change practices though it remains to be seen how long and that is a reason we are doing what we are doing today and for the future but my question for you would be can you expand what is considered exceptional assistance? i don't understand that part. >> the easiest way to describe would be the previous administration was set up the capitol purchase program and this was expanded to all banks even smaller banks could, and and the idea was to try to give more banks the capitol so they were in a stronger position to lend, not because we were in each of those banks but we felt collectively if there was stronger capitalization there would be more lending and it would be good for the economy and individual banks might say

we're going to weather the storm buy not lending, we are going to make much money but we will get through it. for us we know 5,000 banks to that at the same time that means there's going to be less small-business lending and there's going to be less growth and this recession will last longer, so that is a generally accessible program. and the people who come to wait don't necessarily come because they are weak but because we have a policy goal allowing banks to have more capital. compare that to perhaps citigroup where the required government assistance for their fundamental financial stability, and because of their importance to the overall financial stability in the economy and the desire to let something like lehman brothers happen, we make exceptional effort. we make an exceptional assistance they get. it is not available to their peers and it isn't based in a general goal, it is based on an

exceptional intervention to assist them and essentially in their fundamental financial stability that is a different situation and i think that principle is one people understand. i think people understand there is something different about a on eg and citigroup and gm in the community bank that takes more capital and the capitol purchase program and i want to make clear fall of the land that was passed in the recovery act applies to everyone so the restrictions on bonuses we added provisions on luxury expenditure, say on page, having to write in the narrative way of the risk analysis is but we were not as interested in the situations because many of those banks are the community banks in your district where you were giving taxpayer dollars to a company that would have gone into bankruptcy if they were not systemically sycophant. we feel a higher obligation and that really is in many ways the fundamental --

>> my husband actually believed nobody should give bonuses, just a good paycheck. >> we are going to return with the panel and i am going to call on the docratic side, only the members that are here and didn't get to ask questions. new members will get to question the second panel. the five members who didn't get to ask will be called on, finished this panel and we will then get to the next panel and one or two republicans. we will not be gone more than 25 minutes. there are only two votes. we will be back out soon as we

>> "want to thank the other senior republicans being so struftmental in bringing us to

this day in bringing out a republican vision for restoring essential freedom to our free markets. >> washing is destroying the very foundation of capitolism that has allowed this nation to prosper. congress cannot continue asking this generation to bail out the irresponsible decisions of others or the failed policy in washington, d.c. today house republicans are stand with the people who say loud and clear.

no more bail outs. time to end themania of bail out. time top end the government's ability to pick winners and losers and restore some level of responsibility in our marketplace. it's time to put freedom back in our premarket >> thank you. thank you for joining us. republicans are united today in offering this plan jo i want to introduce 9 republican