From: Douglas Shoemaker
Sent: August 9, 2005
To: rule-comments@sec.gov
Subject: File No. SR-NASD-2004-183


Douglas Shoemaker
6390 Greenwich Drive Ste 225
San Diego, CA 92122

August 9, 2005

Jonathan G. Katz

Secretary, Securities and Exchange Commission Securities and Exchange Commission 100 F Street, NE Washington, DC 20549-9309

Jonathan Katz:

Mr. Katz- The following is text that adequately describes my feelings about the above referenced proposed rule. However, allow me to simply add that I truly believe that the regulations being imposed on us as financial advisors is becoming too overwhelming. No one would ever fly on a plane, if before the flight, a passenger was required to read and sign a form documenting all the potential catastrophes, food poisioning, hijacking, etc. Airline passengers are not required to inspect the maintenance logs and sign off on them prior to stepping into an aircraft. Likewise, in our efforts to protect the consumer, please do not impose regulations that lead consumers away, and do not permit me to do what is in the best interest of my clients. Thank you.

I am a licensed insurance professional and variable product salesperson. I am writing to you because the principal review requirements and redundant suitability standards contained in NASD proposed Rule 2821 are unnecessary, will provide no meaningful additional protection to consumers and will adversely impact my business. I urge the SEC to disapprove the proposal.

I firmly believe that people who engage in misleading sales practices should be aggressively prosecuted and subject to appropriate sanctions.
However, proposed Rule 2821 duplicates requirements that are already in place. NASD rules already contain suitability requirements that apply to all sales of securities, including variable annuities. If regulators really want to protect consumers, appropriate enforcement of the existing suitability rule rather than adopting a new rule is the answer.

Furthermore, the requirement for review by a principal found in the proposed rule appears to present a bias against these products. In addition, these requirements will lead to constant second guessing of my advice and recommendations (based upon less first hand information than was available to me) as well as significant increases in merit less litigation.

Finally, I believe that the proposal is a "solution in search of a problem"I do not think the available data supports the NASD's claims that the level of sales problems in the variable annuity marketplace calls for the adoption of the proposed rule. The NASD has not statistically quantified the scope of the problem it is allegedly seeking to solve with the proposed rule. Furthermore, over 95% of the comments received by the NASD regarding the proposal opposed the new rule, and the NASD has not adequately responded to the concerns raised by the vast majority of commentators. For these reasons, I urge the SEC to disapprove NASD proposed Rule 2821. Thank you for your consideration of my views on this matter.

Sincerely,

Douglas Shoemaker