« previous | MUCK HOME | next »

SECer: Under Cox, Subpoena Power For Probes Harder To Obtain
In his statement released last week in response to the SEC's failure to catch Bernard Madoff's alleged "$50 billion ponzi scheme", commission chair Chris Cox lamented his staff's failure, during previous investigations, to seek subpoenas to compel Madoff to provide information. But according to a veteran agency source, under Cox's leadership the commission has made it increasingly difficult for investigators to obtain subpoenas, with the inevitable result that they have become less likely to ask for them.
In the statement, Cox wrote:
I am gravely concerned by the apparent multiple failures over at least a decade to thoroughly investigate these allegations or at any point to seek formal authority to pursue them. Moreover, a consequence of the failure to seek a formal order of investigation from the Commission is that subpoena power was not used to obtain information, but rather the staff relied upon information voluntarily produced by Mr. Madoff and his firm.
That passage appears to refer most directly to a 2006-2007 SEC probe in which investigators relied only on documents handed over voluntarily by Madoff, and which has emerged as the most glaring example of SEC failure on Madoff. But according to a longtime enforcement staffer, the failure to seek subpoena power in this case was in large part a natural result of the chairman's own policy.
"Under Cox, increasingly burdensome standards were applied to obtain subpoena power," the source told TPMmuckraker in an interview. For investigators to obtain subpoena power, they're required to write a memo to the SEC's commissioners. Previous commissioners were more willing to respond by granting subpoena requests. "But under Cox," the source continued, "when you bring your memo down there, they pepper you with questions. It dies a thousand-cuts death."
The source added that a running joke has developed among enforcement staffers that the commissioners apply a "summary judgment standard" -- in other words, requiring enough evidence to make a full ruling -- merely to agree to issue a subpoena. (SEC humor, perhaps -- but indicative of what the source describes as the commissioners' extreme reluctance to issue subpoenas.)
That in turn produced "a chilling effect", said the source, in which investigators became less and less likely to ask for subpoena power -- exactly what Cox appears to criticize his enforcement staff for in his statement on the Madoff case.
The source made clear that the commissioners' greater reluctance, under Cox, to issue subpoenas was part of Cox's well-documented "ideological bent against enforcement," especially in regard to large financial entities.













As a long time C-SPAN junkie who takes advantage of all C-SPAN has to offer I'm quite familiar with Cox. Watching his performances at hearings and his speeches on the floor over the years I was convinced that when Bush appointed him as head of the SEC there was dancing in the streets at Wall Street.
December 24, 2008 9:12 AM | Reply | Permalink
this is just another example -- and there are thousands -- of the bush administration's failure to regulate business. the results are terrible, in the madoff case uniquely so because of their size, and eminently predictable. let us never forget that we have just lived through eight years of the worst president in american history.
December 24, 2008 10:23 AM | Reply | Permalink
Republicans give big business what it wants, Democrats give it what it needs. One would hope that the latest massive failure of "every man for himself" capitalism, plus the clear long-term trend that businesses overall do much better under Democratic than Republican administrations would finally get it through their thick skulls that business regulation doesn't just protect consumers from corporate excesses, it protects them from each other's excesses, and that the cost is worthwhile, like insurance. But I doubt they will.
December 24, 2008 10:58 AM | Reply | Permalink
Was it not always obvious that this result could be reasonably extrapolated from the appointment of Representative Cox to head the Securities and Exchange Commission? This was a move that have not only Wall Street executives, but the likes like of the US Chamber of Commerce and such reactionary characters like Grover Norquist dancing in the streets.
'Real' deregulation— laissez faire capitalism, really—was coming to the markets, which would (of course) 'self regulate' to prevent the emergence of abuses.
Well, we've all seen how that worked out. Rather like the deregulation of the electrical utilities industry, another cause championed by the same cast of characters.
And now, Chairmen Cox muses thoughtfully on the failure, wondering how such an outcome might possibly have occurred, deflecting any personal responsibility and—by inference—blaming his 'apparently ineffective' staff for failing to have foreseen this calamity. It's always been about accountability and enforcement, and under the 'leadership' of Chairman Cox, every possible barrier has been tossed in the way of both.
December 24, 2008 10:25 AM | Reply | Permalink
Did the phrase "who could have anticipated" ever escape his lips?
Seems to be the pet Republican response to catastrophes caused by their warped philosophy.
December 25, 2008 1:28 PM | Reply | Permalink
He sounds like Bush. E.g., "if" the intelligence hadn't been incorrect, it would have been different. But he still would have invaded Iraq. The disgust with Bush and his administration is bipartisan. Cheney is touring the news admitting his criminality. If Obama's administration doesn't go after these guys, then we know the game is rigged.
December 24, 2008 10:34 AM | Reply | Permalink
The Madoff Miracle, disappearing $50b before the very eyes of Cox's SEC and investors, is just the most egregious example of the fraud perpetrated on the world by the moguls of Wall Street with the help of the Republiclowns.
In fact the entire bubble and collapse cycle we are now dealing with is part of the same basic confidence scheme that sharks have been pulling on the public since the invention of money: Using their advantaged access to capital and official sanction, the sharks create the illusion of respectable instruments with better than average return. Investors flock to the higher returns, sharks make their money on transaction fees and frenzy-inflated value, and then when things start going south, when the instrument's unexpectedly mundane performance is revealed to all, the sharks have already bailed, floating away on rafts of cash, leaving the common investors to scramble for remaining pennies on their dollar.
The whole point of regulation is to diminish the sharks' unfair advantages, to keep the investment landscape flat and predictable and risk-managed. It's so boring. When the Republiclowns say that regulation stifles competition and innovation, they're right, but notice what kind of competition and innovation comes into play when regulations are relaxed: ARM's and CDO's and thousands of other tricks to lure investors into participating in a rigged game that always favors the sharks.
The only difference between Madoff and the rest of the sharks is that Madoff admitted the fraud when it started to unravel while the rest of the sharks are still collecting. They tapped out the investor monies and now they're collecting TARP dough from taxpayers. Now that's a hell of a scheme!
December 24, 2008 10:46 AM | Reply | Permalink
Translation: "I am gravely concerned about these failures which are totally not my fault and definitely began before I got here, okay?"
December 24, 2008 10:48 AM | Reply | Permalink
And now that I think about it, a definite subtext of "damn! I was this close to getting out of here before anyone realized how much of this was my fault!"
It's kind of amazing to think that the one thing John McCain may have been right about was that the SEC chairman should be fired...
December 24, 2008 11:09 AM | Reply | Permalink
As I have said before to comments of middleclassbill or shooter242, it was without a doubt a sublime Act of God that the dire consequences of 8 years of rule by a Republican administration would rise to the surface, clear even to the most delusional wingnut, while the lying bunch of incompetents were still in office.
December 24, 2008 1:44 PM | Reply | Permalink
This is one coglione (Cheyney, Rumsfeld and Bush are among others) I'd like to see in an orange jumpsuit.
December 24, 2008 11:18 AM | Reply | Permalink
According to Galbraith (The Predator State) the "Plan" of the Bush administration and the financially powerful forces which helped steer its policies, it doesn't matter whether it's incompetence (IRAQ), neglect (Katrina) or systematic planning (e.g. those put in charge of the various agencies (DOJ, Interior, GSA, EPA, to name a few), in their quest to weaken government's role in governing a free and democratic society.
December 24, 2008 11:28 AM | Reply | Permalink
... while also weakening its future via massive deficit and military spending.
December 24, 2008 1:12 PM | Reply | Permalink
Weaken the American government, destroy its economy and its citizens' faith in government--to what end?
Ownership of what, by whom, for whom? What happens to the rest of us? All the current and promised unhappiness and disarray are purposeful? Some power wants this current condition to endure?
Sorry to, um, Joshuaically beg the question, but what do you see the game plan, or the endgame, being?
I think it's deliberate liquidation of a substantial portion of the world's population, but that's just me.
December 29, 2008 11:21 PM | Reply | Permalink
I wonder how much in kick-backs and undisclosed gifts Cox recieved...? Probably not that much, I suspect a fairly small amount would convince him to look the other way..as we have seen in Congress's graff, not only are most of these guys crooks....they are cheap crooks...they will sell out for pennies on the dollar
December 24, 2008 1:22 PM | Reply | Permalink
Not just Cox. Cox came in a bit late in the game. Donaldson is the one who actually messed up leverage. And note that Paulson was at that time at the helm of GS.
December 24, 2008 5:16 PM | Reply | Permalink
Isn't this the guy John McCain said he would fire if elected??? Then he was lambasted for picking on the wrong man (and claiming authority he wouldn't have)...
Did Johny actually have one good idea while campaigning?
December 24, 2008 5:18 PM | Reply | Permalink
Nothing by accident.
When you are stealing you want all the help you can get.Why not lobby for less locks on the loot?
Why would you want regulations?
Get to the point.
Stealing is stealing.
Don't forget all these people use kenronlay methods and accounting.
Oversight is the enemy.
December 24, 2008 9:08 PM | Reply | Permalink
RIP buy-and-hold investors.
Given our society's blind eye to personal accountability and encouragement of inflated self-worth, it's not surprising that Christopher Cox gives himself strong marks for how he has run the Securities and Exchange Commission. Yet, the reality is our stock markets have been allowed to run amok over the past couple years and now more resemble a gambling casino than the cornerstone of mature capitalism that focuses on valuing companies based on their business fundamentals. By catering to the myopic greed of Wall Street, the SEC has allowed market volatility to explode as hedge fund blackbox trading schemes and a growing number of derivative instruments now dominate the trading floors.
According to the SEC website, its mission is to "protect investors, maintain fair, orderly, and efficient markets, and facilitate capital formation." Yet what has become quite evident, especially during this severe financial implosion, is that the SEC has been asleep at the wheel allowing well-financed players to manipulate the markets through hugely complex computerized trading schemes. Furthermore, the lack of real transparency or meaningful enforcement of SEC rules to prevent schemes such as illegal short selling has damaged even healthy companies and their investors.
What is clear is that Cox has taken his marching orders from a Republican administration with an extreme aversion to responsible oversight and regulatory enforcement. Now our markets are in near-chaos with extreme volatility, only rewarding short-term traders at the expense of responsible investors and shareholders. Yes, the titans of Wall Street have been humbled but the investors on Main Street are exiting this rigged game in droves with their nest eggs and retirement savings in shambles. Job well done, indeed, Mr. Cox.
December 25, 2008 12:20 PM | Reply | Permalink
Well stated klip.
December 25, 2008 4:36 PM | Reply | Permalink
This just seems so uncharacteristic of Cox & the Bush administration as a whole.
December 25, 2008 10:47 PM | Reply | Permalink
Cox is just the tip of this financial iceberg. There is no credibile reason as to why Americans have had the burden of bailouts placed on their backs when there are trillions of dollars that are readily available to government.
http://www.brasschecktv.com/page/512.html
Where all the money goes
Two sets of books
The government take over
of the US economy
This video was originally produced on January 8, 2000 by Walter Burien.
The government, at all levels, is running a very simple financial con game.
If something produces revenue - like bridges, highways, ports, or successful investments etc - that revenue goes into off budget slush funds.
If it costs money, it's charged to the public via taxes.
This is being done at all levels of government - including state, county, city, and school districts.
The total "off budget" funds held by the various governments amount to trillions of dollars.
The real accounting is contained in what's called Comprehensive Annual Financial Reports (CAFR) which are not only not made available to the public, their very existence is never mentioned by the news media.
Why?
Trillions of dollars pays for a lot of corruption.
Every time an elected official stands before you and tells you the government is out of money and they have to raise taxes, he or she is lying through their teeth.
www.brasschecktv.com/page/512.html
December 26, 2008 10:13 PM | Reply | Permalink