Not for the first time and sadly not for the last, we ask on this program what happens

after the crisis.

From American public media, this is Marketplace.

In Los Angeles, I'm Kai.

Rizdole is Monday, today, the 20th of March.

Good as always to have you along, everybody.

Underneath all the finger pointing and Monday morning quarterbacking over how and why

Silicon Valley Bank and signature failed, there is a fundamental question.

Were these regulatory failures or were they failures of supervision?

As politicians and lobbyists and various and sundry interest groups take sides, Marketplace's

Kimberly Adams explains the difference between the two first of all and why which kind

of failures they were matters for what comes next.

Okay, who didn't do their job right?

Danielle Zanzalari teaches economics at Seton Hall University and used to work at the

Boston Fed.

She puts it in a more academic way.

Was it a failure of regulators and not supervising this institution long before they failed or was

it the fact that they were meeting the regulatory rules, but SVB perhaps needed tighter regulation?

So that's the question that people are asking.

A regulatory failure would mean we need better laws or rules to prevent this from happening

again.

To decide whether this was a regulatory or supervisory failure, it helps to know what bank supervisors

...