Peter J Henning of the New York Times is so afraid of anonymity and freedom that he’s calling for the creation of a whole new government agency, a crypto-cop agency to protect him from his fears of fintech that just must destroy everything this man has worked so hard to build up.
He’s a white-collar crime lawyer, now a law professor at Wayne State University, so his dependence on preserving the way things are is fairly high.
Here is an excerpt for his justification for a call to create a new crypto-cop agency.
|Should Congress Create a Crypto-Cop?|
At a recent hearing of the Senate Banking, Housing and Urban Affairs Committee, Jay Clayton, the chairman of the S.E.C., and J. Christopher Giancarlo, the chairman of the C.F.T.C., spoke about their limited power to regulate the use of cryptocurrencies.
Mr. Clayton highlighted the risks posed by cryptocurrency trading platforms that call themselves “exchanges,” which gives the impression that they are regulated like the New York Stock Exchange and the Nasdaq. But investors using such platforms “do not receive many of the market protections that they would when transacting through broker-dealers on registered exchanges,” Mr. Clayton said. Instead, the cryptocurrency exchanges are considered “money transmission” businesses, subject to a hodgepodge of state and federal rules that provide little protection to those who use their services……
….Whether the S.E.C. or the C.F.T.C. are the best venues for this type of regulation is something Congress will have to decide. Neither agency has experience in overseeing virtual currencies, so assigning responsibility to one (or both) will require increased appropriations to develop rules and effective oversight.
Perhaps a new agency is needed. The S.E.C. was created by Congress in 1934 to implement greater federal regulation of the securities markets. The creation of, say, a Cryptocurrency Exchange Commission, or C.E.C., could address a rapidly developing product that defies easy categorization without having to deal with the demands — and foibles — of an entrenched bureaucracy.
|Read More at NYTimes.com|