Andreesan seems to be purposely and slightly deceptive here.. This is entwined in a larger issue.
I do worry about Rogan sometimes.. I like him a lot, he is honest and curious. But Rogan lacks the knowledge to properly challenge people on very complex issues. What Andreeson wants to get rid of is an anti-corruption law designed to keep politicians from using their connections to influence this industry.
This particular issue is coming up contentiously because non-banks are acting as banks. Banks have legal and fiduciary obligations imposed on them since the Great Depression. But there is now a new industry popping up where companies are brokering bank transactions, in effect acting as banks.. But without protections for the end user. So the quasi-bank takes your money and then the credits your account with them and then they send your money (as if it belongs to them) to the real FDIC insured banks). So the quasi-bank's holdings in banks technically is insured by the FDIC. When grandma loses $500,000 when the quasi-bank goes under she cannot get her money back. Technically the quasi-bank put the money into the FDIC insurance banks, but it is not her money, it belongs to the quasi-bank. This is huge issue since many Fintech startups have collapsed and the people with holdings cannot get their money back. In fact, the banks do not know if it belongs to the end user.. Because it came from the Fintech.
This is an issue the regulators have been warning about for a long time. The House Of Representatives, controlled by the Republicans, refuses to act.
PEP is designed to stop politicians from investing where there is a conflict of interest. It is an anti-corruption regulation. Many republicans are tied to Fintech. And these people if active in politics show up as PEP. Most real banks deal with this all the time and they simply verify where the money is coming from when a PEP is involved. If a PEP sells a house then they show the house sale document to the bank and life is good, the transaction continues. If the PEP cannot show where the money is coming from (or refuses to show where the money is coming from) then they are not allowed to deposit it. There is no evidence of a political bias is the sphere. The banks really, really, really want your money. But it has to be verified. The Fintechs are trying to skirt the law. If allowed this then becomes a dark money extravaganza. China can flood the system with their money, for instance.
www.zerohedge.com
