SEC And Citigroup – A Study In Ineptitude

Judge Jed Rakoff’s heroic decision last month to face down the SEC and deny it  its cowardly Citigroup settlement – at least temporarily – continues to reverberate. It’s providing a much-needed mirror into the hollow soul of the agency whose mission appears to be founded on the idea that what’s best for Wall Street is what’s best for America. If the Republican Presidential candidates want to know what appeasement really looks like, they should re-set their sights from 1600 Pennsylvania Avenue to SEC headquarters on F Street.

But appeasement isn’t the most troubling thing about Mary Shapiro’s SEC, it’s the agency’s apparent wholesale ineptitude.

According to Wall Street Journal sources, “Everything’s come to a halt because the SEC doesn’t know what to ask for anymore in the settlements.” If Chairwoman Shapiro and her crew are unable to distinguish between a pinprick ($285 million) and a meaningful penalty for blatantly un-American activities ( how about a minimum of a single quarter’s Citigroup profit: $3.8 billion) then perhaps they should consider something called ‘going to trial.’

The agency will argue that they can’t afford to go to trial. I contend that they can’t afford not to. We as a country can’t afford not to. Going to trial would not only remove the seemingly impossible burden of determining a fair settlement from the shoulders of the SEC, it would send a message to the American public and the world markets that we’re serious – at long last – about financial reform. Yes, it would cost some cash and it would require SEC staff to work their tails off and burn some midnight oil, but that’s their job, right? Expediency is the last thing that should be considered when faith in the government is at a record low and the will of financial institutions to circumvent rules and spit in the face of moral decency hasn’t been this strong since – well, perhaps ever.

If you’re looking for something to occupy, the address is 100 F Street.

Light *this* fire, OWS!