Americans are cynical about bureaucratic motives, but sometimes not enough. Consider that the Commodity Futures Trading Commission may go to court to defend its obligation to impose needless rules for nonexistent problems.
A federal judge ruled late last month that the 2010 Dodd-Frank law does not require the CFTC to impose new trading regulations if the CFTC doesn’t believe they are necessary. One would have thought this would be welcome news. Show of hands, how many people want to be forced to implement policies they don’t believe in? But now comes word that CFTC General Counsel Dan Berkovitz is recommending an appeal.
The rule in question, struck down by Judge Robert Wilkins of the District of Columbia Circuit, restricted the size of positions that traders could hold in derivatives related to commodities. The CFTC enacted its position-limits rule in 2011, ostensibly to limit speculation, which is believed by some to result in volatile markets when it isn’t the root of all evil.
But Democratic Commissioner Michael Dunn, who cast the deciding vote in a 3-2 decision to enact the rule, said he only did so because he believed Dodd-Frank required the CFTC to enact position limits. Read more of this post