with fsoc, are you better positioned to deal with systemic risk than you were prior to fsoc? >> i believe so. because it allows us to take a broader perspective. each individual agency, for example, will can make a presentation to everybody and we'll be informed about what the sec is doing and money market mutual funds or insurance people are doing on insurance issues. >> let's talk for just a moment about cutting our way to prosperity. is there a down side to cutting our way to prosperity? and i'm referencing to some extent cutting to the extent that we start to decrease the number of jobs. we're cutting jobs. we talk quite often about systemic risk. but -- well, actually stimulus providing a stimulus for the economy. and not wanting to provide too much stimulus. but can we also move to a point where we are cutting such that we are hurting the economy? >> well, i've expressed concern about what happens on january 1st which will be a major fiscal contraction. i think it would pose a risk to the recovery. but what i advocated is a two-point, two-part process, one of which is c

insurers unless, in the future, a systematically critical insurance company is so designated by the fsoc. that hasn't happened yet. it would be there's been some discussions just to give ourselves a better insight into the industry. >> what i'm alluding to is that there's been insurance companies where they've been -- ten of your staff has kind of moved in and taken up residency and they don't know exactly why they are there. >> i will find out and i will xun indicate with you. >> i appreciate that.with you. >> i appreciate that.cwith you. >> i appreciate that.owith you. >> i appreciate that.mwith you. >> i appreciate that.mwith you. >> i appreciate that.uwith you. >> i appreciate that.nwith you. >> i appreciate that.iwith you. >> i appreciate that.awith you. >> i appreciate that.tewith you >> i appreciate that. with you. >> i appreciate that.cate with >> i appreciate that. >> what kind of discussions are you and your staff having with the federal insurance office, which is designated to be federal insurance expert. >> we've been interacting with them on the fsoc, financial stability ove

. >> but you are on the fsoc. >> i am. >> now that's a consideration of too big to fail. you do have some, by cause of your other placement of where you serve, right? >> yeah. that's fair enough. i would say, just to be honest with you, sir, i don't know that i have enough perspective at this point to assess the pros and cons of that amendment. so. >> well dr. volcker said, if they are too big to fail, maybe they are too big to exist. you have to think about the taxpayer. thank you mr. chairman. >> senator menendez. >> thank you for calling this hearing. in the worst financial crisis in generations, consumers were not protected from the tricks and traps and federal regulators were often more concerned about the interests of wall street than main street. and we now have an obligation to hold both wall street and non-wall street lenders and providers of financial services accountable for whether they treat consumers fairly and it can be done by laying down clear rules of the road and so that is why i look forward to your work at the agency. let me ask you a couple of specif

i've been actually quite pleased with the functioning of the fsoc. we've met regularly.y principal. we have good discussions. between the formal meetings, we have extensive discussion among the senior staff of the various agencies. there's been a lot of interaction. there are a lot of benefits to coordination. we have talked to each other about making sure our policies are as consistent as possible, that they provide a leveling playing field. and obviously where we can avoid redundancy, we want to do that. at the federal reserve's level, we support the basic goals of dodd/frank, which are to create a more macroprudential approach to make sure that our large institutions have more capital, more liquidity and are better supervised. all those are the key goals. we understand the specifics of the regulations make a big difference. it's very important to make sure that we get the best result for the least burden. and we have a process of both comments, consultations and, of course, cost benefit analyses to make sure we are minimizing the regulatory costs, particularly i would