Mark Pocan Asks SEC Commissioner Paul Atkins: ‘Has DOGE Met With Your Agency At All?’

Forbes Breaking News

During a House Appropriations Committee hearing before the congressional recess, Rep. Mark Pocan (D-WI) questioned SEC Commissioner Paul Atkins about DOGE work in the SEC.

Transcript

00:00And for any questions you may have.

00:01Yeah, thank you, Mr. Chairman.

00:02Five minutes.

00:03So I just want to do a clarification because I think I'm a little confused.

00:06So none of the positions at SEC were let go.

00:09They all were voluntary by taking early retirement.

00:12Is that correct?

00:14That's what I understand.

00:16Do you want to look behind you and check?

00:18Because I know you said you're only there 20 days.

00:19Okay, just verifying.

00:21Okay.

00:21Did Doge meet with your agency at all?

00:23Well, I've met with a couple of people over the phone and in person.

00:31They're focused on investment technology.

00:34And so they've been looking at our contracts.

00:39As I mentioned at the outset, we had like 2,000 contractors on top of 5,100 at the end of last year.

00:48And so, you know, I would have had to hire contractors to look at what contractors are doing to make sure that's what they're doing.

00:56So through this process, we've been able to rationalize some of the contracting so far to the tune of $90 million.

01:05So I think that's not chicken feed.

01:08And I think that's really valuable to have a look like that.

01:12Well, the good news is you don't got to hire people back that got fired, right?

01:16That's like looking at the silver lining, right?

01:18With Doge not coming in and directly firing people, you don't have to worry about bringing people back like almost every other agency.

01:24So that's good, right?

01:27Clarification also.

01:27You said you couldn't talk directly about this tweet that said this is a great time to buy.

01:33Does that mean there is currently an investigation going on?

01:38No, I have no clue, actually, if there is or is not.

01:42I mean, but...

01:43There's not an investigation.

01:44Well, I don't know and I couldn't really say.

01:46Turn around and ask, because I know 20 days, I'm not trying to hold you to anything.

01:49Is there an investigation going on right now?

01:53You know, I cannot confirm or deny, I mean, under the rules of, you know, FOIA and the Exchange Act and all of that.

02:03So, as I said, there are a lot of very smart and ambitious folks in the enforcement position.

02:09How would one get initiated if there is or is not one?

02:13How would one get initiated, again, just so I understand that process?

02:17Well, there is a process of where it's an automated process, at least it was back 15 years ago,

02:23and I understand it's still basically the same way,

02:26where somebody can enter what's called a matter under investigation to initiate that.

02:35Somebody on staff.

02:36Somebody on the staff or in the regions, headquarters in the regions,

02:39and then, you know, then that starts the process of, you know,

02:45putting people on that particular investigation

02:48and seeing if there's anything that is worthwhile looking at.

02:52If it develops more, then they could come to the commission

02:55to ask for a formal order of investigation for subpoenas and all of that.

02:59All right, thank you.

02:59Just one last question.

03:01Just, this is more your philosophy again.

03:04You've previously been opposed at the SIC to increasing penalties on large corporations.

03:08You even co-authored a law article with the attorney general's brother, Brad Bondi,

03:13saying that these penalties don't deter wrongdoing

03:15and suggested that individuals should be held responsible.

03:19I'm intrigued by that, what that means exactly.

03:22Are you suggesting that rather than lobbying hefty fines at corporations

03:25who lie, cheat, or steal,

03:27that you would go directly after individual members of corporations

03:33and prosecute them criminally?

03:36Or what is your philosophy on this?

03:39Well, first I'd refer you to,

03:41there was a bipartisan unanimous statement by the commission back in 2006

03:47when I was a commissioner regarding corporate penalties.

03:51Basically, what we were looking at is oftentimes penalties

03:55that are assessed against corporations are because of issues

04:00that basically harmed the shareholders themselves.

04:03So whether that resulted in, say, financial fraud

04:07or something like that of the company.

04:08And so it seems, you know, unfair to impose a penalty

04:13on the very shareholders who, of the company who were ripped off.

04:18Other times where a company has, and the shareholders have gained

04:22because of, you know, some, you know, financial misdeeds of the company,

04:28then it would be, you know, I think fine and good

04:32to then find the company itself because the shareholders

04:37and the company have benefited from that.

04:39Would you look at going after individuals at the corporations?

04:42And that's part of it, yes.

04:43So especially where the shareholders have been harmed

04:46by corporate insiders who have either lined their own pockets

04:51or whatever, that's absolutely where, you know,

04:55we need to look at remedies against individuals.

04:59Appreciate that.

05:00Chair now recognizes the gentlewoman from Iowa, Ms. Hinson,

05:03for any questions she may have for five minutes.

05:05Thank you, Mr. Chairman and ranking member

05:06for holding this hearing today.

05:07And Chairman Atkins, thank you so much for...

Category

Transcript

Recommended