![]() |
Enron Mail |
I spoke with Stacey Carey today after the ISDA call. I reiterated that we
have been willing to support the process so far on the understanding that we would prefer a bill that gives us parity with financial products and, failing that, the minimum we can accept is a bill which exempts (preferably excludes) energy commodities and hopefully metals from the Act. She confirmed that ISDA will continue to push for the exemption or exclusion. The comments from Treasury to Chris Long recently underscore that our "Phil Graham card", to the extent we have one, is a significant political strength for us and we should not play the card until we need to. Stacey agreed with a statement made by Don Moorehead on this morning's call that Graham will not start to move in the process until the House has produced a viable bill. Given that we should probably not seek his help until a bit later in the process - possibly mid September. Mark E Haedicke@ECT 08/11/2000 09:30 AM To: Chris Long/Corp/Enron@ENRON cc: Allison Navin/Corp/Enron@ENRON, Cynthia Sandherr/Corp/Enron@ENRON, Joe Hillings/Corp/Enron@ENRON, Mark Taylor/HOU/ECT@ECT@ENRON, raislerk@sullcrom.com, Richard Shapiro/HOU/EES@EES@ENRON, Steven J Kean/HOU/EES@EES@ENRON, Tom Briggs/NA/Enron@Enron Subject: Re: CFTC Reauthorization Do you think that a bill favorable to energy will be passed over the strong opposition of the CFTC? What kind of odds do you put on it? It is a significant change if Treasury is not longer against us -- but it is a little hard for me to believe that it is real. Should I try to make a trip to Washington in September? Let me know. Mark Haedicke
|