Subject: Proposed changes to 12b-1 rule

July 20, 2007

Ms. Nancy Morris, Secretary
Securities and Exchange Commission
100 F. Street N.E.
Washington, D.C. 20549-1090

RE: File No. 4-538

Dear Ms. Morris:

I am writing to you regarding the current discussion regarding the possibility of repealing or reforming the 12b-1 fee rule.

My practice consists of selling and servicing insurance and securities accounts. Approximately 35-40% of my income comes from selling and servicing mutual fund accounts. The folks who come to me with mutual fund business are overwhelmingly in the category of individuals and small business owners who are not necessarily investment savvy, and are counting heavily on my counsel and ongoing service.

Most of my client accounts have long term investment horizons, therefore A shares are the appropriate share class to recommend in most cases. I am always looking for ways to give my clients breakpoints and do so whenever possible and reasonable, given the client’s objectives. The fee derived from the 12b-1 rule on A shares is a small price for my clients to pay, and a small fee for my continued regular service of my clients’ accounts.

Additionally, class C shares give me the option to recommend an investment to a client who may have a shorter time horizon, and a front end load may not be appropriate, while still providing some compensation for my services.

I have folks that move their assets over to me from another firm that charges asset management fees over and above the 12b-1 fees. Whenever possible, I counsel my clients to move assets over to our firm “in kind” to avoid charging the client a new sales load. I do not charge asset management fees, therefore, saving my clients considerable amounts of money. The income I do receive from the 12b-1 fees is the only compensation for these accounts. Compared the asset management fees ranging from 50-150 basis points charged by some firms, the A share 12b-1 fee of 25 basis points is a very reasonable fee for my counsel.

I strive to spend considerable time and energy to educate my clients as to how I am compensated, and why I make the recommendations that I do. The repeal of these fees would result in forcing many registered reps to charge asset management fees, which will result in clients paying more than they would in the current A share structure.

If the intent of the new rule is to protect the investor from high investment fees, it will not accomplish that purpose. I will instead create an arena where the investor will have to pay higher fees for the same service provided now.

Please consider the consequences of how this will affect the whole securities industry. Please do not make a hasty decision that will impact not only the representatives that service their clients, but the clients themselves with higher than necessary fees.

Thank you for the opportunity to be heard on this important issue.

Sincerely,

Kevin Monroe, ChFC, FIC
Chartered Financial Consultant
Monroe Financial (www.monroefinancial.com)
District Representative, Modern Woodmen of America