Last CFTC Commissioner Needs $31.5 Million Extra To Do Work Of Five CFTC Commissioners

Four more commissioners would be great, too.
Author:
Updated:
Original:
(CFTC)

(CFTC)

New SEC Chairman Jay Clayton is being a good little boy, graciously accepting the $1.6 billion Santa Trump offered him in his, uh, starry-eyed and slightly deranged budget. Sure, Clayton thinks the $240 million that’ll give him to spend on technology is, uh, a little modest compared to the $10 billion some of the folks the SEC polices spent on the same, but that’s OK because the SEC’s sort of taking the year off anyway.

Things over at the CFTC are a little different. For one, that regulator’s budget gift was less than one-sixth the size of its big brother’s. For another, it still doesn’t have a permanent chairman. And, oh yeah, the still-interim guy? He’s also the only sitting commissioner on the CFTC right now, holding meetings with four empty chairs surrounding him. And so with all due respect to Mick Mulvaney’s carefully thought-out plans, and in spite of whatever impact it might have on his getting the top job for real, J. Christopher Giancarlo’s going to need a few more bucks if he’s going to continue doing the work of five people.

"The $31.5 million in additional funds is not a formulaic or superficial number, but a thorough and informed assessment of what the CFTC needs to execute its mission," acting Chairman Chris Giancarlo said in prepared remarks.

Wall Street regulators make budget pitches to Congress [Reuters]

Related

CFTC Commissioner Bart Chilton Uses Public Meeting On Dodd/Frank Rulemaking To Test Out Open Mic Night Bits

In full: "Thank you Mr. Chairman. There are a couple of important events coming up that I want to share with you today. First, tonight the All-Star game will be played. Also, in just 11 days, we’ll have the two-year anniversary of the signing of the Dodd-Frank Wall Street Reform and Consumer Protection Act. Now, some of you are asking, “How’s he going to put these two totally divergent things together?” It’ll all make sense in a minute. Really. First, how many of you have heard of Bryce Harper? He’s the youngest position player ever chosen for an All Star game and plays for what is for many of you, your hometown team, the Washington Nats. He not only has a way with the bat but he seems to have a way with words, too. A couple weeks ago, a reporter asked him what he seemed to think was a silly question, and he responded by saying, “That’s a clown question, bro.” That answer went on T-shirts. It went on late-night TV. It went viral. Now, back to Dodd-Frank. There are those who say we don’t need it. Let’s repeal it—or at least parts of it. Let’s de-fund the agencies overseeing it so they can’t enforce it. Heck, let’s just take ‘em to court if we don’t like the line-up. Let’s take our bat and ball and go home. So, here’s the question they seem to be asking: “Do we even need Dodd-Frank?” Let’s not even talk about 2008 and the financial collapse and the real reason Dodd-Frank came along in the first place. Let’s talk about how MF Global (as some would suggest) got caught trying to steal. Let’s talk about JPMorgan’s losing streak. Let’s talk about Barclays’ balk. Do we need Dodd-Frank? That’s a clown question, bro. So yes, we need rules. We need the funding to enforce them. Plenty of folks still seem to think they can get around the rules. Plenty of folks in this town seem to think we don’t need umpires. Do we? That’s a clown question, bro." That's A Clown Question, Bro [CFTC]