Podcasts about financial policy studies

The Federal Housing Finance Agency (FHFA) oversees the administration of both Freddie Mac and Fannie Mae. What's next for the agency? What are the priorities that the agency should be pursuing? This episode features remarks from FHFA Director Mark Calabria and a discussion of the issues with reform by our panelists.Featuring:- Mark Calabria, Director, Federal Housing Finance Agency- Edward Pinto, Resident Fellow and Director, AEI Housing Center, American Enterprise Institute- Peter Wallison, Senior Fellow, Arthur F. Burns Fellow in Financial Policy Studies, American Enterprise Institute- [Moderator] Alex J. Pollock, Principal Deputy Director, Office of Financial Research, U.S. Department of TreasuryVisit our website – www.RegProject.org – to learn more, view all of our content, and connect with us on social media.

The Federal Housing Finance Agency (FHFA) oversees the administration of both Freddie Mac and Fannie Mae. What's next for the agency? What are the priorities that the agency should be pursuing? This episode features remarks from FHFA Director Mark Calabria and a discussion of the issues with reform by our panelists.Featuring:- Mark Calabria, Director, Federal Housing Finance Agency- Edward Pinto, Resident Fellow and Director, AEI Housing Center, American Enterprise Institute- Peter Wallison, Senior Fellow, Arthur F. Burns Fellow in Financial Policy Studies, American Enterprise Institute- [Moderator] Alex J. Pollock, Principal Deputy Director, Office of Financial Research, U.S. Department of TreasuryVisit our website – www.RegProject.org – to learn more, view all of our content, and connect with us on social media.

On March 15-16, 2019, the Federalist Society's student chapter at the ASU Sandra Day O'Connor College of Law hosted the 2019 National Student Symposium. The third panel explored "Economic Liberty in Criminal Justice: Business Crimes and Economic Sanctions".Although criminal justice is often associated with non-economic issues—such as those raised by violent crimes and long prison sentences—the system regularly implicates individual economic liberty, as can be seen in the prohibition and prosecution of certain commercial and financial interactions. Sometimes individuals are held strictly liable for their actions even in the absence of force, fraud, or direct harm. In turn, the government may impose a variety of economic sanctions for purported wrongdoing, with fines, fees, and forfeitures levied in legal processes which often seem bereft of basic procedural protections. This panel will explore these and other criminal justice issues and the implications for individual economic liberty.Prof. Beth A. Colgan, Assistant Professor of Law, UCLA LawProf. Erik Luna, Amelia D. Lewis Professor of Constitutional and Criminal Law, ASU Sandra Day O’Connor College of LawMs. Christina Sandefur, Executive Vice President, Goldwater InstituteMr. Peter J. Wallison, Senior Fellow and Arthur F. Burns Fellow in Financial Policy Studies, American Enterprise InstituteModerator: Hon. Elizabeth L. Branch, U.S. Court of Appeals, Eleventh CircuitAs always, the Federalist Society takes no position on particular legal or public policy issues; all expressions of opinion are those of the speakers.

On March 15-16, 2019, the Federalist Society's student chapter at the ASU Sandra Day O'Connor College of Law hosted the 2019 National Student Symposium. The third panel explored "Economic Liberty in Criminal Justice: Business Crimes and Economic Sanctions".Although criminal justice is often associated with non-economic issues—such as those raised by violent crimes and long prison sentences—the system regularly implicates individual economic liberty, as can be seen in the prohibition and prosecution of certain commercial and financial interactions. Sometimes individuals are held strictly liable for their actions even in the absence of force, fraud, or direct harm. In turn, the government may impose a variety of economic sanctions for purported wrongdoing, with fines, fees, and forfeitures levied in legal processes which often seem bereft of basic procedural protections. This panel will explore these and other criminal justice issues and the implications for individual economic liberty.Prof. Beth A. Colgan, Assistant Professor of Law, UCLA LawProf. Erik Luna, Amelia D. Lewis Professor of Constitutional and Criminal Law, ASU Sandra Day O’Connor College of LawMs. Christina Sandefur, Executive Vice President, Goldwater InstituteMr. Peter J. Wallison, Senior Fellow and Arthur F. Burns Fellow in Financial Policy Studies, American Enterprise InstituteModerator: Hon. Elizabeth L. Branch, U.S. Court of Appeals, Eleventh CircuitAs always, the Federalist Society takes no position on particular legal or public policy issues; all expressions of opinion are those of the speakers.

In this episode we bring you the great discussion we had from the opening panel of the 2019 Legislative Branch Review Conference, held on the Hill in February in partnership with the Federalist Society's Georgetown Student Chapter. The panel asked, "Can the Other Branches Help Restore Congress?", exploring how and if executive and judicial efforts could stoke the legislative ambition Madison expected. We hope you find it interesting and enjoyable.Featuring:David Hoppe, President, Hoppe StrategiesProf. Sally Katzen, Professor of Practice and Distinguished Scholar in Residence; Co-Director of the Legislative and Regulatory Process Clinic, New York University School of LawDr. Philip Wallach, Senior Fellow, Governance, R StreetHon. Peter J. Wallison, Senior Fellow and Arthur F. Burns Fellow in Financial Policy Studies, AEIModerator: Thomas G. Hungar, Partner, Gibson DunnIntroduction: Nathan Kaczmarek, Director, Article I Initiative; Director, Regulatory Transparency Project

In this episode we bring you the great discussion we had from the opening panel of the 2019 Legislative Branch Review Conference, held on the Hill in February in partnership with the Federalist Society's Georgetown Student Chapter. The panel asked, "Can the Other Branches Help Restore Congress?", exploring how and if executive and judicial efforts could stoke the legislative ambition Madison expected. We hope you find it interesting and enjoyable.Featuring:David Hoppe, President, Hoppe StrategiesProf. Sally Katzen, Professor of Practice and Distinguished Scholar in Residence; Co-Director of the Legislative and Regulatory Process Clinic, New York University School of LawDr. Philip Wallach, Senior Fellow, Governance, R StreetHon. Peter J. Wallison, Senior Fellow and Arthur F. Burns Fellow in Financial Policy Studies, AEIModerator: Thomas G. Hungar, Partner, Gibson DunnIntroduction: Nathan Kaczmarek, Director, Article I Initiative; Director, Regulatory Transparency Project

On February 6, 2019, the Federalist Society's Article I Initiative and the Georgetown Student Chapter co-sponsored the first Legislative Branch Review Conference. The first panel asked "Can the Other Branches Help Restore Congress?"Madison famously asserted that “ambition must be made to counteract ambition,” but how would he advise the current federal government Branches in support of the separation of powers? Are there opportunities for each Branch to encourage or even compel Congress to shoulder the constitutional responsibilities that are central to the Legislative Branch's nature and purpose? How can we effectively address this important restoration work from both within and without?Featuring:David Hoppe, President, Hoppe StrategiesProf. Sally Katzen, Professor of Practice and Distinguished Scholar in Residence; Co-Director of the Legislative and Regulatory Process Clinic, New York University School of LawDr. Philip Wallach, Senior Fellow, Governance, R StreetHon. Peter J. Wallison, Senior Fellow and Arthur F. Burns Fellow in Financial Policy Studies, AEIModerator: Thomas G. Hungar, Partner, Gibson DunnIntroduction: Nathan Kaczmarek, Director, Article I Initiative; Director, Regulatory Transparency ProjectAs always, the Federalist Society takes no particular legal or public policy positions. All opinions expressed are those of the speakers.

On February 6, 2019, the Federalist Society's Article I Initiative and the Georgetown Student Chapter co-sponsored the first Legislative Branch Review Conference. The first panel asked "Can the Other Branches Help Restore Congress?"Madison famously asserted that “ambition must be made to counteract ambition,” but how would he advise the current federal government Branches in support of the separation of powers? Are there opportunities for each Branch to encourage or even compel Congress to shoulder the constitutional responsibilities that are central to the Legislative Branch's nature and purpose? How can we effectively address this important restoration work from both within and without?Featuring:David Hoppe, President, Hoppe StrategiesProf. Sally Katzen, Professor of Practice and Distinguished Scholar in Residence; Co-Director of the Legislative and Regulatory Process Clinic, New York University School of LawDr. Philip Wallach, Senior Fellow, Governance, R StreetHon. Peter J. Wallison, Senior Fellow and Arthur F. Burns Fellow in Financial Policy Studies, AEIModerator: Thomas G. Hungar, Partner, Gibson DunnIntroduction: Nathan Kaczmarek, Director, Article I Initiative; Director, Regulatory Transparency ProjectAs always, the Federalist Society takes no particular legal or public policy positions. All opinions expressed are those of the speakers.

In this book, Peter J. Wallison argues that the administrative agencies of the executive branch have gradually taken over the legislative role of Congress, resulting in what many call the administrative state. The judiciary bears the major responsibility for this development because it has failed to carry out its primary constitutional responsibility: to enforce the constitutional separation of powers by ensuring that the elected branches of government―the legislative and the executive―remain independent and separate from one another. Since 1937, and especially with the Chevron deference adopted by the Supreme Court in 1984, the judiciary has abandoned this role. It has allowed Congress to delegate lawmaking authorities to the administrative agencies of the executive branch and given these agencies great latitude in interpreting their statutory authorities. Unelected officials of the administrative state have thus been enabled to make decisions for the American people that, in a democracy, should only be made by Congress. The consequences have been grave: unnecessary regulation has imposed major costs on the U.S. economy, the constitutional separation of powers has been compromised, and unabated agency rulemaking has created a significant threat that Americans will one day question the legitimacy of their own government. To address these concerns, Wallison argues that the courts must return to the role the Framers expected them to fulfill.The Hon. Peter J. Wallison joins us on this Teleforum to discuss the book and give some additional insights, Featuring: Hon. Peter J. Wallison, Senior Fellow, Arthur F. Burns Fellow in Financial Policy Studies, American Enterprise Institute Teleforum calls are open to all dues paying members of the Federalist Society. To become a member, sign up here. As a member, you should receive email announcements of upcoming Teleforum calls which contain the conference call phone number. If you are not receiving those email announcements, please contact us at 202-822-8138.

In this book, Peter J. Wallison argues that the administrative agencies of the executive branch have gradually taken over the legislative role of Congress, resulting in what many call the administrative state. The judiciary bears the major responsibility for this development because it has failed to carry out its primary constitutional responsibility: to enforce the constitutional separation of powers by ensuring that the elected branches of government―the legislative and the executive―remain independent and separate from one another. Since 1937, and especially with the Chevron deference adopted by the Supreme Court in 1984, the judiciary has abandoned this role. It has allowed Congress to delegate lawmaking authorities to the administrative agencies of the executive branch and given these agencies great latitude in interpreting their statutory authorities. Unelected officials of the administrative state have thus been enabled to make decisions for the American people that, in a democracy, should only be made by Congress. The consequences have been grave: unnecessary regulation has imposed major costs on the U.S. economy, the constitutional separation of powers has been compromised, and unabated agency rulemaking has created a significant threat that Americans will one day question the legitimacy of their own government. To address these concerns, Wallison argues that the courts must return to the role the Framers expected them to fulfill.The Hon. Peter J. Wallison joins us on this Teleforum to discuss the book and give some additional insights, Featuring: Hon. Peter J. Wallison, Senior Fellow, Arthur F. Burns Fellow in Financial Policy Studies, American Enterprise Institute Teleforum calls are open to all dues paying members of the Federalist Society. To become a member, sign up here. As a member, you should receive email announcements of upcoming Teleforum calls which contain the conference call phone number. If you are not receiving those email announcements, please contact us at 202-822-8138.

Concern with “the regulatory state" often focuses on reforms to formal institutional structures and legal doctrines such as Chevron deference. But arguably these formal constraints only touch the tip of the iceberg regarding the issues of individual liberty and the rule of law raised by concerns about the regulatory state, because they fail to appreciate the myriad ways in which regulators exercise informal influence to accomplish ends that they might not be able or willing to achieve through more formal processes. In particular, the deep entanglement between the government and the banking system involves regulatory activity that is outside of the public eye. Commentators and practitioners who raise such concerns point to unwilling banks that felt pressured to take TARP money, implementation of Operation Choke Point, and some enforcement theories applied in the name of lending discrimination. Commentators on the other side of the argument point out the extent to which financial services affect not only individual lives but the welfare of the community and the nation, including the danger of financial crises. What does the experience of the financial services industry and its regulation tell us about concerns and challenges going forward?Prof. Richard A. Epstein, Laurence A. Tisch Professor of Law and Director, Classical Liberal Institute, New York University School of LawProf. Hal S. Scott, Nomura Professor of International Financial Systems and Director, Program on International Financial Systems, Harvard Law SchoolMr. Peter J. Wallison, Senior Fellow, Arthur F. Burns Fellow in Financial Policy Studies, American Enterprise InstituteProf. Arthur E. Wilmarth, Jr., Professor of Law, The George Washington University Law SchoolModerator: Hon. Carlos T. Bea, United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit

Concern with “the regulatory state" often focuses on reforms to formal institutional structures and legal doctrines such as Chevron deference. But arguably these formal constraints only touch the tip of the iceberg regarding the issues of individual liberty and the rule of law raised by concerns about the regulatory state, because they fail to appreciate the myriad ways in which regulators exercise informal influence to accomplish ends that they might not be able or willing to achieve through more formal processes. In particular, the deep entanglement between the government and the banking system involves regulatory activity that is outside of the public eye. Commentators and practitioners who raise such concerns point to unwilling banks that felt pressured to take TARP money, implementation of Operation Choke Point, and some enforcement theories applied in the name of lending discrimination. Commentators on the other side of the argument point out the extent to which financial services affect not only individual lives but the welfare of the community and the nation, including the danger of financial crises. What does the experience of the financial services industry and its regulation tell us about concerns and challenges going forward?Prof. Richard A. Epstein, Laurence A. Tisch Professor of Law and Director, Classical Liberal Institute, New York University School of LawProf. Hal S. Scott, Nomura Professor of International Financial Systems and Director, Program on International Financial Systems, Harvard Law SchoolMr. Peter J. Wallison, Senior Fellow, Arthur F. Burns Fellow in Financial Policy Studies, American Enterprise InstituteProf. Arthur E. Wilmarth, Jr., Professor of Law, The George Washington University Law SchoolModerator: Hon. Carlos T. Bea, United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit

This lecture was presented on June 23, 2017 by Peter J. Wallison at the Institute of World Politics. ABOUT THIS SPEAKER Peter J. Wallison holds the Arthur F. Burns Chair in Financial Policy Studies at the American Enterprise Institute and is co-director of AEI's program on Financial Policy Studies. Prior to joining AEI, he practiced banking, corporate and financial law at Gibson, Dunn & Crutcher in Washington, D.C., and New York. Mr. Wallison has held a number of government positions. From June 1981 to January 1985, he was General Counsel of the United States Treasury Department, where he had a significant role in the development of the Reagan Administration's proposals for deregulation in the financial services industry. During 1986 and 1987, Mr. Wallison was White House counsel to President Ronald Reagan, and between 1972 and 1976, he served first as Special Assistant to New York's Gov. Nelson A. Rockefeller and, subsequently, as counsel to Mr. Rockefeller as vice president of the United States. Mr. Wallison was admitted to practice before the courts of New York and the District of Columbia, and is retired from practice in New York. He continues to be a member of the District of Columbia Bar Association. He received his undergraduate degree from Harvard College in 1963 and law degree from Harvard Law School in 1966. Mr. Wallison is the author of Ronald Reagan: The Power of Conviction and the Success of His Presidency, published in December 2002 by Westview Press. On financial or regulatory matters, he is the author of Back From the Brink, a proposal for a private deposit insurance system, and co-author of Nationalizing Mortgage Risk: The Growth of Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac; The GAAP Gap: Corporate Disclosure in the Internet Age; and Competitive Equity: A Better Way to Organize Mutual Funds, all of which were published by AEI. He is also the editor of Optional Federal Chartering and Regulation of Insurance Companies, and Serving Two Masters, Yet Out of Control: Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac, also published by AEI. On campaign finance, he is the author (with Joel Gora) of Better Parties, Better Government, (AEI Press 2009) and Bad History, Worse Policy: How a False Narrative about the Financial Crisis Led to the Dodd-Frank Act (AEI Press 2013) . His most recent book is Hidden In Plain Sight: What Caused the World's Worst Financial Crisis and Why it Could Happen Again (Encounter Books 2015). He is currently working on a book on the administrative state. He testifies frequently before committees of Congress, and is a frequent contributor to the op-ed pages of the Wall Street Journal and other print and online journals. He has also been a speaker at many conferences on financial services, housing, the causes of the financial crisis, the Dodd-Frank Act, accounting, and corporate governance, and was a member of the Shadow Financial Regulatory Committee between 1995 and 2015. He is also a member the Council on Foreign Relations, the SEC Advisory Committee on Improvements to Financial Reporting (2008), co-Chair of the Pew Financial Reform Task Force (2009), and a member of the congressionally- appointed Financial Crisis Inquiry Commission (2009-2011). In May 2011, for his work in financial policy, Mr. Wallison received an honorary doctorate in Humane Letters from the University of Colorado.

- Peter Wallison, Fellow in Financial Policy Studies at AEI - Please call 1-800-388-9700 for a free review of your financial portfolio

- Peter Wallison, a Fellow in Financial Policy Studies at the Amercian Enterprise Institute discusses Systematcially Important Financial Institutions - Please call 1-800-388-9700 for a free review of your financial portfolio

- Peter Wallison, Fellow in Financial Policy Studies at the American Enterprise Institute - Please call 1-800-388-9700 for a free copy of the report "Financial Services Outlook"