To listen to Sen. Barack Obama, Sen. John McCain is a Johnny-come-lately to the cause of regulating financial markets. "He has consistently opposed the sorts of common-sense regulations that might have lessened the current crisis," Obama said in New Mexico Thursday. "When I was warning about the danger ahead on Wall Street months ago because of the lack of oversight, Senator McCain was telling the Wall Street Journal -- and I quote -- 'I'm always for less regulation.'"

But the full quotation from McCain's March interview with the Journal's editorial board belies Obama's one-sided rendition. The Republican candidate went on to say, "But I am aware of the view that there is a need for government oversight. I think we found this in the subprime lending crisis -- that there are people that game the system and if not outright broke the law, they certainly engaged in unethical conduct which made this problem worse. So I do believe that there is role for oversight."

It's fair to say that McCain has dramatically ramped up the regulatory rhetoric in the wake of the meltdown on Wall Street. Obama made the argument about the need for increased oversight much earlier. And McCain has generally taken an anti-regulatory stance, although not in all cases -- his support for federal regulation of tobacco and boxing being prominent counter-examples. McCain backed a moratorium on all new federal regulation in 1995, saying that excessive regulations were "destroying the American family, the American dream." On the campaign trail in 2000, he touted his record of voting "for smaller government, for less regulation."

However, when it comes to regulating financial institutions and corporate misconduct, McCain's record is more in keeping with his current rhetoric. In the aftermath of the Enron collapse and other accounting scandals, he was a leader, with Sen. Carl M. Levin, D-Mich., in pushing to require that companies treat stock options granted to employees as expenses on their balance sheets. "I have long opposed unnecessary regulation of business activity, mindful that the heavy hand of government can discourage innovation," he wrote in a July 2002 op-ed in The New York Times.

"But in the current climate only a restoration of the system of checks and balances that once protected the American investor -- and that has seriously deteriorated over the past 10 years -- can restore the confidence that makes financial markets work."

McCain was an early voice calling for the resignation of Securities and Exchange Commission Chairman Harvey Pitt, charging that he "seems to prefer industry self-policing to necessary lawmaking. Government's demands for corporate accountability are only credible if government executives are held accountable as well."

In 2006, he pushed for stronger regulation of Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac -- while Obama was notably silent. "If Congress does not act, American taxpayers will continue to be exposed to the enormous risk that Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac pose to the housing market, the overall financial system, and the economy as a whole," McCain warned at the time.

One element of the Obama campaign's brief against McCain is that he supported repeal of the law separating commercial banks from investment banks.

"He's spent decades in Washington supporting financial institutions instead of their customers," Obama said Thursday.

It's reasonable to question which candidate has been more attentive to the brewing problems on Wall Street and which has a better prescription for them. But Obama's attack does not give a fair reading of the McCain record.

This editorial appeared in the Washington Post.