We've noted over on FierceSarbox, on occasion that it is better for an industry to be involved in attempts to impose regulations than to be passive. Indeed, we sometimes see an industry calling for federal regulation as a way to preempt state regulations, which can be hit or miss. Which makes the lack of high-level participation curious when it comes to the current move to re-regulate the financial services industry.

The top banks are no doubt making their voices heard via their lobbing organizations. But their cause would be aided by a top executive taking up the mantle of leadership, suggests a New York Times columnist. He lists five crucial areas: Glass Steagall 2.0, countercyclical approaches, mark to market, credit default swaps and compensation. These are complex areas, and you cannot assume that the politicians will get it right. 

For more:
- here's the column

Related Articles:
The challenges of "sweeping" financial regulation
AIG vs. Geithner on bonuses
Government to tackle thorny valuation issue
Can the government change the rules of the game?