Exactly. Let’s not be so quick to say “the regulators failed”, particularly when the case is that even if the regulators did somehow fail and not have stronger regulations removed by Congress leading to said failure, these financial firms as a business failed first by making poor business decisions.

> but you can’t blame regulators

When I read "regulators failed", I don't think of Joe Regulator phoning it in at work. If Congress creates and oversees regulations, then they are the regulators in my book. This may be what the comment you replied to meant as well.

The rollback of Dodd-Frank was at least nominally bipartisan.

Limiting the feds power is broadly popular with the population. This is one of the outcomes of those desires, Congress representing their constituents wishes seems hard to call a failure just because the outcomes have some negative outcomes (all laws have negative outcomes for someone).

Note that this is a state chartered bank rather than a national one.

Thus, state regulators are the ones with the oversight power and the ability to really do things.

California Financial Regulator Takes Possession of Silicon Valley Bank - https://dfpi.ca.gov/2023/03/10/california-financial-regulato...

> SAN FRANCISCO – The California Department of Financial Protection and Innovation (DFPI) announced today that, pursuant to California Financial Code section 592, it has taken possession of Silicon Valley Bank, citing inadequate liquidity and insolvency. The DFPI appointed the Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation (FDIC) as receiver of Silicon Valley Bank.

> Silicon Valley Bank is a state-chartered commercial bank based in Santa Clara and is a member of the Federal Reserve System, with total assets of approximately $209 billion and total deposits of approximately $175.4 billion as of Dec. 31, 2022. Its deposits are federally insured by the FDIC subject to applicable limits.

---

Note California and "state-chartered" in there.

My (limited) understanding is that a state chartered bank is still regulated at the federal level.

From https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bank_regulation_in_the_United_...:

  a Nevada state bank that is a member of the Federal Reserve System would be jointly regulated by the Nevada Division of Financial Institutions and the Federal Reserve.

> State regulation of state-chartered banks and certain non-bank affiliates of federally chartered banks applies in addition to federal regulation. State-chartered banks are subject to the regulation of the state regulatory agency of the state in which they were chartered. For example, a California state bank that is not a member of the Federal Reserve System would be regulated by both the California Department of Financial Institutions and the FDIC. Likewise, a Nevada state bank that is a member of the Federal Reserve System would be jointly regulated by the Nevada Division of Financial Institutions and the Federal Reserve.

And from https://www.fdic.gov/about/what-we-do/index.html

> The FDIC directly supervises and examines more than 5,000 banks and savings associations for operational safety and soundness. Banks can be chartered by the states or by the Office of the Comptroller of the Currency. Banks chartered by states also have the choice of whether to join the Federal Reserve System. The FDIC is the primary federal regulator of banks that are chartered by the states that do not join the Federal Reserve System. In addition, the FDIC is the back-up supervisor for the remaining insured banks and savings associations.

Right, but in SVB's case, since they are a member of the Federal Reserve System (like the Nevada example), they were regulated by the Federal Reserve in additional to the State.

The California bank in that example is regulated by FDIC because it's not a member of the Federal Reserve System.

In the run up to the 2008-9 financial crisis, Sheila Bair at the FDIC and Brooksley Born at the CFTC were making alarums about the banks and the housing market, but the dudes at the Fed, Treasury, and the Comptroller of the Currency were like everything's fine, go back to the kitchen.