Disconnect

From "PhillyDeals: Roundtable was where CEOs, pols let hair down," by Joseph DiStefano, Inquirer 5/01:

When bank CEOs trooped down to Capitol Hill for a public scolding by U.S. House members in March, the proceedings led the TV news.

And why? Bankers and congressmen, in those situations, don't say what they really think, says Rep. Paul Kanjorski (D., Pa.), head of the House subcommittee on capital markets that is helping rewrite bank regulations in response to the financial crisis.

"That's oatmeal," Kanjorski said of members' public remarks. "It's sanitized. Nobody wants to say things that will be held up against us."

Candor is saved for private meetings, like the second gathering of the Bipartisan Financial Regulatory Roundtable on April 27, where JPMorgan chief executive officer Jamie Dimon and Stanford economics professor John Taylor met with Kanjorski, U.S. Rep. Scott Garrett (R., N.J.), and 10 committee members for dinner, drinks, questions, and answers.

From a press release from Rep. Kanjorski's office dated 5/01:

Congressman Paul E. Kanjorski (D-PA), Chairman of the House Financial Services Subcommittee on Capital Markets, Insurance, and Government Sponsored Enterprises, today announced that the Subcommittee will hold a hearing to examine the need for hedge fund registration and the need to protect investors by increasing transparency in financial markets.

“At this hearing, I intend to examine hedge fund registration, institutional investor and pension fund investment in hedge funds, and the need for transparency in this area of the financial services sector,” said Chairman Kanjorski. “I look forward to hearing from a variety of witnesses who will help shed light on this issue and engage in thoughtful and constructive conversation. Though this hearing will focus specifically on hedge funds, other pools of private capital, such as private equity, venture capital, and real estate trusts, must also be similarly examined as we further consider regulatory reform. I hope that we can work in a bipartisan manner to achieve an appropriate amount of regulation of the financial services industry without stifling the vitality of the markets.”

Perhaps I'm misreading something but there just seems to be a disconnect between these two statements.