This article is within the scope of WikiProject United States, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of topics relating to the United States of America on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the ongoing discussions.
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Politics, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of politics on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.PoliticsWikipedia:WikiProject PoliticsTemplate:WikiProject Politicspolitics articles
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Finance & Investment, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of articles related to Finance and Investment on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.Finance & InvestmentWikipedia:WikiProject Finance & InvestmentTemplate:WikiProject Finance & InvestmentFinance & Investment articles
Latest comment: 8 years ago3 comments2 people in discussion
Added a chart of the voting members. Also shows the political orientation. A SEC Commissioner was pretty upset about what that means. See: [1]
FSOC has substantial authority. With the strength of the Chair being a cabinet position (expected to be extremely aligned with the President, terminable at will), and given the very strong majority of voters, may see a rise in FSOC instigated rule making? I'd expect every forward move however to be legally challenged to the max. They will have to rely on explicitly spelled out statutory authority in DFA. Once however they establish momentum...? The opening test seems to be Money Market reform.Rick (talk) 01:29, 27 February 2013 (UTC)Reply
.svg)
