Schumer's expensive mistake

Wall Street Journal Editorial:

The federal takeover of IndyMac Bank over the weekend could cost the Federal Deposit Insurance Corp. between $4 billion and $8 billion. But Senator Chuck Schumer, who helped to precipitate the collapse by publicizing a letter to the bank's regulator last month, has no remorse.

He was, he says, just doing his job in telling regulators that the bank "could face a collapse," a prophecy that quickly proved to be self-fulfilling. "It's what legislators are supposed to do," the New York Democrat told the Journal. Depositors who spent Monday trying to recover some of their money might beg to differ.

The Office of Thrift Supervision (OTS), whose job it actually was to regulate IndyMac, took a different view. "The immediate cause of the closing," the OTS wrote in a press release, "was a deposit run that began and continued after the public release of a June 26 letter to the OTS and the FDIC from Senator Charles Schumer of New York." The OTS added: "In the following 11 business days, depositors withdrew more than $1.3 billion from their accounts."

Mr. Schumer now argues that OTS was asleep at the switch, and that blaming him is like blaming "the fire on the guy who called 911." In fact, it's blaming the guy who poured on the gasoline. Very few banks, if any, would remain standing for long in the current tense financial environment after a Senator, in effect, told its depositors to run for the exits. In the 1930s, such tipsters were derided as rumormongers and often faced indictment for encouraging depositors to stampede banks.

Only last week, the Securities and Exchange Commission announced an investigation into the role of rumor-peddlers in the run on Bear Stearns. We somehow doubt that Mr. Schumer will receive similar SEC scrutiny for his very similar role in bringing about a liquidity crisis at IndyMac. But he may be more deserving.

...

... Mr. Schumer was not content merely to share his profound concern with regulators. He also leaked the June 26 letter to the press – which is more like shouting "fire" in a crowded bank than dialing 911.

If one of the regulators had done what Schumer did he would be fired. There is a reason why regulators are required to keep information like that secret until it is time to file a case or a determination is made that the problem has been corrected. What Schumer did was make it impossible to correct the problem. It will not only cost the FDIC billions, but it will also cost depositors who had more than the insured amount in their account.

Legislative privilege under the debate clause should have its limits. We have already seen how Rep. Murtha slandered Marines at Haditha and has so far attempted to avoid any consequences for that abuse. I suspect that Schumer would attempt the same excuse, but at a minimum, both should be scrutinized by the ethics committee for their respective congressional bodies.