and so really the -- i believe that dodd frank gives regulators, if they have the courage to use it, the ability to come in and the authority to say, we didn't have -- when lehman went down, to come in and guarantee liabilities or inject capital as part of an orderly resolution process. it doesn't tell you how long the orderly resolution process should last. and i -- i don't believe the public would be as angry if the crisis -- if the economy hadn't turned way down and if they weren't suffering. they wouldn't be as angry if banks were propped up, failed banks in their current form. which is what david got in to with the perception of the american public. they don't understand why an institution fails, should be bailed out, propped up in its current form. i think regulators have an important tool. but i frankly, you know, it's interesting, when i go through this every time someone says something, i want to do what barney did, stand up and make a comment or interject because the comment was made, well, we don't have orderly liquidation authority, it looks like we have the basics, but w

ever and iran sat down with us earlier today to talk about dodd frank and the politics of money you won't want to miss that one and ever wonder what goes on behind the doors of the gilded doors that is a goldman sachs we've got the guy who can tell you all for stephen man does it work to goldman for more than a decade and joins me in studio today to discuss his new book but for now let's get to the. i was a look at last year the federal reserve said it wouldn't raise short term interest rates until after the jobless rate dropped below six point five percent but according to new research the fed suggested it could keep short term interest rates near zero for longer if they lower the threshold for the unemployment rate now these graphs that you're seeing right now these are from the wall street journal and they show how the fed is trying to thread the needle between short term interest rates and inflation the research argues that the market's threshold for rate increases could be more effective if it were lowered from six point five percent to five point five percent. elsewhere tesla is dow

they expressed them when dodd frank was being considered. we are working very hard to address the concerns around this role -- this rule. we didn't wear likely to be able to do so. -- we think that we are likely to be able to do so. we want to address the concerns that people have so that it won't be necessary to repeal the rule. that is my hope. they're certainly trying to do that. >> what is your timeframe on that? once you are confirmed? >> this is something we hope to get out hopefully later this year. >> you said you could do that without changing the section in question? >> i believe that is the case. we will be able to address those concerns. i understand the concerns. we are trying very hard. i've see share chairman bernanke's viewpoint? >> i believe so about those concerns that are there. we need to address them. we need to do so and we will. >> since the start of the qe, the financial markets have responded to pronouncements by the fed. are you concerned that the markets are too driven by speeches and pronouncements from central ba

dodd back with us today. i'm happy about that. [ applause ] and in the interest of time we'll move on to item no. 3. >> item 3, discussion item, directors report. >> lisa got pee. directors office. we are very happy to see her today. we have some very good news on the personnel front, our well ness manager is starting on december 9th. her name is now stephanie fisher because she was married last week. she'll be starting december 9th as our wellness manager. we are interviewing the compliance manager and our service manager position closes on monday and we'll start interviews on that as well. we have hired an 1844 to work on our contracting team. actually for the first time in 3 years that i have been with health service system, we lost one of our 1210's to mta. one of our super star ben fits analyst. we'll surely miss her. moving on to operations for beginning of december has been delayed to mid-january because of the law library also went in on our building and pushed us back a month. we have a significant e

dodd/frank is a really mixed bag.ot of very important and powerful and constructive paradigms in dodd/frank. for example, moving derivatives to clearing houses, which create more transparent and fair markets. the consumer protection part of dodd/frank is well intended, but it also takes away consumer choice. and i had think that's a material flaw in the framework of dodd/frank. we've moved away from a structure of making sure consumers are adequately and fairly informed of their choices, to a structure where consumers just don't have a choice. and i think that's a real setback for financial services. i think one of the challenges that we have right now is an industry, is the fed's policies have been really supported to our industry in a really clear and powerful way. it's to help the private equity firms with their portfolios, the hedge fund managers with their portfolios, the bank rebuild their balance sheets, where we've seen the wealthy in america become wealthier. and the fed hasn't done this to help our industry.

lawsuits in analysis paralysis now he was a candid wall street critic and unapologetic supporter of dodd frank chilton is the latest high level departure from the agency the cia f.t.c. chairman gary gensler is planning to leave at the end of the year as well while enforcement chief david mr stepped down last month and joel soma republican commissioner quit in july mr chilton did not specify a reason for the departure of departure date or his future plans. those are some of your headlines for this wednesday november sixth twenty thirteen. jack he was one of the most prolific lobbyist of all time so ambitious in fact that his work landed him behind bars in two thousand and six was sentenced to six years in federal prison for mail fraud conspiracy to bribe public officials and tax evasion join me earlier today from our new york studio to discuss the lucrative business that is the lobbying industry and i started off by asking him how soon after the passage of dodd frank did he think that the lobbyists of k. street started working to have this arranged the bill in the interests of their clien

ever and iran sat down with us earlier today to talk about dodd frank and the politics of money you won't want to miss that one and ever wonder what goes on behind the doors of the gilded doors that is the goldman sachs we've got the guy who can tell you off or stephen man doesn't work to goldman for more than a decade and joins me in studio today to discuss his new book but for now let's get to the. i was a look at last year the federal reserve said it wouldn't raise short term interest rates until after the jobless rate dropped below six point five percent but according to new research the fed suggested it could keep she. term interest rates near zero for longer if you lower the threshold for the unemployment rate now these graphs that you're seeing right now these are from the wall street journal and they show how the fed is trying to thread the needle between short term interest rates and inflation the research argues that the market's threshold for rate increases could be more effective if it were lowered from six point five percent to five point five percent elsewhere tesla is down

dodd/frank also, though, made you do that. it was part of the process. there has been criticism, i'm sure you read it in the report, we're not doing that on other things. you were made to do that on one and the other it isn't occurring. all of us want the same thing, we want good practices out there. i wondered if you wanted to publicly respond to the report on that issue. >> i would. what i would say is several things. i think in general what the bipartisan center said where you engage in a process that involves more openness and broader input, it tends to be a better process. you learn more and come away with better rules. that has been the process we've consistently followed on every one of our rule makings, including remittance rules where we went back and redid it to fix problems pointed out to us on all of our mortgage rules not just qm rules. we also have in other areas where we weren't obliged to do so gone out and sought significant public input. for example, we're going to be moving forward with debt collection rules. we're starting with a requ

the last point is congressman dodd, who i worked for, did file one of the -- there were four dissentsmmittee report. three that said there was not a conspiracy. congressman dodd believed there was a conspiracy but believed the ballistic information, not the grassy knoll information that michael referred to that since has been debunked because of acoustical information. but there was 1.66 seconds between the first bullet and the second bullet that was fired. there was no information persuasive to the committee. in fact the fbi did a test on it in '64 and couldn't replicate it. the committee did a test and couldn't replicate it. the reason congressman dodd filed his dissent because they promised another test, a final test and they didn't. within a year after the report they had four marksmen that tried to replicate it from the washington police department and couldn't do it in time. and the only people that could were two staff members who did it without focusing and using the telescopic range. and so the feeling was that oswald could not have fired two bullets in close proximity withou

dodd? >> thank you, elisa. i wanted to just underscore one thing and thank supervisor ferrel for his leadership for calling the hearing on transparency and say we are the first local government to really tackle this and hopefully our leadership will have other local cities and counties fall into line. i think margaret's work with the treasurer's office on the healthy city and resolution by supervisor ferrel and passed by the board increases our liasons with the public employees. we are the leaders and it's great to be not only out in front but including other public agencies. i wanted to publically say when we were in the old prop b hearings or c hearings, but the unions made it very clear that they didn't want to have one health care at the civic center, they wanted us to take things to them. we did four health fares and 17 flu shot clinics out and about the city in different departments is amazing. if we are not thanked by the people who asked us for it, i want to point out that we did it and saying thanks fo

david beat goliath with the passage of dodd-frank. we did that together. americans for financial reform, the roosevelt institute and so many of you in this room. i am confident that david can beat goliath on too big to fail. we just have to pick up the slingshot again. it's good to see all of you here. thank you. [applause] thank you. thank you. thank you. [applause] >> [inaudible] >> sure. let me just make sure. i never own my own schedule. we want to do questions for just a minute? is that okay? holding up two fingers which i think means two questions. >> thank you so much. so there's a microphone on the side that people can introduce themselves and ask their question briefly. that would be wonderful. >> okay. thanks, lisa. >> hi -- [inaudible] with the other 98%, and i was hoping you could talk about the part of your bill that takes away the derivatives during bankruptcy. i was hoping you might be able to elaborate on why you put that in there. >> so the reason that is in there, as some of our bankruptcy experts this the room know, is that in effect wha

because the mortgage market interestly when dodd-frank was written. and it was responding to a crisis, you know, in the economy that was caught by an overheated mortgage market that became pathological in various respects and a lot of very almost crazily irresponsible practices that have become, you know, very widespread. by the time we came to write the rules to implement dodd-frank we're now looking at a mortgage market that could hardly be more different. it's a market with credit that is real cri tying. this is what happened when you have a boom and a bust and a crash. mortgage lending was pulled back significantly and what we learned from getting an exceptionally broad range of input is that access to credit is a very significant problem that we're going to have to pay attention to here. it isn't just adding new consumer protections if credit is going to shrink even more. that is currently one of the big problems in the mortgage in helping markets. so that was notable to us. and i think it will inform our approach to all rules. as i said we can w

dodd/frank also, though, made you do that. it was part of the process. there has been criticism, i'm sure you read it in the report, we're not doing that on other things. you were made to do that on one and the other it isn't occurring. all of us want the same thing, we want good practices out there. i wondered if you wanted to publicly respond to the report on that issue. >> i would. what i would say is several things. i think in general what the bipartisan center said where you engage in a process that involves more openness and broader input, it tends to be a better process. you learn more and come away with better rules. that has been the process we've consistently followed on every one of our rule makings, including remittance rules where we went back and redid it to fix problems pointed out to us on all of our mortgage rules not just qm rules. we also have in other areas where we weren't obliged to do so gone out and sought significant public input. for example, we're going to be moving forward with debt collection rules. we're starting with a requ

dodd? >> i just did one last announcement. on the tragedy in the philippines. if our department has circulated that and contributing through the sfgovtv.org website. please pick up one of those press releases and go to our website and contribute at this time. >> other comments? i would like to suggest anybody who has had a chance to read through this document that was presented at the transparency hearing. there is some really interesting statistics. one that jumps out is the difference on the metabolic panel. $1700 in we are area and the lowest was $451 on another. a tylenol tab was no charge in one area and $7.06 in another. one tylenol tab. this is a real statistic and shows you the cost of things. i don't know if there is a copy of this out there for the public or not. yeah. okay. very good. thank you. that's all i have to say. >> i just wanted to give another personal example of the importance of transparency and the work we are doing. i am being treated as many of you know at stanford hospital and last week they insisted on doing a pregnancy test on me. m

we've had dodd-frank.e've got this issue a numb of issues still related to that and other issues too. one particular thing i want to ask you about, the volcker rule this issue of financial institutions using their own money, proprietary trading. i think you've said you want outlines from the regulate yorns this by the end of the year. >> i don't want outlines, i want the rule. >> what's your expectation now by the end of the year? is there clarity? >> i'm optimist exwe'll see a rule by the end of the year. i've met on a regular basis with regulators. five different agencies have to come to the same place. it's a complicated process. but it has to come to closure. it was an important part of dodd-frank. i think it's important in terms of financial regulatory policy. i think it's important in terms of confidence and government. these processes can't go on forever. if you look at the period of time from dodd-frank being enacted until now, there were a couple of years where every effort to delay the implementa

congress to repeal dodd frank. for the last year we have seen a different and vernon. we have seen an environment that need for certainty and acceptance, that dodd frank is the law of the land has replaced the effort to delay and perhaps repeal it. but i became secretary i moved in on that opportunity and pulled the regulators together and said you need to figure out what it is that are the differences between agencies and we have to come together every few weeks to talk through the issues. you need to make decisions. the major issues are resolved. is aare figuring out it complicated piece of business. on the one hand they have to preserve the ability of firms to make markets and on the other ofd because of the policy stopping proprietary trading, needing to shut down the kind of risky positions that firms were holding on their own account. i am optimistic that they are getting there. >> you expect there to be -- the role will be agreed and published by the end of the year. >> that is what i have urged them to do a

dodd frank act was signed into law in the way congress passed 2010. dodd-frank -- title 14 of the law would have taken effect of its own accord at the beginning of january 2013. 10 months ago now. so, it would've had a new framework. it is not as though our qm rule has altered the status quo and without it the status will would -- the status quo would have continued to operate as it was. change was coming. it was embedded in the statute. fact that we wrote that rule delayed the implementation of the changes in the market by one year. we have given industry an extra year beyond the two years to begin to get ready for this. so the vast majority of institutions are ready. it is important that we continue to move ahead. much of industry has told us that certainty in the mortgage market is critical to the emerging and continuing housing recovery. i think it is a matter of fairness to that many institutions have taken this seriously and gotten themselves into position. the final thing i say is there are other things building onto the qm regime. the longer t

they expressed them when dodd frank was being considered. hard toorking very address the concerns around this rule.- this we didn't wear likely to be able to do so. -- we think that we are likely to be able to do so. we want to address the concerns that people have so that it won't be necessary to repeal the rule. that is my hope. they're certainly trying to do that. >> what is your timeframe on that? once you are confirmed? >> this is something we hope to get out hopefully later this year. >> you said you could do that without changing the section in question? >> i believe that is the case. we will be able to address those concerns. i understand the concerns. we are trying very hard. i've see share chairman bernanke's viewpoint? >> i believe so about those concerns that are there. we need to address them. we need to do so and we will. qe,ince the start of the the financial markets have responded to pronouncements by the fed. are you concerned that the markets are too driven by speeches and pronouncements from central banks around the world?

dodd? >> would it have been easier if there was more transparency from our vendors? >> i probably couldn't say yes or no. but what i will tell you that it's difficult in any trust that changes from one plan year and to the fully funded to a flex fund. we had the same type of challenges we would have had doing the audit for any two of the significant transactions taking place. it is a learning experience not only for management but the third party vendors in the plan. the challenges we had is somewhat known and expected in what we can work through in the year. >> any other comments? thank you very much. >> thank you. >> now, i would like to go over the actual financial statements. jamie mentioned several items, but i'm just going in a linear basis on building up from where we were in net assets at the beginning of the fiscal year 2012-2013 and where we ended the year. as you know and you just heard that the one of the goals of the audit is to look at our financial statement, see if there is any weaknesses and look at for backup what we are stating what's in famous and

dodd? >> i apologize for not bringing this up on the call when we went through this. it occurs to me now, i forget the actuarial term but we even out our uhc claims over a 3-year period, like a 3-year averaging. would that also be a consideration given the idea that we might get hit with 7 percent increase in 2017 that we'll put the money. >> that will smooth it out. that was the intent. yes. >> rather than do a full one in 2016. >> i would recommend we do a 3-year amortization when we have a cash applied to a rating structure so it will smooth it all out. so that the trim line stays at 3 percent a year which is what we want our medicare rates to do, to never go up. >> just to be clear, we can see a decrease, a loss on this line item next year? >> going down because of the appropriation of $3 percent a year which is what we want our medicare rates to do, to never go up. >> just to be clear, we can see a decrease, a loss on this line item next year? >> going down because of the appropriation of the $2.8 million. it would be a decrease in the rate. >> the reconciliation

this is dodd/frank.tually helps banks a lot. >> if they drop it, if you can borrow cheaply, whatever. this is dodd/frank. so many embedded costs into that regulatory structure, with capital requirements and everything else. by the way, the banks -- >> you say the reform we had since the end of the depression is actually prompting banks to hike fees? >> i can't wait to see adam deny this. the banks said this right at the start. we were going to stop free check. we're going to raise fees, we're going to -- >> they never said -- >> oh, no, they told reporters this all the time. >> i don't think it will happen. i don't think the federal reserve to charles' point is going to cut the interest rate paid on bank reserves. i don't think banks will do this. >> the banks need to get money from somewhere. >> they need to finance loans. number one. that is one of their biggest moneymakers. number two, you sell other services to people who have money on deposit so they can easily make up what they might lose. >> adam,

we've had dodd-frank. we've got this issue a numb of issues still related to that and other issues too. one particular thing i want to ask you about, the volcker rule this issue of financial institutions using their own money, proprietary trading. i think you've said you want outlines from the regulate yorns this by the end of the year. >> i don't want outlines, i want the rule. >> what's your expectation now by the end of the year? is there clarity? >> i'm optimist exwe'll see a rule by the end of the year. i've met on a regular basis with regulators. five different agencies have to come to the same place. it's a complicated process. but it has to come to closure. it was an important part of dodd-frank. i think it's important in terms of financial regulatory policy. i think it's important in terms of confidence and government. these processes can't go on forever. if you look at the period of time from dodd-frank being enacted until now, there were a couple of years where every effort to delay the implemen

and they did -- worked on the dodd frank regulation.nd they managed the capital markets stabilization programs extraordinarily well. but i believe that when president obama picked him as his treasury secretary i think that was a big step toward sticking with the capital market stabilization programs that i think there was a real continuity. across the board. as i said, the stress tests were a logical extension of the capital program, that 75% of the t.a.r.p. dollars were already committed. 95% of the programs were already in place. again, president bush was able to -- i just don't think he begins to get enough credit for his view. for the better part of a year i brought him bad news after bad news and he never once said look at the bulls. can you imagine how much he must have liked -- and i'm being facetious here. making the auto loans. or bailing out bankamerica, you know, on the night before he was -- the day he gave his farewell address to the nation we were putting capital in bankamerica. and a lot of his political advisers were say

what that means, dodd-frank gives you the ability to wind down the emergency lending authority.en established as far as i know internal timelines to do that. so one obvious question related to this study coming out today -- will you do that as chairman? and when will you do it? >> well, senator, i think that that guidance is in the works, and we will try to get it out soon. >> do you have a general timeframe in mind? >> i'm not certain just what the timeframe is, but i will -- i will try to make sure that that happens. >> if i could just ask you to supplement the record following the hearing with more specifics about the fed's plan to act on dodd-frank with regard to that. thank you. >> you also mention increased leverage ratios for the biggest banks. i agree that the action you supported in july in terms of supplementary leverage ratio for larger banks was very positive. i do not agree that it's enough, and i think even when you consider the sifi surcharge and other things, more needs to be done. would you support going further in terms of leveraged ratios for the largest banks

because the mortgage market interestly when dodd-frank was written. and it was responding to a crisis, you know, in the economy that was caught by an overheated mortgage market that became pathological in various respects and a lot of very almost crazily irresponsible practices that have become, you know, very widespread. by the time we came to write the rules to implement dodd-frank we're now looking at a mortgage market that could hardly be more different. it's a market with credit that is real cri tying. this is what happened when you have a boom and a bust and a crash. mortgage lending was pulled back significantly and what we learned from getting an exceptionally broad range of input is that access to credit is a very significant problem that we're going to have to pay attention to here. it isn't just adding new consumer protections if credit is going to shrink even more. that is currently one of the big problems in the mortgage in helping markets. so that was notable to us. and i think it will inform our approach to all rules. as i said we can w

could this affect the enforcement of dodd-frank? >> yeah.no, i mean, certainly the derivatives regulation, and i would expect the capital levels. there's no -- >> how? how would that work? >> the first language in both these deals goes something along the lines with, "all signatories are required to make their laws and regulations conform to the standards of this agreement." they are literally required to make their nation-based laws subordinate to the terms of these agreements. and, again, we don't know exactly what's in them. but the whole notion is that they are to permit very liberalized capital flows and minimal restrictions. so dodd-frank basically is inconsistent with that. >> so foreign trade partners would conceivably be allowed to challenge american laws? >> yeah. >> that's exactly the point. >> that's the point. you know, one of the things it extends is a concept that exists in nafta, which is that you have special panels that companies can go to to get matters adjudicated if they believe that regulations have led them to lose pro

it wasn't that dodd frank gave them something they didn't have. they had the authority back then. they just didn't use it. >> have we made it too hard to get credit in 2013? this circle where business people would come to the white house and say, we cannot get credit. and that's why we can't grow. bank says, we didn't tighten the standards. they didn't want any credit. we went back and forth. then they both agreed, let's blame it on regulators, but we talked to the regulators, and they said, we haven't applied any standard to the banks. it's hard to say. it feels like it used 75% of tightness of credit has nothing to do with government regulation. it has to do with everybody just came through such a horrible time that they pulled through the lines of credit, that they are not willing to land at the kind of rates they were before. some comes from regulatory, but we do have to move. at three but are we don't want to mess anything up in the short run, so let's not discuss that until way in the future, i think the chances are we would never do it. >> it back. that suggests were not st

we have received now 15 million words under dodd-frank. that represents 22 volumes of war and peace which would be about this site if they placed on this table. we are only 39% of the way through dodd-frank. we've got another 20 million words to come. this type of access is driven in large part by an attitude which essentially says to folks, listen, we the regulators know better how to deal with your life than you do. we want to take risks out of her life. you should not risk in your life. we are basically going to be in charge of your life through regulations. it's a bureaucratic access in many ways. there is no question that an appropriate regulation is needed in a market economy. but that at some point, if you go too far, you end up constraining that economy because the energy, instead of going to create an economic activity, goes to respond to basically the issues raised by the regulators. area -- the third area, again, at its core our folks who generally don't believe in market economies, free market economies especially. it's a belie

. >> now, you had to fight tooth and nail for dodd-frank, your landmark reform law. but we still see the gop continue to fight against consumers. >> well, they're trying to slow the act down. something very important happened the other day. the regulations that are done under the legislature that we passed can be challenged and they go before the district of columbia court. they get all the regulation that some bank or hedge fund doesn't like. the judges on that court are, unfortunately, in a conservative majority. now, there are three vacancies. president obama is trying to fill those vacancies, not create any new judges, not packing the court. he just wants to appoint his share of judges who we wouldn't have a conservative bias on the court. and the republicans are filibustering it. people should understand why. it's to protect financial institutions. because until president obama can get his people confirmed, there will be a majority there that will strike down regulations unfairly. and just one more minute, i'm going to give you one quick example. the commodity f