[ by Melanie Gretchen ] The Senate is eying a bill to make it easier for start-up companies to raise money and court investors.  Scheduled for several procedural votes in the Senate on Tuesday toward a possible final vote as early as this week, the bill would also get rid of numerous safeguards against investment fraud and allow some small companies to sell stock to the public with minimal disclosure or oversight. New Bill. The Senate version  differs substantially from the bipartisan version passed by the House two weeks ago.  The Senate amendment must get 60 votes on Tuesday to revise the House bill, and it's unclear that Democrats will be able to attract enough Republican votes. In its initial form, the JOBS Act - "Jump-start Our Business Start-ups," drew widespread support on Capitol Hill and from the White House for its promise of attracting small-business investment and allowing businesses to hire workers. Opposition. SEC Chairman Mary Schapiro, along with industry heavyweights like pension funds and lobbying groups - e.g., the AARP (American Association of Retired Persons) are fighting the amendment, because of fears of reviving some of the worst (Enron-like) practices of the dot-com era.

"Too often, investors are the target of fraudulent schemes disguised as investment opportunities.  As you know, if the balance is tipped to the point where investors are not confident that there are appropriate protections, investors will lose confidence in our markets, and capital formation will ultimately be made more difficult and expensive." -- Mary Schapiro, in a 3/13/12 letter to the Senate banking committee.

Kill Bill. Critics also claim that efforts to amend substantial portions of a bill that evolved over several months in the House are little more than an attempt to kill the bill, according Representative Spencer Bachus (AL-Rep), who chairs the House committee.  He said that the Senate was "acting like Lucy snatching the football away at the last possible moment, and it is the entrepreneurs and job-creators who are made to play Charlie Brown." In response, House Republicans argue that their bill offers plenty of protection.  The House Financial Services Committee, which advanced the bill, issued a statement on Monday noting that a witness chosen by Democrats "said the bill would increase investor protections and access to information." What's at Stake. The bill defines an "emerging business" as one with annual revenue of up to $1 billion or has no more than $700 million in publicly held stock - a large divergence from an SEC forum in 2010 on small-business capital formation, at which one of the top recommendations from small-business experts was to set a limit of $250 million in public stock, for companies to qualify for small-business exemptions from many securities regulations.  A Senate amendment sponsored by Jack Reed, Democrat of Rhode Island, would increase the limit to $350 million of annual revenue. In addition, the House bill would also require an emerging growth company to file no more than 2 years of financial statements before it sold shares to the public and would exempt those companies from hiring an independent auditor to assess its internal controls.  The measure would also do away with restrictions on financial analysts taking part in a Wall Street firm’s attempt to win the business of underwriting a company’s stock offering. For its part, the White House issued a "statement of administration policy" this month.  It noted that President Obama "called for cutting the red tape that prevents many rapidly growing start-up companies from raising needed capital," while also providing for "appropriate investor protections." Will the amendment fit the bill? For further details, go to [NYTimes, 3/20/12].