Whatever happened to the rabid calls for eliminating Sarbanes Oxley? Does anybody even Enron, Tyco, Worldcom, etc? After calls for strong regulation to prevent such things from happening again, Congress gave us the weak Sarbanes Oxley. Not long after, the business press was squealing about the excessive requirements of Sarbanes Oxley.
Now that the subprime mortgage scam is imploding, Sarbanes Oxley has fallen from notice.
Any thoughts?
3 comments:
Here's a thought: try proofreading your post before hitting the Submit button.
I think many such regulations just make the crooks work a little harder at being devious, but who's to say things wouldn't be much worse without Sarbanes Oxley? More importantly, would the situation be much better with or without Sarbanes Oxley if we had a fully functioning Justice Department and SEC, and a non-criminal White House?
By the way, anonymous may have no manners, but does have a point.
David Altig has been critical of the way SarbOx was designed. It indeed may have certain poorly designed regulations as David suggested and be too weak at the same time as you suggest. But hey - the accounting firms are making a mint off of this new bill, which of course was necessitated by their own bad behavior.
Post a Comment