Taxpayers not the banks are Secretary Paulson's clients and he needs to remind himself of that says the NYT editorial page. It wants to see the government bring in new more competent management and not use the management that got us into this mess in the first pace especially where that management has demonstrated poor judgement and made errors that caused the bank to be in trouble. And it does not want to see the government a passive investor. It want the government to have a sy in mergers an acquisitions. Its not saying tha the government should take on the job of running the banks but protecting its investment means Treasury has to be involved in critical decisions that affect its investment and in the way the business is run and what risks are taken. Also Treasury is asked to watch for and take steps against conflicts of interest. Many of the same banks that are selling their assets to Treasury will also be asked to help Treasury to run the troubled asset program. Treasury to take care that these banks do not end up writing the rules on one side for Treasury and selling Treasury the assets by being on the other side because it won't be good for taxpayers. See Guillermo Ortiz's advice to Fed chairman Bernanke at the recent G20 meetings which says says be sure to take ownership stakes, as there was serious, lasting and damaging political fallout in Mexico during the 1994-95 peso crisis, from conflicts of interest and the failure to take ownership stakes and dividends on preferred shares. ...