today we'll hear about the ongoing implementation of dodd frank. academic researchers estimate when dodd/frank is fully estimate there had will be more than 13,000 new regulatory restrictions in the code of federal regulations. over 10,000 pages have already been proposed, requiring as is estimated over 24 million compliance hours each year. that's just the tip of the iceberg. that's some 400 rules required by dodd/frank, roughly one-third of it finalized. about one-third have been proposed but not finalized and roughly one-third have not even yet been proposed. together the hundreds of dodd/frank proposed rules are far too complex, offering confusing and often contradictory standards and regulatory requirements. i'm concerned that the regulators do not understand and are not focusing aggressively enough on the cumulative effect of the hundreds of proposed rules and that there as lack of coordination among the agencies, both domestically and internationally. that's why it's important for the regulators to perform meaningful cost benefit analysis so

today we'll hear about the ongoing implementation of dodd frank.academic researchers estimate when dodd/frank is fully estimate there had will be more than 13,000 new regulatory restrictions in the code of federal regulations. over 10,000 pages have already been proposed, requiring as is estimated over 24 million compliance hours each year. that's just the tip of the iceberg. that's some 400 rules required by dodd/frank, roughly one-third of it finalized. about one-third have been proposed but not finalized and roughly one-third have not even yet been proposed. together the hundreds of dodd/frank proposed rules are far too complex, offering confusing and often contradictory standards and regulatory requirements. i'm concerned that the regulators do not understand and are not focusing aggressively enough on the cumulative effect of the hundreds of proposed rules and that there as lack of coordination among the agencies, both domestically and internationally. that's why it's important for the regulators to perform meaningful cost benefit analysis so

liz: is dodd-frank unconstitutional? oklahoma's attorney general scott pruitt challenged part of the act saying what is supposed to protect the consumer is putting people at risk? he will join us ex-chrufsy are to tell us about the lawsuit that might affect stock. david: the tarp bailout, is it a success story or not? some people say they paid back all their money with interest. we have somebody on who says tarp is losing money and it probably we'll never get it back. if you're looking for a case model, this is a negative example, not a positive one. stay tuned for him coming up. ♪ . this is $100,000. we asked total strangers to watch it for us. thank you so much. i appreciate it. i'll be right back. they didn't take a dime. how much in fees does your bank take to watch your money? if your bank takes more money than a stranger, you need an ally. ally bank. your money needs an ally. today is gonna be an important day for us. you ready? we wanna be our brother's keeper. what's number two we wanna do? bring it up to 90 deca

has already gone down that road and dodd-frank strengthen those provisions. the second set of proposals is what i characterize as a functional split so saying there are certain functions that cannot be done within a bank holding company, glass-steagall was that approach which separated investment banking from commercial banking. there are proposals out like this and some of them would allow some of them would allow underwriting and not marketmaking. others might say nothing at all other than commercial banking, and the issues are kind of on both sides. on the one hand we have to ask if we did that, would it actually address the problem that led to the crisis as senator johnson was indicating in introductory remarks, a failure of bear stearns, a broker dealer, not a bunch of relationships with i b is that precipitated the crisis and the second issue is what would be lost. are there valuable roles to play when for example and underwriter also makes market and securities which it underwrites and most people would conclude that there are. the third example is emb

function of dodd-frank. i think it's been a failure at dreathing the underlying causes of the financial crisis. >> see, doctor is trying to see something on the point. >> i took a corner there and -- [inaudible] [laughter] >> too big to fail is a huge issue. something i know i have heard you before you are nervous with just saying let's shut down at the certain size or whatever. it's a hard issue for which there isn't been an obvious solution. i think you're selling dodd-frank too short in the following sense. besides the capital requirement and all of the things designed to prevent failures from happening, one of the parts was the idea of living wills. financial institutions are supposed to write one of the things the law tried to make clear in. we're not going to prop up a particular institution if it gets in to trouble. there has to be a way that it can be wound down that will not bring the system down. i think that is one. if we can implement that. and i agree it's hard and whether banks will really do t

people said dodd-frank didn't go far enough.ys generals from states who say it gives treasury too much power. that the treasury secretary can pinpoint a problem matic bank and liquidate it within 24 hours. that does not give people enough time and bondholders, et cetera. do they have a point? >> i don't think so, liz. i think this statute was very carefully crafted. it doesn't give the secretary treasury so much power. that power resides in the financial stability oversight council that is collection of all the regulators. they have a process very well thought through and subject to lots and lots of public comment and adjustment based on the public comment. this is a statute an important addition to the safety and stability and resilience of our financial system. liz: so you think it will hold up against 11 attorneys general who are fighting it? >> absolutely i do. liz: china, every treasury secretary going back to robert rubin, larry summers john snow, paul o'neill, geithner, paulson, they edged toward the chinese let your yuan

it basically is pointing to the approach that was taken in dodd-frank. . dodd-frank. it is saying look, the problem of the 2008 financial crisis is that the regulatories and supervisors didn't have enough information or the authority to do something about it. then when they did, they didn't do something about it. they need to give the -- them more power and tell them to be more aggressive. that plus increased capital liquidity means we don't have to worry about too big too fail institutions because they won't fail. the government can step in when an incompetent manager screws things up. i just don't have the faith in government that they can see it coming and they can prevent it. so the question is, we now have something like two dozen stoically important institutions, former i will known as too big to -- formerly known as too big too fail institutions. we have a structure that is like the structure we had with fannie and freddie. nobody wants to acknowledge it and we're all hoping that these institutions won't fail through some combination of competent management and

you know, i do worry a lot of dodd-frank was left to be filled in. all the rulemaking is an arduous process, a slow process. it does create difficulties for businesses. and one of the things, and also it is a time or rules can get weekend or basic principles are there but the devil is in the detail. and i do think we need to watch that, and i am somewhat concerned that maybe we are not going to be doing enough as we actually write those rules. >> small topic. [laughter] so, increased capital liquidity is good. completely ignoring two of the largest financial institutions that are still causing problems and have cost taxpayers hundreds of billions of dollars, fannie mae and freddie mac. that's just a big gaping hole. by think the other thing is that the approach behind dodd-frank was higher capital and liquidity, rearrange the org chart. are used to be a group called the president working group on financial markets, which was the treasury secretary and head of all the regulatory agencies. that the group, they have not added a couple different table tw

it is important that we extend dodd-frank. if you're confirmed, the first problem you might have is the implementation of the dodd-frank rule known as a q.r.m. i was scared to death they would overreach but they didn't and they define it in such a way to avoid lending and housing but to protect housing. the pend rule which has been circulated twice and pulled by the six-member committee would require for exception a 20% or greater down payment. if that took place you would withdraw 60% of the people buying housing. nobody is going to hold risk retention for loans for that length of time. would you engage with hud, if f. fdi, drorvings come up with a reasonable approach for the retention in dodd-frank? >> if confirmed, i would engage in the issues of rules implementing dodd-frank and the relationship between the department of treasury and the department of housing and developmentment. we continue to work closely on those issues. the q.r.m. rule were designed to address impt issues and i appreciate the comment you made on the ru

dodd-frank goes some way, and i applaud dodd and frank and others for this very very much, towards forcing derivatives to be standardized and traded on organized exchanges like stock options. well, stock options are a derivative. that is a very familiar dative ri that's been standardized and trading on originnized exchanges for case, and it works really well. one upshot of of that is if you decide you'd like to buy apple call options with a strike price of $419.27 that expire on your birthday, you can't do that. you go to the market, and they're a standardized commodity. you pick the one that's closest to what you want to do. the over the count derhode island tyes -- derivatives market was just the opposite. l that means, first of all, that nobody's really paying attention. there's no standardization, no market trading. if the counterpart gets in trouble d counterparty gets in trouble, then you're in trouble. and these were ones that got us into big troubles. dodd-frank takes some of that on and pushed things towards organized explainings. the industry is fighting back norsely. i don't thi

. >> there's a three-part plan under dodd/frank. part number one is to impose costs on large institutions that offset the benefits they get in the funding markets, for example, capital surcharges, activity restrictions, liquidity requirements, living wills, a whole bunch of other things that impose greater cost and force the largest firms to take into account their systemic footprint. that's number one. number two is the orderly liquidation authority which we're working closely with the fdic and our foreign counterparts to figure out how we would take down a large institution without bringing down the system. and part three is a whole raft of measures to try to strengthen the overall financial system so it will be more credible that we can take down a large institution without bringing down the system. that's sort of the three-part plan. it's working to some extent. for example, even though u.s. banks are stronger financially than european banks, frequently u.s. banks have wider credit default swap spreads indicating a higher probab

dodd-frank take some of that on and the industry is fighting back ferociously. i don't think it has gone far enough. but in the right direction. that is one example of the volcker rule making this example. things are yet to be done. >> in regards to the fiscal cliff and the cumulative effects and policies in particular, that of maintaining interest rates artificially lower, which you call quantitative easing, i ask especially because recently economic journalist william cohen had an article on the front page of "the washington post." this is what he said. quantitative easing not only hurts older americans on fixed incomes and loans that are dutifully saved for retirement, and these are people who can't afford to take advantage of historically low mortgage interest rates. mainly the quantitative easing helps the wall street banks and traders with a dynamic that could be setting us up for another financial crisis as investors have high-quality investments that wall street is only too happy to provide. >> i do not agree with the last part. i don't think there are a

they say dodd-frank fails to protect your bottom line. me now, director of fincial affect -- financial regulation studies indicate institute. tell me, you said current regulations, we could end up paying for yet another bailout. i have to tell you, all the democrats in washington say you are wrong. what don't they know? >> well, i sent a -- i think they want to defend the act of the past, but the evidence is is too big to fail this year, the largest bank should be able to borrow at a lower rate than rivals. midsized and small banks, and if you looked at the data it is clear that they can. it was not that way before the crisis. big banks did not have an advantage. again, i do think that the democrats on the hill, the administration was to sell you on the dodd-frank works when it clearly does not to read -- gerri: here is something. he said the limits dodd-frank puts on the fed rescue authority is largely cosmetic. what do you mean? >> absolutely. the change that congress did, it said, if you do any bailout programs from now what needs to b

the state of dodd-frank, which the next guest says is 9,000 pages of rules and regulations making it do their job and lend people money. former oklahoma governor, frank keating, the president and ceo of the american bankers association. governor, tharngs for being with us right now. >> my pleasure, tracy, thank you. >> this is killing the community banks because, i mean, you got basal3, you name it, stuff coming on on the little guys in a point where they are ready to lend, aren't they? >> they really do. banks have never been health departmentier. they have a -- healthier, they have a lot of capital, and lending willingness. there's a mountain slide, if you will, of rules and regulations coming from washington. you mentioned dodd-frank, 9,000 pages of proposed and final rules, and the average community bank has 37 employees so that's, you know, stacks upon stacks of daniellesteele novels. 20% is come pliement, not good for lending. obviously, we believe in regulations, it's appropriate, safety and soundness is essential, but sometimes enough is enough. tracy: yeah, and reading daniel

there's a three-part plan under dodd/frank. part number one is to impose costs on large institutions that offset the benefits they get in the funding markets. for example, capture is charges, activity restrictions, liquidity requirements. living wills. a whole bunch of other things that impose greater cost and force the larger firms to take into account their systemic footprint. that's number one. number two is the order of the liquidation authority which we're working closer with the fdic and our foreign counterparts to find out how we'd take down a large institution without taking down the system. and part three is a whole raft of measures to try to strengthen the overall financial system so that it will be more credible that we could take down a large institution without bringing down the system. that's sort of the three-part plan. it's working to some extent. for example, even though u.s. banks are stronger financially than european banks, frequently u.s. banks have wider credit default swap spreads indicating a higher prob

it's part of dodd- frank legislation. supporters hoped awarding whistleblowers would encourage more people to come forward and fight wall street corruption. but, according to marketwatch, the sec has paid out a scant $50,000 in claims. that's despite a fund of $450 million. some say the process takes too long and are hoping senator elizabeth warren may push the program to its full potential. the federal reserve confirms that one of its computer systems was hacked. apparently it was the work of the hacktivist group "anonymous" and targeted an emergency communications system. the fed released a statement saying the exposure was fixed quickly, is no longer an issue and did not affect critical operations of its system. the breach did, however, involve the collection of sensitive data of 4,000 banking officials. the ntsb says it will release its latest findings today in the investigation of boeing's troubled dreamliner. however, the agency specified the full investigation "could take weeks." the ntsb is looking into "risks" as

the bottom line is dodd-frank did and too big to fail, institutionalized too big to fail. nuer one, now hav i now have the federal government giving the ability to designate firms as too big to fail, and dodd-frank sets up the orderly liquidation that essentially allows the fdic to take taxpayer funds up to 90% of the balance sheet of the too big to fail firms and usethat to resolve the firms. as chairman of the financial services committee, we're going to deal with too big to fail, and we will introduce legislation to terminate the designation, financial institutions and tw there is something wrong in america were some institutions are too big to fail and others are too small to matter. gerri: a lot of frustrations about sequestration and not just in washington, all the country voters are so tired about hearing about the fact congress and the president can't get together and make progress on the very important issues. john boehner today, speaker of the house, addressing his frustrations with what is going on. here is the speaker. >> we should not have to move a third bill

through dodd-frank, credit allocation is in play. they haven't made any big moves yet but they're rolling them up. under the so-called consumer compliance, which is credit allocation, they can make you products, lime subprime lending, and your going to see subprime consumer lending happening. so the government can force -- they can also stop allocation. they do that -- they control the capital ratios for the banking business. before this crisis, a bank making a subprime, high-risk mortgage, had to have half as much capital as making the loan cost. increase subprime lending? if they want green energy, they can subdice dies green energy by saying green energy as a social purpose, therefore banks can pass the capital for green energy like they do for a dirty industry, whatever that means. so they set up a mechanism where they can control the allocation of capital in the united states, and when it blows up, everybody blames the bank. and the set this up -- this is intentional. >> community bank model does not work. and i think community

it if we are able to achieve some bipartisan consensus on steps to improve dodd frank, what are some ons that you think need location or improvements for reconsideration? >>. frank is a date and complicated piece of legislation that addresses many -- dodd frank is a comic at a piece addresses many issues. piece oficated legislation that addresses many issues. reduce costs without losing the purpose of the regulation. something along those lines would be doable. but fed is willing to work with you closely. in terms of specific, we want to do the work, but you mentioned in your opening remarks of clarity. there is an area which is the wish out derivative -- pushout initiative for derivatives. the burden falls heavily on small community banks, which do not have the resources to manage those regulations very effectively. i would say that we ought to work together to find ways to lower that burden for smaller institutions. >> thank you. i appreciate your advice and your willingness to work with us on this to try to improve. last issue -- i want to talk about the crisis in europe. elastic t

>> well -- >> if so, would you identify. >> the only answer i can give you is dodd-frank is a complicated bill -- >> well, that piece of it is not complicated. it's eight words. that's not complicated. it's a directive to you, and you're a part of this and a winner with dad-frank. i ask the question, why would you not go ahead and identify that, and if there's an entity that is in our nation, if it failed something that poses a systemic risk, you know that. why not go ahead to move to deal with that? >> well, the fsoc has the authority to designate nonbank firms that use the systemic, and they come under the oversite of the fed. >> let me ask, if we have firms, though, are we going -- is it your thought that under this power that you've been given, is it your thought that we would continue to have farms operating in our country that if they failed, they would pose systemic risk, or are we going to try to mitigate that? i'm curious. >> the goal of the powers you gave to the fed and other agencies is to urges as much as possible, eliminate the problem over time. additional steps i, i think,

. >> dodd frank, massive. lot os of requirements that banks become safer, not enough? why not? >> because what dodd frank did mainly is give regulators a lot of authority, so there's nothing that they cannot do. the problem is they just don't do it. that's-- you have the political robb right there. they won't do it, and you can blame the regulators, you can blame the politicians that press the regulators or you can, in this town, it was senator durbin that says they own the place. >> the book is the banker's new clothes, anat admati, thank you for your team. >> glad to be here. >> susie: today was one of the lightest trading days of the year, party because the northeast is still shoveling out from under the weekend blizzard. one sector that posted slight gains was financials, up almost 0.5%. but there was a pull back in energy stocks, one of the strongest-performing sectors this year. also moving lower: gold prices. they tumbled on word that world finance officials might issue a statement this week aimed at cooling what many are calling a "currency war". gold fell nearly $18 to

>> i very much believe dodd frank was necessary. needed to modernize the regulation of the financial- services industry. the oversight provisions need to be implemented. if confirmed, it would be an extraordinarily high priority of mine. >> one of the other things you will have in your portfolio as the treasury secretary is the instrumentation of sanctions. as the author of the iran sanctions act, i am interested in making sure treasury pursues the law that the congress passed unanimously that the president signed as our last tool to prevent iran from achieving nuclear weapons. if confirmed, will you ensure the robust enforcement of the sanctions provisions we have given to the president? >> yes, senator. if i might elaborate on that. i think our sanctions are bringing the world community together. they are they largest sanctions regime in history. i have some hope we will be able to resolve the issues we have with iran peacefully and. cinches are doing what they need to do. it is crushing the iranian economy -- sanction are doing w

it's important we complete the implementation of dodd-frank. if you are confirmed, very shortly the first problem you may have as the secretary of treasury is implementation of the dodd-frank move will known as qrm. mr. record ray just issued aqim ruling that i commend him on. i was scared to death they were going to overreach but they didn't. they defined qm as a way to avoid a predatory lending but provide housing. he also had a qrm requirement and the pending world which has been circulated twice and pulled by the six member committee would have required for the risk retention exemption, 20% or greater down payment. if that took place in the connection of the mortgage market you would withdraw 60% of the people buying from the marketplace because nobody is going to hold risk retention against loans for that length of time. will you engage as the secretary of treasury with hud, the occ and others on the committee to come up with a reasonable approach to the risk retention exemption? >> senator, i would very much as the chairman engage in the

cheryl: one of the things in dodd frank and this is the regulation that everyone is dealing with, and are not immune to this, they are going to require money transfers to be part of the consumer protection side of dodd frank. are you worried about that? do you think that will hurt the business? >> we are not worried about it. we think we have had an abundance of disclosure to our consumers. that's really what the money remittance rule of dodd frank or that is being promulgating on our industry, it is about disclosure. we are ready to go live february 7th, and mid december, cfpb delayed that. we're ready for the rule to be final. cheryl: i hate to bring up western again. the price war, are you ready for that? >> we are ready to continue to maintain and grow our shares. i will say it that way. that's what we're focused on. they did lower prices in november. cheryl: just trying to get some numbers. really quick, this is great, valentine's day is coming this week. you're warning customers about on-line valentine scams. what is out there that i need to know about for transferring money on

there's been no innovation since dodd-frank. the micromanagement -- i think this -- today, we have had the incentive program for our powers approved by the federal government. i know that's hard to believe he can as we might instant our toes to take an inordinate risk their i don't how we would do that but they have to be approved. so you've got micromanagement of large institutions. with with a going to come and i believe this is the intention is to consolidate the industry to 1520 place, then you can control the they don't like all these messy community banks. they won't ever say that. they wanted very consolidated industry that they can control. is also the lending standards of are the worst in my 40 year career. why is that? they have this obsession with standardization pictures the problem with standardization. i grew up with small lending institutions. you have to judge people. are you going to pay me back or not but you can run numbers and numbers are helpful, but at the end of the day a lot of the small business loans sh

sherman and i don't know a lot no big because the onerous regulations that dodd frank placed on small banks have actually yes he will absolutely. certain actually thriving that it would underdog and that's not an accurate that's more banks are doing is enough the security gains are growing like weeds i mean the it's the big banks he's doing great yeah ok unions as a whole are going to let. you know they're doing great because the big three spend a lot of money lobbying against them when patrick talks about banks and i don't like radios he told my community banks and he's talking about these charters many of them that are state based and they are not doing well and it's precisely because they can't they can't compete in the way that these huge banks which are large enough to have to absorb by the way they have you might say they have a monopoly then let's break up the big banks if you're in favor of competition any coloradans are fed up with gun violence and tragedy after columbine in one thousand nine hundred residents push to close the gun show loophole in the state wouldn't act colo

well the dodd frank act explicitly. tells a regulatory body called the federal. it's called f. sock but it's a federal stability oversight committee to identify banks that are too big to fail and so this agency soch has named several companies that are large financial institutions effectively saying if these companies go under we have to do something about them now ben bernanke says well the markets expect that will bail these companies out but just like with fannie mae and freddie mac. before and during the lead up to the financial crisis everybody is expecting the government to bail out banks if they don't trouble because of the belief in washington is that we have to maintain stability ben bernanke is explicit mandate at the fed is to maintain price stability washington is all about trying to create stability in financial markets there's no way that of goldman sachs or j.p. morgan chase were to go insolvent that they wouldn't be bailed out so there is this this expectation exists and it was explicitly put in place by the dodd frank act warren there she cited this figure of e

many view dodd frank by saying it doesn't drive the sharks away.ce the regulations in place didn't work, creating another level of bureaucracy exclusively to be on the side of the consumer seemed like a good idea. do the republicans in the senate at least care how it looks that they're opposed to this? >> first of all there are a lot of agencies out there that are supposed to be exclusively on the side of the voter or consumer. that's what regulatory agencies are created for. this is not new except for the way it was framed and named. it's certainly not unique in that respect. i think the idea of republicans coming out and opposing the bureau and the nomination of cordray at this point is not good strategy but again it's not exclusively--it's not the only agency that is pro consumer. >> john: i agree with you there, but it does seem to play into the hand of thester row type of the democrats. don't that's moves make the bureau like this vulnerable to less committed appointees and the threat of being starved for money? >> i think they make it like ev

how many people think the dodd- frank act as then implement it? -- has been implemented? 2.5 years since god-frank was passed, less than one third of it has been implemented and more than three quarters of the deadlines have been missed. millions of dollars were spent lobbying against it. perception that conditions have changed -- i want to show you guys why they have not changed. why obama or romney or any number of politicians would want people to think. starting with the point of what has changed, i think there have always been practices on wall street that are not great and are dubious. the simplest way to mark what has changed is look how banks make their money. and i joined the firm in 2000, when i joined wall street, at least half the money was being made in the original things that made finance get called finance. wall street finance, things that help companies raid -- raise money. they acted as an advisor in many capacities. when i joined, about 60% of goldman sachs also revenue within the banking side of the business. there will always be conflicts, but there are

he was a prominent figure in drafting and implementing dodd-frank. but he has recently lamented -- quote -- "to the extent that a growing systemic footprint increases perceptions of at least some residual too-big-to-fail quality in such a firm" -- meaning a megabank" -- not withstanding the panoply of dodd-frank and our regulations, there may be funding advantages for the firm which reinforces the impulse to grow." close quote. in a little more blunt terms, our colleague, senator elizabeth warren, who was also a figure in coming up with dodd-frank, said recently in our banking committee hearing with chairman bernanke -- quote -- "i'd like to go to the question about too big to fail, that we haven't gotten rid of it yet. and so now we have a double problem. and that is the big banks, big at the time they were bailed out the first time, have gotten bigger. at the same time investors believed with too big to fail out there it's safer to put your money into the big banks and not the little banks in effect creating an insurance policy for the big banks th

can i say on the dodd-frank bill, one important point.that bill in june, 2010, the financial community and the republicans said this is going to be the end of the markets. this is going to destroy the financial community. in the 2 1/2 years since that bill became law, the dow jones industrial average has gone up 40%. we have just had one of the best periods in american history in the stock market. and i'm not saying that the passage of the bill caused it, but the notion by trying to get good regulation, let me say this. if that's undermining, there's a lot of people that would like to be undermined. >> well, the chairman conceived it and the president is fighting to protect it. former congressman bar knee frank, thanks for your time tonight. >> thank you, al, as usual. >> ahead, for the first time ever, there are two african americans serving in the senate at the same time: and chris christie's walgt? it's a red hot controversy that everybody is taking sides. in america today we're running out of a vital resource we need to compete on the

dodd-frank is great, stop the presses, somebody says.laws put in place are great for xoom because they are so proconsumer. you have to be transparent and fees, effects, guarantee payout, give a refund when asked for. with e do that -- we do that already. we are in favor of the laws because it's good for us, but hard for the competitors. liz: those of you who remember xoom.com was a name, but you are different from back then. >> exactly. liz: congratulations. >> thank you so much. liz: president and ceo of xoom, first day of trading, up 43%. closing bell rings in 17 minutes. telecom and centurylink moving higher after getting crushed yesterday. that's what happens when you slash dividends by 25%. should you still be chasing dividends for return, and how stable are the ones you get now? could they get slashed like centurylink did in bringing in an expert to explain what he thinks about this in a fox business exclusive and what names he really likes that are dividend payers right now. ♪ ins. i didn't see them coming. i have obligations. cut

dodd-frank was a dump truck of rules. they are still coming out. -- david: slowed you down, by the way, all the dodd-frank rules? >> sure, it has an effect, had the greatest profit in our history of 145 years last year. if you focus on the customers, give quality service, which we got the jp power for retail best in customer service three years in a row, grinich we have 22, no other bank has higher than that in the united states. it's not about the rewards. it's about the customer we're responding to what they want. david: old fashioned salesmenship, you please customers than the big banks removed from the customers. talk about the fed. they printed a lot of money. it's been enabling politicians to spend more than they have. the government is not paying penalties for spending all that money on debt, but what else has it been doing? the money it's printing does not seem to be circulating on the part of the banks other than the smaller banks like your own. >> well, first of all, i'm going to speak for dick evans, and i would say you can -- we're a wa

let's get to dodd-frank.cial reform, the act pass the and signed into law by president obama in 2010, and it still has not been totally implemented. 2010 until today. what is the hold up? charlie has the latest. could it be the 1450 questions and sub questions that the law has? >> well, yeah. you know, and many of those questions, i wouldn't say all, but many of them, are involved one edict in particular in dodd-frank named after the former fed chairman, former senior adviser to president obama and economic matters had a plan to essentially take risk out of banks. make sure they don't roll the dice in the securities markets. they don't trade, do what's known as pro-- proprietary trading. it's not that simple. to date, regulators, and this is the various regulator involved in it. the cftc, the fcc, the fed, bank regulators, they still can't figure out exactly what is a proprior tear trade. here's the hold up. what's the difference between market making and proprietary trading. when i market make on a bank, i h

i want to talk to you about the dodd/frank reform.partisan consensus on steps to improve dodd/frank, what are some of the provisions that you think need clarification, or improvement for reconsideration? >> first as a general matter, senator, dodd/frank is a very big complicated piece of legislation, addresses many different issues. i'm sure there are many aspects of it that could be improved one way or another. i recall in fact that you yourself had a bill five or six years ago on reg reform simplification. >> that's right. >> which was a bipartisan effort to find ways to reduce costs without losing the purposes of the regulation. and i think something along those lines would be very doable in this context. the federal reserve would certainly be willing to work with you closely. in terms of specifics, we would want to do the work, of course, but you mentioned in your opening remarks, the end user issue, clarity on what congress would like us to do about end users, for example. another area which is proving difficult is the pushout pr

the european effort, dodd/frank increased liability standards for the ratings agencies. that alone increased the costs for anyone who wants to be an nrsro which makes firms like rapid ratings decide we don't want to be an nrsro, frankly costs are far greater than actual benefits of having this designation. >> how do we fix this? >> we need to focus on creating an environment that fosters competition. ultimately until we have new methodologies like rapid ratings and others approaching the market in different ways, new revenue models, not being paid by issuers where there's a potential conflict of interest but paid by subscribers. all these things need to be fostered and we need to make sure we're not creating barriers that makes small firms say i don't want to be in this market. >> there's so many hurdles and barriers that can't be explained in a 4:00 tv segment. >> i don't like them but have to use them legally because pension funds may have rules that say i can't buy anything unless it's rated by one of the two or big three nrsros. >> really nailed it. >> it's a bizarre

bigger survives because of dodd-frank and all that.here are barriers to be an investment about banker it's hard to have diversification. and is there a barrier in the airline industry? >> neil: i don't think airline prices or ticket prices are that high. i know to gerri's point to the fees they can't give you a ticket price and leave it at that. it is cheap to fly in the scheme of things. i just suspect that reality will come home and it won't be a cheap? >> over the past 30 years, airline prices came down dramatically. it got really inexpensive to fly. airlines didn't make any money. prices will go up. i think that smaller airlines will start up where routes aren't served well. they will succeed and some will fail. this has a cycle to it. >> you are going to see a lot of rural routes disappear. that is my prediction. >> neil: if you think about it, southwest started the idea to feed an area of the country and others that weren't served by the big guys. you don't see that happening again? >> i think you have so much consolidation that