Regulatory Outreach for Student Education

Engaging Students in the Debate Over Financial Services Reform

Today’s debate over regulatory reform is a watershed activity in the careers of financial industry professionals. Years ago, similar debates over mandated pre-funding of pension liabilities (ERISA) and the reunification of investment banking with commercial banking (Glass Steagall's repeal) changed the direction of financial market evolution. Opinions may differ on the merits of those changes, but no one disputes their significance.

Without question, college students and young professionals should be well-versed in the issues involved in today's debate. The Regulatory Outreach for Student Education (ROSE) program is the Center's way to give top students, tomorrow's business and finance leaders, opportunities to experience the financial regulatory process up-close.  The ROSE program is designed to put students in touch with the regulators, policy-makers, and industry leaders who are currently shaping the financial regulatory landscape.  We then challenge them to research and articulate their own positions on the most intriguing and interesting issues.  

ROSE Program Blog

Sunday, May 15, 2016

Fordham Students Submit Comment Letters to Basel Committee

Author: David Schwartz

On May 16, 2016, Fordham students participating in the Center's Regulatory Outreach for Student Education (ROSE) Program submitted their winning comment letter on the Basel Committee's December 17, 2015 consultation, "Identification and Measurement of Step-in Risk."  

Five teams of Fordham economics, finance, accounting, and law students participating in the ROSE Program researched and drafted comment letters, which were then submitted for judging by a panel of industry experts. The letters were then submitted to the Basel Committee on Fordham letterhead.   

The ROSE Program brings together students from across the university to study our financial system, how it affects society, and, specifically, current issues in financial regulation. This year’s groups included both graduate and undergraduate suduents bringing a diverse range of perspectives and skills to the task. The consultative document, with its breadth and depth, offered an excellent opportunity for them to comment.