The Supreme Court's recent decision allowing regional interstate banks has done away with

one restriction in America's banking operation, although many others still remain. Although the ruling does not apply to very large money-center banks, it is a move in a liberalizing direction that could at last push Congress into framing a sensible legal and regulatory system that allows banks to plan their future beyond the next court case.

The restrictive laws that the courts are interpreting are mainly a legacy of the bank failures of the 1930's. The current high rate of bank failure--higher than at any time since the Great Depression-has made legislators afraid to remove the restrictions. While their legislative timidity is understandable, it is also mistaken. One reason so many American banks are getting into trouble is precisely that the old restrictions make it hard for them to build a domestic base large and strong enough to support their activities in today's telecommunicating round-the-clock, around-the-world financial markets. In trying to escape from these restrictions, banks are taking enormous, and what should be unnecessary, risks. For example, would a large bank be buying small, failed savings banks at inflated prices if federal law and states regulations permitted that bank to explain instead through the acquisition of financially healthy banks in the region.？ Of course not. The solution is clear. American banks will be sounder when they are not geographically limited. The house of Representative's banking committee has shown part of the way forward by recommending common-sensible, though limit ed, legislation for a five-year transition to nationwide banking. This would give regional banks time to group together to torn counterweights to the big money-center banks. Without this breathing space the big money-center banks might soon extend across the country to develop. But any such legislation should be regarded as only a way station on the road towards a complete examination of American's suitable banking legislation.

The author's attitude towards the current banking laws is best described as one of ______.

A．concerned dissatisfaction

B．tolerant disapproval

C．uncaring indifference

D．great admiration