Justice Brandeis wrote “sunlight is said to be the best of disinfectants; electric light the most efficient policeman.” He championed creating the SEC after the 1929 crash.
Now, SEC is doing its work in secrecy. Read this
@bettermarkets.bsky.social brief: bettermarkets.substack.com/p/the-secret...
I wrote a new piece outlining how SEC leadership is using “staff” statements and novel legal maneuvers to avoid the APA, a critical public transparency law.
It’s a way to deliver for the financial services industry while avoiding scrutiny of skeptics and public interest advocates.
![Groundhog Day
There is a tragic throughline running through this long-running script: financial industry leaders blow past legal guardrails, citing that their technological innovations cannot possibly be cabined in by outmoded rules created by a previous generation. Regulatory and law enforcement officials are under-resourced and out-gunned even at times when they have the best intentions for fulfilling the public interest. Other times, these officials are captured by the very industries they're tasked to police. In either case, industries are too often able to establish economic power through their noncompliance with existing law and translate it into political power to rewrite the rules to bless their business models. This noncompliance in the face of clear existing legal precedent creates the very "uncertainty" that the industry points to as a justification to change the law. And the final rhetorical move is to invoke international competitiveness, hoping to scare lawmakers into believing that a failure to bend the law to an industry's favor will harm U.S. industries, jobs and growth.
Crypto has memorized this script and is reading their lines in an Oscar-worthy performance to many policymakers. Congressional hearings bemoan the "legal uncertainty" caused by applying longstanding laws to arrangements that look a lot like pre-existing investment schemes but are digital or blockchain-based. Crypto industry petitions to federal agencies say that Great Depression-era laws "[prevent] market participants from leveraging the efficiencies new technology can offer."](https://cdn.bsky.app/img/feed_thumbnail/plain/did:plc:32lvgu3krzhhw3h6k3pme72r/bafkreih6mirekxauy353h5w7jg2qg4cxkbf4lcl25dzqhiicoejnd2wkou)
Groundhog Day There is a tragic throughline running through this long-running script: financial industry leaders blow past legal guardrails, citing that their technological innovations cannot possibly be cabined in by outmoded rules created by a previous generation. Regulatory and law enforcement officials are under-resourced and out-gunned even at times when they have the best intentions for fulfilling the public interest. Other times, these officials are captured by the very industries they're tasked to police. In either case, industries are too often able to establish economic power through their noncompliance with existing law and translate it into political power to rewrite the rules to bless their business models. This noncompliance in the face of clear existing legal precedent creates the very "uncertainty" that the industry points to as a justification to change the law. And the final rhetorical move is to invoke international competitiveness, hoping to scare lawmakers into believing that a failure to bend the law to an industry's favor will harm U.S. industries, jobs and growth. Crypto has memorized this script and is reading their lines in an Oscar-worthy performance to many policymakers. Congressional hearings bemoan the "legal uncertainty" caused by applying longstanding laws to arrangements that look a lot like pre-existing investment schemes but are digital or blockchain-based. Crypto industry petitions to federal agencies say that Great Depression-era laws "[prevent] market participants from leveraging the efficiencies new technology can offer."
Important explanation by @bettermarkets.bsky.social of how the crypto industry is reusing the same bogus “technological advancement” hype that Citigroup circa 1999 to gut key financial market protections.
Past is prologue. We should heed its lessons: bettermarkets.org/wp-content/u...
in the past, money that the CFPB collected would either go back to harmed consumers or go to a fund to finance consumer education and empowerment. The Trump Admin has both (nearly) stopped suing to recover money for harmed consumers and is also shutting down the education fund.
This new proposal would put that to an end - allowing auto lenders to operate without oversight and meaning the 1.36M customers that were helped in the past are way less likely to receive help in the future. Read more here: bettermarkets.org/wp-content/u...
The result is that in the PAST, the CFPB has sued a ton of subprime auto lenders and recovered money for individuals and families. They can do that, in part, because they supervise these entities and can stop problems early.
Subprime auto lenders also target rural customers and servicemembers, and may be more likely to be non-complaint with laws that protect military borrowers.
Why does this matter? Well, subprime auto lenders are more likely to offer cars priced higher than book values. Interest rates are higher, payment plans come with more traps, and car repossessions happen more frequently.
For auto lenders, the CFPB since 2015 has supervised companies that make > 10K auto loans per year.
This new proposal suggests raising that threshold 105x up to 1,050,000! Raising the level that high would ensure that ZERO lenders that serve subprime customers would be covered.
After the 2008 crisis, Congress ordered the CFPB to supervise non-bank companies like auto lenders, debt collectors and credit reporting bureaus that play an outsized role in whatever market they operate in. These are called "larger participant" rules.
🚨@bettermarkets.bsky.social analysis found that the CFPB proposal would exempt auto lenders where the Bureau previously recovered nearly $75 million in restitution & penalties affecting 1.36M including more than 50,000 servicemembers
While the CFPB is closed for business when it comes to helping Americans fight financial scams, they are hard at work rewriting rules to benefit subprime auto lenders. (quick thread)
三 COb Consumer Financial Protection Bureal / Newsroom CFPB Proposes Rule to Stop Data Brokers from Selling Sensitive Personal Data to Scammers, Stalkers, and Spies Rule seeks to protect Americans from crime and illegal foreign surveillance DEC 03, 2024
proposed rule would modity and re-interpret ABA opposed CFPB regulation of data brokers reports, The proposed rule's stated purpose is to, among other things, ensure that the FCRAS protections are applied to sensitive consumer information sold by data brokers. While we support the objective of protecting consumers from potential misuse of personal information by data brokers and others, the FCRA is not the right tool to accomplish this goal. The CFPB's proposal to use the FCRA for this purpose
Paul Benda of the American Bankers Association calls for more regulation of data brokers to combat fraud and scams.
That’s strange… When the CFPB proposed just that, ABA opposed it.
www.consumerfinance.gov/about-us/new...
www.aba.com/advocacy/pol...
Commodity Exchange Act Section 6(c)(1) prohibits the misuse of material nonpublic information in derivative markets.
Since Polymarket declared itself a “futures exchange” instead of a gambling house, this proposal by Ackman is indeed very illegal!
Over on the other site, Bill Ackman is urging Eric Adams to bet on Cuomo’s chances of winning the NYC election & then drop out & cash in his bet once Cuomo’s odds inevitably rise.
Ackman is also declaring this scheme legal when in fact it very much not.
Question: did the White House vet this guy and like what they saw or were they too lazy to vet him?
She’s too busy but I would love 800 words from @tressiemcphd.bsky.social on this
An entire dissertation could be written about the visual accompanying this senate campaign announcement.
The men foregrounded and centered when *she* is the candidate is really communicating a lot without saying anything.
Trump musing that an appointee maybe did something maybe wrong unrelated to her job is not grounds for firing. She should fight it.
In the meantime, Wall Street should be freaking out.
Trump and FHFA Director Pulte have launched a smear campaign against Fed Governor Lisa Cook.
Setting aside the many offensive things about this post, the central image is also not Cook. It is an unflattering photo of a different Black woman that is not a Fed Governor.
In 2021 when I was listening to @bft.wtf and @cascoinfoundation.org talk about the crazy history of Tether it would end up being the best prep for understanding influence peddling in the second Trump Admin
Our Policy Director & COO @amandalfischer.bsky.social spoke with @cnn.com about the GENIUS Act, stablecoins, and potential risks to investors. www.cnn.com/2025/08/18/b...
Grateful to talk about crypto risks on CBS. Check it out.
Every time I hear someone talk about Web 3.0 or AI or whatever, I just want to scream "fix wireless printers, fix cell phones." Stop inventing new things until this is solved.
today for whatever reason I'm reminded of that
For the life of me I can't find it, but there was this conservative pre-COVID essay about DC devolving into an unlivable hellscape & two of the data points were the increasing presence of chicken bones on Barrack's Row & the way that "High Tea" at DC hotels had become too casual
This type of activity in traditional securities markets has lots of disclosures and borrowing limits and examinations and other regulations. The SEC just YOLO'd it on this one and when the tide goes out, it won't be good.
There are a lot of other technical elements that the industry uses to obscure this point: this is an opaque mess that rhymes w/subprime mortgage toxic derivatives. It will exacerbate risks in the crypto market, especially when this "liquid staked" crypto is put into ETF wrappers
There are also very long wait times right now to UNSTAKE assets - meaning, unwind the deposit and get your collateral back. Last I checked, it was 11 days for ETH. So managing the risk of getting your crypto back quickly is no small thing.
Assets can also be restaked and restaked and restaked - generating synethic token upon synthetic token. It begins to look a lot like the leverage on derivatives tied to mortgages. A subprime mortgage is a risk to one bank - but when there are 30x bets on that mortgage? Woof
