According to recent press reports, the Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) is considering releasing a controversial proposal to impose additional capital and liquidity regulations on the $2.7 trillion money market fund industry (MMMFs) and to replace the fixed $1 net-asset value ("par value") rule now used by all MMMFs to redeem customer funds with a mark-to-market (NAV) requirement. 

National Mortgage News (December 19) asks, "Can Regulators Prevent the Next Systemic Risk Crisis?" Probably not.  Certainly not, if they can't even define the central term, "systemic risk."  As Donna Borak writes, "The chief obstacle to heading off systemic risk turns out to be agreeing on a definition for...

We need good economics over politics, now more than ever. That means sensible tax reform, a Fed focus on maintaining liquidity, and rationalization of the European monetary system.

The financial crisis has highlighted the institutional features of our financial system and regulatory policies that unexpectedly resulted in financial instability.

A systemic risk advisor might help ameliorate bubbles and busts, though not avoid financial cycles.

On the heel of the recent JP Morgan fiasco, American Enterprise Economist John Makin makes the case for how Dodd-Frank is an insufficient guarantor of financial stability.

There is a limit to the degree domestic regulation can go without severely impairing the global competitive economic advantages that the United States has enjoyed for so many decades.