From: Thomas Wojciechowski [twojo6@hotmail.com]
Sent: Thursday, January 01, 2004 7:56 PM
To: rule-comments@sec.gov
Subject: File No. S7-23-03

To whom it may concern:
 
I submit the following by Dr. Jim DeCosta. Please help clean up Naked Shorting. 
 
Thanks, Thomas Wojciechowski
 
THERE ARE TWO GIGANTIC FLAWS WITHIN THE PROPOSED REG SHO.  

1) THE FIRST INVOLVES HOW THE SEC HAS CLEVERLY NOT DIRECTLY ADDRESSED HOW THEY 
ARE GOING TO DEAL WITH THE MASSIVE PREEXISTING NAKED SHORT POSITIONS CURRENTLY 
IN EXISTENCE.  ARE THEY GOING TO TAKE THE MORAL HIGH ROAD AND BUY IN THESE "OPEN 
POSITIONS" IMMEDIATELY OR ARE THEY GOING TO COWER TO THE WALL STREET FRATERNITY 
SYSTEM YET AGAIN AND NOT ADDRESS THESE PREEXISTING  "OPEN POSITIONS"?  

2) THE SECOND MAJOR WEAKNESS IS THE LACK OF APPLICABILITY OF RULE 203'S INVOCATION 
OF RULE 11830'S PARAMETERS FOR QUALIFYING FOR THE "SAFE HARBOR" OF THE "RESTRICTED 
LISTS.  AS IT IS CURRENTLY WRITTEN, THE SEC HAS CHOSEN ONCE AGAIN TO ABANDON THE 
U.S. INVESTORS OWNING SHARES OF NON-REPORTING COMPANIES.  THE QUESTION BECOMES WHY 
ARE THE U.S. INVESTORS THAT FREELY CHOOSE TO INVEST IN NONREPORTING COMPANIES NOT 
AFFORDED THE SAME PROTECTION AS U.S. INVESTORS THAT INVEST IN REPORTING COMPANIES?   
IT IS NOT IN THE SEC'S PURVIEW TO INDIRECTLY DICTATE  INVESTMENT CHOICES VIA 
"REGULATORY ARBITRAGE".  THE INVESTORS IN NONREPORTING SECURITIES NEED THE 
PROTECTION PROMISED IN THE 1934 SECURITIES EXCHANGE ACT, PERIOD!  THE '34 EXCHANGE 
ACT CLEARLY ALLOWS SMALL COMPANIES TO OPERATE UNDER A 12-g EXEMPTION FROM REGISTRATION 
AND FILING REQUIREMENTS FOR A REASON.  THE SEC'S AS WELL AS WALL STREET'S IN GENERAL 
STEREOTYPICAL VISION OF ALL NONREPORTING PINK SHEETED COMPANIES AS BEING SCAMS HAS 
TO BE ENDED RIGHT NOW!