chairman and ranking member crapo, thank you. i'd just want to add that i will hold them all in my prayers in oklahoma. it is a terrible catastrophe. thank you for mentioning it publicly. thank you for being here, secretary lew. i want to talk about a different brown amendment. you may remember senator brown joined with senator kaufman during the dodd-frank debate to introduce an amendment that would have broken up the country's largest banks. the amendment had bipartisan support behind it, but it did not pass and we all know what has happened since then. the four biggest banks considered too big to fail before the crisis are now 30% larger than they were just five years ago. the libor scandal, the infamous london whale, the fourth quarter foreclosure fraud. attorney-general holder -- said they could not do this without factoring in potential systemic fallout. there are parts of dodd-frank there to address the problem, even federal reserve chairman bernanke says it is not yet over. i know you're elsewhere during the dodd-frank de

senator crapo, you are next. >> thank you, mr. chairman. you know, there's been a lot of discussion about who knew what and when they knew it. and one of the big questions i have, this is probably for you, mr. george, is it seems that there is an argument being made that there was no political motivation indeed actions. is that a conclusion that you have reached? >> in the review we conducted thus far, senator, that is the conclusion was reached. >> and how do you reach that kind of conclusion? >> it is, in this instance it was as a result of the interviews that were conducted for people who are most directly involved in the overall matter. and so you take it one step by another, and we directly inquired as to whether or not there was direction from people in washington beyond those who are directly related to the determinations the unit. and their indication to us, and i have to note this is not done under oath. and began an audit and not an investigation. but they did indicate to us that they did not receive direction from people beyond t

idaho republican mike crapo was skeptical of his conclusion that i.r.s.nts were not driven by politics. >> you have simply the reached the conclusion that there was none or that you haven't found it? >> it's the latter, that we have not found any, sir. >> because it seems to me that it's almost unbelievable to look at what's happening and then say there's no political motivation here. how could an agency with the power that the internal revenue service has engage in this kind of conduct and it not be politically motivated? >> woodruff: there were also plenty of questions directed at the white house again today, the administration's timeline surrounding who knew what and when about the activities at the i.r.s. faced mounting scrutiny. presidential press secretary jay carney said monday that the white house's top lawyer and the chief of staff were told in april about the inspector general's report, but the president was not informed. today, he said: >> there was nothing the president could or should do until that process was completed. and upon the release

senator bozeman, center crapo, senator fisher, senator inhofe, center session, center vetter, all of them serve on this committee. they usually participate and are part of the process, but they're not here today and they're boycotting this committee, and the thing that hits me about this is that this is just an outright obstructionism and abuse of the rules, and we're starting to see this spread throughout our committees and on the floor, and it's spreading like an epidemic. it's spreading like wildfire. and the list here goes on and on. we had all of this talk about, we were going to return to the regular order. we were going to do the budget, and we have stayed up until 5:00 in the morning and in the senate produced a budget and the house produced a budget and now they don't want to good to conference on the budget and are objecting on that front and so, more obstructionism. the court of appeals in d.c., one of the most important circuits in the country, a lot of people argue just as important as the supreme court. justices roberts' position has not been filled. for eight years. an

senator cornyn called the democrats behavior political blackmail and center michael crapo said democrats are turning the nomination process into quote an attack on the president. so this is what they said when we held up the leavitt hearing and markup for two weeks. they've already held her up for three weeks. they've asked three times the number of questions and they're not here. so you know, it seems to me unbelievable that after what they said when we wanted answer to questions from and we held it up for two weeks, now they have held out for three weeks with no, nothing insight. because the bottom line is they've gotten the answers to the questions, folks. they don't like the answers, because they're holding gina mccarthy hostage to their pro-polluting philosophy. that's what this is about. they want her to say, okay, i give up, i will change the cost benefit ratio so it helps the polluters. a, issued a that she wouldn't represent president obama. this is his big, and b., she is come in her position has to enforce the clean air act. if my friends want to change the clean air act, try

crapo, you are next. >> thank you, mr. chairman. you know, there's been a lot of discussion about who knew what and when they knew it, and one of the big questions i have, this is probably for you, mr. george, is it seems that there is an argument be made that there was no political motivation in these actions. is that a conclusion that you have reached? >> in the review we have conducted thus far, that is the conclusion was reached. >> how do you reach that kind of conclusion? >> it is, in this instance it was as a result of the interviews that were conducted of the people who are most directly involved in the overall matter. and so you take it one step by another, and we directly inquired as to whether or not there was direction from people in washington beyond those who are directly related to the determinations of unit. and their indication to us, i have to note, this was not done under oath. and again, and audit, not an investigation, but he did indicate to us that they did not receive direction from people beyond the irs. >> w

so my amendment now -- we've worked all throughout the day and i thank senator crapo and senator johnson's staff has been helpful as well. we're not quite there yet but we are working on a fix to delay the implementation of some of these rate increases to give our communities -- this is not just for louisiana. texas is affected. florida is affected. the east coast is affected. california is number three in the terms of policies that are related to flood insurance. it will give us just some time to give our people a little bit more breathing room until we can get our levees constructed, until this new mapping can be put into place as not to shock homeowners and owners of commercial real estate with these very high premiums that we hope to be able to avoid. again, it's amendment 888. there is no score attached to it. we will accept a 60-vote threshold and i really hope that my colleagues will look at this. i thank senator vitter for his leadership on this. it's a landrieu-vitter amendment. again, with senator schumer and senator lautenberg and their staffs giving us plenty of help and assist

senator crapo. i'm sorry. >> but a presidential appoint ethere for the purpose of carrying out the law and when it becomes patently obvious that the law is being thwarted because the irs ability not to tax is being used by organizations to eke election ear, -- electioneer, the obligation of the leader of the organization, political appoint eor not, it is the obligation of that leader to take responsibility that the law is not being obeyed. whereas senator hatch has pointed out from his standpoint that, this was government run amok, it also seems to me this was government that was impotent. and that did not act. mr. general inspector, should we be concerned that groups are undermining the intent of the law in gaining tax-exempt status even though electioneering is their purpose? >> we should be concerned if any organization is not adhering to the law as it is, has been passed by congress and enacted by the president, there's no question about that. >> well, the law as it's written is written. so any