Send a Tweet
Most Popular Choices
Share on Facebook 5 Share on Twitter Printer Friendly Page More Sharing
OpEdNews Op Eds   

Discursive Comments On The Oral Argument In The Court of Appeals In The Madoff Case On March 3, 2011. Part 5

By       (Page 2 of 6 pages) Become a premium member to see this article and all articles as one long page. (View How Many People Read This)   1 comment
Author 2556
Message Lawrence Velvel

-           By protecting small investors, confidence and investment in markets were to be built;


-           That the reasonable expectations of investors are to be satisfied;


-           That account statements and confirmations are the measure of reasonable expectations and net equity, especially because the change to holding securities in street name left investors no other way to know their holdings;


-           That investors are to be paid promptly, which is inherently impossible under CICO because of the need to reconstruct complex accounts over many years;


-           That investors are to receive securities where they can be acquired in a fair and orderly market, as can be done here where the securities are S&P 100 stocks that can be acquired in blocs over time.   SIPC ignores this requirement, though it was   a "principal purpose" and "essential feature" of the 1978 amendments;


-           That investors are to be protected against theft, which occurred here on a massive scale;


-           That SIPA creates an insurance program modeled after the FDIC.   Here counsel for the Trustee has stated that Senators who made this point did not know what they are talking about, saying "They are wrong . . . ."


The legislative history comprised of scores of statements on the floor revealing Congressional intent are nowhere cited by the Trustee, SIPC or the SEC.   Yet the statements were by many of the leading Senators and Congressmen of the 1960s through the 1980s:   by two men who ran for President, Senator Muskie and Congressman John Anderson, by legislators prominent with regard to economic, financial and tax matters, such as Senators Cranston, Harrison Williams, and Proximire, and Congressman Rostenkowski, and by other leading legislators such as Senators Hartke and Bennet and Representatives Staggers, Eckhardt, Moss and Boland.   Identical statements were made by President Nixon and Secretary of the Treasury Kennedy.


Next Page  1  |  2  |  3  |  4  |  5  |  6


Rate It | View Ratings

Lawrence Velvel Social Media Pages: Facebook page url on login Profile not filled in       Twitter page url on login Profile not filled in       Linkedin page url on login Profile not filled in       Instagram page url on login Profile not filled in

Lawrence R. Velvel is a cofounder and the Dean of the Massachusetts School of Law, and is the founder of the American College of History and Legal Studies.
Go To Commenting
The views expressed herein are the sole responsibility of the author and do not necessarily reflect those of this website or its editors.
Writers Guidelines
Contact AuthorContact Author Contact EditorContact Editor Author PageView Authors' Articles
Support OpEdNews

OpEdNews depends upon can't survive without your help.

If you value this article and the work of OpEdNews, please either Donate or Purchase a premium membership.

If you've enjoyed this, sign up for our daily or weekly newsletter to get lots of great progressive content.
Daily Weekly     OpEdNews Newsletter
   (Opens new browser window)

Most Popular Articles by this Author:     (View All Most Popular Articles by this Author)

Preliminary Memorandum of the Justice Robert H. Jackson Conference on Federal Prosecutions of War Criminals

Investing With Bernie Madoff: How It Happened, What Happened, What Might Be Done (Part I)

Madoff And The Mafia: A Mere Speculation Or Almost A Sure Thing?

Irving Picard's Three Percent Commission In The Madoff Case.

Alan Dershowitz on Whether to Prosecute Executive Branch Criminals

It Appears That The Madoff Scam Was Not, Repeat Not, A Ponzi Scheme.

To View Comments or Join the Conversation: