The President’s budget for Fiscal Year 2009 includes $130 million in funding for the Commodity Futures Trading Commission. What has the CFTC done to earn this dramatic growth in its funding? Has it proved especially effective at exercising oversight and ensuring integrity in the markets where it has jurisdiction?
Of course not. While the agency avoided embarrassments like the collapse of Amaranth last year, commodities futures markets are no cleaner or better run last year than the year before. But this presents no obstacle to additional funding. The private sector rewards success but in the government sector all too often failure is rewarded. According to government logic, failure indicates not a broken regulatory model but a “need” for additional resources. Thus this funding is intended to help the commission cope with the growth in futures markets, although the connection between market integrity and commission funding is assumed without evidence.
We gave up on this model with schooling. Failing public schools now risk losing funding, while improving schools can earn more funds. Yet somehow in market regulation, failure is still rewarded.
CFTC Applauds President’s Recommendation for Increased Agency Funding [CFTC Press Release]

Sign up for the Dealbreaker newsletter

Subscribe to our free daily email and get breaking news, financial headlines, commentary, and analysis from Dealbreaker.

— Advertisement —

Comments (10)

  1. Posted by EE | February 4, 2008 at 12:21 PM

    Ron Paul would reduce the CFTC’s budget by $130M USD

  2. Posted by Anonymous | February 4, 2008 at 12:29 PM

    where’s bess?

  3. Posted by limey | February 4, 2008 at 12:34 PM

    Carney, since a market can only have one regulator I fail to see where you’re going with this piece.
    You can arb schooling but if you’re going to trade commodity futures you can’t arb the cftc.
    No excuse to not improve if they are a bunch of wasters, but competition won’t help you here.

  4. Posted by Anonymous | February 4, 2008 at 12:42 PM

    CFTC wasn’t regulating ICE financially settled natgas mkts where amaranth had the bulk of their positions.

  5. Posted by Anonymous | February 4, 2008 at 12:44 PM

    I don’t think No Child Left Behind is a good model to follow in any arena…

  6. Posted by Bill Bennett | February 4, 2008 at 12:52 PM

    Shhh…it’s really No Poor Minority Child Left Behind. Excluding Asians of course.
    Ya know it’s true!

  7. Posted by Cramer | February 4, 2008 at 12:54 PM

    Where is the recap of Cramer on Stern this morning?

  8. Posted by Toro | February 4, 2008 at 1:04 PM

    “although the connection between market integrity and commission funding is assumed without evidence.”
    You’re right. Arthur Levitt didn’t know what he was talking about when he complained about Congress starving the SEC of funds in the 1990s. Good thing we didn’t have a follow-one avalanche of accounting scandals.
    Hey, wait a sec…

  9. Posted by Anal_yst | February 4, 2008 at 2:47 PM

    Government is absolutely effective and only gets involved when its absolutely necessary. Just like Arlen Spector getting involved with the Patriots lil’ Spygate incident…

  10. Posted by Garth Maheux | May 10, 2012 at 1:22 AM

    I discovered writing ebooks to be one of the most effective for me.

Leave a comment

You can log in with your account or comment as a guest below.