While regulators may say that enforcement statistics don't matter, they obviously do, since every regulator touts its enforcement statistics. If they don't matter, why talk about them? If they do matter, what about them does? Do higher numbers reflect better enforcement? Or more aggressive enforcement? Current enforcement or past efforts? (These questions are appropriate to ask of (almost?) every agency that has an enforcement division.)

The SEC has not undertaken a truly comprehensive review of its policies on the use of derivatives or effective leverage since its . Since that time, the SEC has come out with guidance as to different types of derivative and credit transactions, but such guidance treated economically similar products in dissimilar manners - an approach that reflects the absence of any well-defined agency policy. It is past due for the SEC to take a step back and to formulate (with investor and industry input)…

The CFTC is moving away from the philosophy of "if it moves, regulate it." That Dodd-Frank philosophy never made the markets safer. Soaking up regulatory resources on matters of no regulatory consequence, or where there is another regulator involved, merely distracts regulators from matters of importance.

The exemption of BDCs from CPO registration is an example of a good step forward given that BDCs are already comprehensively regulated by the SEC. Hopefully, the CFTC will restore…

Are there uses of biometric data that are broadly objectionable, even if they produce a public good? H.R. 4008, a bill to prohibit the use of biometric recognition technology and biometric data analysis in certain federally assisted dwelling units, poses difficult questions. Are the persons who live in government housing being protected by such measures or are they being denied access to a tool that is available to others? As we begin to wrestle with issues as to permissible uses of data, a…