The Supreme Court’s recent decision allows regional interstate banks to do aw

游客2025-01-08 22

问题 The Supreme Court’s recent decision allows regional interstate banks to do away with one restriction in America’s banking operation, although many others still remain. Although the ruling does not apply to very large money-center banks, it is move in a liberalizing direction that could at last push Congress into framing a sensible legal and regulatory system that allows banks to plan their future beyond the next court case.
The restrictive laws that the courts are interpreting are mainly a legacy of the bank failures of the 1930s. The current high rate -- higher than at any time since the Great Depression -- has made legislators afraid to remove the restrictions. While legislative timidity is understandable, it is also mistaken. One reason so many American banks are getting into trouble is precisely that the old restrictions make it hard for them to build a domestic base large and strong enough to support their activities in today’s telecommunicating round-the-clock, around-the-world financial markets. In trying to escape from these restrictions, banks are taking enormous, and what should be unnecessary, risks. For example, would a large bank be buying small, failed savings banks at inflated prices if federal law and states’ regulations permitted that bank to expand through the acquisition of financially healthy banks in the region7 Of course not. The solution is clear American banks will be sounder when they are not geographically limited. The House of Representative’s banking committee has shown part of the way forward by recommending common-sensible, though limited, legislation for a five-year transition to nationwide banking. This would give regional banks time to group together to form counterweights to the big money-center banks. Without this breathing space the big money-legislation should be regarded as only a way station on the road towards a complete examination of American’s suitable banking legislation. [br] The author’s attitude towards the current banking laws is best described as one of _______.

选项 A、concerned dissatisfaction
B、tolerant disapproval
C、uncaring indifference
D、great admiration

答案 A

解析该题问：文中作者对目前银行法的态度最好被描述为下列的哪一种? A项意为“忧虑和不满”。第一段指出，最高法院(the Supreme Court)最近一项裁决使地区性州际银行(regional interstate bank)在美国银行业务中摆脱了一项限制，虽然许多限制尚存。这项裁决并不适用于金融中心银行，但它标志着向放宽的方向迈进了一步，最终会使国会制定(framing)一个合理的法律法规制度，对银行的未来发展做出规定，而无需等待法院的再一次裁决(beyond the next court case)。文章最后一句指出，“但是，这样的立法只能被看作是全面制定合理的美国银行法的一个小插曲。”显然，在作者看来，美国国会需要全面修改现行银行法，而不应该仅停留在对它的修修补补上。

转载请注明原文地址:https://tihaiku.com/zcyy/3903699.html

相关试题推荐

随机试题

最新回复(0)

The Supreme Court’s recent decision allows regional interstate banks to do aw

Onewaytoovercomeregionalvariationandfacilitatethecommunicationbetween

Cliniciansatarecentpsychoanalyticconferencebroughtforthinterestingev

InrecentyearsAmericansocietyhasbecomeincreasinglydependentonitsuni