Why The Trade Associations Don't Want The Republicans To Repeal Dodd-Frank Hot

For example, SIFMA was not exactly a strong supporter of industry reform when it was working through Congress the first time, but now the influential broker-dealer-heavy group recognizes that there's no sense in reopening the fight.

Noted Washington political columnist Tim Carney has a cynical read on the situation. He notes that the tighter regulation gets, the more valuable the insiders who know how to game the system -- that is, the lawyers who have dominated a lot of the debate on all sides -- become to paying clients.

However, while it's definitely true that compliance attorneys can remain a lot more relevant in an environment where the SEC is fully funded and the supervisory framework is in flux, this argument fails to address where these apparently regulation-happy lawyers were when the financial crisis was ramping up.

Were regulatory insiders like the ones Carney writes about fighting for more industry oversight in the go-go years between 2004 and 2007, for example? 

What's more likely is that groups like SIFMA recognize that fighting Dodd-Frank at this point will probably cost them more political capital than it's worth.

The law is on the books and all the PR around it focuses on protecting retail investors. And confidence in the industry is still fragile in the wake of the credit crash -- any move that appears self-serving may only accelerate the backlash against Wall Street banks like J.P. Morgan and Goldman Sachs in particular.

In this light, it's only natural that Wall Street appears eager to align itself with Dodd-Frank and retail investor protection. 

This Website Is For Financial Professionals Only