as was discussed earlier, there's general agreement the conservativeship was the right thing to do in 2008, and there's general agreement that the con -- conservativeship is not the permanent solution and needs to be replaced with something. i think the question before us today is whether or not this bill is the sole and sufficient replacement for fannie and freddie o -- opposed to some of the alternatives that are authored by other members of this committee including myself, so my first question for you would be if fannie and freddie disappeared tomorrow, and this bill were the sole replacement for that, is that sufficient? is that sufficient? could this plmbs serve the entire market place? >> it could not do it tomorrow. >> why not? >> because this would take time for standards to be developed and arctic lappeted, and in order to -- articulated, and in order to gain capital and build out the infrastructure for securitization in the bill, private capital wants to know what the standards are, how the securitization requirements are going to be, and then make the necessary and appropri

since 2008 have been in a conservativeship run by the federal government.estified when i asked him that since he used the powers were in this bill that i initiated, there have been no losses the losses that you read about are payments for things that happen before that. and since 2008 they have done a pretty good job of housing and have not caused any losses. i was late in recognizing the problem. but it was when i was in the minority. i had -- i had the first impact i had legislation came in 2007. when i recently mentioned it on television michael steele, the former chairman of the national public committee said frank forgot they took over the house in 1996, held it until 2002. that is delusional, you since acknowledge that he was wrong. so with regard to the financial crisis, oh by the way, when the senate wouldn't do our subprime bill, we did incorporate that into the bill that is now the financial reform bill. the subprime loans that made problems for people are now illegal. what i said in my statement there were two issues. ironically they're the ones

--- conservativeship living off the taxpayer dime. mr. gingrich is $1.8 million richer though he isn't sure how much freddie paid him. i now see why congress has consistently failed to investigate what happened at freddie mac along with fannie mae to determine exactly what decisions by whom, by whom and when led to this financial ruin. i have a bill to do just that. h.r. 2093, the fannie mae and freddie mac commission act. it's well past time to pass it and i invite members to join me in this effort. the allegations against m.f. global are serious. mr. corzine's firm had essentially paid $6.3 billion of a bet on a sovereign debt of several european governments. after its most recent quarterly return showed an almost $200 million in losses, and that's global stock lost 67% of its value. but this is not just the case of an investment firm being lured by the higher returns of riskier bonds. c.m.e. group incorporated who audited the accounts found that mr. corzine's company violated key requirements to keep its accounts separate from its