heard and that's exactly what don de bar a political activist an antiwar activist told my colleague bill dodd except for the state media channel the government has no access to the public over the airwaves the remaining media are in the hands of private concerns which backed the right wing governments that were in venezuela up until go chavez that back to kuwait actually participated in the coup in two thousand and two and have been trying to find a way to unseat the ball of government since it took power so the government can either stand idly by and watch as a cool one falls on the streets in front of it or connect the u.s. is refusing to accept except the election result well what's its role in all of this now well this election is not as contested as the two thousand or two thousand and four presidential elections in the united states venezuela is the nexus point for the standing up of the global south you know you see u.s. behavior elsewhere where minor interests are threatened this is an existential threat to the global germany of u.s. capital and they're going to try this to squash it

late hugo chavez to maintain influence as antiwar activist don de bar explained to my colleague bill dodd. except for the state media channel the government has no access to the public over the year waves the remaining media are in the hands of private concerns which backed the right wing governments that were in venezuela up until go chavez the back the cool when actually participated in the coup in two thousand and two and have been trying to find a way to unseat the ball of government since it took power so the government can either stand idly by and watch who on falls on the streets in front of it or connect the us is refusing to accept except the election result will its role in all of this now well this election is not as contested as the two thousand or two thousand and four presidential elections in the united states venezuela is the nexus point for the standing up of the global south you know what you see us behavior elsewhere where minor interests are threatened this is an existential threat to the global german leave us capital and they're going to try this to squash it if they

the obama administration has given the dodd-frank bill and others.at we need is financial regulation. the reason for this crisis was the absolute changes in the regulatory framework that created this crisis. as george say, it's not just domestic. it is international. if you don't regulate internationally, you will have a problem that goes from one place to another. >> this international point is actually really key. part of what we're seeing is governments, the greek government was an extreme example but the u.s. and european governments increasingly lack the power to tax the richest companies and richest citizens. it's just not

>> larry, i've heard a lot of promises about bills that have gone through congress. we heard them all with obamacare, dodd the stimulus. the only thing that i know about this bill is it's going to give legal status and eventual s citizenship to those who came unlawfully. the rest is promises and many are on the books and they have been ignored for years. the only way to solve this problem in a way that unites americans is to fix our immigration system in a way that works for americans before we try to deal with the problem that our system has created. >> all right. >> jim, one of the big issues here which divides the republican party, most chambers of commerce, including the american chamber of commerce, is for some sort of immigration plan. they believe this is going to help the labor market, which i believe as well. what about the division this is causing inside the republican party? >> well, i think, howard, what's happening right now is people are just beginning to see what's in the bill. and obviously, that's when we find all of the these 400 special favors that are in here and the things that don't

the obama administration has given the dodd-frank bill and others.eed is financial regulation. the reason for this crisis was the absolute changes in the regulatory framework that created this crisis. as george say, it's not just domestic. it is international. if you don't regulate internationally, you will have a

how does that work in the case of both the ipab and the dodd-frank bill? >> well, it doesn't. that's because the statute allows the secretary power to appropriate to her own agency. i argue that starving the beast doesn't work very well at all because we've been trying that. the exception of a small interruption in the 1990s for 30 or so years right now, and the size of government doesn't -- or government spending doesn't seem to be growing -- or curtailed by the fact that we have human deficits, but in the case of ipab, where the secretary has the ability to appropriate funds, not just to maybe siphon off medicare funds, but appropriate funds to her own agency spelled out in the statute, what else do you need? >> you're right about -- what's in the dodd-frank bill, and to repeat what i said earlier with the consumer agency, it's funded by the fed, so the fed just prints money and gives it money. that doesn't mean that congress is prohitted in the future from appropriating money for it, but that's not happened, and if they are smart, they won't let it happen or ask for it. wit

thing goes to hell in a hand basket and the next thing they do, they name the bill to fix it after barney frank and chris dodd. that's how we do it in america. i'm not going to let them have it both ways. politicians want it both ways. i'm not going to let them. it's like the old boy a veterinarian and aid taxidermist, either way you get your dog back. i'm not going to let them do that. not on my watch. >> this week the president was in colorado and his big crusade, as i said at the opening of the show is gun control. here's what his solution seems to be. >> every day that we wait do something about it, even more of our fellow citizens are stolen from our lives by a bullet from a gun. now, the good news is colorado has already chosen to do something about it. [ applause ] >> all right, andy, is he letting the media, and particularly hollywood off the hook a little bit. i'm not saying they're to blame for violence. nothing said about it. >> the thing is hollywood likes to sit there and say this is what bothers me, the hypocrisy. hollywood likes to say none of it is their fault but they love to pat themselves o

thing goes to hell in a hand basket and the next thing they do, they name the bill to fix it after barney frank and chris doddp that's how we do it in america and i'm not going to let them have it both ways. the politicians want to have it both ways and i'm not going to let them kind of like the old boy who is a veterinarian and taxidermist, either way you get your dog back. [applause]. and the president's on gun control, and his solution. and every day we wait to see what to do about it every day our fell he low citizens are stolen by the bullet from a gun and the good news is colorado has already chosen to do something about it. >> mike: all right, andy, is he letting the media and particularly hollywood off the hook here? i'm not saying they're to blame for violence, but nothing said about it. >> the thing is hollywood likes to say-- it bothers me, the hypocrisy. hollywood says none of this is our fault. they like to pat themselves on the back with an important movie or affecting the culture in a positive way. you can't have it both ways. if you're affecting the culture in a positive way, and i do. i think

would you expect, given dodd/frank, given your legislation on the table right now, this bill, do you that that would force banks to separate? i mean, you know, sell some of the investment banking capital market intensive businesses and or split off the plain vanilla businesses? >> it's really not clear to me and i think you'd probably have different decisions at different places. and i think it is significant and preferable that we not mandate that, per se, directly, by breaking up institutions, but setting reasonable capital standards and then let them decide how they want to deal with it. >> even if you aren't specifically looking to break them up, won't this bill make it more likely that the banks will sell off some of their non-banking assets? >> i'm sure they would look at it more than they would look at it otherwise. and i think that's reasonable. unfortunately, right now, what we have is a market distortion. a distortion that is fueling size and consolidation, way beyond what it would otherwise be. >> i guess, you know, one of the questions out there is, is it really capital?

it's because, you know, he things it gets in the way of dealing with the bill, itself as it becomes more do you like chris dodd but he doesn't want that on his tombstone. >> 20 minutes after the hour bob cue sack managing editor of the hi the hill.com here on the "full-court press." we are taking a look at the issues facing this congress. they will come back to work one of these days and have a lot to deal with 866-55-press, the toll-free number. we invite you to join our conversation. >> this is the full court press. "the bill press show," live on your radio and on current tv. >> heard around the country and seen on current tv, this is "the bill press show." >> 24 minutes after the hour now, here we go on this monday morning, april 1st, with bob cusack intude studio with us. your calls welcome at 866-55-press. i have never seen anything like this before. the issue of marriage equality goes up in front of the supreme court. >> uh-huh. >> not the congress. but members of congress were tripping all over each other, particularly democrats to get on board before the argument. >> yeah. >> there was no legislation?

dodd-frank either. i don't care where anybody is on the immigration issue. here's an 844-page billis one of the most complicated things we've ever seen. we have to rush through this? >> so you opened up another set of conversations. so i'm glad because i want you to come back. i think it's a mischaracterization to suggest we have been rushing towards doing something. in fact, quite the opposite. we keep doing not much of anything at all on the policy fronts. is there one piece of advice you have for boston families? >> no. i mean they're going to miss the loved ones for the rest of their lives. but there's never going to be closure. hopefully they'll just pray. they're going to miss their loved ones terribly. hopefully the politicians will take some sort of accountability. >> you have to ask for help. you can't keep it inside. everybody suffers ptsd. not just people in battlefield. >> and you have been a voice keeping jim's legacy alive. >> we lost 6 to 12 firemen in waco. hopefully osha check the workplaces and not lie tohe wor fine when it's not. >> i love this. bob is going to s

dodd-frank. hindsight, to, in understand how to tackle the problem. one was emerging crisis to crisis. of reform bill, the basis which dated back to the 2005 attempt, which passed the house but not the senate, why, because fannie and freddie were on the press this and had serious problems and the secretary of the treasury said, his famous line at the hearing was, i need a bazooka. i hope never to use it, but i need a tremendous amount of firepower. it was enacted very shortly after. a power the regulator lacked under the previous framework. that pass at the end of july. past october 3. i will take a liberty because i think it might be fun. the staff experience this in a way that is different from a member spirit also different from the general public. the secretary of the treasury and the chairman of the federal reserve and the leaders of congress said, we have a real problem and we need a lot of money and we need it now. there was a series of debates back and forth in a beat -- in the legislative process to craft that framework, and it met with tremendous public opposition. the president went on nat

that laws, whether it's basel iii or dodd-frank, are bogged down in detail and haven't been implemented, the drafting still ongoing. so in response last week a new bill to simplify this. let's go after something that's easily defined, not too comply complicated, put in more capital. i think the number one issue is to have higher capital requirements. so there are a variety of other things, but i'd say there's actually something there. now, as to what the right number is from a protecting the system, the higher the better. so they came up with a really big number. so i think it's a natural response to 2,000-plus pages of dodd-frank still to be defined and a lot of work to be done, to keep it simple. >> and the prospect of it going any place? >> low. very low. >> so you think capital requirements are a better strategy than, um, forcing banks to either split up or not engage in so-called proprietary trading, whatever that may mean? >> if i were ranking, there are a lot of things to do. but the number one item i'd have on the list is capital. and the more you have, then by any definition you take risks, and you get lower returns. but you are protecting t

bill that it was in the county commission or some aspect that violated the constitution for a lack of accountability but was able to cure that with a relatively narrow fix. the boards created under doddrank and obamacare have such widespread and serious constitutional problems that the boards of violate the constitution and put every assistance as unconstitutional. i'm wondering if any of the panelists have a response to that. >> there is the financial oversight board appointed by the fcc. the supreme court decision is that double insulation in the case as an example of the consumer bureau or the resolution authority, but the general point is quite right on that that case will be heavily relied on it and it is a signal we hope that the court is looking at this very, very carefully and it did have other come currencies and defense. it's enough to suggest that we would be pressed not to raise the bigger issue as we are doing and so we take some heart from that case. the questions are being raised. >> fortunately, the provisions of the ppaca or so absurd and unconstitutional the congress has ignored them in that it has referred repeatedly to repeal the entire wall even though the statut