8/7/2019 March 2011 Letter to SEC Chairman

1/5

c ton greu 5 o f tb t I ln iteb c i> ta tt5Uill l5bington. Ill: 20510

March 16,2011

The Honorable Mary L. SchapiroChairmanSecurities and Exchange Commission100 F Street, NEWashington, D.C. 20549-0001Dear Chairman Schapiro,

It has been more than two years since thousands of Americans lost their savings in theStanford Ponzi scheme. For many of the victims, these losses reflect most, if not all, of theirretirement funds that were accumulated over many years of hard work. These Americans reliedon the Securities Exchange Commission (SEC) to uphold its federal mandate to protect investorsand the SEC failed in this regard.

For twelve years, the SEC failed to seriously investigate the Stanford Ponzi scheme,which grew from approximately $500 million in investments in 1997 to $7.2 billion in 2009. In2010, SEC Inspector General David Kotz revealed the SEC was aware as early as 1997 thatStanford investors' funds were in jeopardy of being stolen. It was not until 2004-seven yearsafter the SEC first became aware of problems at Stanford-that an official investigation wasopened. By the time the SEC took action in this case, it was too late for the Stanford victims.Stanford investors lost virtually everything.

While we understand there are numerous complexities involved in the Stanford case, thebottom line is that investors' funds are missing and the SEC failed to act in a timely manner toput an end to Allen Stanford's fraud. In addition, we understand that many Stanford investorswere customers of Stanford Group Company (SGC), a broker-dealer that was a member ofSecurities Investor Protection Corporation (SIPC). We are also keenly aware of ongoing SECefforts to determine whether Stanford Victims qualify for coverage under the Securities InvestorsProtection Act ("SIPC coverage"). As you continue to review and reconstruct the fraud oftheStanford Ponzi scheme, we urge you to prioritize the determination of whether Stanford Victimsqualify for SIPC coverage.

Weare aware of several issues the SEC staff has raised with respect to whether StanfordVictims qualify for SIPC coverage. It is our understanding that SEC counsel has informallystated that SGC customers are not eligible for SIPC coverage at this time because (1) SGC wasmerely an introducing broker-dealer, and (2) SIPC is not meant to compensate customers ofworthless securities. Before making a formal decision, we request the SEC consider the facts set

8/7/2019 March 2011 Letter to SEC Chairman

2/5

forth in the Declaration of Karyl Van Tassel (attached hereto as "Exhibit A"), which illustrateshow the funds for SGC were generally routed to continue Stanford's fraudulent businesspractices, rather than purchasing securities.

We are concerned that the SEC's ongoing review of Stanford Victims'eligibility for SIPCcoverage reflects a lack of urgency . We trust you will expedite your review of this issue andkeep us informed of your findings.

Sincerely yours,

=

U.S. Senator

U.S. Senator

~~.

Bob CorkerU.S. Senator

!~.~Lamar S. SmithU.S. Representative

U.S. Representative

dht.... t.4~,, ,Robert P. CaseyU.S. SenatorM~-~t lW-Mark Pryor

U.S. Senator

JoU.

6 f~ P-LRon PaulU.S. Representative

8/7/2019 March 2011 Letter to SEC Chairman

3/5

David E. PriceU.S. Representative

L~Bennie G.T h 6 I D P S O I lU.S. Representative~

8/7/2019 March 2011 Letter to SEC Chairman

4/5

U.S. Representative

&~{q~U.S. Representative

assidyU.S. Representative

Gregg erU.S. Representative

-Pete G. OlsonU.S. Representative

U.S. Representative

ttJ/1.!((~Michael McCaulU.S. Representative

U.S. Representative

U.S. Representative

~ Steve ScaliseU.S. Representative

U.S. Representative

8/7/2019 March 2011 Letter to SEC Chairman

5/5

Bill Flores

u.s. Representative

~ Allen B . Westu.s . Representative

. Tim GriffinU.S Representative

u.s . Representativ

Cedric RichmondU.S. Representative

U.S. Senator