THERE'S NOTHING WRONG WITH THE SEC'S `CIRCULATION'
Your article on the Securities & Exchange Commission, "Will new blood improve the SEC's circulation?" (Finance, May 10), replays old and discredited allegations. While delays in decisions on administrative cases have been a problem for more than a decade, you barely note the most significant point: Delays have been largely eliminated since I created a task force to tackle the problem and beefed up staff. In fiscal 1990, we issued 18 opinions; in 1992, 48 opinions. You state that the "backlog" of cases is rising but don't mention that's because we are bringing 46% more administrative cases per year than when I became chairman (paralleling a nearly 200% rise in securities financings we oversee).
You note that the average time for deciding appeals in 1992 doubled from 1988. But you do not mention that this resulted entirely from clearing the backlog of old cases I inherited--including three of the four cited in your article.
Judging from the stale reporting, superficial analysis, and blatant slant of your article, one cannot but wonder whether, for those readers interested in serious reporting of business and financial news, a more important question than the one posed in the title to your article would be "Will new blood improve BUSINESS WEEK's circulation?"
Richard C. Breeden, Chairman
Securities & Exchange Commission
Editor's note: Breeden declined comment when the story was written.