basel 3 and dodd/frank act eliminate tier one for trust preferred securities while dodd/frank provides a measure for trust securities for small banks with assets less than $15 billion, basel 3 has no such exception. because many small banks have trusts preferred securities, this issue will impact banks and their communities throughout the country. how do you plan to resolve the diversion for small banks taken by dodd/frank, basel 3, have you gotten into that yet and would you give your views on basel 3, whether it prevents another economic crisis and prevents banks from being undercapitalized? you know, the whole thrust is for banks to have more capital, which makes sense to me, and also to have liquidity, which makes a heck of a lot of sense. >> yep. i do think that the recapitalization of the banks and the provisions that we've made domestically here in the united states, as well as what basil is trying to trying to accomplish is helpful to the american system. american banks have more capital they're keeping on hand than european banks by comparison, for example. >> perhaps not enou

you know, if you look at, it's eerily similar, and i studied dodd frank more, to dodd frank. the reform bill. when you unpock dodd frank it's a goldberg contraption of rules and regulations that really doesn't do much about the underlying financial crisis and suppose today prevent an implosion and prevents banks from making moynihan giving out loans and i think it's a huge problem and i tell you, i don't know what republicans do, i don't know what anybody, but there is an argument to be made that this man, just not this socialized the economy, he may be ruining it for years to come. >> i don't worry so much about the obvious costs in the ways to raise revenue that charles pointed out. i worry about the cost, but at least those have been known and they're out there, like i'm personally, really angry about the 10% tanning tax that went into effect. and a 10% tax on tanning services, 10%, that's outrageo outrageous. >> outrageous, i'm serious, but it's the hidden costs, it's what's hidden in this. >> and they have a separate 10%. >> it's a 10% exeyes tax on just tanning. >> they

the dodd-frank effective date for the volcker rule is july 21st. and we've heard that regulators think that this is a daunting task to complete by that. do you have any plans to phase in i'm me men tap implementatior rule? >> yes, we will certainly be giving institutions adequate time to adjust and adapt to whatever, adapt to whatever rule that's put out. >> okay. thank you. and then i've heard from some of my constituent insurance companies that fed staff has been we pldeployed to insurance companies. what's the purpose of their presence that given that the insurance companies are regulated by the states? is the fed simply increasing its insurance expertise or does dodd-frank give the fed authority to regulators first? >> no, we don't have any authority to regulate insurers unless, in the future, a systematically critical insurance company is so designated by the fsoc. that hasn't happened yet. it would be there's been some discussions just to give ourselves a better insight into the industry. >> what i'm alluding to is that there's been insurance

165 of dodd/frank. you were given that the opportunity to differentiate among companies on an individual basis or by category, taking into consideration the capital structure, riskiness and complexity. and, of course, congress put this provision in because we expected that you will differentiate between the largest and most complex bank holding companies and those with more traditional activities who also exceed the $50 billion level in assets. can you tell us have you yet established at least conceptually the different categories or tiers of risk subcategories and associated enhance safeguards including specifically with regard to capital that will exist for the bank holding companies that have access larger than $50 billion? >> as you know, that's section 165, 166 of dodd-frank. we put that out for comment. we're still receiving comment on that. and we've also made public our discussions on the basul capital rules. both of those call for gray date the application to banks. with the highest application

it didn't help small business to have dodd-frank passed the way it was. energy policies, when the president said no to keystone pipeline, does that encourage energy here and business here? i met with the chief executive of dow chemical. he said to me that they announced a $20 billion factory that they're building in saudi arabia. he said they hoped to build it in the united states but they couldn't count on a reliable supply of natural gas because of the epa regulators that are making it harder and harder to understand if we can get the gas out of the ground. so they had to build elsewhere. the president's policies of multiplying regulations. he's been adding regulations 2 1/2 times greater than his predecessor. more regulations, dodd-frank, obama care, card check, cap and trade, holding off on energy resources, that has not made it more likely for america and our economy to recover. it's made it harder for this economy to recover. thank heavens the entrepreneurial and innovative spirit of the american people is winning out and over coming all these burde

there's stuff in dodd/frank that's already there. section 121.saying bank of america needs to be broken up. and so far we haven't really seen any response to that from the fed. i think there's two parts. we need to sort of make sure that it doesn't get watered down in this drafting of the regulation before it becomes final. then we also need to make sure that there are actual -- they are using the new powers they have been given. >> that depends on who is on the fence. and -- you know, remember when james carville once said trying -- said -- reincarnated and wanted to come back as the bond market everyone is scared. >> thank you. it is also when bill clinton said in his first term when they were first negotiating the budget, eisenhower, we are all republicans now. and -- because i think what happens in -- you see this over and over again. democratic administrations got into power and first thing they do is have to reassure wall street. and so there are -- appointments to secretary of the treasury and appointments to the fed and almost invariably

so it is certainly true that 34 many of the provisions of dodd/frank are aimed towards the banks. they should be spared even the need to demonstrate that their small banks. >> they currently do have to demonstrate. >> what we're doing at the fed, we have a subcommittee of two governors, governor duke, a community banker and governor raskin, who was -- besides being a senate staff person -- was also the head of supervision in maryland. so they're both very knowledgeable about small banks. and their job working with staff is to try to first make sure that rules that don't apply to small banks are not put in force and that in addition to that, that we provide as much clarity as we can to what the small banks need to worry about, what part they can just throw away. to help us on that, we created an advisory council of institutions we meet with. we get their feedback. so, you know, i appreciate your point. and i think it's progress in moving away from the safety and soundness issue. >> do you feel it's fweting better? the community bankers i'm talking to are getting more frustrated. to

bailout in 2008 and you had dodd/frank this huge financial law signed into law. and at that time they could not get it through, and they had to strip it out of the conference report of the wee hours last night as they were debating it. so trying to bring it back now is a difficult thing, and housing advocates have spoken with since it has been announced said that they would hope that there would be another way to achieve this, and not that they don't agree with the idea of trying to hold banks accountable for the financial crisis and their role therein, but the fact that it is dead on arrival politically makes it a hard sell. >> well, let me put this in terms of the political campaign, because we have just wrapped up the florida primary yesterday and the nevada primary is on saturday and these are two states where they have a huge percentage of the housing stock under water or foreclosed and the ununemployment rate in florida and nevada higher than this rest of the country largely because of the housing industry and the job losses. >> a great point, and something

i tried to pass some legislation in dodd-frank that says if you are too big to fail, you're too damn big, and you should be broken up. i tried to pass legislation to say it shall be illegal to have naked credit default swaps. you've got to have an insurable interest. couldn't get either passed. >> you're talking about dodd-frank passed after the 2008 crash to try to prevent it from happening again, and you're saying it's too weak to prevent another collapse. >> it is. yeah, i mean dodd-frank passed with my vote because it does some good things and moves in the right direction, but it is timid. it doesn't -- if you were going to address the real causes here, you would decide that too big to fail cannot be tolerated. if you're too big to fail, we need to be slicing away at those enterprises and bring them back down to size. and i hope that congress will begin doing that at some point. >> but you don't expect it will really. even as we speak, capitol hill, over your shoulder there, is swarming with lobbyists from wall street trying to weaken further an already weakened bill, right? >> a

the problem with the dodd-frank reform, there's this financial stability oversight council.s going through the same thing. if you look at mf global, which was the last institution that had some problems, they filed bankruptcy on october 31st. our early warning system looked at that at their board meeting on october 31. they are not acting in this role envisioned in dodd-frank. >> they have this fantasy they make a bunch of rules they can fix it as opposed to writing down the debt and moving on with our lives. >> how difficult was it to get hold of the figures? the true financial information of all these bailouts? >> well, there's what's called the freedom of information act, which is very nice sounding. you think you could walk into the agencies and get what you wanted. they have exemptions, which are essentially big enough to drive a truck through in the sense that they label something deliberative process, and the agency puts that label on something and they can immediately exempt it from any release. i was struggling with that. i got a lot of help from judicial watch. the

the dodd-frank act designed it to be free of the most basic checks and balances. and unfortunately the president has circumvented with his checks of the recess appointment of mr. cordray. i hope that the supreme court will determine this issue. because of the structure of the bureau, this means that mr. cordray will have unfettered power. his decisions alone will determine how the bureau approaches its work. if he so chooses, he does not have to answer to anyone. this is not a choice any bureaucrat should have. since his appointment, mr. cordray, said he would intend to proceed cautiously. the test is whether this will find its way into the bureau's actions. the actions have been inconsistent with the promise of the leaders. under dodd-frank the bureau is required to convene panels of small businesses to discuss the impact of proposed regulations. mr. cordray has said that they will convene these small panels not just because the law tells us to do so but we recognize that it will help us do our work better. the bureau has yet to convene a small business panel des

. >> when it was -- >> dodd-frank was a year ago. >> i stand corrected on the time, my point remains. >> the gentle lady will have an additional 30 seconds. >> i think the gentlemen for putting into the record the correct number of years s years whatever it is and i'm sure it's the case. the point i made by introducing this is that the president's patience had been exhausted and that even members of a prior administration who had held this very office said at some point somebody has to quote call the senate's bluff, i think that is what was done here and i ask for your response with respect to that or should he just have it go on for another two or four years however long it might have taken. >> i do that opinion reflects the fact that the basis for the president's actions are not uniquely partisan. there's a sort of wider more sod i -- more solid ground in which he is operating. i think the president faces a situation where he knew if he did not act, there would be these harms that would continue to occur. that the consumer financial protection bureau would be left unable to perform

let me talk about the amendment that we were responsible for including in the dodd frank legislation from extractive industries in which you were helpful in supporting that effort and having it included in the dodd frank provisions. i would ask if you could perhaps share with us how you see that playing internationally. that is important for investors to have transparency, but it also leads to stability of governments that are critically important to u.s. interest. the international community is looking at the united states and sees the leadership here and wondering if you can share how you think this will be effective internationally. the leadership on transparency of the mineral companies so that the wealth goes to the people rather than to fund corruption. >> first, i want to commend you and the senator for including the principals and the disclosure requirements in dodd frank. we know and see it every day how development of natural resources has fuelled corruption and mismanagement and the so-called oil curse or resource curse and it upheeds brought cased economic growth. you set

the drafters of dodd-frank were a adamant about this, they said a safety and soundness check on your actions would gut the agency. but you stated, have safety and soundness as our primary concern, we have consumer protection as our primary concern. how do you intend to reconcile your actions at the bureau, where i presume you will give no consideration to the safety and soundness to institutions, with your responsibilities as a board member of the fdic where you must consider the safety and soundness of institutions. it looks to me that it should be a balance. safety and soundness is important but so is consumer protection. you cannot have one without another. if you don't have safety and soundness, you won't have an institution. >> i agree with that, senator. i think it is a balance. what i said their primary responsibility is safety and soundness and ours is consumer protection we are going to be consulting and coordinating with the other banking agencies at all times, that is why i believe congress put us on the financial stability oversight council to work with them. i agree with

at the federal reserves level, we support the basic goals of dodd-frank which are to create a more macro approach to problems, making sure we are looking at systematic risks and to make sure the large institutions are better supervisored, have better liquidity. and we understand the specifics of the regulations make a difference. it's important to make sure that we get the best result for the least burden. and we have a result of comments and consultation and cost/benefit analysis to make sure that we are putting out rules that are on the one hand effective at reducing the risk of financial crisis and minimizes the regulatory cost, particularly for the smallest banks which are able to deal with the costs. >> thank you very much. >> mr. chairman, thank you for that repeating of the notion that the financial reform bill is causing all the terrible problems. i should point out, bipartisan nature is not fully understood. another contributor was sheila bare, and i was at the treasury department and noted the picture of frank paulson that has gone up, with his approval at least, took credit fo

we've got to take the big leap to do a globalized dodd-frank. because without it, the kind of slipping around controls takes place across borders and you have an escape hatch for whatever regime is in place. >> i have to dash away. i apologize for that. it's been a great discussion. i hope we can really continue to wrestle with these issues of international monetary strategies and institutions. and i wanted to mention that it was a number of years ago that i remember an article in which warren buffett was replacing his investments to be denominated in foreign currencies because of his expectation that the dollar wasn't going to be the global currency. that is also an instrument or a change that would have an impact on the cost of our goods to the world. to the degree the dollar becomes weaker, making them a more affordable to the world. so that's another interesting conversation. i'm sorry i'm going to miss the sweden solution, but i look forward to hearing about it. thank you. >> thank you, senator merkley. senator thune, would you like to take

i wanted to ask about -- well, much of the debate to repay rule under dodd/frank seems to center under whether qualified mortgage sh either be safe harbor or rebutable presumption. the concern has been expressed rebutable assumption that will result in overly cautious underwriting and less consumer access to credit. can you share with me your views on the safe harbor rebutable presumption? >> sure. so, the ability to repay rule, as you know, and as you mentioned, is one of the rules congress has required us to adopt to try to fix what we're seeing and what were irregular problems in the mortgage market. i mean, you would think you wouldn't really need to have a rule where the lender pays attention to whether the borrower can repay the loan but securitization practice and other things created misaligned incentives so we're to adopt that rule. one issues we've heard maybe most about with respect to that rule thus far and we aren't even to the proposed rule stage, although it is a rule we'll be working on over the course of the year. it intersects with some other rules that others -- anot

me, as a supporter of dodd/frank, i have no idea whether dodd/frank could have or should have addressed this issue. there's simply not enough knowledge on the table yet. for all i know it might be simple basic criminalality. for all i know it might be excessive risk. i don't know yet. i haven't talked to anybody that has drawn a conclusion yet. i'm here to learn, if you want the truth. not to draw conclusions. i didn't come today or the last hearing or probably the next hearing we have in the not too distant future with those conclusions. that's why i'm here. i have lots of different questions. i still fear we may be ahead of the curve, which is a good thing. we'll probably have a whole lot of questions as we did last time that can't be answered. it's important to ask them, continue there investigation to see not just in this instance, as i have said before and will continue to say, it's always bad for a company to lose a billion dollars. it's a bad thing. really, if there's a criminal aspect to it, somebody misappropriated funds, that's not what congress does, that's justice department

dodd-frank was designed to prevent banks from failing again. the government from having to go in and bail them out. but we have stuff like this and a lot of other baloney stuff, forcing bangs to do things to squeeze the earnings and creating new consumer panels and the consumer, this was not all about the consumer but it was about banks taking too much risk. what is the word, fatuous, how is that for a five dollar word, it is stupid. okay, c.e.o.'s get paid a lot. do we, just, and, by the way, it is interesting how they snuck it in knowing that an election year when this went into effect would come around the corner. so, clearly is it an election year ploy. dodd-frank --. >>neil: is it a requirement? >>guest: of all banks. >>neil: so companies have to comply. >>guest: it will be to their official documents. >>neil: so you will know my boss is paid 500 times the average --. i can see the "usa today" saying, here is the ranking of companies and the gap. >>guest: it is purely political. that is the problem with dodd-frank. that is why they need to

many of the provisions of dodd- frank are aimed at the biggest banks. small banks should be stated the need. >> they do have to demonstrate it. >> what we are doing, we have a subcommittee of two governors, governor duke and governor raskin who was the head of supervision in maryland. they are very knowledgeable about small banks. their job, working with staff, is to try to first make sure rules that it not apply to small banks are not put in force. to provide as much clarity as we can to what the small banks need to worry about. to help us on that, we have created an advisory council. we get their feedback. i appreciate your point. i think it is progress that we are moving away from the safety and soundness. >> the think it is getting better in the next year? it is the frequency of how many small pieces. with a bank of 40 people, they cannot keep up with the frequency. >> we have a process whereby we will try to provide guidance to small banks about what parts they can throw away. >> it would be very helpful. obviously there are a number of banks out t

we didn't think they would give any ground at all amid dodd/frank. he said a little bit of give from jpmorgan, saying they will review all of the rules, how they work together. but i think there's also a subtle political message here, maria, which is that while republicans are going to campaign against dodd/frank, it sounds to me the obama administration is willing to campaign on dodd/frank. >> let me ask you this, steve. he didn't give us a date, but i know that the volcker rule was supposed to be implemented in july. they keep pushing the comment period out. do we know if it's still going to be july? did he say anything that would suggest -- >> he did not, maria. but my guess is you're talking to a few bankers who are really curious about this question. here's the issue, it's called the volcker rule, but there aren't any rules related to the volcker rule that have been passed, or the substantial ones. this will go into effect july 21, i believe it is, whether or not the actual rules of the volcker rule are in place. that's a substantial question th

on obamacare, con dodd-frank, i have been for private sector health care. i believe in capital markets. that has been my philosophy. i have stood for those things, on like other people in this race. these are the huge issues of the day. these are the issues that will decide this election. it is about to your trust in what kind of america we will have. we have a strong track record that police and you, believes in it for the markets and free people -- that believes in you, believes in free markets and free people. we have an opportunity here with the right candidate and the right message to go out and tell the story to the american public. how we can build a strong prosperous america. we have the plans to do it. if we can put those plans in place and did that last piece, cut the government, i propose a balanced budget. i was fighting for a balanced budget before it was cool to fight for a balanced budget. back in 1995 -- [applause] 1995, we had an opportunity to pass a balanced budget amendment to the constitution. we came within one vote. most people do not

and dodd-frank is doing something, right?e guys i talked to really feel the pressure of the regulatory environment. and it's changing their business, there's debate about how much it's changing their business, if you look at the leverage ratios, not to get technical, the businesses cannot borrow as much money. i know that critics wanted to go further and break up the banks, but you know, the reality is, the regulations are working and it will be a question now whether the republicans will be able to water them down when a lot of the rules are being argued in washington. >> and there's no shortage of anger directed at the white house for these regulations, actually kind of maybe sort of working. gabe, thank you for joining us and sharing your wisdom with us. >> thank you. >> his piece, the event mascula -- what the tough talk means for the u.s. and the region next on "now." ♪ he was a 21st century global nomad ♪ ♪ home was an airport lounge and an ipad ♪ ♪ made sure his credit score did not go bad ♪ ♪ with a free-credit-score-

we see everybody up on stage at the debate complaining about dodd-frank.wo of the three candidates supported the wall street bailout, the predecessor of which dodd-frank was based upon. who would provide a clear contrast? believing in the conservative and vision, bottom-up, free people, free markets, not government dependency, government control. we're not going to win with money. we are going to win with contrast, win with ideas, when by making -- win by making barack obama and his failed policies the issue in this race. [applause] we won in 2010 because conservatives rallied. they were excited about the contrasts, excited about the candidates were put forth in that election. that is why we won. we always talk about how do we get the moderates. why would an undecided voter vote for a candidate who the party is not excited about? [applause] we need conservatives now to rally for conservatives to go into november, excite the conservative base, and defeat barack obama in the fall. [applause] [applause]

we may not like the dodd frank bill and think it overly em cumbers the security markets, we may think that the authorities are better off exercised by the treasury department, we may have all of those objections, but those objections are to be heard in the debate on the legislation. once the legislation is passed, they are to be advanced. the law is to be honored, and that includes honoring the recess appointment authority of the president. you know, there was another reason i think more for the lack of intercession appointment, and that was because the initial years were spent trying to figure out which vacancy was covered. these that existed prior to the recess, or those that only arose during the context of the recess. that was where most of the focus was in the 18th and 19th centuries. but with the exception of the misguided attorney general knox who was rather promptly overruled, it seems to me every attorney general that examined this and every office of legal counsel that examined this indeed concluded that intrasession practices have by virtue of tradition if nothing else, and

and the regulations implemented under dodd/frank, he spent 30 minutes a week on regulations. he now spends three to four hours a day, and he's getting out of business. and so the big guys will take over. why? they have big compliance departments. they can handle this. i've always said, and i really believe this, that unfortunately big business doesn't necessarily mind big government. gives them a competitive advantage. but big government and regulation kills the little guy. kills innovation. kills the -- the -- the -- the -- creates barriers to entry. look at obamacare. obamacare if you get to 50 employees, all of a sudden you're going to get hit with huge tax burdens. there's companies right now, i know, i've talked to them, trying to figure out how they can get under 50 employees so they're not going to have to comply with obamacare. why would we do this? but that's what we're doing to the small business. we're saying, don't grow. you're going to get nailed. even if you don't, if you're going to sit there and we're going to tell you how to manage your business, that creates

section 165 of dodd/frank.given the opportunity to differentiate among companies on an individual basis or by category, taking into consideration capital structure, riskiness and complexity. and of course congress put this provision in because we expected that you will differentiate between the largest and most complex bank holding companies and those with more traditional activities who also exceed the $50 billion level in assets. can you tell us, have you yet established at least conceptually the different categories or tiers of risk subcategories in associated enhanced safeguards, including specifically with regard to capital that will exist for the bank holding companied that have access larger than 50 billion? >> well, as you know, that's section 165, 166 of dodd/frank, we've put that out for comment. we're still receiving comment on that. and we've also -- we've also made public our discussions on the basil capital rules, basil 3, and both call for a gray datdat dated application to banks with the highest

these included rule making under federal consumer laws that predated dodd frank. very important lending laws, home mortgage disclosure act, conducting supervisory examinations with banks and assets over $10 billion. and taking enforcen't actions. and prior to january 4th, the actions taken in the bureau's name reference this power a presumably were approved by this secretary and his need. now, of course, all they are doing to do that. if that authority is held illegal, all the bureau's actions, including those that have recently been taken under this treasury secretary's department will be imbalanced. what previously had been clear power to exercise some of the bureau's all right authority has been replaced by significant uncertainty with respect to all the bureau's authority. to take an example on the remittance's rule that is going to go into effect on february 7th and that the bureau just issued could be challenged on this basis even though it could have been issued under the treasury secretary's authority. the same is true of the mortgage underwriting rule tha

so one of these days we've got to take the big leap to do a globalized dodd-frank because without it the kind of slipping around, the controls that adam lerrick mentioned takes place across bored eshs and you have another escape hatch from what every american union takes place. >> i have to dash. i want to say it been a great discussion. i wanted to mention mr. lerrick it was a number of years ago i remember an article in which warren buffett was replacing his effort -- the threat out there could have profound consequences both enormous shocks but it's also an instrument or a change that would have an impact on the cost of our goods to the world. and to the degree the dollar becomes weaker, making them more affordable to the world. that's another interesting conversation, i'd love to have. i'm sorry i'm going to miss the sweden solution, but i look forward to hearing about it. thank you. >> thank you, senator merkley. >> senator thune, would you like -- >> i can ask a couple quick questions. >> then we're going to go to a second round. >> thanks for holding the hearing. i think it's

dodd-frank was going too far is preposterous. it's economic and not taken seriously on wall street but they are going to score a lot points with people who are against regulation in general. >> when folks on wall street hear mitt romney saying no regulatory reform, they are laughing, saying that doesn't solve the problem but we love that mitt romney sort of looking out. >> absolutely. he is standing up for us. look, they have the expectation that they are going to get that role back. they have been getting nothing but deregulation for 20s, 30 years, and for them to have any regulation increased at all is an abberation they have a full expectation that all of these laws will be whittled away again. it's just it will take them a little while. >> matt taibbi rolling stolen "countdown" contributor. thank you for coming in? >> thank you. >> the komen foundation apologized foplanned parenthood and reversed the decision. the damage komen i know conflicted upon its self may not ♪ ♪ [ male announcer ] you know why you don't see other full

when we passed dodd/frank. i'm a great believer in not reinventing the wheel. did we take a look at what the new asian banks put in place when we designed dodd/frank? does that make sense and would it make sense to do so? >> my impression as someone who followed it closely is that we were very taken with the exceptional nature of the united states. and there were various lessons we could draw from scandinavia. he hit the nail on the head. make banking boring. and the scandinavians have come through this crisis in relatively good shape from a fiscal point of view, in part because they had had terrible problems with the banks in the 1990s. got completely out of control, just like emerging markets. and they cleaned them up and made them much more conservative and careful including much higher levels of capital. >> what the asians adopted was an idea called the international standard which was invented by one of our staff, morris goldstein. the idea was then picked up and heavily promoted with the emerging markets by the u.s. government, by the international moneta

it presents a pretty dark portrait of our financial system in the wake of dodd-frank and stein. i think the article sums it up in ambitious is often welcomed but in this case it is leaving the roots of the financial crisis underaddressed and more or less everything else in financial overwhelmed. mr. chairman, dodd-frank required the regulators write over 400 rules for the financial system, yet, over 300 of these remain unwritten. would you agree that this lack of clarity is a hindrance on financial sector? >> i think so. we're working as quickly as we can. we want to create as much clarity as we can.

. >> in that context, under dodd-frank we're setting up a more transparent derivative mark are there parallel efforts in europe to clear up an exchange and clearinghouse? >> not at the level and for the instruments that would really matter. there's a lot of cross border trading. they are dragging their feet on key parts of this. for example, take the euro swap market, interest rate swaps. it's over $300 trillion inotal exposure there. no one can tell you who owe what is towhom, either on basis or on a net basis, which is the bare minute number you should be able to. that is deeply troubling. if that isn't keeping regulators in this country awake at night, they're not paying attention. >> it does highlight the point to the u.s. agree to the degree possible has to be involved in a discussion that helps establish that discussion and trading agreement as well in europe as in the united states. >> i wanted to add one point. a fundamental problem in the pe they still do it at the national level. they still have not been able to get the european monetary union to encompass european-wide fin

in that case dodd/frank and sarbanes-oxley. 30 seconds until europe closes across the pond.about what happened and explain why we're obsessed with the letters ltro. >> if we're allowed to mention them on the network. what i think is really interesting, as we come into the european close, the power of the fed and the power of ben bernanke. you know, the world is watching what you see on capitol hill. let me show you where we are on the bond market. we have to mention of course this huge dump of liquidity that will come through tomorrow. in excess of $710 billion deposited into the bank accounts of 800 banks around europe, equal to 5%, 6% of the annual output of the eurozone economy. that's why you can see they're making way for that on the bond markets. yields falling today. we'll see what happens tomorrow when the cash is increasingly around for them to use. take a look where we are on the equity markets coming into the closing. this is what i mean about the power of bernanke. this is how we've traded today, as you can see. this is when the announcement came out what the ecb

seen this most recently with the fight against the volcker rule now the volcker rule was part of dodd frank it's supposed to ban proprietary trading that's where banks speculate with your money with customer money to make a profit for themselves by taking huge risks while doing it the problem with it is when too big to fail banks do this and something goes wrong and they're highly leveraged they could get wiped out only they won't be out by a doubt will day because they're too big to fail so they'll be bailed out by you and me now wall street is fighting the volcker rule to the nail and you can imagine why but even without wall street fighting it the five hundred thirty page monstrosity of a bill allows for plenty of loopholes according to critics as you can imagine in five hundred thirty pages now david outlined by the financial activist group occupy the s.e.c. which wrote a three hundred twenty five page letter to the agency in charge of regulating wall street which is what the f.c.c. is now to set this all up one of the loopholes in this volcker rule comes in the form of a market making

employee and finally it would remove incentives for the whistleblowers previously guaranteed by dodd frank since you know often whistleblowers will lose their jobs after reporting of the wrongdoing inside companies. and it's kind of funny with a lot of things here in washington the title of this bill is a little deceptive it's called the whistle blower improvement act so there's this and speaking of whistle blowers the accused wiki leaks whistleblower bradley manning begins his trial next week as it turns out president obama also has used the espionage act to charge six people for alleged mishandling of classified information six people may not sound like a lot but before obama there were only three cases ever like this so not more about all of this i'm joined now by kathleen mcclellan attorney for the government accountability project kathleen let's talk first about what i just mentioned with president obama how already he has charged six people using the espionage act which by the way goes back to world war one yes it's a world war one era law that has been used three times as you said i

just it's not a bill it's it's the regulators regulators think it was dodd frank right i. i don't know i think they could do it in twenty pages or less easily twenty pages or less well that's a good note to end on ladies i really appreciate you being here on the show to break this all down for us at such an important issue that you guys have been doing amazing work on that was alexis goldstein and kaitlyn climb both members of occupy the s.e.z. . yes . all right before we go let's break things down with our own team now want to bring in dimitri kovtun as our producer here in the studio and shannon donna in the control room to talk about this so we know greece is not in the clear there are still racing to make reforms and there was fresh bad news today of a downgrade. according to the ratings definition that pitch is given us a few rating indicates a quote unquote hard to fault risk by reading verbatim darn good chere you're going to have any possibility to see ratings signal imminent default from an all right so there is that you have the euro group in this context who wan

was working for the industry or the koch brothers funding people trying to declaw and the fang dodd frank so that we can't say look get in there and see what's going on with oil speculation or here in california the oil deregulation that happened in the late ninety's that led to and ron and the rolling blackouts i mean this is the way the game is played and and what they'll do is they'll cover their trail by making sure government can't go in and take a look at what's going on and regulate it and then they'll say you have no proof we're doing something wrong so that's the way the game has been played for a long time and futures derivatives all those types of things that once you know had a good purpose kind of like insurance for the airline you mentioned have now become tools to really potentially break the economy this is just one example of that to gamble and to hustle and for the record phil gramm the guy who pushed the commodities futures modernization act and bliley which blue glass steagall which is a whole nother hysteria both of which tremendously held one company enron his wife w