Date: 05/06/2000 5:35 PM Ref File No S7-25-99 SEC Rule Nos 34-42099: IA 1845 Comment Against the proposal. The SEC appearrs to be the guardian of consumer rights and protection. This proposed rule would seem contrary to that position. It seems inconsistent and inequitable that those providing investment advice should be subject to differing educational and ethical requirements based on their employment structure . Consumers are best served when they can expect the same level of competance, and disclosure from any "professional" providing investment advice. Because investment advice MUST not be looked at in a vacuum it is critical that those givign advice are at a MINIMUM required to conform to the Investments Advisor requirements. Investors are relatively nieve and mislead by the press and industry on what is important and what should be focused on in sercuring their financial future. Unfortunately my experience is that when my clients have been preyed upon and incurred significant losses in their investments it has been via Broker/dealers/stock brokers who simply do not take the time to know their clients nor have the knowledge to do a professional job. Lets no weaken what protection their is for the individuasl investor. For most it's their guality of life we are talking about. Richard Hall CFP ChFC