Instead, Romney may give the financial industry something itwants more: a revamped Dodd-Frank that would accommodate some ofthe most profitable and riskiest activities while preserving apatina of protection for investors and consumers.

“There's this perception that banks hate everything inDodd-Frank, and that's just not true,” said Mark Calabria, a formertop Republican aide on the Senate Banking Committee. “From a bank'sperspective, you'd rather have piecemeal reform of Dodd-Frank, notonly because there are things in the law you want to keep, but alsobecause you're going to have more control over the process.”

Congressional Republicans have already laid out the roadmap.

“With Dodd-Frank, it's not going to be repeal,” saidRepresentative Scott Garrett, a senior Republican member of theHouse Financial Services Committee. “There might be repeals ofsections, but there will be a piece-by-piece analysis. We'll throwout some and reform others.”

U.S. bank executives have made no secret of their dislike ofparts of President Barack Obama's 2010 financial-regulatoryoverhaul. Yet those same bankers, including Goldman Sachs GroupInc.'s Lloyd Blankfein and JPMorgan Chase & Co.'s Jamie Dimonpledged broad support for the law, leaving their lobbyists andlawyers to fight behind the scenes for revisions that may savemillions, if not billions, of dollars for their companies.

“If I could push a button and eliminate Dodd-Frank would I doit? No, I would not,” Blankfein, the chief executive officer ofGoldman Sachs, said in a July appearance before the Economic Clubof Washington. Still, he said, there are “some parts that go toofar.”

The sentiments of CEOs such as Blankfein and the politicalrealities of Washington mean that Romney would have an easier pathwinning revisions than repeal.

The architecture that Wall Street wants has emerged in House andSenate hearings and proposed bills over the past two years. Itincludes loosening rules governing the swaps market, an area whereU.S. banks reported $7 billion in revenue in the first quarter of2012, according to the Office of the Comptroller of the Currency.Restrictions on bank investment in private equity and hedge funds,as well as their ability to trade for their own account, also havebeen targeted.

Change That Matters

For banks spending billions of dollars to comply with the rulesdictated by the 2,300-page law — and millions on lobbying to alterit — these are the changes that really matter.

Romney and congressional Republicans argue that the newregulations have weakened the economic recovery, in part becausebanks must focus resources on compliance instead of lending thatmoney. With hundreds of rules touching everything from mortgageunderwriting to proprietary trading, revisions to the law presentan opportunity to streamline or eliminate provisions that mayreduce the annual pretax revenue of the largest eight banks,including Bank of America Corp. and Wells Fargo & Co., by asmuch as $34 billion, according to Matthew Albrecht, a creditanalyst with Standard & Poor's.

Glenn Hubbard, an economic adviser to the Romney campaign, saidin an Aug. 1 Wall Street Journal editorial that Romney would “workwith Congress toward repealing and replacing the costly andburdensome Dodd-Frank legislation.” Cost-benefit analysis — afixture of congressional Republican proposals aimed at Dodd-Frank —would be the Romney approach, he wrote.

House and Senate Republicans have drafted dozens of changes tothe law, which was put into place in the wake of the worstfinancial crisis since the Great Depression. Revised rules forgoverning the $648 trillion swaps market have been passed by theHouse, along with restrictions on the new Consumer FinancialProtection Bureau.

Romney's public comments track closely with the congressionalRepublicans' yet have lacked detail. Until he comes forward withhis plans, bank executives who assume they'll get their wish listsare making a “roll of the dice,” said Calabria, now director offinancial-regulation studies at the Cato Institute inWashington.

Calabria pointed to Republicans who have called for breaking upthe largest banks or cutting back on parts of the law that give afunding edge to Wall Street firms. It's “not necessarily alwayssomething bankers want,” he said.

Volcker Rule

The provisions that banks and their lobbyists have said go toofar, such as bans or limits on trading activities including theso-called Volcker rule that bars banks from trading for their ownaccount, have been specifically targeted by Republicans, who almostunanimously opposed the law in 2010.

The hit list also includes the consumer bureau, a regulatorwhose potential independence and power drew opposition asDodd-Frank was being drafted from an array of interests, from theU.S. Chamber of Commerce to Dimon, JPMorgan's chairman and chiefexecutive officer. Dimon, in a 2011 letter to shareholders, saidthe bureau, which is housed within the Federal Reserve butmaintains its independence, needed to be “effective for bothconsumers and banks.”

Representative Kevin McCarthy of California, the third-rankingRepublican in the House, says a Romney administration will tip thebalance for several House-passed bills that have been stalled bythe Democratic-led Senate.

“A Romney administration will provide the opportunity forCongress to make progress with financial-services regulatoryreform,” McCarthy said. “Senate Majority Leader Reid refuses towork with us in order to enhance the safety and soundness of ourfinancial system.”

The stakes for the securities and investment firms andcommercial banks far exceed the money they've given toward electingRomney, almost $13 million, according to the Center for ResponsivePolitics. Of the 10 companies whose employees gave the most moneyto Romney's joint fundraising committee with the RepublicanNational Committee, nine are Wall Street firms, according to acomputer-assisted analysis by Bloomberg of Federal ElectionCommission data.

The eight largest banks stand to lose between $22 billion and$34 billion in pretax revenue annually as a result of the new law,according to Albrecht, the S&P analyst. The numbers, releasedin August, are an increase from the $19.5 billion to $26 billioninitially projected by S&P.

Proprietary Trading

The “bulk of the higher projected costs” come from the Volckerrule, S&P said, citing the ban on proprietary trading thatelicited more than 17,000 comment letters last year. The rule,which hasn't been finalized by regulators, has the potential toincrease the cost of borrowing for companies as it reducesliquidity in bond markets, according to Republicans.

The Dodd-Frank opponents say the Volcker Rule restricts anactivity that had little to do with the financial crisis. New rulesin the swaps market exposing commercial companies to extracollateral demands and allowing U.S. regulators to overseeactivities in foreign jurisdictions have also drawn opposition fromRepublicans.

Many of the changes proposed by Republicans, though stalled inthe Senate, have also received support in the House from Democrats.Lobbyists and analysts point to next year as a realopportunity.

Obama has touted the law as a necessary check on Wall Streetexcess, needed to protect homeowners and investors from a repeat ofthe failings that led up to the financial crisis.

Many investors and consumers are still reeling in the wake ofthe near-collapse of the U.S. financial system.

The U.S. unemployment rate has stayed above 8 percent for morethan 40 months and there have been 3.7 million completedforeclosures since September 2008, the peak of the financialcrisis, according to data provider CoreLogic Inc. More than 11million homeowners now owe more on their houses than they are worthand people have struggled to take advantage of interest rates thatare at historic lows.

The public's struggle is one reason that wholesale repeal wouldbe politically difficult. In the Senate especially, the rules makeit much easier to block a bill than to pass one. Even if theRepublicans were to gain a majority there in November, Democratsmight have enough seats to sustain a filibuster to kill a repealmeasure — or even one that swings too far over toward WallStreet.

Still, if Romney wins, he'd have no shortage of allies onCapitol Hill. Plans are taking shape.

Piece by Piece

Senator Richard Shelby, the top Republican on the Senate BankingCommittee, gave a speech in July outlining what he would do if hetook the gavel in a Republican-led Senate in 2013.

Romney's comments don't rule out an option less than fullappeal.

“I'd like to get rid of Dodd-Frank and go back and look atregulation piece by piece,” Romney told the guests at a Londonfundraiser last month. “I very much believe in updated regulation,but I believe Dodd-Frank has gone beyond what was appropriate forthe sector.”

Representative Barney Frank, the Massachusetts Democrat whoco-authored the law, had a simple response when asked what a Romneyadministration would mean for the law: “It would be the death ofit,” he said.

Bloomberg News