i don't think we summers is implementing the agenda that senator coffman would be comfortable with. we need to bring more voices out in this debate about financial reform in the senate right now is unimportant. i think it's incredibly important that this be positioned so that people can speak clearly and truthfully on this issue and not edit all lost in some political gain. but we'll see how that plays out. i'll take a question on the right the gentleman in the back of them will go to the back. >> i'm not an economist. [inaudible] but when i heard you on diane raines the other night, the other day, my mind went back some i think 15 years and i can remember this huge debate that went on when banks were allowed to become investment companies as well. i don't know if i have that right. there was a lot of harbingers of june at that time and i think that's of course a lot is what happened. instead of breaking these companies up, will it be -- would have the same purpose to divide retail banking again from the investment banking and allow bank of america to be a busy retail banker at 3% i

larry summers was questioned on the abc weekend show about what senator coffman said he was forced into the position were yet to say he was exactly right. i don't think larry summers is implementing the agenda that he would be comfortable with that is where we have to go and we need to bring more voices out and this debate among financial reform is very important and it's incredibly important that this be positioned so that people can speak clearly and truthfully on this issue and not get it lost in some tactical political game but we will see how that plays out. very early. i will take a question on the right and the gentleman in the back and then go to the left.

larry summers was questioned on the abc weekend show about what senator coffman said he was forced into the position were yet to say he was exactly right. i don't think larry summers is implementing the agenda that he would be comfortable with that is where we have to go and we need to bring more voices out and this debate among financial reform is very important and it's incredibly important that this be positioned so that people can speak clearly and truthfully on this issue and not get it lost in some tactical political game but we will see how that plays out. very early. i will take a question on the right and the gentleman in the back and then go to the left. >> i am not an economist -- is this on? when i heard you the other night -- the other day, my mind went back some i think 15 years and i can remember a huge debate that went on when the banks were allowed to become investment companies. i don't know if i have the right and there was a lot of harbingers of doom at that time and it thinks it is of course a lot of what's happened. instead of breaking these companies up, would it

coffman: thank you, mr. speaker. i'm proud to stand before you today in strong support of h.r. 5013, the improve acquisition act of 2010. as a member of the house armed services defense acquisition reform panel, i commend chairman rob andrews and ranking member mike conaway for their leadership over the past year as we delved into the complex world of defense acquisition. recently based on our panel's detailed study we released our final report containing recommendations for improvements to defense acquisition. today -- today's legislation implements our defense acquisition reform panel's recommendation and i am proud to co-sponsor this very important bill. as a result of the panel's efforts, this legislation reforms the remaining 80% of the defense acquisition system, not addressed by last year's weapons system acquisition reform act. these measures will potentially save billions of taxpayer dollars. the primary focus of the bill is to reform defense spending by identifying cost-saving techniques at the earliest sta

. >> senator coffman. >> the 2005 reports as 42% of loans creates suspect activity or fraud. did you buy those back do you know? >> i don't know that those loans were sold. >> thank you. >> did you check? >> i did not. i wasn't copied on the report. >> in general were you aware that 2005 and 2008 investigations we have been discussing that you were not aware of that time? >> i was not. >> as you supervise the program that was set up to investigate any complaint about your securities and loans? is there is a been step program at long beach has set up? do you remember that? >> i do. >> that was to investigate a complaint about the loans; is that correct? >> said at the end of 2006. >> you supervise the program, write? >> yes. >> deduce up a similar program for wamu's loan? >> the program was designed for long beach. >> my question is did you set up a cellular program for wamu's? >> the purchase recovery team also looked at requests for the repurchasing for wamu loans the sentenced the process that you are referring to which was used at long beach. >> why was it not set up for t

senator coffman. >> thank you. mr. reich, what is the stated income? >> if a loan where the borrower states his income, obviously, but i believe that i've been told that there's actually a little bit more documentation behind stated income, low dock and no-doc loans that is obvious. those are catchall terms. their ketchup a terms, but it's my understanding that there's a little more documentation dinners in the popular. >> each loan where the income is the stated income. >> i think in many cases there is background checking of reasonable for the amount of income reported depending on the person -- >> he said there was background checking beyond -- >> that's what i have been told. >> now i'm not saying that was the case in every state in come, but that there were -- there were some procedures which existed by institutions that may have stated income taxed loans, that relied upon other hikes have reporting agency to sort of verify the reasonable income for certain types of occupations. >> and not have been your experience of the stated income loan? >> i

i'm very pleased to be able to report on the trip that senator coffman and senator and i took to iraq and pakistan the week prior to easter. i want to thank both ted for their extraordinary support and collaboration on this trip. let me make some general points about each of these countries and then try to elaborate a bit and recognize as the case may be and then go from there. in iraq, and this is my 15th is a, there are more things holding it together today than falling apart and that is quite a bit different than it was a few years ago. there are still fault lines. the attention is particularly acute but general odierno and investor hill are taking creative ways to try to manage that conflict and look towards a solution among the parties. sectarian violence is still there and sporadic and it has not had the effect it has several years ago which ignited widespread counter violence. but radical sunni elements are trying through car bombs and attacks on buildings and the same kind of violence they were successful with a few years ago that is not taking place and that is a good sign. i

coffman who worked so diligently on this bipartisan legislation. i'm very pleased to join my colleagues, congressman quigley and congresswoman giffords in offering this amendment. this amendment provides the department of defense the full support of congress to use energy efficiency as a key tool to improve our national security and providing more value to taxpayers regarding our defense dollars. this amendment will send an important and strong signal to defense contractors that their bids will be more competitive if their product and services will use less energy. i urge support of this bill. i am very pleased that among all the institutions in our country, our defense departments are the most aggressive in pursuing good energy policies. we in the world face a huge crisis in energy, and i'm pleased that our defense department is leading the way in our country and i'm very pleased to be here to support this good amendment and very good bill. thank you. i yield back. the chair: the gentleman yields back. all time has expired. the question is on the