mr. cartwright, you're recognized for five minutes. >> chairman mchenry, members of the subcommittee. you've honored me with your invitation to appear before you today. i thank for having me. you have my written testimony, and i won't try to rehearse that testimony again here in these brief remarks. instead i want to frame questions and discussions followed by offering my perspective on why the jobs act was passed with the support of the administration by overwhelming votes in both houses of congress and why i think we're here today. i believe the jobs act was passed because there's a widespread, fullily bipartisan understanding that something that gone quite wrong in the worltd world of american companies. the number of public companies, exchange lists companies has declined dramatically. in the roughest of numbers, we have gone from having somewhere around 8,000 exchange listed companies to something in the vicinity of 5,000. that's a dramatic drop. it's happened because not enough companies are signing up to dpo public to replace those who drop out. the number of initiate public of

mr. coffee. >> thank you, chairman mchenry, ranking member quigley and members of the subcommittee. my name is john cove, an i've been working in the field of initial public offerings for over 30 years. let me make three basic points briefly. first, i believe the greatest enemy of the job creation today is not overregulation but the loss of investor confidence. today american investors have lost confidence in the april ipo marketplace, facebook disaster, the drying up of the ipo pipeline and the initial public offerings all trading below their offering price. this erosion confidence goes all the way back to the burst of the internet bubl in 2001 and confidence has not been restored, but more recently there's been a new focus. investors are again and again complaining about the prevalence ever selective disclosure in ipos. as issuers, underwriters and analysts seem to be tipping, as seems to have occurred in facebook, projections and forecasts to preferred institutional investors. i think there were a number of problems with the ipo mark placed today, and i agree with many of the com

mr. mchenry. >> thank you, mr. chairman. mr. dimon, there's a discussion today, the distinction between hedging and proprietary trading. can you define to us the difference, in your view, of hedging verse proprietary trading? >> i'll tell you what i think. a hedge is meant to protect you, that if something goes wrong in a decision you make. proprietary trading, i think, you can make money in a price change. the problem with that is every time we make a loan, it's proprietary. the riskiest thing we do is loans. they're all proprietary. if we lose money on them, and one of the congressmen mentioned how much money we can lose on loans, that's to the house account. we still make them. we still try to do the right thing to risk manage it. i never understood the intent of the volcker rule to make companies safer. i totally agree. we've made a very -- something very complex, which is going to be hard to legislate or put in regulatory terms. >> is there a bright lin distinction between hedging and proprietary trading? don't they look si

mr. mchenry for five minutes. >> thank you, mr. chairman. mr. dimon, there's this discussion today the distinction between hedging and proprietary trading. can you define the difference of hedging versus proprietary trading? >> i'll tell you what i think. a hedge is meant to protect few yo something goes wrong in a decision you make. proprietary trading i think it's making a bet that prices change and you can make money in a price change. the problem is that is every time we make a loan, it's proprietary. the riskiest things we do is loans. they're all proprietary. irunderstand and never disputed the intent of the volcker rule trying to make companies safer. i totally agree. i think we made something very complex which is going to be very hard to legislate or put in leg latory terms that works. >> is there a bright line distinction between hedging and proprietary trading? don't they look similar unless there is a balanced trade on the other side that matches up? >> i think in some case there's a bright line, yes. >> okay. how is -- how long have

mr. mckenry. >> votes no. >> mr. mchenry votes no. >> anyone else seek recognition. >> votes aye. >> mr. murphy votes aye. >> the clerk will report. on that vote, mr. chairman, there are 14 ayes, 23 nos. >> the amendment is not agreed to. we now call the roll on the lynch amendment. mr. i. no. >> mr. mica votes no. mr. plats votes no. mr. turner. mr. turner votes no. mr. mchenry votes no. mr. jordan votes no. mr. chaffetz. >> no. mr. chaffetz votes no. mr. mack votes no. mr. wahlberg. mr. wahlberg votes no. mr. langford votes no. mr. move votes no. mr. gozar. mr. labrador votes no. mr. meehan. mr. walsh. no. mr. gowdy votes no. mr. ross votes no. mr. ginta votes no. mr. thentholds votes no. mr. kelly votes no. mr. cummings. >> yes. >> mr. cummings votes aye. >> mr. towns. >> mr. towns votes aye. miss la moaneny votes aye. miss norton votes aye. mr. kucinich votes aye. mr. attorneyeny votes aye. mr. clay votes aye. mr. lynch. mr. clay votes aye. mr. lynch votes aye. mr. connelly votes aye. mr. quigley votes aye. mr. davis votes aye. mr. brayly votes aye. mr. welch votes aye. mr. murphy votes aye. miss spear votes aye. >> the clerk will report. >> on that vot

mr. mchenry for five minutes. >> thank you, mr. chairman. mr. dimon, there's this discussion today the distinction between hedging and proprietary trading. can you define the difference of hedging versus proprietary trading? >> i'll tell you what i think. a hedge is meant to protect few yo something goes wrong in a decision you make. proprietary trading i think it's making a bet that prices change and you can make money in a price change. the problem is that is every time we make a loan, it's proprietary. the riskiest things we do is loans. they're all proprietary. irunderstand and never disputed the intent of the volcker rule trying to make companies safer. i totally agree. i think we made something very complex which is going to be very hard to legislate or put in leg latory terms that works. >> is there a bright line distinction between hedging and proprietary trading? don't they look similar unless there is a balanced trade on the other side that matches up? >> i think in some case there's a bright line, yes. >> okay. how is -- how long have

mr. brian cartwright, you're recognized for five minutes. >> chairman mchenry, ranking member and membersf the subcommittee, you have honored me with your invitation to appear before you today, and i think you for having me. you have my written testimony, and i won't try to rehearse that testimony again here in these introductory remarks. instead, i want to phrase the questions to follow by offering perspective on why the jobs act was passed with the support of the administration by overwhelming votes in both houses of congress and what i think we are here today. the j.o.b.s. act was passed because there is a bipartisan understanding that something has gone quite wrong in the world of american public companies, particularly the newer, up-and-coming companies. after all, the number of public companies, exchange listed companies come has declined dramatically. in the roughest of numbers, we have gone from somewhere around 8000 exchange listed companies to something in the vicinity of 5000. that is a dramatic drop. it has happened because none of companies are signing up to go public to repl

mr. mchenry? >> thank you, mr. chairman. mr. dimon, there is a distinction between hedging and proprietary trade. can you defined to was the difference of hedging versus proprietary trade? >> i will tell you what i think. a hedge is meant to protect you if something goes wrong in a decision you make your proprietary trading, i think make a bet that prices will change. the problem with that is that every time you make alone, it is proprietary. the riskiest thing we do is loans. they are all proprietary. if we lose money on them, that it is to the house account. we still make them. we tried to do the right thing and risk management. i understand and never disputed the intent of the the volcker rule. i can make companies a safer. i agree. we made it something complex that it will be hard to legislate or put in regular terms that worker >> is there a distinction between hedging and proprietary trade? do they not look similar lester is a balanced trade on the other side that matches up? >> in some case, yes. >> how are doing in -- ho

mr. mchenry do you seek recognition? the gentleman from oklahoma's recognized for five minutes. >> thank you mr. chairman. we are here today because attorney general eric holder has failed to pursue the subpoena issued to him by this committee. we promised that we would get to the bottom of this matter for brian terry's family and the american people in order to make sure this type of operation never occurs again, that we would find out the facts and information, reform the system based on the information. many republicans and democrats on this committee demand to know the facts and answers about this casey year ago when all this started. what started as a pursuit of facts has now turned into a slow crawl of evidence, requests and delays. we cannot look at the evidence in the department of justice refuses to turn over those backs. internally, they reviewed 80,000 documents. they had actually turned over to our committee 7000. i have no doubt that if the department just a subpoena documents from someone, they would not patiently wait seven months for those documents do he produced. no u.s. attorney would a

mr. mchenry, for five minutes. >> i get follow-up those fireworks. dash that i can't follow-up those fireworks. [inaudible] >> i won't, mr. chairman, but i'm trying to respect my colleagues, even if they are wrong. but the question come in north carolina, dr. hall, you might be the right person for me to ask based on your experience with bls. you know, i'm deeply concerned about our agencies. we should be a light for the rest of the world on how government, governments keep track of data, whether it's labor statistics, whether it's our senses whether it's these very key, important pieces of data that we need to have very clear understanding of, strikes and falls, the whole thing. so i'm very concerned about the strength of that data and the independence of it. and in making sure that release is done well and correctly, that the public has this information. my colleague asked about what you subscribe to whether bloomberg oil reuters, or whatever these different services are, and i subscribe to a whole variety of services in my office so i can have data assembled in a way that i can consume it better than maybe what's on the website

mr. mchenry, do you seek recognition? the gentleman from oklahoma is recognized for five minutes. >> thank you, mr. chairman. we are here today because attorney general eric holder has failed to meet his obligation pursuant to the subpoena issued him by this committee. we promised that we would get to the bottom of this matter for brian terry's family and american people in order to make sure this type of operation never occurs again. that we would find out the facts, the information, reform the system based on the information. many republicans and democrats on this committee demanded the facts and answer abouts this case a year ago when all this started. but what started as a pursuit of facts has now turned into a slow crawl of evidence and delay. we cannot look at the evidence if the department of justice refuses to turn over those facts. internally, they have reviewed 80,000 documents. they have actually turned over to our committee 7,000. i have no doubt that if the department of justice subpoenaed documents from someone, they would not patiently wait seven months for those documents to be produced. no u