morgan Stanley didn’t do well, Fannie and Freddie dropped quite a bit too.) The Fed claims that they won’t step in with credit because Lehman has been doing poorly for some time and have access to the discount window. Seems last reported was that Lehman was perhaps to be broken up in three ways with “Bank of America would acquire the bulk of Lehman Brothers, including its mortgage assets. Barclays, Britain’s third-biggest bank, would take a smaller parcel including Lehman’s asset management and fixed income businesses, while Goldman would take the rest.” However other sources are claiming Barclays has backed out citing it “couldn’t get guarantees from the government or agree on a private-sector deal to mitigate what it called Lehman’s “open-ended” trading obligations.”

It’s going to be interesting to see what comes out. They really want to figure out something before Asia markets open. Tomorrow could be a really nasty day.

In other news JP Morgan is in talks to buy Washington Mutual. With all these buyups and mergers the results remind me more and more of the 1907 panic where its believed that JP Morgan spread rumors of bank insolvency in order to buy their assets up cheap after the bank run which would inevitably occur. The neo-merchentialist/corporatist system we have continues to increase the power and wealth of the bankers and power elite at the expense of all the rest and the public continues to dig their own grave by playing into the hands of the banks and politicians by requesting more regulation and nationalization which only further expands their power.

For those interested in knowing more about the history of banking in the United States, The Great Depression and why the Federal Reserve System is bad:

America’s Great Depression

• Free: http://mises.org/rothbard/agd.pdf
• Print: http://www.mises.org/store/Americas-Great-Depression-P63.aspx

History of Money & Banking in the United States

• Free: http://mises.org/books/historyofmoney.pdf
• Print: http://www.mises.org/store/History-of-Money-and-Banking-in-the-United-States–P191.aspx

The Case Against The FED

• Free: http://mises.org/books/fed.pdf
• Print: http://www.mises.org/store/Case-Against-the-Fed-The-P69.aspx

I just checked the news and it looks like Bank of America has pulled out too. The Fed is claiming it won’t provide any funds to prevent the collapse. Tomorrow is not going to be pretty. I also noticed that Mr. Greenspan is saying the obvious: “the U.S. credit squeeze has brought on a “once-in-a-century” financial crisis that is likely to claim more big firms before it eases.”