Restoring American Finacial Stability Act of 2010 - Continued

Floor Speech

BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT

Ms. MURKOWSKI. Would the Senator from Connecticut yield for another question?

Mr. DODD. I would be happy to yield for a question.

Ms. MURKOWSKI. Our State--the great State of Alaska--believes that it would be appropriate and in the public interest and, in the interests of State and local governments across the Nation, for the SEC to add governmental entities to the definitions of ``accredited investor'' and ``qualified institutional buyer'' when it promulgates rules pursuant to this legislation. The reasons for including governmental entities in these definitions are as sound today as they were 3 years ago. In particular, governments are large and sophisticated investors with professional treasury management staffs that manage large amounts of the government's own money and seek to invest in bonds and other securities investments in order to prudently diversify their investment portfolios and obtain a favorable return. Many of the most attractive investments are offered only in private placements to institutional investors conducted under regulation D or rule 144A. Without access to these investments, the government earns a lower return and has less diversification in its investments than would be optimal. Does the chairman agree with us that when the SEC promulgates its rules under this legislation, it should address, while taking care to ensure appropriate minimum asset protections are in place, the inclusion of State and local governments in the definitions of accredited investor and qualified institutional buyer?

Mr. DODD. I believe it would be appropriate for the SEC to take the opportunity presented by the rulemakings under this legislation, to consider whether to include State and local government bodies within those definitions.

BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT

Source