that she illegally funneled presidential campaign donations to an inwhat state senator. bu bachmann is adamant. >> be assured my decision was not in any way influenced by any concerns about my being reelected to congress. i've always in the past defeated candidates who are capable, qualified and well funded. i have ever confidence that if i ran, i would again defeat the individual who i defeated last year, who recently announced that he is once again running. rest assured, this decision was ten members of congress are not impacted in any way by the urging the washington redskins to change their name, calling it recent inquiries into the recent activities of my former a racial derogatory slur. presidential campaign or my former presidential staff. josh barro, yes or no? >> as with all things bachmann, >> i think they probably should, but 79% of americans disagree with me. >> yes, that's in the a.p. poll. hers is filled with questionable >> i think change it. logic. if bachmann was not concerned if you're offending people, change the name. about reelection, perhaps she >> i'm with the 79%. would have not spent $85,000 in if you're on twitter, el

tv ads in may alone, 17 months encourage to send the hate now. before the election. >> because it's quote/unquote while bachmann maintaining that tradition. >> i feel like we've gotten recent inquiries didn't sway politically correct. her, the fbi joined that i know i'm going to get skilled for that. investigation this month. >> what about black skins is it. finally, despite the reference, >> i know. this is why i'm getting in and as jonathan shake points out trouble. >> i thought he was with the 1%. her status as president of >> oh! we have to leave it there. crazyland, bachmann never had thank you to josh, joy, andrew any presidential staff. in the end her woes may reflect and richard. "andrea mitchell reports" is coming up next. give me the skillsld those of her party. according do some, the gop has that i needed to make one of those tech jobs mine. we teach cutting-edge engineering technology, problems. >> what you do you think of the party, the republicans, today? computer information systems, networking >> i think he ought to put a and communications management -- the things that our students sign on the national committee need to know in the world today. our country needs more college grads doors "closed for repairs." to help fill all the open technology jobs. >> the republican party is undergoing, you know, some to help meet that need, here at devry university, significant and serious changes, and they're going to have to we're offering $4 million dollars in tech scholarships for qualified new students. rethink their approach as a learn more at devry.edu. political party and how they're going to regroup and become a governing majority party that for qualified new students. i tthan probablycare moreanyone else.and appeals to a broader group of we've had this farm for 30 years. americans than they do today.

>> even conservative commenter we raise black and red angus cattle. we also produce natural gas. laura ingram is worried that the that's how we make our living and that's how we can pass the land party will miss the golden and water back to future generations. opportunity. >> they have to turn this moment into a step forward in policy people should make up their own mind what's best for them. all i can say is it has worked well for us. and advocate for smart policy that really hits people in the gut and in the mind as well, right? they have to have great candidates. you can't have people making stupid comments about, you know, women and abortion and -- >> in fact, that may be precisely the problem. producing smart policy or any policy for that matter does not yet appear to be on the rep agenda. talks of a grand bargain have stalls as gop leaders refuse any revenue increases even as the president has put earned benefit programs on the table, and now there are signs of dissent among the ranks on immigration reform. then again doing absolutely nothing, except perhaps for naming post offices seems to be the right flank's preferred

strategy. >> striking deals with the democrats is what got us into the mess that we are in today. too many of those deals were struck by old-line republicans, wo believed that when the democrats put something forward, we must have an alternative. again, folks, i rear my head and say this is what happens when people do not look at things ♪ idea logically. it's just a bunch of republicans there you go. and democrats running around, come on, let's play! democrats has been to have the [ male announcer ] there's an easier way power right now, and we'll win to protect your dog from dangerous parasites. good boy. some elections and they'll strike some deals with us, and fetch! trifexis is the monthly, beef-flavored tablet the ruling class inside the that prevents heartworm disease, beltway continues on kills fleas and prevents infestations, and treats hook-, round-, and whipworm infections. uninterrupted. and hope for better results next time. treatment with fewer than 3 monthly doses if that's the -- it's going to after exposure to mosquitoes be a long 17 months. may not provide complete heartworm prevention. joining mess josh barrow, the most common adverse reactions managing editor of the grio.com were vomiting, itching and lethargy. serious adverse reactions have been reported and msnbc contributor joy reid, following concomitant extra-label use

of ivermectin with spinosad alone, columnist and co-host of "squawk one of the components of trifexis. box" on cnbc andrew ross sorkin prior to administration, dogs should be tested for existing heartworm infection. and executive director, richard to learn more about trifexis, talk to your veterinarian, call 888-545-5973 wolffe. joy, before we get to the or visit trifexis.com. broader issues plaguing or not you don't have to go to extremes plaguing perhaps in some to protect your dog from parasites. people's minds, the republican you need trifexis. party, the exit of michele visit our website to save up to $25. bachmann. available by prescription from your veterinarian. let us take a moment, because it is a moment worthy of relishing or putting the signpost down. this is the retirement of a right now on "andrea woman who at one point said that mitchell reports," bachmann bails. the tea party caucus leader and obama care will kill people, has one-time republican presidential hopeful will not seek reelection questioned whether carbon to congress and goes out of her dioxide is harmful or not, way to say what it's all not about. whether or not a.c.o.r.n. was conducting a crennel us, really >> be assured, my decision was a woman with many theories in not in any way influenced about the political sphere. i wonder what you make of the any concerns about my being retirement, and whether you think it was motivated by potential scandal or inquiry as it is today in terms of michele

bachmann's campaign structure. >> first of all, if ulieie, the presidency of crazyland is open? great. shoo-in. and michele bachmann was sort of the perfect kind of crystallization of the problem with the republican party and the tea party. you had this tea party that said we're not really republicans, we're just out there to fight for a better american, and michele bachmann says i will make a caucus, will bring you into congress and i will be your leader. most republicans said, no, we don't want to join the caucus. they sort of didn't want to be near her, but as far as her leaving congress, when you're being investigated for corruption, typically the way to end it is to leave. typically then the investigation northerlially ends, because people who were pursuing corruption investigations, what they want is you out of power. >> or first they want to find out what happened and theoretically you're out.

>> this is a good stay out of trouble free step. >> richard, let's not underestimate the fight she had ahead of her. mitt romney won bachmann's district by 15%. she was facing an uphill battle, which is why she was taking out campaign ads almost immediately after she won reelection. >> and focus on not a presidential year, she was struggling, the polls were not good, and these pesky investigations, you know, not just the ethics thing, but the fbi? do they not know the constitution that has a little protection clause for michele bachmann? yeah, she was in deep, deep trouble. it was only going to get worse. i think now that the fbi involved, just stepping down will not stop it, but it will allow her to raise some money and may pay for lawyers to obstruct the fbi. >> and that is part of it. people who say crazy things end up become president of the

heritage organization, or -- >> or invited to "dancing with the stars." >> just by virtue of being an inflammatory conspiracy theorist doesn't mean your career in the public eye is on the floor. >> certainly not. in a sense it's a loss leader, you develop this reputation, and then you can cash in, instead of becoming a lobbyist like you might do if you were more of a mainstream politician. she's more disciplined that is sarah palin, i think she'll have a successful career doing that, but a real problem she's a symptom of is this large strand of the republican party that doesn't care about governing and engaging productively, they don't really care about winning policy fights. >> right. >> they want to be up there saying no to everything, and they want to be able to say, well, i stood against this. it's the reason that the way that this house of representatives is governing the last year is you have coalitions for really important matters put together with most of the

democratic caucus, and enough republicans to get to a majority. when people say it's speaker pelosi, it's because on the most important issues it's a democrat-heavy caucus that's cutting the deals, that's because most republicans don't care about the fight, they just care about -- >> which is why they had to repeal -- it's like literally doing a keg stand to repeal obama-care, a rite of passage in the animal house. i just want to real an excerpt from politico this weekend, andrew, talking about the power of speaker boehner. she day -- boehner has little ability to work his will. he has quit for good and the solo effort to craft a grand bargain and hasn't bothered to initiate a substantive conversation in this calendar year. the style in short is not lean in or lean on, it's lean back and wait, to sea nothing of leaning in directions as slogans action but what is your take? >> all of this, i think what josh said, it's obstructionist,

it's -- the who will gold is to be able to say no? that makes sense. having said that -- and i don't want to be like alex p. keating, but just to make things interesting, i would suggest that -- i completely believe the republican party has been the party of obstruction. having said that, i think there are places where the democrats probably could have gone, the president could have gone on some issues around entitlements and other things that thoughtful people generally think should be touched upon, and yet democrats don't go there, either. i can sit and blame boehner all day long, and i will if you want, but i would also say that part of the job of the president is to take you over the finish line. >> and simply because nobody else at the table wants to do that, so i'm playing devil's advocate. >> politico is not known as a biased left-wing outlet. i think there's real analysis on both sides of the aisle that boehner is weak as a speaker of

the house. he is the president's deal maker on the other side, it's hard to come to a bargain regardless of how much you're willing to put on the table. >> i would suggest in this case, sadly, both -- i've covered deal making on wall street for many years, both of these -- you're talking about some of the worst deal makers around both sides of the aisle, full stop. >> michele bachmann in a way republicans the problem boehner had. had he stood up to a michele bachmann, it could have given him an opportunity to look strong. because she had appointed herself queen of the tea party, those were opportunities to say, no, i run the house of representatives, not the 87 members of the caucus, but instead he completely capitulated to them. he would literally go into a full negotiation with the white house only to go back to his caucus and be told no, by freshmen. so the problem is, if you have somebody like michele bachmann, who has more actual temporal power than the speaker of the house, just by saying crazy

things on youtube, you've got a problem if you're john boehner, when you have to go hat in hand to nancy pelosi just to get even the meagerest deal across the finish line. >> but what's the other option? the problem he's facing over and over is they want an alternative to the president's agenda. because they stopped doing earmarks. the one thing they could have done -- that's the way you do business. >> now we're going to encourage earmarks? >> no, no, we're not doing that. i'm not encouraging that, but there is a lot of drum beating on the right about the president needs to be more of a leader. you know what? it would be nice to have leadership from the right for someone with a sane brain -- >> it takes two to tango. i'm not suggesting that it doesn't. i'm suggesting in the grand scheme of the discussion, i can blame boehner all day long, but can also say there's a problem on both sides. >> richard there's a headline in the hill that says senate gop

feels jilted after being wind and dined by obama. some republicans think the president has become distracted from the deficit by intensified controversies over the attack on benghazi, the targeting of tea party groups. >> everybody wants to feel loved. >> maybe he is distracted, because that's all republicans have been concerned with the last two months. republicans are upset that the president is obsessed with the republican obsession with him? there's a whole meta thing going on there that's too complicated. andrew, please, i love you stepping up and being --ivities just trying. >> i realize you're with the "squawk box" people and you have to pla i that kind of game over there -- >> and that --ivities so the president saying change cpi, let's deal with social security, hundreds of billions from medicare spending which, by the way, republicans campaigned against for.

that is technically touching entitlements. you know, i agree with you, two sides need to deal. he and boehner actually did come up with a deal. we say he should have given them ear marging to buy them off. you know what the problem was? his leadership. his leadership has been openly trying to get his job. as a speaker, as a leader, he has had people within his center office, his inner circle, notably eric cantor, trying to be the leader of the tea party and challenge him for his job. that's a weak speaker. >> richard, thank you. i will fold my cards right now. done. >> you know, it's a conversation. i'll just say, josh, rachel maddow did a great piece pointing out what bob dole supported. the clean water act, the endang irspecies act, violence against women's act, to say that now as a republican running for the highest office in the land would get you cut off at the knees, i think. >> well, yeah, and i think the republican party has put more

and more of a premium on ideological purity over the last few years. it's unclear when they will figure out this is electoral poison for them. i think partly it's the house map. they can underperform quite a bit and still hold on to the house. if that's what it would take to get the message through that they don't have an agenda that they can sell to the majority of america, losing to the house. i think that will take toward the end of the deck kay for that to happen. but bob dole came up at a time when republicans did not win a majority in the house of representatives for 40 years. so they understood that they needed to broaden their message. now there's still this sense among republicans that if we just maintain conservative purity and we run better campaign tactics and don't nominate people like todd akin, we'll win in the next cycle. it will take them a while to realize that's wrong. >> and whether that gets you

1600 pennsylvania avenue is another -- when we come back, u.s. policy remains am bivalent. we will discuss red lines and boots on the ground when the president of the council on foreign relations joins us live, next on "now." we're here at nashville's renowned jimmy kelly's steakhouse, where tonight we've switched their steaks with walmart's choice premium steak. it's a steakover. it's tender. good flavor. it just melts in your mouth. mine's perfect -- man! we're actually eating walmart steaks. are you serious? fantastic! that was a good cut of meat. [ earl ] these are perfectly aged for flavor and tenderness. i would definitely go to walmart to buy steaks. walmart choice premium steak in the black package. it's 100% satisfaction guaranteed. try it.

next minute i'm in the back of an ambulance having a heart attack. i was in shape, fit. i did not see it coming. i take bayer aspirin. [ male announcer ] so be sure to talk to your doctor before you begin an aspirin regimen. see your doctor and get checked out.

congestion, for it's smog. but there are a lot of people that do ride the bus. and now that the busses are running on natural gas, they don't throw out as much pollution to the earth. so i feel good. i feel like i'm doing my part to help out the environment.

for more than two years, the blood letting has continued in syria. russia is sending more arms to the syrian government, threats

from israel of another strike, and the leader of hezbollah, the iranian-backed terrorist group vowing over the weekend to bring victory to president aassad. calls to take action are reaching fever pitch. senator mccain became the highest ranks u.s. officials to visit syria since the conflict began. he urged the white house to intervene. last night from brute, nbc's richard engel addressed the complexity. >> reporter: there's a growing realization and concern that something must be done. this is what's happening without action. at least 80,000 dead in syria so far, more than a million refugees. iraq is going back to a civil war, lebanon is heading toward a civil contact. almost every day there are funerals for hezbollah fighters. today the rebel free syrian army gave hezbollah 24 hours to leave

syria or it would declare war on the group. at the moment the conflict is largely a war between the sunni majority and the ruling minority. with hezbollah stepping up its role and word of a new shipment of anti-aircraft missiles from rush on the way, the balance of the battle could tip any moment. john kerry met with the russian foreign minister. and today the u.n. human rights council held an emergency debate on syria, drafting a statement to condemn foreign fighters. the administration has acknowledged that officials were aware of senator mccain's trip to the region, but there's been ambiguity from the white house this week to any plan of action. joining us is the president on the council on foreign relations, richard haas, the case for putting america's house in order. richard, thanks so much for joining us. >> thank you, alex. >> i think a lot of us look at

this conflict with 80 thousands people have been killed, 1.5 million refugees. it is a humanitarian crisis, mass atrocities seem to be occurring in the region, yet the question is, what can and should we do? what do you think the options are as far as the white house and next steps in the coming weeks? >> well, you're right, the united states does have humanitarian and strategic stakes. at the same time we've got to balance it against what we really think we can accomplish given local realities. it's also not the only thing in the world we've got to think about. there's other issues in the middle east like iran, have to worry about keeping stability in asia, so it's a different choice for the united states. i would say we're right to not get involved directly militarily. i don't think we would have results that would adjust the investments. we should probably be prepared to do more indirectly. there i would agree with senator mccain that the united states

ought to provide so-called lethal military help, certain kinds of arms and training to those elements of the opposition that we think we can essentially live with their agendas. >> richard, would you take issue with the writing earlier this moment, no fly zones, bombing did damascus and so forth would simply make the situation worse. none of the proposals would resort in an outcome strategically -- into the worst-kay scenario. can that be avoided? he might be right. what all of those have in common is they're not likely to be decisive. so then the question is, if you do a bit directly and that isn't enough, then are you repared to do more? that's why i have trouble with that incrementalism, and i think brzezinski is right there. if we're not prepared to go down that path, i don't think we should, given the local realities and all else we have

on the plate. i think we ought to be prepared to provide arms to the select members of the opposition, let them fight it out, if that's what they're prepared to do. >> richard, i just want to open this up to our folks in new york. dexter filkins basically asserts that the president may have waited too long. he writes -- in essence the president has reasoned that the war is too complicated for the u.s. to have too much influence. perhaps obama is right, but its also true the reluctance to act has allowed the war to run off on its own course. so you look at the dynamics of this conflict. it's sucking the region in. by proxy hezbollah, iran is in and out involved, you have the refugee crisis, it's affecting turkey and jordan. you talk about stability in the middle east. syria just isn't in an area that you need to get involved, but you could say strategically it is a problem for the united

states. you could. you would also have to understand -- there is no good side for you to back, right? there is the proiranian government backed by proiranian hezbollah, and the rebel are did i pro-al qaeda style islamists. who will we support here? if we argue that our strategic goal is to take on iran, then maybe we should do that directly. otherwise what we're looking at is a situation much like afghanistan in the late '7 ons, early '80s where the people we're supposed to be backing because we hated the soft yet union ended up spawning ultimately the al qaeda. i do think, you know, you have to understand what is our impetus here. there's a strong humanitarian urge, absolutely. we're maybe wen televised massacre away from versus mass political support if not popular support for us to be more greatly engaged.

that is a humanitarian piece of it. there's a strong argument for it, but let's not pretend that the strategic goal here is to stabilize syria or lebanon. we tried in lebanon before. it didn't work out well. if the real goal is iran, let's deal with it. if it's syria and humanitarian im, we need to be very robust. >> richard, do you think that the president could sell greater involvement in syria on the basis of the iran question? >> no. syria, given the ethnic divisions and all that, goes way beyond iran. you can't put ump humpty-dumpty back stover again, the dynamics of syria are exacerbated by iran, but not created by iran. i also don't think there's a lot of american appetite for yet another military intervention in these messy quasi civil quasi

political wars, but there is more we can and should do to help the refugees. there's more we can and should do to make sure the war doesn't spread to turkey and to jordan. the question of dealing directly with iran is a big idea. it's going to come up in the context probably of the nuclear program, but we shouldn't kid ourselves. it's easier to begin such an involvement than to dictate a course or its end. it is an awfully big undertaking. i would say again let's stop and thing, do our interesting warrant it? can we promote them by using force? what about the rest of the world? what about the needs here at home. ? we have to think strategically, the totality of our national security. i'm not sure quite honestly that syria should dominate it to the extent that some of the advocating for intervention so emto imply. >> the president gave an address talking about our current terrorism strategy and national security goals.

i think some people came away from that speech thinking i didn't get enough. i thought it was very helpful insofar as you could see the president's line of thought and the fact he's turns these ideas over in his head and finds himself almost at odds with his ideals in many cases. here you think he is the president has talked about human rights and humanitarianism. at the same time, he is not someone that wants to send more young women and men overseas to fight another war in the middle east. but in terms of ideology and morality, this is a difficult place for him. >> absolutely. real politics has released a come right to the president's doorstep. as you said there is the humanitarian piece and the economic situation in the united states. the exhaustion with the idea of war among the american people. but, yeah, you do have a conflict that is the worst-case scenario.

you have a government, the victims of this sunni majority. well, what about the all right restive sunni in iraq? this has the potential to splinter and destabilize so much of the region, it's hard to imagine the answer is to do nothing. the president is clearly trying to find a way to do this without having the united states intervenes. how do you do that? it's almost impossible. i think that richard is right, that there isn't a strong enough case for the american people given the situation here, for military intervention. >> richard, i want to end, before we let you go, in terms of the big picture here, the president has talked a lot about the pivot to asia. we have a sense it pulls on his heartstrings and foreign policy strings, if you will. what is happening in the middle east would seem to very much complicate that and has complicated it. what is your assessment by how successful he will be toward the

east, which is to say asia in the coming months and years? >> it's going to be a real struggle for him. the business literature, alex, there's an awful lot of writing about the urgent versus the important. in the long run of history, i would argue that asia could be more important. that's where the great powers are, the bulk of the world economy. if we fail to keep countries like japan action china, korea essentially at peace, the 2 isst century could resemble the 20th century. so in some ways we have to figure out how to do more in asia and do here at home. the good news is the kinds of tools we have to bring to bear of trade, diplomacy, diplomatic efforts more broadly, our naval forces, our air forces, those are exactly the tools that could really make a difference in asia. the problem with the middle east is while we still have interesting there, most of the things we can bring to bear are not particularly effective.

one part of the world where there are vital interests. we've got another part of the world where we have lesser interests, where history suggests we can't do a lot of good. that ought to inform what it is we do and don't do. >> we'll see where the past is present. rich article haass, thanks so much for your time. >> thanks for having me. coming up, the financial industry stands at a cross roads, or at least an intersection with a blinkingy ello light. we'll discuss the effort to unwide financial regulation reform when the frank in dodd/frank joins us just ahead. [ female announcer ] made just a little sweeter... because all these whole grains aren't healthy unless you actually eat them ♪ multigrain cheerios. also available in delicious peanut butter. healthy never tasted so sweet.

before i do any projects on on my own.st also available in delicious peanut butter. at angie's list, you'll find reviews written by people just like you. i love my contractor, and i am so thankful to angie's list for bringing us together. angie's list -- reviews you can trust. music ... music ... music...

see, i knew testosterone could affect sex drive, but not energy or even my mood. that's when i talked with my doctor. he gave me some blood tests... showed it was low t. that's it. it was a number. [ male announcer ] today, men with low t have androgel 1.62% testosterone gel. the #1 prescribed topical testosterone replacement therapy increases testosterone when used daily. women and children should avoid contact with application sites. discontinue androgel and call your doctor if you see unexpected signs of early puberty in a child,

or signs in a woman, which may include changes in body hair or a large increase in acne, possibly due to accidental exposure. men with breast cancer or who have or might have prostate cancer, and women who are or may become pregnant or are breast-feeding, should not use androgel. serious side effects include worsening of an enlarged prostate, possible increased risk of prostate cancer, lower sperm count, swelling of ankles, feet, or body, enlarged or painful breasts, problems breathing during sleep, and blood clots in the legs. tell your doctor about your medical conditions and medications, especially insulin, corticosteroids, or medicines to decrease blood clotting. in a clinical study, over 80% of treated men had their t levels restored to normal. talk to your doctor about all your symptoms. get the blood tests. change your number. turn it up. androgel 1.62%.

among them, her opposition to financial regulation. >> working to alleviate all the stifling economic restrictions that banks and businesses must now endure since the enactment of dodd/frank legislation. we will talk with former colleague barney frank when he joins us live, next on "now." ...so you say men are superior drivers? yeah? then how'd i get this... [ voice of dennis ] ...safe driving bonus check? every six months without an accident, allstate sends a check. silence. are you in good hands? next minute i'm in the back of an ambulance having a heart attack. i was in shape, fit. i did not see it coming. i take bayer aspirin. [ male announcer ] so be sure to talk to your doctor before you begin an aspirin regimen. see your doctor and get checked out. before you begin an aspirin regimen. what that's great. it won't take long, will it? nah. okay.

this, won't take long will it? no, not at all. how many of these can we do on our budget? more than you think. didn't take very long, did it? summer is here, so are the savings. that's nice. post it. already did. more saving. more doing. that's the power of the home depot. get 1 cubic foot bags of miracle-gro garden soil,

as the country approaches the three-year anniversary of dodd/frank, many of the laws designed to ensure a safer financial system are under siege. >> passing this bill was no easy task. to get there we had to overcome

the furious lobby of an array of powerful interest groups. a a partisan minority determined to block change. that doesn't mean or work is over. for these new rules -- >> the hurdles are only getting bigger. the financial industry to date has spent over a billion trying to kill dodd/frank. last year the number of wall street lobbyists looking to gut the law's provisions outnumb bert consumer protection lobbyists by 20:1. is the banking are larger than ever. the four biggest hold 7.8 trillion in assets. half the size of the entire u.s. economy. this month the house financial services committee quietly passed five bills. the "new york times" reports that one of those bills was

written almost entirely by citigroup. citigroup's recommendations reflected in more than 70 lines of the house committee's 85-line bill. two crucial paragraphs were copied nearly word for word. lawmakers changed two words to make them plural. all of which led the gray lady to conclude three years after the most comprehensive overhaul since the depression, wall street is finding weight a fredlier place. today roughly two thirds of the rules have yet to be put into effect. a testimony to the strength of the financial industry lobbying power. in the meantime banks continue to sell the very same risky mortgages and loans that went back during the recession. speaking to the nation, john parsons, a senior lecture you are summed up the current state of affairs -- it's like a horrid or movie. you can't be too triumphant just because the first blowing had

the beast weakened. joining us is former congressman and co-author of the dodd/frank wall street reform and consumer protection act barney frank. thank you for joining us. >> you're welcome. >> congressman, i have to ask, after all the work put into dodd/frank, are you satisfied with how implementation is going in congress? >> no, but it is doing better than frankly, you said, they are not selling the same products. the single biggest problem we had in the earlier period we are mortgages being sold to people who couldn't possibly repay them because the mortgages were sold and then securitized. the bill specifically prohibited that. that's being enforced. you do not have the kind of irresponsible mortgages going forward. there's much greater capital. i am disappointed and there are two factors that don't often get mentioned. we did not anticipate when we passed the bill that the republicans were going to take over the house of representatives. the agency that got the greatest increase in power under our

legislation -- well, the one that got the greatest increase was the consumer financial protection bureau, which we set up, which is working well, and that agency is doing a very good job and is totally resistant to efforts to undercut it. the derivatives, a serious problem leading up to the crisis, we gave great power to regulate them to the commodities future trading commission. unfortunately when the republicans took over in 2011, they refused to fund that adequately, the commodity futures trading commission has the major source of new power over former derivatives called swaps. they have been doing a good job. gary gensler is a tough, effective regulator. he's making progress, but the progress has been slow, because the republicans have refused to fund it. by the way, we're talking about amounts in maybe $100 million. not amounts that have a tremendous budget impact the way syrian intervention would, back

to your last comment. secondly the people have read that the president is trying to get judges appointed to the district of columbia srkt circuit court. that's the court to which all cases challenging federal laws go. the filibuster has been used to keep president obama from appointing judges there. so you have the agencies in a double bind. first they don't get enough money, not because they're trying to save money, but because they're trying to cripple the regulation. secondly this very conservative courts tells the agency oh no, we don't like this rule, you have to go back and do more work. one example, the agency under the power in our bill said we want to stop speculation, so they put a limit on how many of a commodity you could buy through a derivative if you didn't use it. you know, oil companies have to

buy oil. airline companies have to buy fuel. there's a limit on the extent to which you can buy. the court ruled it out. they said the legislature didn't mean it, but we did mean it. so i'm somewhat disappointed. i think more progress is being made, and i'm confident of this. we will have a good set of rules in play. all this is not going anywhere. so i think it's been slowed down by an ideological activist court. ironically the conservatives don't like activism unless they practice it. there's a lot to unpack there. first, the d.c. circuit court, just yesterday they were accusing the president by simly trying to fill rakances.

>> i'm a great believer of -- i -- if i could ban some things, i would ban that kind of outrageous misuse of language. parking the court is when roosevelt sought to expand the number of justices. what the president is doing is doing a constitutional job. you the problem, of course, is -- so they're -- i'm glad you cited that, they are illegitimately trying to use the filibuster, and i hope they overrule that, as they're entitled to do, that they say we're going to confirm judges. in the first place they're not giving enough money to go through the rules and the, with

more work and they don't have to do it. you know i want to bring in the folks we have in new york. josh, the cftc. the nation talks about how wall street has defanged -- and they're among the noisy -- to soften the driverty rules. which brings to mind a larger question about regulation, and oversight, and any kind of reform here. >> i think it's inevitable. whenever you have something complicated like financial reform, elf this dance, where a lot of the people who know the industry and can figure out how to regulate it are people with experience in the industry.

gary gensler spent 16th years result goldman sachs and generally is well respected. >> you see that as a necessary precondition to actual regulation? >> can i give an example here? from franklin roosevelt got congress to set up the securities exchange commission, similar problems, similar complaints. he picked to be the first head of the s.e.c. a man who had been deeply engaged in the industry and whoic a knowledged he had been engaged in the practices that were being banned. he was picket precisely because he would be effective in stopping them. he said, i know all the tricks, and his name, by the way, was joseph p. kennedy. >> i think you look at that standards, the four largest banks, holding 7.8 trillion, and we talked about too big to fail.

i think that's a terrifying prospect. in fares they got bigger, because the federal government asked them to. it was the bush administration that said to jpmorgan chase, please don't let them fail, that had cause a problem, take them over. secondly, the critical statistic here is not whether they're big, but how well regulated they are. they are much better capitalized than they were before. finally, and this is it is most important point, we changed the law so the federal government cannot now provide aid to these institutions if they are in trouble and keep them alive. sarah palin was half right. we put in death panels for large financial institutions. under the law, no money can be

used to help pay off the debts of these institutions until they're first abolished. >> barney, you and i have debated this issue before. i agree that dodd/frank has clearly helped and made things better for now. my great worry is if and when, and there will be a when, when a bank gets into trouble. it's likely at some point, i'm not saying tomorrow. when that moment happens, what worries me most is in washington when the markets are falling apart, your death panel, if you will, won't be used, meaning people will say, we never tried this before, we don't know if it actually works and therefore we'll throw money at the problem all over again. that is my great worry. >> i have to say, i have never heard a more serious misreading of the american political move. i don't know what it will be like 20 years from now, but if a bank failed now, i don't know

that there would be any support. one of the great regulator we ever have, they have experience, but what happens is some of the -- so the debts get paid. >> but they're supposed to be paid by the other banks. >> they will be. >> when the you know what is hitting the -- >> no, it does not mean that. two mistakes there. first of all, it does not necessarily mean they will all go under at the same time. if in fact, step in and stop it with one, it may start with the other. secondly they are paid back over time with institutions with more than $50 billion in assets. no congressional action is needed. they pay some of the debts and then over time he's empowered. >> congressman, i'm so sorry, we

really do have to leave it there. i invite you back on many, many more times, as many as you will come on. this is obviously a continuing conversation. the three-year anniversary is this summer, we would love to have you back. thank you. >> maybe with more time. >> next time you can have the whole show. we'll have more after the break. i honestly loved smoking, and i honestly didn't think i would ever quit. [ male announcer ] along with support, chantix (varenicline) is proven to help people quit smoking. it reduces the urge to smoke. it put me at ease that you could smoke on the first week. [ male announcer ] some people had changes in behavior, thinking or mood, hostility, agitation, depressed mood and suicidal thoughts or actions while taking or after stopping chantix. if you notice any of these stop taking chantix and call your doctor right away. tell your doctor about any history of depression or other mental health problems, which could get worse while taking chantix. don't take chantix if you've had a serious allergic or skin reaction to it. if you develop these stop taking chantix and see your doctor right away as some can be life-threatening. tell your doctor if you have a history

of heart or blood vessel problems, or if you develop new or worse symptoms. get medical help right away if you have symptoms of a heart attack or stroke. use caution when driving or operating machinery. common side effects include nausea, trouble sleeping and unusual dreams. with chantix and with the support system it worked for me. [ male announcer ] ask your doctor if chantix is right for you.

[ whirring ] [ dog barks ] i want to treat more dogs. ♪ our business needs more cases. [ male announcer ] where do you want to take your business? i need help selling art. [ male announcer ] from broadband to web hosting to mobile apps, small business solutions from at&t have the security you need to get you there. call us. we can show you how at&t solutions can help you do what you do... even better.

♪ the american cultural landscape has changed dramat dramatical dramatically. we'll discuss efforts to eliminate the "r" word. a questin a questin of blood flow. cialis tadalafil for daily use helps you be ready anytime the moment's right. you can be more confident in your ability to be ready. and the same cialis is the only daily ed tablet approved to treat ed and symptoms of bph, like needing to go frequently or urgently. tell your doctor about all your medical conditions and medications, and ask if your heart is healthy enough for sexual activity.

do not take cialis if you take nitrates for chest pain, as this may cause an unsafe drop in blood pressure. do not drink alcohol in excess with cialis. side effects may include headache, upset stomach, delayed backache or muscle ache. to avoid long-term injury, seek immediate medical help for an erection lasting more than four hours. if you have any sudden decrease or loss in hearing or vision, or if you have any allergic reactions such as rash, hives, swelling of the lips, tongue or throat, or difficulty breathing or swallowing, stop taking cialis and get medical help right away. ask your doctor about cialis for daily use and a 30-tablet free trial. where over seventy-five percent of store management started as i'm the next american success story. working for a company hourly associates. there's opportunity here. i can use walmart's education benefits to get a degree, maybe work in it, or be an engineer, helping walmart conserve energy. even today, when our store does well, i earn quarterly bonuses. when people look at me, i hope they see someone working their way

up. vo: opportunity, that's the real walmart.