There are cries of shock and horror on both sides of the Atlantic. Peter Mandelson, a top British trade official, contends that the rule would be too difficult to implement. He's right. Laws against murder are also difficult to implement, but we have them on the statute books nevertheless. Apparently his dislike of the Volcker Rule was more a question of wounded pride than anything else, as the Brits were not consulted. That's terrible, but since when do we have to consult London to prevent our bankers from cutting their, and our, throats? Would we get annoyed if the British passed a similar measure to control their own bankers?

In Washington, the proposal was the subject of dismissive comments by Senator Christopher J. Dodd, chairman of the Senate Banking Committee. This is the man whose most recent accomplishment was to deep-six the badly needed Consumer Financial Protection Agency. And, at first blush, it would seem that he has the same idea in mind for the Volcker Rule. He's says it's not likely to be part of the omnibus financial legislation that he is attempting to shepherd through Congress. Dodd was quoted as saying, "I can't write regulations. This is beyond the competency of Congress."

Now, it may seem that Dodd is passing the buck. It's hard to believe that such sweeping changes could be enacted by simply printing a rule in the Federal Register. But if he's right, it raises some troubling questions. If Treasury Secretary Tim Geithner already had authority to enact these provisions through the rulemaking process, why is he going to Congress to ask for authority?

I'm saving the saddest bit for last. Yes, friends, the hedge fund community is unhappy with the Volcker Rule. The provision that would restrict investment in hedge funds and private equity funds has been described as a "body blow" to those fine institutions. If indeed the hedgies and buyout people are right that depository institutions are among their biggest investors, then that argues for, not against, the Volcker Rule. Banks engaging in proprietary trading is bad enough. Investing in funds that engage in such strategies, and impose hefty fees for the privilege, is downright insane.

The Volcker Rule, like a lot that has come out of Treasury and the White House, isn't enough. It would be better, in an ideal world, to enact curbs on proprietary trading in general—whether it comes from federally insured institutions or nonfederally insured institutions or hedge funds. As Dodd's comments indicate, it's not entirely clear that the administration has got its act together on this vital issue. But the reaction to the Volcker Rule indicates that not only aren't we in an ideal world, but we are in a world where amnesia is sweeping the planet.

Global economic crisis? What was that?