Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Pastimes : MANIPULATION IS RAMPANT --- Can We Stop It? -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Dan Duchardt who wrote (376)	6/17/2002 12:00:47 AM
From: Dan Duchardt	Respond to of 589

I just came across this on another thread. http://www.siliconinvestor.com/readmsg.aspx?msgid=17607925 Despite my philosophical inclination that there are a number of issues that would best be handled under a uniform set of regulations administered by federal authority, I must say I find the tone of this article a bit disturbing. It's one thing for states to grant authority to the federal government for the sake of uniformity and (hopefully) efficiency, and quite another to argue they should be stripped of that authority: New York, June 15 (Bloomberg) -- Wall Street securities firms are proposing legislation that would strip state regulators of their power and shut down their investigation of analyst conflicts of interest, state officials said. In a speech Thursday, SEC Chairman Harvey Pitt said states have a right to investigate analysts, but not to set rules for them. ``If there are going to be structural or national changes in standards, they cannot and must not be affected by individual states trying to govern a national profession,'' he said. ``Only the SEC can do that.'' Sounds like another classic turf war, with the SEC trying to reclaim "its territory" after having dropped the ball and being upstaged by a state exercising its own authority. I agree that uniformity of rules is preferable, but to suggest that states have no right to govern over activity conducted within their boundaries goes way beyond my notion of granted authority. Dan