Conn Carroll has an essay at Townhall.com called "The Case for Libertarian Populism." Among his suggestions is this:
Republicans should push to make all banks with more than $50 billion in assets ineligible for the Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation program. Then, either the megabanks would shrink voluntarily or the American people would more likely take their money elsewhere.
About 33 banks meet that "more than $50 billion in assets" test, according to a list of banks by assets.
It seems to me that implementing Mr. Carroll's proposal would risk causing a run on some of those large banks, possibly triggering their closure and with it another financial crisis. It might also disadvantage American banks in their global competition with other large foreign-owned banks. It would push a lot of money either to those foreign banks or to smaller U.S. banks and credit unions that might be not as well managed. I can understand the desire to deal with the problem of "too big to fail" banks, but this particular proposal has some drawbacks.
