Sorry I didn't see your comment last night. I don't know what the House is doing. I will try to find out today. Of course, they could already have had Rubin testify for an entire week and the media wouldn't cover it, being so consumed with Harken and Halliburton as they are.
Thank you for your explanation of the seriousness of this situation. I and some others have felt that way, but I freely admit that I know nothing about banking and finance plus anytime I run into what appears to be Clintonian shenanigans I lose any objectivity and go immediately to volcanic rage.
Enraged you should be. Consider this rpecious quote today in the NYT from Warren Buffet - the richest man alive:
Indeed, actions by Congress and the Securities and Exchange Commission have the potential of creating a smoke screen that will prevent real accounting reform. The Senate itself is the major reason corporations have been able to duck option expensing. On May 3, 1994, the Senate, led by Senator Joseph Lieberman, pushed the Financial Accounting Standards Board and Arthur Levitt, then chairman of the S.E.C., into backing down from mandating that options be expensed. Mr. Levitt has said that he regrets this retreat more than any other move he made during his tenure as chairman. Unfortunately, current S.E.C. leadership seems uninterested in correcting this matter. I don't believe in Congress setting accounting rules. But the Senate opened the floodgates in 1994 to an anything-goes reporting system, and it should close them now. Rather than holding hearings and fulminating, why doesn't the Senate just free the standards board by rescinding its 1994 action?