Dear Delegates,

My name is Mason Levens, and I have participated in Model United Nations since my ninth grade year of high school. I credit Model UN to the development of my writing and speaking skills, as well as my eagerness to engage with global education. I served as Co-President of my high school’s Model United Nations club, while chairing numerous conferences throughout my time on the high school circuit.

At Columbia, I am a first year student studying economics and mathematics. I am on the intercollegiate Model UN travel team, and also staff conferences through the international relations council. Outside of Model UN, I enjoy participating in finance-related organizations, exploring New York City, and running.

If you have any questions about this committee, further opportunities in Model UN, or about Columbia more generally, please do not hesitate to reach out! I look forward to a great conference on November 22nd!

Sincerely,

Mason Levens, Chair

msl2246@columbia.edu

Code of Conduct

All delegates will be held to a high standard of behavior and will be expected to treat each other and the topics of debate with respect. No harassment or bullying of any kind will be tolerated. Sensitive discussion of topics is expected to be conducted respectfully and intelligently. The Secretary-General of CESIMS reserves the right to remove a delegate from the conference at any point in time.

Attire

All delegates will be expected to wear Western Business Attire.

Language

The working and official language of the committee shall be English.

Parliamentary Procedure

Points

There are four types of points that a delegate may raise.

Point of Order

A Point of Order may not interrupt a speaker and can be raised when the delegate believes the rules of procedure have been violated. The chair will stop the proceedings of the committee and ask the delegate to provide warranted arguments as to which rules of procedure have been violated.

Point of Personal Privilege

A Point of Personal Privilege may be raised when a delegate’s ability to participate in debate is impaired for any physical or logistical reason (for instance, if the speaker is not audible). This point may interrupt a speech, and the dais will immediately try to resolve the difficulty.

Point of Parliamentary Inquiry

This point may be raised by a delegate who wishes to clarify any rule of procedure with the Chair. It may not interrupt a speaker, and a delegate rising to this point may not make any substantive statements or arguments.

Point of Information

As the name suggests, this point may be raised by a delegate to bring substantive information to the notice. It may not interrupt a speaker and must contain only a statement of some new fact that may have relevance to debate. Arguments and analyses may not be made by delegates rising to this point. A point of information may also be used to ask questions of a speaker on the general speakers list.

Motions

Motions control the flow of debate. A delegate may raise a motion when the chair opens the floor for points or motions. Motions require a vote to pass. Procedural motions, unless mentioned otherwise, require a simple majority to pass.

Motion for Moderated Caucus

This motion begins a moderated caucus and must specify the topic, the time per speaker, and the total time for the proposed caucus.

Motion for an Unmoderated Caucus

This motion moves the committee into unmoderated caucus, during which lobbying and drafting of resolutions may take place. It must specify the duration of the caucus.

Motion to Suspend Debate

This motion suspends debate for a stipulated amount of time.

Motion to Adjourn

This motion brings the committee’s deliberation to an end, and it is only admissible when suggested by the Chair.

Motion to Introduce Documents

A successful motion to introduce essentially puts the document on the floor to be debated by the committee. The sponsor of the document will be asked to read the document and then, if deemed appropriate, the Chair will entertain a moderated caucus on the topic.

Motion to Divide the Question

This motion may be moved by a delegate to split a document into its component clauses for the purpose of voting. This may be done when a delegate feels that there is significant support for some clauses of the document, but not for the complete document.

Motion for a Roll Call Vote

A delegate may move to have the vote conducted in alphabetical order.

Motion for Speakers For and Against

If it would help the proceedings of the committee, a delegate may motion for speakers for and against a document.

Documents

Committee Documents represent the product of the committee’s deliberations and their collective decisions.

Directives

Directives are similar to resolutions in traditional committees, with the notable exception that they do not include preambulatory clauses and are much shorter and more concise. Directives are generally written in response to a specific crisis update, and can be as short as two or three clauses. All direct actions by the committee as a whole require a directive.

Communiqués

Communiqués are formal communications (private by default) directed from the committee to other governments, individuals, or organizations. Committee communiqués pass by simple majority.

Press Release

Press releases express the sentiments of the committee (NOT individuals) on any issue. They require a simple majority to pass.

Amendments

After the first draft of a committee document has been introduced, delegates may move to amend clauses of the draft. If the amendment is supported by all the sponsors of the documents, it passes as a friendly amendment.

Communication During Committee

Communication during committee may take place through handwritten notes:

Notes Between Delegates

Delegates should feel free to write personal notes to their fellow committee members. We ask that these notes pertain to the business of the committee.

Notes to the Dais

Delegates may also write to the Chair with questions regarding procedural issues of the committee, as well as a wide range of personal inquiries. Delegates should feel free to write to the Chair on any issue that would improve the committee experience. This could range from a clarification of procedural issues to substantive matters.

Crisis Notes

Crisis notes are notes written in character to fictional confidants. Backroom staffers will respond to these notes in character. The success of your notes depends on how well the notes are written and researched, and how reasonable the request is.

A Note on Crisis Procedure

The above actor descriptions serve to provide a level of historical understanding underpinning how the financial crisis worked. However, due to this committee having a crisis format, actions taken will be delegate-driven; as long as portfolio powers are used appropriately, actions taken do not have to abide by historical accuracy. In fact, the committee should not play out exactly like the recession did in reality. Creativity is absolutely encouraged!

In this committee one should prioritize both the advancement of the committee’s interests and their own individualized pursuits. Finding a balance between such interests can often represent one of the largest challenges in navigating a crisis committee. Standard backroom procedure will apply, and directives will be composed instead of resolution papers seen in General Assembly committees; all should feel free to ask questions about crisis procedure either ahead of time via email or on the day of the conference. One of the fundamental goals of this committee and more broadly, this conference, is to support learning and growth in the area of Model United Nations.

The 2008 Financial Crisis committee will actually begin December of 2007, when the already widespread global recession began to severely worsen in the financial sector. Widespread investor panic is prominent at this time, and government agencies are beginning to evaluate the ways in which they may need to intervene within the crisis. As the name of this committee suggests, this will be a crisis simulation, meaning that the actions and events of the committee will be primarily delegate-driven; while actions taken should be feasible in regard to one’s specific portfolio powers, the flow of the committee need not mirror that of history, and in fact, it should not. Additionally, crisis updates may be derived both from real-life historical events, and from actions taken in the committee itself.

January - August 2008: The Financial Sector Suffers

As 2008 set in, panic increased as the financial sector seemed to fall deeper into crisis. In an attempt to curb the crisis, measures such as the Economic Stimulus Act of 2008 were instituted in February, while the Federal Reserve continued to cut rates in an effort to support the circulation of capital. By March, Bear Stearns was forced to confront bankruptcy out of exposure to high-risk assets, and the value of the dollar continued to weaken against the soaring prices of commodities. In July, the U.S. Government enacted the Housing and Economic Recovery Act of 2008, intended to address the crisis surrounding subprime mortgages; this act helped both lenders and borrowers in the stabilization of the housing market.

September 2008: An Escalation to Crisis

September 2008 saw the collapse of Lehman Brothers, a major financial institution specializing in investment banking. The collapse of Lehman is largely attributed to its significant involvement in lending within the subprime mortgage market. While there were negotiations for Lehman Brothers to be potentially bought out by either Bank of America or Barclays, the transaction was ultimately not realized. That month, the Treasury Secretary, the Speaker of the House, and the Chair of the Federal Reserve all met to discuss a federal buyout of the toxic mortgages plaguing the economy. By the end of the month, the 700 billion dollar Troubled Asset Relief Program was rolled out by the federal government, preserving the institutionality of many large banks and financial corporations.

October 2008 - June 2009

On the first of October, the Senate passed the Emergency Economic Stabilization Act of 2008, with the House passing it two days later. The economy, still in a state of distress, needed time to recover under strict government watch and regulation. The recession was officially declared over in June 2009, though the economy was in a far from ideal place at that time as well. The financial crisis would forever change the way that many conceive of economic volatility, with the global event introducing key questions surrounding how the financial industry should be regulated.

Goldman Sachs (Lloyd Blankfein)

As a large, bulge-bracket investment bank, Goldman Sachs engages in lending, underwriting, and advising on mergers and acquisitions, alongside offering services in asset management. During the financial crisis, Goldman was significantly involved in the mortgage-backed securities market, challenging its longtime stability as a reliable, financially secure institution. Headed by Lloyd Blankfein, the large bank has connections with a variety of other financial institutions on Wall Street and even government entities. Notably, a large number of former executives held government positions during the financial crisis.

JPMorgan (Jamie Dimon)

JPMorgan is a large, bulge-bracket investment bank that engages in the traditional financial transactions like lending, underwriting, advising on mergers and acquisitions, and offering asset management services. However, with respect to its peers, JPMorgan enjoys a more diversified business model also encompassing credit cards, a notably strong risk management department, and a focus on regional investment banking in addition to its New York focus. Headed by Jamie Dimon, there are strong ambitions for JPMorgan to grow everyday, and the same was true even during the recession; the firm carefully avoided its exposure to toxic assets, and capitalized on the acquisition of other financial institutions.

Morgan Stanley (John Mack)

In a way similar to Goldman Sachs and JPMorgan, Morgan Stanley is also a large, bulge-bracket investment bank that engages in lending, underwriting, mergers and acquisitions, as well as asset management. During the recession, Morgan Stanley was heavily exposed to mortgage-backed securities, challenging its overall security as an institution. Historically speaking, the firm relied on borrowing to finance operations throughout the crisis, with some loans issued at extreme leverage ratios. The CEO of Morgan Stanley during the recession was John Mack.

Bank of America (Ken Lewis)

As one of the largest commercial banks in the United States, Bank of America had some level of exposure to mortgage-backed securities during the financial crisis, but not nearly as much as its counterparts structured purely as investment banks.

However, due to acquisitions made during the crisis such as that of Countrywide Financial, a major mortgage lender, Bank of America was increasingly exposed to toxic assets that threatened its stock value. Later in the crisis, after an acquisition of Merill Lynch threatened the future of the bank, CEO Ken Lewis solicited and received assistance from the U.S. government.

Citigroup (Vikram Pandit)

As a major player in most financial sectors, Citigroup faced difficulty during the recession. Born out of a merger between Citicorp and Travelers Group, the institution was involved in commercial banking, investment banking, trading, credit cards, and lending. Prior to 2008, Citigroup was also one of the world’s largest banks, with total assets exceeding two trillion. Due to its intense exposure to mortgage-backed securities and the subprime mortgage lending market, Citigroup relied on assistance similar to its peers to subsist throughout the crisis and make it to the other side. The CEO of Citigroup throughout the financial crisis was Vikram Pandit.

UBS (Marcel Rohner)

One of the strongest players in global investment banking, UBS experienced immense financial distress during the recession, but ultimately survived. This bulge-bracket investment bank is involved not only in mergers and acquisitions, but also in private wealth management for some of the most prominent clients throughout the world.

Additionally, while UBS has a deep presence in the New York financial industry, its roots are tied to Europe and more specifically the Swiss financial market, indicating that the recession had a global impact beyond the national scope that is typically considered. The bank was headed by CEO Marcel Rohner during the financial crisis.

Wells Fargo (John Stumpf)

During the recession, Wells Fargo experienced strain similar to its peer institutions, but ultimately emerged stronger due to key acquisitions. As a large commercial bank, Wells Fargo focused on consumer banking with a conservative approach, avoiding risky financial investments that could jeopardize its position. While the bank did engage in mortgage lending, its strategic acquisition of Wachovia allowed it to experience enough prosperity to emerge successfully from the crisis. Additionally, Wells Fargo experienced financial support from the government like its peer institutions.

Evercore (Roger Altman)

As an elite boutique investment bank specializing in mergers and acquisitions, as well as restructuring, Evercore emerged stronger from the crisis. By avoiding underwriting, lending, or investing in mortgage-backed securities, the independent advisory firm was able to avoid the financial distress that plagued its larger, more diversified peers.

Additionally, the firm’s restructuring business experienced success the crisis, as Evercore was hired as an independent advisor to assist institutions experiencing financial distress or bankruptcy. The firm was headed by Roger Altman during the financial crisis.

Centerview Partners (Robert Pruzan)

As another elite boutique investment firm, Centerview was not directly affected by the mortgage-lending crisis like its bulge-bracket counterparts. In a way similar to that of Evercore, its avoidance of underwriting, lending, or investment in mortgage-backed securities enabled it to avoid personal distress during the crisis. Being founded in 2006, Centerview was a relatively new institution during the financial crisis; its independent advisory business, and more specifically, its restructuring teams, actually experienced success during the recession, boosting the overall prominence of the new boutique firm.

Lazard (Bruce Wasserstein)

Alongside Evercore and Centerview, Lazard was another elite boutique investment firm that was not directly impacted by the financial crisis. As one of the oldest investment banking firms in the world, Lazard was resilient in its approach to the financial crisis, involving itself in several key restructuring operations that ensured the profitability of the firm. The institution was headed by CEO Bruce Wasserstein throughout the financial crisis.

American International Group (Robert Willumstad)

As one of the largest insurance and financial corporations, American International Group (AIG) experienced extreme financial distress throughout the recession, having to be bailed out by the federal government. Due to writing insurance on mortgage-backed securities, the financial outcome of American International Group appeared bleak before the onset of government support. The collapse of the housing market also severely affected American International Group, resulting in a liquidity crisis. To emerge from the crisis, the institution worked closely with the Federal Reserve to formulate a bailout plan. AIG was headed by Robert Willumstad during this period of time.

The Department of the Treasury (Henry Paulson)

The Department of the Treasury served as the effective control panel of governmental response to the financial crisis. During the recession, the Secretary of the Treasury was Henry Paulson. The goals of the Treasury during this time were to stabilize the collapsing financial system, protect homeowners, and circulate capital to vital institutions. The Treasury served as the initial point of contact for governmental support when institutions experienced financial distress, and had the ability to relay concerns to the wider Executive Branch and to Congress.

The Federal Reserve (Ben Bernanke)

The Federal Reserve can be conceived of as the emergency response team within the context of the financial crisis, serving to work with failing institutions and enable them to continue to survive. In order to stimulate the circulation of capital, the Fed dramatically slashed interest rates during the recession; this enabled money to be borrowed more easily, and increased lenders’ confidence that capital would be paid back. The Federal Reserve was involved in numerous high-profile bailouts during the recession, helping American International Group, Lehman Brothers, Bear Stearns, and several other financial institutions.

Office of the Comptroller of the Currency (John Dugan)

Throughout the financial crisis, the role of the Office of the Comptroller of the Currency (OCC) was to effectively regulate and stabilize national banks. This meant that the OCC worked closely with institutions such as Bank of America, Wells Fargo, and JPMorgan Chase. Throughout the recession, the OCC was headed by John Dugan.

New York Federal Reserve (Timothy Geithner)

Headquartered in Lower Manhattan, the New York Federal Reserve was the most active wing of the Federal Reserve system during the financial crisis. Functionally, the New York Fed was responsible for overseeing monetary policy, operating emergency lending programs to businesses in distress, and supervising the large financial institutions based in New York City. The New York Fed was headed by Timothy Geithner during this time.

New York City (Michael Bloomberg)

As the Mayor of New York City during the financial crisis, Bloomberg was tasked with communicating with both state and federal authorities in regard to the impact of the financial crisis on the city. As a former wall street executive, Bloomberg was deeply aware of the severity of the situation, and worked to ensure fiscal stability within the city. Recognizing New York City’s overreliance on the financial industry as a source of revenue, Bloomberg also worked to implement economic diversification within the city.

New York State (David Patterson)

As the Governor of the state of New York during the financial crisis, Patterson was tasked with communicating with both Mayor Bloomberg and with federal authorities on the topic of the impact of the recession on the state. Taking office suddenly after the scandalous resignation of Governor Eliot Spitzer, Patterson was thrown into the midst of the financial crisis and had to contend with an everchanging economic landscape. To shield the state from fiscal damage, he worked to implement a variety of budget cuts that emphasized frugality, even when unpopular with the state legislature.

New York State Office of the Attorney General (Andrew Cuomo)

As the Attorney General of New York, Andrew Cuomo worked to understand the causes of the subprime mortgage crisis that plagued the economy. He also sought to hold large financial institutions that played a role in the advent and exacerbation of the crisis accountable for their actions, through opening investigations into their practices.

Overall, he took an aggressive approach towards these investigations, in which he revealed severe misallocations of capital by wall street executives.

Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation (Sheila Bair)

Functionally, the role of the Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation (FDIC) was to protect depositors and manage banks in financial distress. Additionally, the FDIC played a supervisory role, ensuring that bank operations were in compliance with the carefully formulated federal regulations of the time. The FDIC also worked to expand depositor insurance, which allowed depositors to experience an increased confidence dissuading them from withdrawing capital. During the financial crisis, the FDIC was led by Sheila Bair.

Securities and Exchange Commission (Christopher Cox)

Prior to the financial crisis, the Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) was tasked with regulating investment banks; due to the level of fiscal distress that emerged, the SEC fell under scrutiny during this period of time. While the SEC originally employed voluntary regulation, where large banks were responsible for primarily self-reporting their fiscal data, it became increasingly evident that this form of regulation did not work. To assist in handling the crisis, the SEC worked closely with entities like the Federal Reserve and the Department of the Treasury.