Looks like Luis A. Aguilar's the hottest kid on the regulatory block right now. The New York Times and the Washington Post jump in with the Wall Street Journal to offer their interpretations on why the commissioner ultimately shot down SEC Chairman Mary Schapiro's proposed money market fund regulations — and why his vote may have been more biased than he claims.

Just to be clear: It's not as if Aguilar's vote comes as any surprise. After all, Aguilar had long voiced criticism of Schapiro's approach. Nathaniel Popper of the New York Times also speaks to Aguilar's former position as a former general counsel for Invesco, pointing out that "[it] is not uncommon, of course, for regulators to side with the industries they oversee."

The issue, both the NYTimes and the Washington Post agree, is that Aguilar can be, well, hypocritical. For example, while Aguilar pointed out that regulators needed more information before moving forward with drastic changes, he never requested additional information, according to people briefed on his actions in recent months. In addition, Aguilar complained about a SEC staff list showing how many money funds had asked the commission for approval to receive financial support from their parent companies, claiming that the commission was not made aware how the list was compiled. SEC officials say he and his fellow commissioners received the complete list, and Aguilar never raised questions about it.

Note, also, that, although Aguilar has frequently faulted the SEC in the past for failing to protect investors and punishing financial misdeeds effectively, it was he who blocked Schapiro's latest efforts to prevent money funds from potentially destabilizing the financial system, reports David Hilzenrath for the Post.

Read about this and more in the New York Times and the Washington Post. 

Edited by: Irene Park


Stay ahead of the news ... Sign up for our email alerts now
CLICK HERE