Compliancex

As the comment period for the Volcker Rule provisions of the Dodd-Frank reform measure heads to the February finish line, some Democratic lawmakers are throwing down their two cents at the 11^th hour.

As it has previously been reported here at the Compliance Exchange, the rule that is aimed at rebuilding the wall between commercial and investment banking by precluding depositary banks from proprietary trading while also implementing new rules liming derivatives transactions; and this measure has previously been met with opposition by Congressional Republicans.

Now, the New York Times DealBook is reporting that Sen. Kirsten Gillibrand (D-NY) is urging the federal regulators to clarify how the rule would be enforced.

“There are a number of areas in which the proposed rules leave unanswered questions over the implementation and enforcement of the proposal,” Ms. Gillibrand said in a letter to the five regulatory agencies hammering out the final rule.

The DealBook notes how Sen. Gillibrand “praised the rule-writing effort under way at the agencies” while raising questions over the number of cooks involved in the Volcker broth. Here, the regulators apparently have “clashed over crucial aspects of the rule, particularly about how to enforce it.”

In short, there has been an ongoing power play among the federal watchdogs, especially between the FDIC and the OCC, and the bout is holding up the rule writing process, a proposal that has mushroomed to about 300 pages. One of the overarching issues is that the “line can be blurred between proprietary trading and legitimate market-making, a practice in which banks hold securities with the intent of selling them to a customer.”

But there is more on Sen. Gillibrand’s plate as she is also busying herself with drafting legislation banning the trading of corporate stocks by members of Congress who use nonpublic political information. Until now, our elected officials on Capitol Hill have been able to haul in hunks of dough by trading on this kind of info and they’ve been allowed to do so since the law has been totally silent here.

Yet just because something is not illegal does not mean it’s unethical, so why is it that the House and Senate ethics committees never addressed this issue?

And why is issue this such a pressing concern now?

Could it be that this is election year politics in play and our elected officials fear being tainted by the backsplash of the anti-Wall Street paint brush that the Kahuna of the Democratic Party has been slinging?

Be that as it may, the Huffington Post is reporting that the legislation known as the STOCK Ac co-authored by Sen. Gillibrand and Scott Brown (R-MA), “would ban trading by members of Congress guided by nonpublic economic or political information.

The law is also designed to enhance transparency of all stock trades and other financial transaction by members of Congress and the legislation got a shot in the arm in President Obama’s State of the Union Address on Tuesday.

“Send me a bill that bans insider trading by members of Congress; I will sign it tomorrow,” Obama said.

Of course, the bill should have been signed many yesterdays ago and this looks like yet another case of politics as usual.

Kyle Colona is a New York based freelance writer and a Feature Writer for the Compliance Exchange. He has an extensive background in legal and regulatory affairs in the financial services sector and his work has appeared in a variety of print and on-line publications.