I would like to add our joint explanation of section 621, which addresses the blatant conflicts of interest in the underwriting of asset-backed securities highlighted in a hearing with Goldman Sachs before the Permanent Subcommittee on Investigations, which I chair. The intent of section 621 is to prohibit underwriters, sponsors, and others who assemble asset-backed securities, from packaging and selling those securities and profiting from the securities' failures. This practice has been likened to selling someone a car with no brakes and then taking out a life insurance policy on the purchaser. In the asset-backed securities context, the sponsors and underwriters of the asset-backed securities are the parties who select and understand the underlying assets, and who are best positioned to design a security to succeed or fail. They, like the mechanic servicing a car, would know if the vehicle has been designed to fail. And so they must be prevented from securing handsome rewards for designing and selling malfunctioning vehicles that undermine the asset-backed securities markets.
Editor's note · Context
The speaker discusses section 621, addressing conflicts of interest in asset-backed securities underwriting.
Share
More from Mike Levin
The uptick in reported TBI cases among veterans underlines the urgency to increase funding for the Congressionally Directed Medical Research Program to study servicemembers’ and veterans’ brain injuries.
We urge your timely submission of these required reports to Congress, and that you lift the procedural hurdles to clean energy deployment that the Department has implemented.
I cannot underscore strongly enough that the Innovation Campuses must have solutions for the disposal of spent nuclear fuel if we are to be successful in this endeavor.
The proximity of that investment to a record federal loan, pushed by a White House adviser, is precisely the kind of sequence oversight is meant to examine.





