I missed Simon Johnson and James Kwak appearing on Bill Moyers' show, but the transcript is available and well worth reading. I have been focused on the question of the regulatory state, Presidential power and the opportunity of populist outrage and will quote from the transcript to further explore these issues:

BILL MOYERS: What should be the purpose of reform? Should it change the behavior of Wall Street, or should it change the regulation of Wall Street? And there is a difference, is there not?

SIMON JOHNSON: Absolutely. Look, I don't know if this will work or not. I don't know if at the end of the day, we will end up supporting the bill. I hope we will, okay? But whatever happens, this is one legislative cycle. Theodore Roosevelt did not change the mainstream consensus in this country with regard to power and monopoly and the dangerous side effects of big business overnight. [. . .] The consensus has to change, Bill. And regulation, the role of regulation or understanding of regulation with regard to finance has to change. The regulation is there to limit the downside to society and to make sure that all of these activities have as much as possible of the positive effect on the economy without generating these massive negative shocks. And we're a long way from that point.

(Emphasis supplied.) Johnson focuses on the power of the Presidency in changing the consensus, but it should be noted that TR's power went beyond the bully pulpit to actual control of the Executive Branch.This circles back to my argument that the conventional (non-Bushian)unitary Executive theory may be vital to a strong regulatory state. More . . .