Let's disclose something upfront: I ran and won two political races as a Republican. Of course, the fact that one of those races was a primary should tell you something else.

Earlier this year, the SEC fumbled its report on the Fiduciary standard by allowing it to become a partisan issue within the ranks of the commissioners. Then, at a Congressional hearing and in subsequent press statements, SEC Chairman Mary Shapiro played the political card in an apparent attempt to fend off those newly elected Tea Party-ers seeking to succumb to fiscal responsibility. She threatened to withhold making any major regulatory changes without a promise from Congress to increase SEC funding. Those wily Republicans called Shapiro's bluff and sent a scathing letter to the SEC questioning not only the sacred fiduciary standard, but the very core of Dodd-Frank itself.

Most serious analysts consider Dodd-Frank your average run-of-the-mill big government boondoggle that not only fails to address what it was originally intended to do, but institutionalized the ugly concept of "too big to fail." Therefore, it's consistent with their traditional philosophy – and the creed of the Tea Party – for Republicans to question Dodd-Frank Financial Reform Act. After all, like the infamously unilateral Health Care Reform Act, the Financial Reform Act made no attempt to consider alternative views.