and so talk about bankruptcy dodd-frank cash in dodd-frank thing, i guess i would like to talk about the road law. so what is the rule of law? we got a general sense about what the rule of law is. rules announced beforehand, equal treatment of everybody on the law, arbitrary discretion being constrained. we kind of know what the rule of law looks like. and why does the rule of law matter? well, we've got a lot of research on why the rule of law matters. and because it really is the cornerstone of economic freedom and prosperity. enforcement of contracts, regularized bankruptcy processes, a big when it turns out if you look at the economic literature is non-entanglement of banks and the government, a very quaint notion nowadays. enforcement of property rights, all these sorts of things. so if you want to know the difference between the united states and a lot of places that are not rich, it's because we have the rule of law here and they don't have a rule of law there. so there's a lot riding on this. and what crusaders for the rule of law around the world have been talking about for

so dodd-frank is truly comprehensive.o whether you like the billboards don't like the bill, it's affecting a very wide range of responsibilities. there's a new consumer regulatory structure with the bill of the consumer protection. i have faith in putting that in, but also scares me a bit. i think we had to have a separate agency to look at this, to make sure it got enough attention. and i could go on at length as to why i think that was necessary. but at the same time, were asking it to be something very difficult, which is to balance protection of the consumer with allowing risk-taking to still happen. my biggest fear -- and in the industry's biggest fear as i go to people in charge of that euro who wind up just stopping a risk, which of course is the gold bureaucrats often have. you tend to stomp a risk without also stomping out economic growth. i hope they get it right. often have faith they will, but their risks. similarly, were doing a number things on derivatives that will be important. they are going to make it mo

let these banks fail no matter how irresponsible they are and there were efforts early on in the dodd-frank process to try to break up these companies and make them smaller but we failed to do that and that's an important problem we didn't address. tavis: is it just the banks or broader than the banks? i raise that because many times on this program, while this was going on, the healthcare debate, that is, the stock of the healthcare industry went through the roof the week it was announced they cut the deal with the obama administration. so clearly, they were happy, if there was going to be healthcare reform, they were happy with what they got, again, to the point that their stock went up. so is it just the financial industry that has government by the throat? or does it move beyond that? >> actually, i included a chapter in this book about the healthcare reform, specifically to point that out, that, in fact, the insurance industry, you know, they were able to survive this entire healthcare reform effort without having anybody touch their antitrust exemption. not many people know that insur

the dodd-frank act addresses the core problems that led to this crisis. system by addressing major gaps and weaknesses in regulation. it puts in place boppers and safeguards to reduce the chance that another generation will have to go through a crisis of similar magnitude. it protects taxpayers from bailouts. it brings fairness and transparency to consumers of financial services. and it lays a foundation for a financial system that is pro-investment and program. but the work is far from done. enacting this law was just the beginning. we have now begun the difficult and complex process of implementation. and today i would like to does this passionate discuss some of our a college was that before i describe how we are in limiting the act, i wanted to tell the broad principles that are guiding our efforts. verse, we're moving as quickly and as carefully as we can. wherever possible we are quickly provided clarity to the public and the markets. but the task we face cannot be achieved overnight. we have to write new rules and some of the most complex areas of

one thing i li abo dodd- frank, todd says the problem with dodd-frank is that it institutionalizes the abuse of power. the thing i like about that institutional as agent is that at least it creates -- institutionalization is that it creates some expectation. you cannot price if the rules are going to be abandoned every time the government encounters a favored political constituency inside of an environment like bankruptcy. i disagree with todd. i do not think that bankruptcy is the appropriate vehicle for everything. we do not use it for everything. it is not necessary to resolve every crisis. . . i don't think that we can easily amend chapter 9 of the bankruptcy code to cover california. i think that when we suggest this, we're again going to the framework of the debate between david and steven. i think david and steven are focused on results and not recognizing the importance of process. one of the problems with amending article 9 to include to allow states to file for bankruptcy is to recognize the difficulties that the 11th amendment to the constitution poses for such an amendment

dodd-frank has limitations on the boards use of compensation consultants.the compensation consultant is owned by a company that is doing other work for the company that is outside, if that is the case, there needs to be more disclosure. host: a couple of more phone calls. scott, from georgia, independent line. caller: good morning. the first point i would like to make is we do not have any free market. the only free market is the black market. the rest of the markets are controlled by a handful of people, no matter how you want to look at -- a look at it. for some reason, the people at the top getting paid more and more is a good thing, yet, somehow, whenever the conversation switches to racing people's pay at the lowest end, there is this economic gloom and doom fallout. people at the bottom are getting just a few cents more. host: joann lublin? guest: you is a good point. another piece of dodd-frank that should give shareholders of voice in whether they like what they are seeing is a vote called say on pay. for the first time, thanks to this new law, shar

that we might actually see an audit well there was this small audit of the fed that went into the dodd frank bill that was passed in september so there is a certain asked there's some of this going to be done on this particular part of the activities not certainly all of them what ron paul doesn't have the power to do is convince the senate to pass anything that comes out of the house so anything that comes out of his subcommittee then has to pass the financial services committee which has to pass the house of representatives which then has to go through the senate and be signed by the president of the states so there is limited power and what can become law what he can do is use a megaphone of committee hearings to bring attention to anything that he thinks is a problem such as all of the problems that the federal reserve has caused over the past ten years they screwed up with interest rates coming out of the last recession that kept them too long too low for too long then they didn't raise them they didn't lower them fast enough when the housing bubble hit they mis interpreted all the sign

. >> a discussion looking at the discussion of the constitutionality of the -frank- dodd reform act. it establishes new financial industry regulations. this is about an hour, 30 minutes. >> think you're much. we have a distinguished group of panelists today. the subject of this case, of this panel, is the dodd-frank bill and the constitutionality of financial regulation. if you like the size of the code of regulations before, you should be happy with this act. last week at stanford we had a conference regarding the constitutionality of the act, and a professor from harvard this did -- lifted everyone's house spirits by informing by july, 2011, when the regulations are enacted, the act has 2300 pages. one professor former member of the obama administration claimed to have read this. the act identifies 243 areas of rule making for 14 to 15 agencies, some yet to be created, and he projected the regulations to add another 43,000 pages to the crf. as far as the motivation of the dodd-frank act, there are views that is -- that it serves an important function in that it creates an excuse fo

a very important element for dodd/frank is to create a macro prudential approach. it is try to look at the system as a whole. there a number of ways that can happen. when it the most basic is that the legislation creates a new council. it will have the major agencies including the fed and treasury. it will meet regularly and tried to talk to each other and identify the problems like a housing bubble. by comparing notes and working together, we should be better able to identify the problems. we cannot guarantee that we can see everything that will happen. it is very important that legislation takes a lot of steps to strengthen the system. i mentioned the basel capital rules. . . d approach. the federal reserve is doing is within our own appach to the get the system as a whole and identify risks that are emerging. on the other side we want to do erything we can to strengthen the system so it can withstand better than it did the past few years. >> university of north florida. my question is about your 2002 speech and making sure deflation does not happen here. you sta

. -- in dodd-frank. when three key is turned, the treasury route -- the treasury -- to take over a firm that is systemically important. there is a process for designating systemically important financial institutions and regulating them differently. the resolution rules do not require that the institution be present -- the pre designated. the institution then decide that if we think is important, if they fail, it will mess up the economy, and invoke the resolution rules. irresolution rules are structured with the intent -- the resolution rules are stricter with the intent of requiring the liquidation. there are all sorts of provisions built into the resolution rules that are designed to end taxpayer bailout. so when president obama says this legislation and a taxpayer bailout as we know them, he was thinking of the resolution rules in particular. will they and bailouts? no, they will not in bailouts. -- they will not end bailouts. companies can still be bailed out before we reach the resolution point, al

. >> let's talk about alan greenspan recently criticized dodd frank arguing that it will impede economic growth. what is your response to that? >> that's like being called silly by the three stooges. alan greenspan's failure to do any sensible regular fwlags in the financial area is how we got into this mess. in 1994, the last democratic congress before the one that we are now losing passed a bill called the homeowners equity protection act mandating the fed to restrict bad mortgages. greenspan refused to do it. he said, the market knows better. he said, don't regulate derivatives. yeah, there was certainty. the certainty was that any financial institution can do whatever the hell it wants to do and it brought about this terrible crisis. we have responded to that and i think here his predecessor paul volker has a better part of the argument. we listened closely to him and others and we imposed some restriction that is greenspan should have imposed. now, the notion that we have created the uncertainty, this is the man who has acknowledged that his failure to use regulatory powers caused a

taxpayer will ultimately be responsible. >> on the issue of whether the dodd frank bill zeroed in onthe causes of the financial crisis, you might study section 342 of the dodd-frank bill which requires all the new agencies required and the firms which will be regulated by the agencies to adopt affirmative action programs regarding hires. next question. >> that was a brilliant lead into my question because i was going to build on the writings that are available at american enterprise institute about the government hand in the crisis. i will also add you have been warning about freddie and fannie for years. build on what the speaker was asking on one of the panels yesterday which is the "so what" question. the fed is enormously important and powerful. they forced bank of america to buy merrill lynch and told citi they couldn't by wells. they are -- buy wells. they are stage managing all of this. i personally think they are doing a pretty good job although others could disagree. but our comments, you made a number of lawyerly comments about what might happen in the face of this legislat

if we think health reform or dodd-frank touches this directly, if any, goc reform will take us that much further. >> just a quick, i think i agree with most of what others have said. i think the key from where i sit is to try to distinguish between their public policy or social function to promote a health market and a market for long term debt, and i think where the real tensions arose over the last ten years was the goc's were given a much more exceptive -- expensive, risky role in promoting social policies, and if we can do something in the next year that strips that responsibility and invests in a strickly funded government agency and leave the goc to do what they were created to do to promote securitization, i think we'll be a lot further ahead than where we are now. >> the only thing i add to this is one of the unique things the goc experience gives us is some insight into the conservativeship process and the fact that, you know, at the time when the crisis was hitting, thankfully congress gave to the treasury department and regulators the ability to place the gocs into conservativ

look at the dodd-frank bill. what does it actually do? the answer is, before you even get to elizabeth warren and her fabulous commission, and this board and that board and the other 50 things they constructed at the federal level, this thing liberates state regulators to hound financial institutions that was in 1864 have been indian from federal compared to state interferences. that means more state power. that means more state regulatory authority. if that's your federalism model, then by all means, go ahead. or is your model the federal aviation act, which liberated the airline on the regulated the airline industry by adequately preempting any and all state law relating to the services, routes, and so forth of air carriers. the lesson is this, if you manage to do anything at all for smaller government in washington, d.c., that doesn't mean the pro-regulatory constituents are get. they were just migrate to the state that if you want to make smaller government state, you must preempt the states and you must preempt that maneuver. to repe

. >> is the dodd-frank bill and financial regulation and it constitutionality.ou like the size of the code of federal regulations before, you should be very happy. last week at stanford we had a conference regarding the constitutionality of the act, and a professor from harvard lifted everyone's spirits by informing us what awaits us by july 2011 when the regulations are implemented. the act itself has about 2300 pages. of the several professors at the conference, one former member of the obama administration actually claimed to have read it. [laughter] the act identifies 243 areas of rulemaking for 14-15 agent is -- agencies, some yet to be created, and he projected the regulations to add another 43,000 pages to the cfr. as far as the motivation of the dodd-frank act, there were some views that it serves a very important function in that it creates an excuse for the regulators who fail to exercise power the first time around. the act also creates the opportunity to flesh out the 2300 pages through granting the administrators vast discretion which will be discus

pleases even involves taking risks that could cause the entire economy to collapse then this year the dodd frank financial regulatory bill was passed aiming to place limits on what those. thanks could do like placing short term bets at the capitol but what do you know it looks like something found a loophole making us once again question of anything on wall street will ever change joining me from our new york studio to discuss it is our chief financial correspondent lauren lyster now lauren first when you tell us about this loophole what's in there. what you referred to in your intro banks making short term bets with their own capital you know trading with their own money that's called proprietary trading and that's what's been eliminated it banks what's been regulated in the volcker rule so this is what banks have been reacting to they've been closing their proprietary trading desks which were big money makers for them but which also carried immense risk because banks were betting with their own money as opposed to customers money which is you know the traditional role of an investment bank wel

i am grateful for being invited to this process and for not having to explain chapter 11 or the dodd-frankresolution. when we were coordinating this panel, to the extent the we coordinated it, send an e-mail to me saying, "i assume you will give your usual talk on the bankruptcy is a good and how bailouts are a bad idea." i was going to give my usual talk, and i still am going to get a lot of it, but it did give me pause. i do think the bankruptcy is almost always preferable to a single firm bailout, and ad hoc bailout, of four reasons most people in the room are probably familiar with. it addresses the moral hazard concern. if people invest been -- if people invest in companies that perform poorly, there is a consequence. it has, generally speaking, the kinds of rules of law virtues and transparency that steven was just talking about. i do feel that bankruptcy is almost always the right answer to some of the questions we are talking about today and tomorrow. i do not think it is always optimal. i do not think bankruptcy is the solution to the afghanistan war. and to a few other things. an

moreover the implementation of dodd-frank and causal -- basel iii will be sped up. it would be better than the taxpayer bearing the risk. ultimately borne by the customers of the banks. customers who want to live in short on deposits and borrow along with 30-year mortgages are going to find that the spread is wind out. -- widening out. i think there will be in effect on the cost of credit. if the requirements or phased in slowly, credit availability should continue to improve, given that it is much tighter than it needs to be as the economy returns for prosperity, so there will be up dampening effect. i think it is quite limited. and there is a very positive long run trade-off for these changes, the extent that the requirements and the changes in practices make our system sector, but more resilience, less subject to this sort of crisis we have just been through. that crisis is adding substantial continuing costs, reducing the possibility of incurring those costs again. it seems to me, it is a very positive aspect of regulatory reform and higher capital and liquidity

if the judicial review of actions taken under the job -- dodd-frank bill are somewhat different from that which we are used to in the regular review of agency actions when the review was limited to arbitrary and capricious action as opposed to the more standard abuse of discretion standard? >> let me take this. is a great question. let me take this one first. i don't think limiting review is a drastic reduction in the capacity of the court to take a hard look and in fact those words hard look our terms of art in administrative law. i think if you look at the development of administrative law from the 60s to the '90s, one of the biggest most important things that happened was court courts finding the notion of arbitrary capricious review could actually involve an executive review of how an agency was going to try to implement legislative authority. i view the non-delegation doctrine as if it is to live it mean something and while i jokingly referred to the napkin napkin -- i think there is intellectual complex in saying there has to be an intelligible principle. if you have to that so

dodd-frank apparently wrote in, no pre-payment penalties. clearly, if that is what we want, we are going to do it. there are many other kinds of mortgage products. those are all consistent with private ownership. a 30-year fixed mortgage -- that does mean, of course, that the interest rate risk will get borne by this government entity. i do fear, as was pointed out, this will ultimately resolved -- results in this pricing to >> there are thousands of questions. you are in the front. >> michael made an important statement -- "protection from a brisk breeze excessive risk- taking." my question is, how do you address this very valid point that michael makes in these government insurance schemes that you are supporting? >> should i go first? i would say two things -- have substantial private capital ahead of the government, and second, not to extend this to other assets. if so, you could say why stop at mbs. there are a lot of other letters. i would start with the recognition that the government's involvement in housing is inevitable, not necess

and when congress in the dodd frank act came to legislate, they didn't deal with it. they exempted fha from the requirements of this qualified residential mortgage. which means that fha can continue to make crummy mortgages for which the u.s. taxpayer will ultimately be responsible. >> on the issue of whether the dodd-frank bill zeroed in and on the causes of the financial crisis, you might study section 342 of the dodd-frank bill which requires all of the new agency creates and the firms which will be regulated by the agencies to adopt firmive action programs regarding hires. next question. >> well, my name is bonnie. that was a really a lead into my question. because i was also going to build on peter wallison's writers which are able for anyone to read at american enterprise institute about the government hand in the crisis. i also add you'd been warning about freddie and fannie earlier, it forms this question. i bit a little bit on what a speaker was asking on one the panels yesterday, which is the so what question? as we both know, the fed is powerful right now.

the republicans can focus on reforms of health care like the 1099 requirement or reforms of the dodd-frank or the tsa. issues that do ail the economy or the average citizen maybe a lot wiser, but to shut down the government makes no sense. we all pay our taxes to have government. we don't want it shut down. >> we heard grover norquist he, of course the influential head of americans for tax reform saying we need to stop the obama spend-a-thon and if that means, jamie, if they shut down, so be it. >> if they want to shut it down, bring it on. one of the few things about getting older and there aren't many that is great, it's wisdom. where was i in '95? oh, that's right, washington. i remember the shut down and who did it help? the democrats. that's right. it backfired on the republicans. if they want to shut it down, i think it's very short sided for them. there's one thing obama has in common with the republicans and that's dealing with the tea party. this desire to shut everything down. the voters i don't think really want that. i think they didn't give change a chance. i think that shutti

look at the dodd-frank bill. what does it actually do? the answer is, before you even get to elizabeth warren and her fabulous commission, and this board and that board and the other 50 things they constructed at the federal level, this thing liberates state regulators to hound financial institutions that was in 64 have been indian from federal compared to state interferences. that means more state power. that means more state regulatory authority. if that's your federalism model, then by all means, go ahead. or is your model the federal aviation act, which liberated the airline on the regulated the airline industry by adequately preempting any and all state law relating to the services, routes, and so forth of air carriers. the lesson is this, if you manage to do anything at all for smaller government in washington, d.c., that doesn't mean the pro-regulatory constituents are get. theyere just migrate to the state that if you want to make smaller government state, you must preempt the states and you must preempt that maneuver. to repeat,

title 8 of the dodd-frank act provided the council with authority under such firms. the council shall designate those utilities that the council determined are or are likely to become systemically important. the financial market utilities defined under the statute as any person who manages or operates a multilateral system for the purpose of transferring, clearing among financial institutions or between financial institutions. the failure destruction to function a financial market utility to increase the significant liquidity problems spreading among financial institutions or markets and thereby threaten the financial system of the united states. through this motion, the council seeks to gather information as it develops the specific criteria and the analytical framework by which you will designate these utilities that are systemically important. it provides the public with 30 days to provide comment. the npr will be provided with a notice of proposed rulemaking. this is npr does not address the analytical framework for clearing nativities carried up by financial ins

but they include launching a new consumer tppb financial protection bureau which is part of the dodd frankegislation, accelerate implementation of small business jobs act, promote automatic mediation to avoid foreclosure. will you talk about how he can do those things and why they are important? guest: in each case those are places where the congress has either recently passed or has for a long time put authority on the books in the area of housing that the president has to begin -- has to implement. the housing legislation has been in the works for a long time. so, what we are suggesting is the statutes don't answer all the questions about how you move forwa forward. there are major priorities in for the economy in figuring out how we can get lending to businesses so they can start to hire people. and what i think the public is saying is we want to see progress. so, if, for example, if the small business bill, those are authorities special extra access to credit for the next two years. it will take a very concerted effort to lift that up and draw the attention of businesses about the new

the other thing that dodds frank authorized legal service programs to assist low-income homeowners andenants facing foreclosures but that is not been appropriated. all of the robo signing allegations from discovery brought to life by aggressive, company attorneys working diligently to represent their clients. homeowners can not negotiate these kinds of issues about lawyers. low income homeowners need funding for legal services and foreclosure defense had taken several hit in recent years. we urgently need the funding. >> thank you for that. mr. miller? 's >> i would underscore the funding set of issues, you know, we have federal funding for our hotline and idea what that's working very well to try and help people modify loans in the whole system of support that. legal services also is terribly underfunded by the congress for a variety of reasons. i'm also a former legal services attorney. in terms of substantive legislation, you know, it might depend on, you know, how we come out with their investigation and our resolution and what we find. hopefully we can all these issues, but, you k

could he stand for locally active banks, and a considerable regulatory changes embodied in the dodd-frank act which was passed by the u.s. congress to reform the u.s. financial system. these measures recognize that to avert or contain future financial crisis is, we need a financial system that can withstand large negative shocks. first, market participants must not have the incentive to take on excessive risk. instead, incentives should reward actions that support economic growth and financial stability. and financial firms must set aside enough capital liquidity so that when things go wrong, they can absorb the losses with their own resources. finally, if these offers proved to be inadequate and if a financial firm does their towards better, official sector needs the tools in place to wind them down in an orderly manner without having to make the terrible choice between a chaotic very that would devastate the entire economy versus a taxpayer-funded rescue. in conclusion, i have to say i've really enjoyed my past few days traveling through upstate new york. it's been a real privilege to t

very good example, but it seems to be the example that has been adopted by the dog-franc bill -- dodd-frank bill. . >> thank you. as i said in the video, i am not sure why i won this award. i am is simply a representation of the youth around the globe in the roots and shoots network. we were doing actions together changing our communities and changing our world. it is altering our individual futures and our future as a generation. it is an inspiring to me to travel around the country and the world and seek used everywhere i go working in their communities to help might future that to help the future of my children and my children's children. that is what keeps me going everyday. it is an honor to win this award. thank you. [applause] >> i would just like to say one more thing. i wish we coulhad had kai give a talk. you would understand how major it is. one thing that really struck me , he was one of the first members in 1991. when we asked what roots and shoots meant to him in his life, he said all of the usual things. he said it was important for him to try to be an inspiration for people.

but they include launching a new consumer tppb financial protection bureau which is part of the dodd frank legislation, accelerate implementation of small business jobs act, promote automatic mediation to avoid foreclosure. will you talk about how he can do those things and why they are important? guest: in each case those are places where the congress has either recently passed or has for a long time put authority on the books in the area of housing that the president has to begin -- has to implement. the housing legislation has been in the works for a long time. so, what we are suggesting is the statutes don't answer all the questions about how you move forwa forward. there are major priorities in for the economy in figuring out how we can get lending to businesses so they can start to hire people. and what i think the public is saying is we want to see progress. so, if, for example, if the small business bill, those are authorities special extra access to credit for the next two years. it will take a very concerted effort to lift that up and draw the attention of businesses about the ne

but they include launching a new consumer tppb financial protection bureau which is part of the dodd franktion, accelerate implementation of small business jobs act, promote automatic mediation to avoid foreclosure. will you talk about how he can do those things and why they are important? guest: in each case those are places where the congress has either recently passed or has for a long time put authority on the books in the area of housing that the president has to begin -- has to implement. the housing legislation has been in the works for a long time. so, what we are suggesting is the statutes don't answer all the questions about how you move forwa forward. there are major priorities in for the economy in figuring out how we can get lending to businesses so they can start to hire people. and what i think the public is saying is we want to see progress. so, if, for example, if the small business bill, those are authorities special extra access to credit for the next two years. it will take a very concerted effort to lift that up and draw the attention of businesses about the new opport

but they include launching a new consumer tppb financial protection bureau which is part of the dodd frank legislation, accelerate implementation of small business jobs act, promote automatic mediation to avoid foreclosure. will you talk about how he can do those things and why they are important? guest: in each case those are places where the congress has either recently passed or has for a long time put authority on the books in the area of housing that the president has to begin -- has to implement. the housing legislation has been in the works for a long time. so, what we are suggesting is the statutes don't answer all the questions about how you move forwa forward. there are major priorities in for the economy in figuring out how we can get lending to businesses so they can start to hire people. and what i think the public is saying is we want to see progress. so, if, for example, if the small business bill, those are authorities special extra access to credit for the next two years. it will take a very concerted effort to lift that up and draw the attention of businesses about the ne

a very important element d dodd/frank is to create a macro prudential approach. it is tryo look at the system as a whole. there a number of ways that can haen. when it the most basic is that the legislation creates a new council. it will have the major agencies including the fed and treasury. it will meet regularly and tried to talto each other and identify the problems like a housing bubble. by comparing notes and working together, we should be better able to identify the problems. we cannot guarantee that we can see everything that will happen. it is very important that legislation takes a lot of steps to strengthen the system. i mentioned the basel capital rules. it is a two-pronged approach. the federal reserve is doing is within our own approach to the get the system as a whole and identify risks that are emerging. on the other side we want to do everything we can to strengthen the system so it can withstand better than it did the past few years. >> university of north florida. my question about your 2002 speech and making sure deflation does not happen here

as a basis for a litigation it is the same thing that's goingto happen when we go ahead on the dodd-frank bill. when you get all the studies, all of the reports, all of the new groups were going to be set up, just think the consumer protection bureau to enact restrictions limiting or prohibiting the use of the pre-dispute binding arbitration they are going to push more disputes to the courts. it's going to be an explosion of lawsuits, and i get you that our next speaker is going to find a great way to come and help us resolve this matter. >> so the list goes on. he can only imagine that, you can only imagine the problems that this economy is going to face. let me and by simply saying that we are living in a time of unbeatable on the certainty. if you go talk to a ceo of a company right now and ask him what he is thinking about, he's thinking what's going to happen with health care, what's going to happen with capital markets, what's going to happen to the epa, what's happening in the labor department. all of this is now regulatory, and then he's going to ask you what's going to happen on

title 8 of the dodd-frank act provided the council with authority under such firms. the council shall designate those utilities that the council determined are or are likely to become systemically important. the financial market utilities defined under the statute as any person who manages or operates a multilateral system for the purpose of transferring, clearing among financial institutions or between financial institutions. the failure destruction to function a financial market utility to increase the significant liquidity problems spreading among financial institutions or markets and thereby threaten the financial system of the united states. through this motion, the council seeks to gather information as it develops the specific criteria and the analytical framework by which you will designate these utilities that are systemically important. it provides the public with 30 days to provide comment. the npr will be provided with a notice of proposed rulemaking. this is npr does not address the analytical framework for clearing nativities carried up by financial ins

you did not call for a repeal of the dodd-frank bill. what parts of that do you want to change? >> i am sorry i left that out. i thought it was a horrible bill, too. i cannot find a banker in kentucky. it is -- it was a terrible piece of legislation. health care was the worst piece of legislation that was passed in my time. in the senate, the financial services bill is somewhat close to that. we will be looking at it and trying to figure out how we can improve it. >> one more. >> thank you. i'm with voice of america. thank you, etc.. -- thank you, senator. how was the foreign policy in respect with the troops in afghanistan. military aid for the pakistan military, $2 billion, it will go through the congress. thank you. >> i think senate republicans are supportive of the policies both in afghanistan and pakistan. i did not anticipate the change in the composition of the senate or the house having an impact on the current policy of this administration in both afghanistan and pakistan. all right. to buy very much, everyone. [applause] -- thank you very much, everyone. >> thanks ver

you did not call for a repeal of the dodd-frank bill. what parts of that do you want to change? >> i am sorry i left that out. i thought it was a horrible bill, too. i cannot find a banker in kentucky. it is -- it was a terrible piece of legislation. health care was the worst piece of legislation that was passed in my time. in the senate, the financial services bill is somewhat close to that. we will be looking at it and trying to figure out how we can improve it. >> one more. >> thank you. i'm with voice of america. -- thank you, senator. how was the foreign policy in respect with the troops in afghanistan. military aid for the pakistan military, $2 billion, it will go through the congress. thank you. >> i think senate republicans are supportive of the policies both in afghanistan and pakistan. i did not anticipate the change in the composition of the senate or the house having an impact on the current policy of this administration in both afghanistan and pakistan. all right. to buy very much, everyone. [applause] -- thank you very much, everyone. >> thanks very much, senator m

the dodd-frank act requires agencies chug the commodities futures trading commission and fdic and s.e.c to craft hundreds of rules. the act's goal is raise federal oversight of financial services firms thus reducing the risk of meltdown like the one that shook the nation in 2008 and 2009. you can read more at w wfrpb wfrw .philly calm. tkpwaeurpy from los angeles. should away extend unemployment insurance or reduce the deficit? caller: i would love to be able to do both. i don't like to see americans suffer, either. one thing that could stimulate the ecomy is you could make fu fuel, gasoline, diesel and aviation fuel from marijuana. that would create jobs all across merchant r america and -- america and the green waste we are waste going to the dump could be converted to gas. host: dave, from pennsylvania. extend unemployment or reduce the deficit? caller: actually neither. i will refer to the last caller about going green. i think that alcohol would be a good clean burning fuel. beside the point talking about the financial problem we have, i think it goes back to the u.s. constitution,

iii are based on ideas that came out of our work and reflect many of the principles that are in dodd-frankhe development document that was set forward in this communiquÉ tracks the development ideas that i put forward several weeks ago in terms of how we can encourage not just aid, but also self- sufficiency. the corruption initiative that's reflected in the communiquÉ was prompted by recommendations and suggestions that we made. so sometimes, i think, naturally there's an instinct to focus on the disagreements, because otherwise, these summits might not be very exciting -- it's just a bunch of world leaders sitting around intervening. and so there's a search for drama. but what's remarkable is that in each of these successive summits we've actually made real progress. and sometimes the progress -- charting the progress requires you to go back and look at previous summits, starting off with -- let's say, on financial regulatory -- in toronto, we said, here's what we need to do; let's have this ready by the time we get to seoul. it wasn't real sexy back in toronto and nobody really wrote ab

where things have gone wrong, how to follow up on regulatory uncertainties on epa, on the issue of dodds frank and a number of agencies many of you have said, we cannot deal with this kind of uncertainty, and i do thi congress at says no to anti-business, anti-growth regulation is important, but at the same time, we have to put in place that are fo w ishat wve to lower the price of risk for all of you. >> one area of uncertainty is president bush's tax cuts, and if we were read to behind the lines -- between the lines of what timothy wagner told us, it is an extension for all cuts to a permanent extension for welfare recipients. how does that give you something to bargain with? would you agree to an extension and use that to reform the tax system? >> the uncertainty connected with the tax rate was primary, and many of the folks who are looking at whether it comes from state planning or any small business, under standing whether the gains go up, they know good and well the danger of having the evidence go from 13% to 9%, so it is something hopefully we can resolve prior to the end of the year,

the dodd-frank act creates an equivalent program running for two years, beginning january 1, 2011. but made several changes including a more narrow definition of a covered amount. in what appears to have been a drafting error, iolts were not covered under the -- ioltas were not covered under the new program and this bill corrects that omission so that ioltas are fully ensured. if the current guarantee were allowed to lapse, attorneys in 37 states with ioltas acted in accordance with their duties to maintain the security of client funds might be forced to transfer iolta accounts from local community banks to larger, safer institutions. and attorneys in other jurisdictions might be forced to transfer funds from iolta accounts to noninterest-bearing accounts to qualify for the unlimited fdic coverage. if the coverage for these accounts is not extended, a critical source of civil, legal rights -- civil legal aid might unnecessarily and inappropriately shrink. in addition, according to the independent community bankers of america, and i quote, without this coverage, potentially hundreds

congress should appropriate the $35 million authorized in the dodd-frank act.t will make a meaningful difference for homeowners who cannot afford an attorney. we recommend regulators of banks use all the power to let servicers know they can't fly under the returradar. this is the perfect opportunity for the new consumer bureau to show what it can do. there is no silver bullet strategy to fix every mortgage, and not every foreclosure is avoidable. but even one unnecessary for closure is devastating to the family and their neighbors. multiple ones are devastating to us all. once and for all let's make sure that the system works. thank you. >> professor? >> my name is catherine porter. i'm a law professor doing research on consumer credit, protection, a regulation, and a mortgage-servicing the debt in the last months allegation about widespread errors in the process triggered moratorium's by a few of the nation's largest servicers. these along with this behavior that led to them are the most recent and visible symptoms of a chronically sick industry. in 2007, rele

look at the dodd-frank bill. what does it actually do? the answer is, before you even get to elizabeth warren and her fabulous commission, and this board and that board and the other 50 things they constructed at the federal level, this thing liberates state regulators to hound financial institutions that was in 1864 have been indian from federal compared to state interferences. that means more state power. that means more state regulatory authority. if that's your federalism model, then by all means, go ahead. or is your model the federal aviation act, which liberated the airline on the regulated the airline industry by adequately preempting any and all state law relating to the services, routes, and so forth of air carriers. the lesson is this, if you manage to do anything at all for smaller government in washington, d.c., that doesn't mean the pro-regulatory constituents are get. they were just migrate to the state that if you want to make smaller government state, you must preempt the states and you must preempt that maneuver. to repe

the other thing that dodds frank authorized legal service programs to assist low-income homeowners and tenants facing foreclosures but that is not been appropriated. all of the robo signing allegations from discovery brought to life by aggressive, company attorneys working diligently to represent their clients. homeowners can not negotiate these kinds of issues about lawyers. low income homeowners need funding for legal services and foreclosure defense had taken several hit in recent years. we urgently need the funding. >> thank you for that. mr. miller? 's >> i would underscore the funding set of issues, you know, we have federal funding for our hotline and idea what that's working very well to try and help people modify loans in the whole system of support that. legal services also is terribly underfunded by the congress for a variety of reasons. i'm also a former legal services attorney. in terms of substantive legislation, you know, it might depend on, you know, how we come out with their investigation and our resolution and what we find. hopefully we can all these issues, but, you