dodd-frank addressed it. they add to the side a mandate that only happens if we then also seek public comment. >> do you think the ability of systemically imports clearing houses to access the fed's discount window makes it more or less likely that clearinghouses will accept risks to their product or will you try to make sure that they don't? >> i think it is our responsibility to make sure taxpayers their stand behind any financial institution like we stood behind before. >> i agree with you. the perverse outcome of the crisis is something we might do more of that and it is important we do everything in our rulewriting to make sure the public not stand behind the clearing houses or other financial institutions. >> thank you. >> on tuesday the chamber of commerce reported federal agencies are not keeping up with markets and technology and the regulated market is one in which they use current technology and techniques to keep pace with market developments. chairman gensler and chairman schapiro, the house comm

this is a statement, directors felt dodd-frank would go over. i suggest cras should be given safe harbor from these provisions. section 932 of dodd-frank covers disclosure of ratings methodology and attempt to mayor -- measure ratings accurately. implementation regulations propose so much disclosure of underlying methodology that they put at risk the intellectual property of a firm like rapid rating that is innovation driven. this is overkill. on accuracy more accurate ratings are good for the market but regulatory enforcement of the prescription of accurate ratings is not. markets drive innovation, not regulation. if the standard for rating the accuracy is prescribed by regulation agencies will engineer ratings to the standard by which they are measured. this means fewer diversified opinions. homogenizing ratings only corelate risk-taking and increase systemic risk. major shortcoming is dodd-frank does nothing to expand nrsro access to data in the ratings process. terms can access data on some forms of structured product but not enough. collate

the worry is dodd-frank does both. uncertainty about the untested resolution process and the associated risk to creditors may encourage a run in an episode when the financial system's capital has been depleted. conversely, the possible imp decision by the fed, by the fdic, of an ex post levy on survivor banks to fill a hole possibly nonintermediary encourages risk-taking and a race to the bottom. let me close then by endorsing the comments of fed governor trujillo. in his words, quote, the special resolution mechanism of dodd-frank and the enhanced capital requirements called for by that law should be regarded as complementary rather than substitutes. indeed, additional capital requirements would relieve some pressure on the insolvency regime, end quote. in those, the causality also goes in the other way. in my terms we need an array of matro-prudential policies to help avoid a tryout of the dodd-frank resolution regime. thank you. >> before we get into questions i would like to give you an opportunity to respond to so

but first let's think about what we want from the dodd-frank act.his is not a statement about some ideal regulatory framework. it's kind of too late for that. and that was politically infeasible anyway. but what do we want from an implemented version of what we have? our goal should be a regulatory system that encourages innovation and competition and provides a transparent financial system, ensures safety and soundness, preserves the u.s. position as a center of global finance and deals as much as possible with the problems of moral hazard and timing consistency. we talk about a lot of these issues in our recent book and i don't want to rehearse them all here. although we're -- we think there were some missed opportunities, we give the dodd-frank act a lot of praise for improving transparency, praise for doing sensible things about consumer protection, worrying about the right ingredients for safety and soundness, but there's some big areas for concern that remain. you know, in good architecture it's said form should follow function and i think the

but dodd-frank and what happened? to belt out with aig, build up their creditors and counterparties. they paid them off dollar on the dollar. the majority were foreign banks. but the treasury and this was not good congress. the treasury came in and put over 100 lan dollars of taxpayer money and paid off their creditors and counterparties a dollar for a dollar. that should've never have been. in fact, secretary baker says cne and freddie were nothing more than moral hazard on top of moral hazard. there is nothing in here -- in fact, if you look at provisions by dodd-frank, they specifically say in the too big to fail institution that the treasury -- when the treasury, that's another word that uni can assume those allegations. uni can pay their counterpart. >> i'm sorry, everyone. we've got to go. the leadership is making to stay at their press conference. i'm sorry we didn't get more questions. thank you all for being here. [inaudible conversations] >> part of the dodd-frank regulation created a new agency, financial s

the dodd frank act, everybody. (cheers and applause) ♪ i'm alone ♪ a 2000 page long ♪ congress passed me without voicing ♪ ♪ i make sure wall street plays by the new regulation ♪ ♪ protecting your investments across the nation ♪ ♪-- . >> jon: hang on there just one second. >> what. >> jon: i'm sorry dodd frank. >> uh-huh. >> jon: what the hell happened to you? >> what dow mean? >> jon: i don't want to say it but you look like [bleep]. >> oh, easy, washington's a tough town, jon. since getting passed yeah i've taken a few shots but i'm still standing. yes, yes, yes, i'm still standing. i'm still here. (cheers and applause) >> in fact, just last week my all new consumer financial protection board opened for business. as soon as it gets a director we'll be off to the races. >> jon: so wait, there's no director? >> no, not just yet. >> jon: it's been a year. >> come on. >> jon: what about elizabeth warner, wasn't she supposed to be the director, what happened there? ♪ confirmation in the senate ♪ ♪ there's no motion ♪-

part of that lack of confidence is attributable to dodd frank and this -- dodd-frank that cfpb which, yes, does have some wonderful consumer protection powers but als has historic dracian powers to ration and ban consumer credit for families and small businesses. and yet here it is, as the gentlelady from west virginia pointed out, almost a year later, only now, only now has the president seen fit to appoint some type of director. the lack of confidence in these policies is what is keeping jobs and capital on the sideline. it is incumbent upon us to return that confidence so, yes, to my colleagues on the other side of the aisle, this is yet again another jobs bill. we need to say, you know what? small businesses of america, there's not going to be one czar, one czar who controls consumer credit, we're at least going to have a panel representing both primary parties in the united states. and oh, by the way, at least now somebody will have to consider safety and soundness and what this bureau does, the people who are telling us don't worry about it are the same people who told us, don't

the occ and the authors of the preemption amendment of dodd-frank have taken one position. the treasury department disagreed with that view. mr. curry, what are your views about how the dodd-frank preemption preventions have been interpreted by the occ and the treasury department? >> i understand that the actual language of dodd-frank is a matter of some controversy between interested parties. generally speaking, i think the principle is clear from the constitution that the federal law supersedes conflicting state law and that's an important concept to remember. >> that the position the comptroller's office takes? >> i believe so. it's a federal agency. >> are you aware of the position that the treasury department department's taking. >> i understand that the treasury department did violate public comment on the occ's opposition. i think having a comment on the record is probably the most appropriate way to express those views. ultimately, i think it's incumbent upon the occ to maintain its independence as a bank regulatory agency and to remain free from any undue influence

i believe that the dodd-frank covers the main basis. you need more people to carry out more regulations and write more regulations. what we want is quality more than quantity. we want to make sure that there is clarity in terms of the rules. we want to understand the rules of the game so that we achieved these results that releases costs to the financial system. the fed does do regular cost benefit analysis of all of the rules and it is always our intention to try to meet the goals of the statute in the least costly way we can. >> did the inspector general recently called that into question, the cost-benefit? there is methodology that they are using which the claim was antiquated. >> i believe that is correct. there have been several studies won by a group of -- i believe. minder standing is that the fed took a positive view of the consistent application of cost- benefit principles to the rules we right. >> it is my understanding that the inspector general recently revealed that the fed's internal policy for rulemaking procedures is mor

quite frankly, it may apply to payday loans at that wasn't the basis for dodd-frank. dodd-frank was about making sure that we never again had a meltdown because certain types of credit instruments were unsafe, unsound, poorly documented and ultimately worth less than they were intended to. but it is clear today that we will be dealing with an agency that will be far larger. the budget for next year is estimated to be larger than the two largest consumer protection agencies presently in existence combined. it's a lot of money. additionally, the authority of this agency is extremely broad. today we also will ask some important questions and this committee has been dedicated to along with the financial services committee for some time. the federal reserve is not transparent. the federal reserve does resist any kind of congressional oversight and considers it unreasonable interference. there have been limited, and i repeat very limited, ability to get transparency in some cases related to the financial bailout from the federal reserve. it is likely that without specific a

the frank-dodd wall street reform act. i had the opportunity to discuss this bill today and also i did last congress and we spoke at that time about its overarching reforms that were being made in that legislation. additionally, i will discuss why and how it is bad for our current economy and what the republican underlying bill will do to protect consumers, ensure credit, and allow for economic growth. last year i stood before this body to state that our friends on the other side of the aisle, they were once again allowing the government to overstep its boundaries well into the private marketplace. one of the most far-reaching provisions of the dodd-frank bill signed into law last year is the creation of the consumer financial protection bureau, best known as cfpb. the cfpb is a classic example of the government unnecessarily crippling its authority into the free enterprise system. this massive new bureau, which will be led by a credit czar, who will have unprecedented and unchecked authority to restrict product choices fo

we'll hear about the dodd-frank regulations law. the financial stability oversight council is meeting. they identify and respond to emerging threats that are seen in the industry and its members are going to be discussing in just a few minutes what's happened since the dodd-frank law's enactment and why some of the measures have yet to be implemented. we're just waiting for federal reserve chairman benernanke and securities and exchange chairman mary dodd-frank all will be speaking at this event. you're watching live coverage here on c-span2. [inaudible conversations] [inaudible conversations] [inaudible conversations] >> okay. there appears to be a critical mass. welcome to the open session of the financial stability oversight council. this week we mark, of course, the first anniversary of the passage of the dodd-frank act. i'm going to give everyone here a chance to say a few opening remarks before we get to the formal agenda but let me just start with a few of my own. we all know why we're here, of course. we had a financial cris

but homeowners, -- a lot of homeowneders are surprised that one of the things dodd frank is a higher down payment to get a mortgage. they talked about 20%. the banks made a mistake, but why should it be harder for me to buy a house. do they have a point? >> it's important for americans to be able to afford homes and for them to be able to find housing, but i think one of the thing that is we found in the midst of the financial crisis were homeowners buying homes and taking out mortgages that they simply couldn't afford, often times because they didn't nld the essential choices that they had to make. so we feel like it's very important to make sure that tay are better protected and that the financial infrastructure that surrounds home ownership is one that makes sure that the system doesn't take on risks that put of home ownership in jeopardy. >> tom: other issue. i hear from house republicans. look, we are headed for default anyway. we have to solve the problem now. and we're preventing a future crisis. what do you respond to that? >> we're not headed for default. this is a country t

part of that lack of confidence is attributable to dodd frank and this -- dodd-frank that cfpb which, yes, does have some wonderful consumer protection powers but also has historic draconian powers to ration and ban consumer credit for families and small businesses. and yet here it is, as the gentlelady from west virginia pointed out, almost a year later, only now, only now has the president seen fit to appoint some type of director. the lack of confidence in these policies is what is keeping jobs and capital on the sideline. it is incumbent upon us to return that confidence so, yes, to my colleagues on the other side of the aisle, this is yet again another jobs bill. we need to say, you know what? small businesses of america, there's not going to be one czar, one czar who controls consumer credit, we're at least going to have a panel representing both primary parties in the united states. and oh, by the way, at least now somebody will have to consider safety and soundness and what this bureau does, the people who are telling us don't worry about it are the same people who told us, do

>> so, so i went to the dodd-frank act, and i don't think there's a direct implication of dodd-frank for mandatory reforms. there is an initiative under the auspices of the federal reserve bank of new york, which is an industry initiative. which is working on reforming the way that the triparty repo market works, but it's not directly to the -- the primary objective of the triparty repo market task force is to solve a kind of technical issue that arises from the tribal -- triparty repo market during the day. the triparty repo market there is secured credit overnight which means 5:30 p.m. and 8:30 a.m., but intraday between 8:30 a.m. and 5:30 p.m., there's an unsecured exposures of cash investors in the triparty repo markets. and this unsecured exposure can give incentives to run in triparty. so this task force is actually working on solutions to that. and this is one of the factors often, you know, that has often been blamed to have contributed to some of the instabilities in the repo market. >> it strikes me as when the leftover pieces of business that we still haven't grappled with

as stated earlier it was created by dodd-frank will st.orm act to write in a fire risk to the u.s. financial stability of market discipline to the emerging threats fsoc kump west to the service regulators as voting members both mardy and tom would be serving on that as the head of the two agencies. there is no existing service regulator in the insurance field the bill provided for the presidential appointment of his independent person to the expertise in order to ensure that insurance which represents a substantial portion of the united states financial system is appropriate and recognized and accommodated within the new framework. i frankly know of no one who could technically qualify as an undeniable expert in all aspects of the highly diversified constantly changing insurance industry as well as the state based regulatory system and its international position. however, if i am confirmed i do believe my half century of experience and insurance would provide fsoc with the insurance perspective that was envisioned by dodd-frank. insurance

today marks the first anniversary of the dodd-frank reform and consumer protection act. the act was a direct response to the worse financial crisis to the great depression. it created a foundation to protect consumers and investors to mitigate future crises. i am pleased to have an architect of this reformation, barney frank. and i welcome the panel to discuss steps they have taken to implement the provisions of this important law to enhance your agency's oversight of the services industry. but congress must also do its part. as chairman of this committee, i am committed to rigors of oversight of the implementation process of restoring american's trust in a credible, financial system. well, as it appears that the meeting on wall street and even some here in washington have already forgotten the real cost of inadequate financial regulations, i have not. and neither have the millions of americans who lost their jobs, their homes and their savings and who are still waiting for their recovery. unfortunately these reforms have been under constant attack since the bill was sig

president obama signed the dodd- frank financial reform and consumer protection act into law. the goal of the massive 2,300- page legislation was to stop another financial meltdown like the one we saw in 2008, before it happened. but a year later, the vast majority of changes, including structural changes to how big banks do business, are yet to come. nearly half of the 243 new rules mandated by the law were supposed to be finalized by now, but regulators have completed fewer than 50. testifying before a senate committee today, federal reserve chairman ben bernanke says implementing the new rules will take time. >> a full transition to the new system will require much more work by both the public and private sectors and, no doubt, we will learn lessons along the way. >> susie: one new process is in place-- the consumer financial protection bureau officially launched today as an independent agency to regulate credit cards, mortgages, and other financial products. our next guest heads up the nation's ninth largest bank and will be dealing with those new rules. he's kelly king, c

act and aim of the dodd-frank act sort of takes this too big to fail support away. we recognize some of the connectedness, the high concentration, the importance to the sovereign, that in a similar situation that they may end up, policymakers may end up looking at changes to the law to give support to the institutions. >> just for the record, the statement though that is there is a statement from -- these are ratings, the table are from moody's but the statement is from standard & poor's. >> yes. we have recently published similar. >> quickly, mr. rowan. your response because your company does the very same thing. >> mr. chairman, as the head of the commercial growth i'm completely removed from the rating analysis, rating committees and the formation of the methodology. so i'm not the person that can speak authoritatively on the question, the point you're asking. >> may i ask you a question? do you think he gives financial unfair advantage that they get anywhere from two to four upkicks for being considered a financially, a risky financial institution? to think that

so what has been the impact of dodd-frank? some of these rules are still being written, which of course is the issue. >> well, maria, you're exactly right. i saw an estimate this week that said something like 95% of the rules that will need to be written for dodd-frank have yet to be written because you need to have 100 impact studies before you actually write the rules. at least thus far, the impact of dodd-frank hasn't been all that great. the problem, though, is it goes back to what we're seeing before. if you don't know what the rules of the game are, i run a small business. when you're constantly looking over your shoulder in terms of the regulatory impact, taxes, it leaves you less time and less money to hire people. and i think that's part of the issue that we're seeing. i think if you had greater clarity on what those rules would be, it would help out a lot. >> so you said you liked multinationals, the large companies in the u.s. that are actually benefitting from the rest of the world's growth. what other sectors do y

first, the dodd-frank act requires the cfpb to collect data on small business lending. this is to insure against discriminatory lending in the small business space. the data collection requirement will impose some limited costs on lenders, but it will also provide an important protection for small businesses, particularly those owned by women and people of color. more generally though, the cfpb has regulatory authority over almost all consumer financial providers large and small. the cfpb regulations could affect the cost or availability of business credit, but i want to emphasize it is simply premature to judge the impact on financial service providers or the impact of the cfpb on small business credit costs and availability. instead, individual rules will need to be evaluated on their own merits when and if they are proposed. the dodd-frank act imposes numerous safeguards on cfpb rulemaking to insure against unnecessary regulatory burdens. adjudication is subject to the administrative procedures act. it's also subject to the regulatory flexibility act. the cfpb is onl

and looking at the year anniversary of dodd-frank. all of that after an update from c-span radio. >> missed deadlines of the new information law will be the focus of a hearing it morning. the financial law known as, dodd-frank signed into law a year ago today. created in response to the 2008 financial crisis. chairman ben bernanke will be testifying this morning. you can hear it live on c-span radio. bloomberg news reports that consumers are increasing to use credit cards. commerce says after tax income adjusted for inplace fell paupt 1% january-may. the space shuttle, commander speaking after the landing said after 30 years of flights, the shuttle has earned its place in history. the landing marked the end of the program. nasa's next stop will be an astronaut and then mars. those are some of the latest headlines on c-span radio. >> live on sunday ann coulter. live on book tv. >> live on the 150th anniversary with call in programs including dikenson college professor. looking at the social, military leaders facing challenges that face

that's the key failing in dodd-frank.ther failing is, i think, it has left hundreds of rules to be made by regulator, and so therefore providing a second manipulation possibility for the industry so they got their first chance when they were talking about the legislation, writing the legislation, got their first chance to manipulate, and now they can manipulate the regulators. >> is it better than nothing in >> there's parts that are fine and good, but i think a 3,000-page law, okay, glass was 32 pages, 3,000 pages, you know, it's way overdone and not effective on the crucial issue of too big to fail. >> yeah, and not to take much longer on that, i think i agree with gretchen. why not add one paragraph that essentially said any institution that has to rely on extraordinary government asset purchases, debt guarantees more than 60 day at the windows has senior officers barred from employment as consultant or otherwise for a period of five years. if you did that, the companies would shrink themselves to the point to manage t

it's the anniversary of dodd-frank, not everybody a celebrating. and steve winn unloads on the policies, do others share his views. and two federal agencies have become the last bastion for pro union policies we'll tell you who they are and what they're up to. welcome to the journal editorial report, i'm stuart varney in this week for paul gigot. dramatic developments in debt ceiling showdown as house speaker john boehner called off talks on the so-called grand bargain. both sides meeting today. even if they get an agreement. is it too late to avoid a credit downgrade? joining the panel this week, wall street journal editor, james freeman. columnist, mary o'grady. kim strassel and steve moore. to you first, kim, if i may. are we looking more and more like greece? >> well, this is been one of the more remarkable aspects of this debate, stuart, in that only a few months ago both the white house and rating agents say we want you to have a clean debt ceiling hike, get it over with and then you'll be fine. increasingly the rating agencies are saying, ac

and the dodd-frank act to some extent contemplates this. it does provide for significant regulations that the bureau adopts that we should be assessing the regulations within, i think, it's about five years. and so that's a statutory requirement. and one that we intend to follow diligently. >> well, i'm concerned with that because with the last jobs report that came out, small businesses are saying that they are going to freeze hires for the next year. 70% of them said that. we are going to wait five years to go back. that's not setting the conditions. can we come back and look at a semiannual review and make sure we include some of the people this could be affecting, community banks or small business owners, instead of waiting five years for a review? >> we have a process. a statutory process, the small business regulatory enforcement and fairment act to provide the small businesses with the opportunity to provide input before we issue a proposal in certain circumstances. >> there was that part of dodd-frank? >> there were amendments, dodd

i believe that the dodd-frank covers the main basis. you need more people to carry out more regulations and write more regulations. what we want is quality more than quantity. we want to make sure that there is clarity in terms of the rules. we want to understand the rules of the game so that we achieved these results that releases costs to the financial system. the fed does do regular cost benefit analysis of all of the rules and it is always our intention to try to meet the goals of the statute in the least costly way we can. >> did the inspector general recently called that into question, the cost-benefit? there is methodology that they are using which the claim was antiquated. >> i believe that is correct. there have been several studies won by a group of -- i believe. minder standing is that the fed took a positive view of the consistent application of cost- benefit principles to the rules we right. >> it is my understanding that the inspector general recently revealed that the fed's internal policy for rulemaking procedures is mor

that is the key failing in dodd-frank. another failing, i think, is that it has left hundreds of rules to be made by regulators, and so, therefore, providing a second manipulation possibility for the industry. so they got their first chance when they were talking about the legislation, writing the legislation, they got their first chance to manipulate. now they can manipulate the regulators, two bites of the apple. >> is it any better than nothing? >> i think there are parts of it that are fine, that are good. but i think that a 3,000-page law, okay? glass-steagall was 32 pages. 3,000 pages is, you know, it's way overdone and not, um, not effective on the crucial issue of too big to fail. >> yeah. not to, not to take much longer on that, i think i agree with gretchen. you know, why couldn't you have just added one paragraph that, essentially, said any institution that has to rely on extraordinary government asset purchases, debt guarantees or more than 60 days at the window will have its senior management and officers remo

thomas hoenig made these remarks on the dodd-frank act. this event runs about 45 minutes. >> we are halfway through our 1- year anniversary event. it is time for our lunchtime keynote. it is my pleasure to introduce thomas hoenig, president of the federal reserve bank of kansas city and the senior fomc member. he is a person who is rich in law from colorado to missouri. it is a big chunk -- is that the louisiana purchase pretty much? pretty much. dr. hoenig has had a distinguished career with and the bank of kansas. he joined the federal reserve bank in 1973 and has been president for 20 years since 1991. dr. hoenig has the legendary and jackson hole seminar every year which we either have i attended or had intended but were never invited. his kansas city federal reserve bank says dr. hoenig has been outspoken about the regulation of the financial industry during the recent crisis. to share his thoughts on why we have not solved the too big to fail problem yet and how we can, i am honored to introduce president thomas hoenig. [applause] >>

quite frankly, it may apply to pay loans, but that was not the basis for dodd-frank. dodd-frank was about making sure that we never again have a meltdown.because of certain types of credit instruments that were not safe, and sound, poorly documented, and ultimately worth less than they were intended to, but it is clear today that we will be dealing with an agency that will be far larger. the budget for next year is estimated to be larger than the two largest consumer protection agencies combined. a lot of money. additionally, the authority of this agency is extremely broad. today, we also will ask some important questions that this committee has been dedicated to along with financial- services.for some time. the federal reserve is not transparent. it considers it unreasonable interference, oversight. there have been limited, i repeat very limited ability to get transparency in some cases related to the financial bailout from the federal reserve. it is likely that without specific and documented transparency and legitimate oversight, fully funded and accountable to the

the dodd-frank bill was not great to begin with. poorly staffed agencies have to implement the rules that are besieged by lobbyists. that is on the democrat and republican side. obama failed to fight for a elizabeth warren or appoint her in the consumer protection agency. the third thing that is unfortunate is his record on jobs, while hardly worth less, and the stimulus save several million jobs, has never been the full focus of this administration. the image of favoring big corporate status quo and wall street even though in his heart of hearts, that is not what he believes. tavis: that may be a enough of an albatross to make sure that he does not get reelected. the first two well, he did not control. was all about law enforcement. the second was about congress, not necessarily the white house. it is the third one that could mess him up. he gets on the campaign trail, he can s u responsibility for the first two, can he not? >> the law enforcement part of that has been under his watch. it has and a lax effort. they have not been ag

the members of dodd-frank have taken one position. the treasury department has disagreed with that view. mr. curry, what are your thoughts about this? >> i understand that the actual language of dodd-frank is a matter of some controversy between interested parties. generally speaking, i think the principle is clear from the constitution that federal law supersedes conflicting state laws, and that is an important concept to remember. >> is that the position the comptroller's office takes? >> i believe so. it is a federal agency. >> are you aware of the position that the treasury department is taking? >> i understand of the treasury department did 5 the public position --the occ's did file a public comment. but ultimately, i think it is incumbent on the occ to remain independent and to remain free from any undue influence from any external source. >> a report by the government accountability office, which we call gao, which you know, says it has not prevented sizable losses to the insurance fund. they found that every bank that underwen

this is the anniversary of dodd-frank. we're talking about legislation that was supposed to at least make sure that we don't have another financial meltdown whether it's working the way it's supposed to work or will work the way it's supposed to work. one of the thins the house appropriations committee has done is cut the scc's budget for the money that was to implement the new requirement on the scc to reregulate. what's the point there? it's not going to cut any money out of the deficit? >> the point there is we don't believe that dodd-frank is encouraging of a vibrant economy. we think when it was passed actually stifles and decreases the ability of the economy to work. it increases the oppressiveness oof of the federal government as the federal government tells private businesses what they must do. it decreases the flexibility of the regulatory agencies themselves. that's not to say that they did their jobs last time because they didn't. we believe that dodd-frank is not helpful to the economy and therefore will only d

. >> it was created as part of the dodd-frank bill. witnesses include the head of the center for responsible lending and representatives for the u.s. chamber of commerce and the american bankers association. tim johnson shares this two-hour hearing. >> good morning. i like to call this meeting to order. -- i would like to call this meeting to order. as we approach the one year anniversary of the dodd-frank act, we should all be reminded of the basic levels we were learning from the great recession. failing to protect consumers has consequences not only for individuals and families but also for the health of america's economy. we need to hold unscrupulous lenders accountable detrimental to american families and sparking a global financial system to near collapse. the cost of that failed oversight and accountability has been a loss of millions of american jobs, millions of homes, and trillions of dollars in retirement and other savings. in numerous experiences in recent years, the committee looked at predatory subprime lenders to comply

. >> in the senate, they reviewed progress of the dodd-frank regulation reform signed in law by the president a year ago. the birthday card from republicans read you have been a job-killer. >> for millions of americans, the one year anniversary of dodd-frank provides little comfort as they continue to deal with the harsh economic reality marked by little to no innovation. anemic economic growth and virtually no job creation. >> they favor rewriting portion of the legislation but supporters say leave it alone. it's working fine. >> the u.s. financial system today is stronger, more stable. and better able to fuel growth. and create jobs. >> still, regulators lag in the financial rule-writing, finishing just 50 proceedings under the more than 240 required by the law. >> reporter: with the one-year anniversary of dodd-frank and the consume procedure text bureau it created safely opened for business today but they're blocking confirmation of the president's nominee to head it. until he takes over, the bureau will operate with limited powers. >> bret: thank you. despite the depressed sales peter to

in the dodd-frank bill it has been a timed review to take place. if you are hanging with a bad foreclosure or some bad action, this oversight board can review quickly the decision that the consumer board did to protect you. you know what has happened now? they have given the oversight board an indefinite amount of dime. this is in the backdrop of undergraduates carrying record high credit card balances. what my amendment does, it restores reality and restores a time certain that the oversight board can review the regulation that is giving you relief so that you can benefit from the consumer protection. is that not a simple premise? i ask my colleagues to accept this amendment. and i reserve. the chair: the gentlelady reserves. the gentlewoman from west virginia. mrs. capito: i claim time in opposition. the chair: the gentlelady is recognized for five minutes. mrs. capito: what we have done in our bill as the gentlewoman said is to give the fsoc as much time as necessary to evaluate the effects of the cfpb rule. it's easy to imagine under any scenar

>> the chamber said this during the dodd-frank debate.here were failures with respect to the entities that had consumer protection authority. the chamber supported congressional action to remedy those still used. during the run up to the financial crisis, there were failures of regulators to exercise their existing regulatory authority. one question was what was the best way to remedy that. congress decided it was to consolidate that authority in a new regulator. the problem is it is a new regulator that has none of the checks and balances designed to ensure accountability. these are the features of our government structure. >> how about the structure of the fcc? lehman brothers and bear stearns. their budget is subject to congressional authorization. do you think they were effective regulators? >> i think the ftc has had some regulatory failures. the chamber said that changes were needed. on the other hand, if you look at the federal trade commission, many people say the federal trade commission has been a successful and effective consum

congress made that distinction in dodd-frank. and so the place where we are focused, and i just want to be clear about this, it's really about saying, consumers just need to know what the price is. they need to know generally what the risk is. the difference of fixed rate mortgage and variable rate mortgage and we need there to be less fine print so they really have a shot at comparing straight up three mortgages, three credit card agreements, three checking accounts. they can actually look at that. that's really the thrust of what we want to do. my own view of that is that that actually makes credit, if anything, more available to consumers. consumers can trust that when they sign on the bottom line, i get it, i know what's happening. >> and that's true. i think that oftentimes when we're dealing with retail customers and they go to a lendor and we -- lender and we try to guide them through that progress and over the years you have given a lot of good advice to people and one of the things we always caution people about is, you

i remind the ranking member who originally was the sponsor of dodd-frank bill, the bill that is going to destroy so many jobs in this country, he said he was in favor of the same type of legislation that we have before us on the floor. this is once again a case where the ranking member was in favor of it before he was against it. mr. frank: will the gentleman yield? mr. garrett: not at this time. if the bill weakens the agency, then the bill you introduced originally would actually destroy the agency. i have heard the ranking member during his debates do what he always does when he hasn't the facts or the law on his side, he attacks and twists other people's motives and he was in support of the elements of this bill before, but today, he comes out against it. he accuses everyone on our side of the aisle of trying to kill his legislation, but might i remind him to consider his own statements. the ranking member has claimed over the past week that the most important piece of the dodd-frank bill is the risk retention section of the legislation and then turns around and says -- mrs. capit

dodd-frank for some provisions in holding onto 8% issue holdup analogy. i agree with you there. so that is an area we probably should pay more attention to as we move forward because you're right. if that becomes the vehicle, not there is a whole host of other things around that problem. bad rating system and phony off-balance sheets instead of real off allergy. that is the capital requirements they think we last because everyone had with a wink and a nod that you have, we will provide the bailout as an institution. so those have to be addressed. but i think in a systematic way we too need to address that and it's a very good point. yeah, morris. >> tom, you made the case is asked to way too big to fail such a problem, but in talking about how you discourage to stop it, at least in your oral remarks you put emphasis on bringing back glass-steagall. what about size caps? i mean, if you're worried about size, this semester i dream you could even argue with glass-steagall, you could get mergers after it lurches to two shins. $2 trillion they could move their money on tni loves rath