Tim,
I changed the topic since we've gotten well away from the "election".  My
complete sig is proffered with multi-layered irony.  For the sake of
clarity, I risk providing more information than is desired in what follows.


I pretend to no special or inside knowledge of banking (though it is an
important subject to me and originally became so for me because of Pound).
I function as CTO (Chief Technology Officer) for Kelling, Northcross &
Nobriga, A Division of Zions First National Bank (KNN).  I am not a banker,
and have not taken any of the securities licensing tests.  KNN's function is
to arrange (not provide) financing for public agencies (school districts,
cities, counties, the state, state universities, etc.) in the most
economical way for the client (which is ultimately the taxpayer, though it
is formally one agency or another).

Zions First National Bank (Zions) acquired KNN in 1998, KNN remains in most
respects independent.  With the exception of direct purchase lease
agreements through Zions, which are a very small fraction of KNN's business,
financings (bonds, notes, and certificates of participation) are arranged
through either (1) competitive bidding (2) invited competitive bidding
(technically, under SEC rules, a form of negotiated contract) and (3)
negotiated contracts.  By far the smallest category for KNN is (3), and even
of these only a very small number go to the Zions underwriting desk.  100%
of KNN's business takes place in California (our offices are in Oakland).

Zions was orignially established by the Church of Latter Day Saints
(Mormons).  The Mormon church still controls 5% of its stock, but it is a
publically traded "National Banking Association" (Zions Bancorp), the
strongest in Utah (its primary - and larger but weaker - Utah competitor was
purchased by Wells Fargo Bank after a merger with Zions fell apart due to an
over-valuation of the competitor's stock by a Wall Street investment firm).
Zions has also purchased several small California banks and Sumitomo
(California) Bank.  These now operate under the name California Bank & Trust
(CBT), which is the 5th largest commercial bank in California.  Zions also
has the only primary securities trading desk west of the Mississippi, which
until October was located in KNN's office but has since taken its own digs
in Marin County.  There will be some cross-pollination between KNN and CBT,
but it remains a goal of top management to keep KNN's advisory status clear
of perceived conflicts of interest by a policy of non-interference from the
parent corporation.  I am closely involved in many deals (documentation and
technology) and have seen zero evidence of pressure from Zions to award any
underwriting deals to them.

My formal education, such as it was, focussed on ancient Greek and English
poetry.  Ezra Pound became my "master" the year I graduated from high
school, which was the year of his death.  My erratic interaction with the
academic world can be traced directly to Ez.  In the early '80s I bought a
computer and taught myself.  Now I'm the computer guy.  Though I've read a
fair amount regarding banking, I must rely on arguments, not authority, for
any point of view I might put forth.

The shift of dollars to the sunbelt in the S&L bailout is something I have
never considered or heard, but it's an interesting interpretation.  At first
blush, I don't understand why that shift would have been perpetrated.  The
banking cartel known as the Federal Reserve has shifted money (and
government policy) in many directions since Morgan and Rockefeller
interests, Daddy Warbucks (Paul Warburg) et al put it together, but I have
been unaware of a purposeful shift of funds TO THE SUNBELT (though certainly
they are always shifting funds to the banking interests in one place or
another).  Given the history of central banking (these guys are no less
manipulative than Biddle was), I would expect the Fed not to hesitate to do
such a thing - if they had a purpose.  I just don't understand why, i.e.,
whose interests at the Fed were served.

But you didn't explicitly state that the shift was purposeful, and I perhaps
inferred too much.  Perhaps S&Ls are just more important in rural areas than
in urban ones.

Dirk Johnson
Assistant Vice President
Kelling Northcross & Nobriga
A Division of Zions First National Bank



-----Original Message-----
From: Tim Romano [mailto:[log in to unmask]]
Sent: Tuesday, December 19, 2000 7:39 AM
To: [log in to unmask]
Subject: Re: USA elections


David,
Judging from your sig, you will probably have  much more firsthand knowledge
than I of a related issue, the S&L Bailout. The S&L bailout was the largest
geographic shift of wealth since the civil war. Hundreds of billions of
dollars, and the power that goes with such money, was drained from the
industrial north. That debacle accounted for an immense shift of wealth and
power to the sunbelt.  The economies of Atlanta, Houston, Dallas, Phoenix,
Orlando, and the Miami-Ft. Lauderdale corridor were in part fueled by these
billions. It would be an interesting exercise to plot the density of
bailout-money by state  --as on a weather map where the greatest
thunderstorm activity is representented by the deepest red.
Tim




> Tim:
>
> It's true that the Electoral College is meant to give representation to
> smaller states. It performs this function very well - too well.  During
the
> past 200 years, along with a tremendous boom in population and urban
> activity, the basis of conflicting interests has actually shifted away
from
> states vs. fed to rural (agrarian and energy) vs. urban (manufacture,
> commerce, and transportation), with the Fed as the prize.  Most urban
areas
> are in states with powerful rural economies.  This means that, in the
larger
> states, federal representation is diluted (in the Senate, practically
> diminished to zero).  Since there are many primarily rural states and,
with
> the "exception" of D.C., no primarily urban states, the urban population
is
> under-represented in the federal government.
>
> During the Cold War, it was said that citizens of New York and Moscow have
> more in common with each other than either has with a citizen of rural
Iowa
> or the rural Ukraine (and vice versa).  Citizens of San Francisco and
> Chicago have more in common with each other than either has with a citizen
> of rural Illinois or rural California.  Drawing the lines of
representation,
> especially in presidential races, along state boundaries no longer
reflects
> the actual dislocation of interests.
>
> I am not arguing for a dissolution of the Union, the Constitution, or the
> Electoral College as they presently exist (though they do not balance
power
> very well anymore, if they ever actually did).  It is simply that I do not
> hold the winner-take-all-by-state Electoral College to be representative
of
> the interests even of the particular states in which they are appointed.
> And, since to eliminate the Electoral College would require the
> participation of those who now hold greater representation per capita, the
> Electoral College (as well as boob-tube elections) is here to stay.
>
> One positive effect of the Bush selection (I baulk at saying that he was
> elected) could be that people will pay more attention to representation in
> both Congress and their respective state legislatures.  Most people know
who
> the president is.  Many know who their senators are.  Fewer know who their
> congressmen are.  Still fewer know who their state representatives are.
> Maybe the threat of the Florida Legislature to select their own slate of
> electors should Gore win the popular vote after a full recount will wake
our
> neighbors up a bit - but probably not.  The airwaves will be full of the
> next spectacle and the treachery of this election will be largely
forgotten
> or dispersed with inflated rhetoric.
>
> Unfortunately, I can't "remember a day when the historians left blanks in
> their writings, I mean, for things they didn't know."
>
> All that just to say that I basically agree with you.
>
>
> Dirk Johnson
> Assistant Vice President
> Kelling, Northcross & Nobriga
> A Division of Zions First National Bank
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Tim Romano [mailto:[log in to unmask]]
> Sent: Monday, December 18, 2000 8:31 AM
> To: [log in to unmask]
> Subject: Re: USA elections
>
>
> Jacob
> Thanks for the compliment.  The charges of anachronism and class-bias are
> often brought against the electoral college system. But were it not for
the
> disproportionate clout the less populous states get through this system,
> presidential candidates and party platforms might pay little or no
attention
> to these states; even more attention would be spent on wooing those states
> with the large urban populations: Illinois, California, New York,
> Pennsylvania, et al --- and the attention would probably be given in the
> form of 10-second sound-bites on mass media. So the anachronism might be
> regarded as one of the few institutional counters to the purely boob-tube
> campaign. In any event, powerful economic interests centered in sparsely
> populated states (mining, forestry, agribusiness, energy) pretty much
> guarantee that these states will never willingly hand back power to the
> urban centers. That said, there is still some realistic hope that in a
> greater number of states the apportioning of electors might be carried out
> on a pro-rata basis, rather than winner-take-all, which would have some
> beneficial impact upon the process, I think, especially in respect to the
> viability of reform parties.
> Tim Romano
>
>
> >         Your analysis of the Supreme Court's erroneous decisions is
> > masterly. Well done.
> >         I am more than ever struck by the fact that these provisions for
> > electing a President are archaic, intended for a time when the states
had
> > more autonomy, when there were no parties, and when legislatures
consisted
> > of upper-class landholders.
> >
> >
>
>