Missile Defense - Deal or no Deal - with Russia

/PRNewswire-USNewswire/ -- Riki Ellison, Chairman of the Missile Defense Advocacy Alliance (MDAA) www.missiledefenseadvocacy.org, went on record today commenting on the subject of the United States and Russia making a deal on the proposed third site for deployment of our missile defense system in Poland and limiting Iran's development and deployment of ballistic missiles. His comments are as follows:

"The United States decision to deploy missile defenses in Europe for the protection of the American Public, U.S. Armed Forces and U.S. Allies is about Iran's growing capability, intent and national will of nuclear ambition coupled with ballistic missiles. Any and all influences that can prevent and stop Iranian efforts to build nuclear weapons and ballistic missiles should be fully endorsed and supported. For the United States of America to stop the deployment of the missile defense system in Europe without complete verification that the Iranian nuclear program is dismantled and destroyed as well as the termination of development and deployment of long and medium-range ballistic missiles would put in jeopardy and risk the lives of the American public, the European public and the U.S. Armed Forces deployed in Europe and the Middle East."

"It would be foolish and remiss to believe that President Obama and his National Security Team would not choose to defend the American public, U.S. Military Forces and our Allies from an Iran that will soon develop nuclear strategic missiles. To that extent, movement towards deployment of missile defense systems in Europe must proceed."

"We fully support the outreach to Russia by this President and would hope that Russia is capable of halting Iran's national intent and their development of nuclear and ballistic missile programs. We would also want that Presidential outreach to be extended to collaboration and cooperation with Russia on their missile defense systems, of both sensors and interceptors, to help defend Europe, Russia and the United States if Iran chooses to ignore Russia's influence."

Committee on Capital Markets Regulation Releases Recommendations for Reorganizing U.S. Regulatory Structure

/PRNewswire/ -- The Committee on Capital Markets Regulation, noting that the U.S. financial crisis has put the issue of financial regulatory structure on the front burner of public policy for the first time in decades, today released the following statement and recommendations for reorganizing the nation's financial regulatory structure:

The crisis has made possible reforms on a scale not imaginable since the Great Depression. Indeed, the severity of the crisis, the scope of the regulatory failures and the antiquated, patchwork design of the U.S. regulatory structure have given rise to a broad consensus regarding the need for sweeping regulatory reorganization.

This consensus presents a historic opportunity to bring U.S. financial regulatory structure into the 21st century, ensuring our role as a global leader in financial markets. Done properly, reform will restore market confidence, increase consumer and investor protection, improve regulatory quality, stimulate capital formation, enhance our ability to manage systemic risk and facilitate global policy coordination.

The Committee on Capital Markets Regulations believes there is enormous room to improve our regulatory structure. The U.S. employs more financial regulators and expends a higher percentage of its gross domestic product on financial oversight than any other major country. There are approximately 38,700 financial regulatory staff in the U.S., versus some 3,100 in the United Kingdom. Meanwhile, financial regulatory costs in the U.S. total $497,984 per billion dollars of GDP, versus $276,655 in the United Kingdom.

Yet recent events suggest that the far larger staffs and greater funding in the U.S. have not resulted in a correspondingly higher quality of supervision. The U.S. Treasury recognizes this, and issued its own bold recommendations, "Blueprint for a Modernized Financial Regulatory Structure," in March 2008.

At its core, federal financial regulation performs four functions: providing a lender of last resort, supervising and regulating financial institutions for safety and soundness, regulating market structure and conduct and providing for consumer/investor protection. Any regulatory structure must effectively perform these four functions. Further, the Committee believes that the functions must be coordinated by the President through the office of the Secretary of the Treasury. However, determining which part of the regulatory structure performs some or all of these functions is a more difficult challenge.

The Committee's recommendations address only revisions to U.S. federal regulatory structure. The Committee may consider later whether to address the role of the states and self-regulating organizations ("SROs"), internal agency organization or global coordination.(1)

The Committee is a non-partisan group of independent U.S. business, financial, investor and corporate governance, legal, accounting and academic leaders. It was formed in the fall of 2006 to study and report on ways to improve the regulation of the U.S. capital markets.

(1) In March, the Committee will release a new report -- "Capital Markets Regulation After the Credit Crisis" -- addressing key substantive regulatory issues.