????下一個雷曼兄弟（Lehman Brothers）不會在一夜之間突然冒出，這個過程可能會有幾個月。問題是這次會不會有什么改進。

????上周四，美國聯邦存款保險公司（Federal Deposit Insurance Corp.，簡稱FDIC，是由美國聯邦政府創辦、為商業銀行儲蓄客戶提供保險的公司——編者注）代理主席馬丁?格倫伯格在芝加哥聯邦儲備銀行（Federal Reserve Bank of Chicago）舉辦的一次會議上發表講話，首次公布了如果雷曼危機重演、政府將采取的應對計劃。根據多德-弗蘭克（Dodd-Frank）銀行改革法案，FDIC有責任接手監管部門認為瀕臨破產的大銀行。

????格倫伯格表示，FDIC的計劃是由政府接管瀕危大銀行的母公司，不讓它立即破產。然后，FDIC會解雇該銀行的高管和董事會，接管其子公司，如分支機構或股票交易業務，直到FDIC為這家瀕危銀行找到買家。格倫伯格稱，在這個過程中，FDIC將抹去這家銀行的股票價值，把該行的一些債券轉換成新銀行的股票。其他債券持有人將承擔一些損失。而政府會提供融資，讓該行繼續經營下去。

????格倫伯格表示，整個過程可能需要幾個月，但總的來說，這樣做要比雷曼破產后造成的一片混亂好很多。“這一清算策略的目標是采取一些能維持金融穩定的可行做法，”他說。FDIC與大銀行一直都有定期聯系，這一計劃獲得的反映總體積極。“他們普遍認為，我們的計劃聽起來不錯，”格倫伯格稱。

????在上周四的會議上，有人質疑這個計劃是否行得通。Rochdale Securities的銀行業分析師理查德?博弗認為，這個計劃會讓銀行股的風險更高。佛羅里達大學（University of Florida）的經濟學家馬克?弗蘭納瑞表示，銀行很精明，會想出各種辦法來轉移所有資產，政府掌控不了他們。

????以前也有人質疑，FDIC是否能強制要求破產銀行的債券持有人承擔損失。如果這些債券的持有人是其他銀行，甚至可能會導致其他銀行破產。斯坦福大學（Stanford University）的經濟學家艾耐特?阿德瑪迪也是幫助FDIC制定清算計劃的顧問委員會成員，他說，政府還需要敲定一個問題，即決定何時由FDIC接管一家銀行的具體流程。“計劃可以訂得很漂亮，”阿德瑪迪表示，“問題是計劃是否真的能啟動。”

????一位與會者問格倫伯格，FDIC會不會考慮在房利美（Fannie Mae）和房地美（Freddie Mac）上實驗其破產清算授權。格倫伯格回應稱，對于2008年底政府接管的大型按揭貸款擔保公司，FDIC沒有破產清算授權。

????最近，美國一些共和黨眾議員呼吁取消多德-弗蘭克法案中給予FDIC破產清算授權的內容。格倫伯格似乎比較樂觀，相信這些做法不會得逞。“兩黨普遍認為，大到不能倒絕非好事。”格倫伯格表示，“沒有這一點（即破產清算授權），公眾取向將造成行業競爭更加不均衡。”

????譯者：早稻米

????The next Lehman Brothers may not happen over the course of a weekend. It could take a couple of months. The question is if that would be an improvement.

????On Thursday, Martin Gruenberg, who is the acting chairman of the Federal Deposit Insurance Corp., speaking at a conference put on by the Federal Reserve Bank of Chicago, laid out for the first time publicly the government's plan to deal with the next Lehman Brothers-like failure. Under the Dodd-Frank bank reform law, the FDIC has the responsibility of wind-downing large banks that regulators think are headed for bankruptcy.

????He said the FDIC's plan is for the government to take over the parent company of a troubled large bank, rather than let it fail immediately. The FDIC would then fire the bank's executives and its board, and run its subsidiaries, like its branches or its stock trading operations, until the FDIC was able to find a buyer for the failed bank. In the process, Gruenberg says, the FDIC would wipe out the value of the bank's stock. Some of the bank's bonds would be converted into stock in the new bank. Other bond holders would take some losses. And the government would provide the financing to let the company continue to run.

????The whole process could take a couple of months, Gruenberg said. But he said it would be a better route for the market in general than what happened after Lehman. "The goal of the resolution strategy is to come up with something that could be used and maintain financial stability," says Gruenberg. Gruenberg says his agency has been in constant contact with the big banks and generally the reaction has been positive to the plan. "Their general response is that our plan make sense."

????At the conference on Thursday, some questioned whether the plan would work. Richard Bove, a bank analyst at Rochdale Securities, said he thought the plan would make bank stocks more risky. Mark Flannery, an economist at the University of Florida, said banks were savvy enough to figure out how to shift all their assets so that the government wouldn't be able to get a hold of them.

????Others in the past have questioned if the FDIC would be able to force bond holders of a failed bank to take losses. If the holders of those bonds are other banks, then that could cause other banks to fail as well. Anat Admati, an economist at Stanford University, who is on the advisory panel that helped the FDIC come up with resolution plan, says the government still has to iron out its process for deciding when the FDIC would take over a bank. "One can do a great job of preparing a plan," says Admati. "The question is whether it would really get triggered."

????One participant asked Gruenberg if the FDIC would consider testing its resolution authority on Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac. Gruenberg responded that the FDIC had no authority over the large mortgage guarantee companies that were taken over by the government in late 2008.

????Republicans in the House of Representatives have recently begun an initiative to repeal the part of the Dodd-Frank law that gives the FDIC resolution authority. Gruenberg seemed optimistic that those efforts wouldn't succeed. "There's fairly broad bi-partisan agreement that too big to fail is not a good thing," says Gruenberg. "Without this, you create an expectation of public support that creates an uneven playing field."