|
|
Enron Mail |
Lee Sachs was contacted for a second interview by Girth. Lee concluded fro= m this interview that Girth is going down the "Enron influence" path. Girt= h did not probe the question of whether derivatives drive the physical comm= odity market, which as noted below was a big part of the first interview. = Girth asked Lee extensive questions about Enron's involvement in the legisl= ation and who talked to whom and when. Girth said that he had talked to th= e CFTC who said they got steamrolled on the energy exemption by the Hill. = Lee reminded Girth how the CFTC got themselves into this bind when they fir= st issued the "Concept Release" paper, which the President's working group = immediately denounced. Lee said that the Working Group constantly told the= CFTC that they should work out the issue with the Hill and to do so quickl= y because the CFTC had made a massive mistake with the Concept Release docu= ment. Lee reminded Girth that while the Working group did not get into the= specifics of the energy exemption, that in fact energy was already exempte= d prior to reauthorization and that it continued to meet the criteria laid = out in the President's report. I can go into that part of the discussion m= ore thoroughly, but just suffice it to say Lee meticulously walked Girth th= rough the safe harbor test and the background of the issue. Girth asked Le= e if I had talked to Lee about the issue after leaving Treasury, to which L= ee said we talked but not about this subject and that he instead talked to = Chris Long. Girth asked if Ken Lay had talked to either Summers or Phil Gr= amm. Lee said he did not think Ken talked to Summers about the CFTC reauth= orization (but mentioned Ken's very constructive engagement on the Calif en= ergy talks) and that as far as Ken talking to Gramm, Lee had no idea but as= sumed two Republican Texans would have lots of reasons to talk to each othe= r. Girth told Lee he would soon go on vacation and that they story would c= ome after Labor Day. =20 ----- Forwarded by Linda Robertson/NA/Enron on 07/31/2001 05:37 PM ----- =09Linda Robertson 07/10/2001 06:00 PM =09 To: Mark Palmer/Corp/Enron@ENR= ON, Steven J Kean/NA/Enron@Enron, Richard Shapiro/NA/Enron@Enron, James D S= teffes/NA/Enron@Enron cc: Subject: Jeff Girth of NYT=09 As I mentioned earlier to Mark, Jeff Girth of the NYT again today contacted= Lee Sachs about Enron. You recall Lee was Asst Secretary of Treasury for = Financial Markets during the Clinton Administration. From his conversation= , Lee reports the following items were raised by Girth: a) the state of en= ergy trading products and investment climate; b) Enron's role in this mark= et; c) whether and how financial energy products drive pricing and supply o= f physical energy products (Lee told him emphatically no); and, c) whether = government regulators understand these issues. Lee said this is clearly an= Enron specific story. Lee thinks Girth came away from the conversation wi= th more of a right perspective (namely that these are important markets and= that we play a vital role). Lee said that Girth was less focussed on pass= age of the CEA and the politics than Girth had been in an earlier conversat= ion; almost all of today's conversation was forward looking. Girth told L= ee that he had not told Lee "all" that is behind this story, but did say th= at there is an interesting twist (Lee thinks Girth perhaps something specif= ic either on a document front or source). Lee gave Girth a list of expert= s to talk to who are unbiased but clearly right thinking on the subject. L= ee suggested that Girth to: Pat Parkinson at the Fed (the godfather of the= "hands off" regulatory perspective for the OTC market), Bill Rainer, and E= d Rosen (a prominent attorney in NY). Lee expects Girth to keep calling hi= m.
|