The Obama Administration and the U.S. Financial Crisis
There has been tremendous pressure on the Obama Administration to justify the actions taken with regards to the U.S. financial crisis which has managed to eliminate, overnight, over a quarter of the middle class wealth and leave one in six adults without a job or underemployed, while generating a bailout debt that was unimaginable in scale and scope only five years ago. In response to this public pressure, in mid-June 2009, the Obama Administration issued a white paper titled Financial Regulatory Reform - A New Foundation: Rebuilding Financial Supervision and Regulation" (published by the U.S. Department of Treasury) covering a wide range of areas of financial regulation that proposed a new architecture for financial supervision. Although the White Paper touches upon many of the Administration's promised responses to the crisis with regards to new financial regulations and supervisory changes, it has been criticized as being too narrow in the scope and breath needed to manage the sheer size and scale of the impact of the U.S. financial crisis. This paper focuses on ten concerns and issues of note with the Obama Administration's actions and responses to date with regards to the U.S. financial/banking crisis and its 2009 White Paper on Financial Regulatory Reform." They are as follows: (1) No Discussion and Minimal Attempt by the Administration to Relay Their Understanding of and Global Transmission of This Financial Crisis, (2) Proposed Financial Oversight Council, (3) Increased Powers for the Federal Reserve, (4) Most Recommendations Do Not Follow the Trend Toward Supervision Consolidation, (5) Macroeconomic vs. Microeconomic Supervision, (6) Government in the Financial Markets and Industry, (7) No Significant International Standard Setting or Coordination to Date, (8) Issue of Too Big to Fail Still at Large, (9) Obama Administration's PR Debacle, and (10) Something to Show after Spending $1.4 Trillion Plus.
If you experience problems downloading a file, check if you have the proper application to view it first. In case of further problems read the IDEAS help page. Note that these files are not on the IDEAS site. Please be patient as the files may be large.
As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to look for a different version under "Related research" (further below) or search for a different version of it.
Volume (Year): 10 (2010)
Issue (Month): 1 (February)
|Contact details of provider:|| Web page: http://www.degruyter.com |
|Order Information:||Web: http://www.degruyter.com/view/j/gej|
When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:bpj:glecon:v:10:y:2010:i:1:n:6. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.
For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: (Peter Golla)
If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.
If references are entirely missing, you can add them using this form.
If the full references list an item that is present in RePEc, but the system did not link to it, you can help with this form.
If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.
Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.