The feds want unprecedented authority to snoop into them, but say it’s only to combat money laundering and terrorist finance — for now, at least. They’ve been tightening the screws on banks that aren’t forthcoming enough in reporting cash transfers deemed suspicious: “Some smaller community banks have sold out to larger companies for fear of increased liability, banking officials say, and banks have dropped some money-transmittal businesses that do significant business overseas because of the risk. Some executives, meanwhile, are steering away from serving on bank boards, concerned that they will be hit with punitive measures, banking industry officials say.” But the regulations do not seem especially promising in blocking money transfers intended to abet terrorism, most of which are smallish in size or otherwise not facially suspicious. (Eric Lichtblau, “U.S. Seeks Access to Bank Records to Deter Terror”, New York Times, Apr. 10). For more, see my Reason column for Mar. 1999.

The aim of proposals before the Senate Finance Committee may be to crack down on financial abuses by some charitable entities, but the result could be to impose onerous regulatory burdens on the good and bad alike. (Heather Higgins, “Death by Bureaucracy”, OpinionJournal/WSJ, Apr. 10).