in 2010 he warned that the dodd- frank law would backfire... but he says he was up against a powerful lobby. >> imagine that you have angelina jolie at your door. you are a very big u.s. company, george clooney at your door saying you guys, you're the ones fueling the armed groups there. do you think that for the reputation of those companies they would be still sourcing from this region? they said ok we are stopping and that's what happened. >> soon after the law passed, companies took their business elsewhere. sales of tin ore from this province plummeted by more than 90%. >> ah the containers. >> that's the material ready to be exported. we are doing almost 2 containers while we used to do 8 containers per month. >> the only way john, or anyone in congo -- can now legally export to the u.s. is by opting into a system that traces the origin of the minerals. >> yes i can show you some. these are the tags. >> so these tags are attached to the bags of minerals that come here? >> yes. >> at mines that are determined to be "conflict free" bags of

the dodd frank act.n fact, sitting there in the audience and listening to the ceo panel, i was kind of amused because i have given this talk many, many times. and many of the people in the audience are in the financial business. and i said, how many people here have encountered or know what i am talking about when i am talking about the dodd frank act? and very few people understand. even in the financial business. they know there is much more regulation, they know what they have to comply with daily, but they don't understand that it is all the results of a new act. that new act, the dodd frank act, was adopted because of the diagnosis that the media, to a large extent, and the government itself had given to their causes of the crisis. we have been told that it was a lack of regulation of the private financial system that caused the crisis. i have shown you the data that indicates that actually it was the government. but most of the things you see in the newspapers suggest that it was the private sector

that's all that's in dodd-frank about my position. finally, the third section of my written testimony tries to go into my willingness to work with congress on how the role and authorities of the position can be clarified to strengthen the independence of the position in order for the holder of this position to be more effective in contributing to the work of the council. thank you. i'm happy to answer any questions. >> chairwoman matz, you are recognized for the testimony. >> thank you, chairman hensarling. i appreciate the opportunity to discuss the financial stability oversight council. congress established the council in response to the 2008 financial crisis. the crisis made clear that financial markets cannot quickly absorb the collapse of very large interconnected companies. fsoc's primary goal is to pre vent systemwide financial crisis. the council's multi-agency structure also ensures that a diverse array of views on risks in each financial sector is considered when making decisions. from the beginning, the council has recogniz

that's all that's in dodd-frank about my position. finally, the third section of my written testimony tries to go into my willingness to work with congress on how the role and authorities of the position can be clarified to strengthen the independence of the position in order for the holder of this position to be more effective in contributing to the work of the council. thank you. i'm happy to answer any questions. >> chair woman matz, you are recognized for the testimony. >> thank you, chairman hensarli hensarling. i appreciate the opportunity to discuss the financial stability oversight council. congress established the council in response to the 2008 financial crisis. the crisis made clear that financial markets cannot quickly absorb the collapse of very large interconnected companies. fsoc's primary goal is to prevent financial crisis. the council's multiagency structure also ensures that a diverse array of views on risks in each financial sector is considered when making decisions. from the beginning, the council has recognized

prohibits protection, dodd-frank protection from being removed by congress. for all practical purposes this means the bureaucracy is free to do whatever it wants in the broadest interpretation of its authority without fear of losing its funding or its leadership. this is a very dangerous recipe for petty dictatorship and its completely foreign to the american model. i always remind people lord acton's faith -- famous dictum power tends to corrupt. absolute power corrupts absolutely and notice he just attends. no better example of the corruption of power than this agency which is totally secret, totally unaccountable spending vast amount of money having huge cost overruns and doing what ever wants to to have to whoever feels like doing it too. we know this is dangerous because we have watched the bureau's behavior over the past four years. we have seen the contempt with which it treats congress and the american people. the cfpb is prohibited from regulating car dealers. it's done so anyway. it's an absurdly inaccurate technique which by the way in the private

if you now think ahead, ironically, the job i see is to defend dodd frank. dodd frank is under vigorous and in some dimensions successful attack from the financial industry which is trying to push this, what they consider overregulation, away. this will be a battle a battle that will go on for at least a next year or two if not longer. there are a few things in financial reform that were not done in dodd frank, so we haven't figured out what to do with fannie mae and freddie mac, the housing businesses. i said we didn't nationalize companies, but we sort of nationalize them. they were half government anyway. they are still in that state of purgatory. we haven't figured out what to do with them. we need to figure that out. we have not fixed the rating agency problem. we haven't talked about that, but none of the -- i rattled off a bunch of guilty parties earlier but i left off the rating parties which left a lot of these complicated and largely horrific securities with aaa ratings which means safe enough to recommend to grandma. they were not. that problem ha

betty: would you repeal dodd-frank? glenn: i would not repeal dodd-frank. think there are pieces of dodd-frank, particularly derivatives that are useful, but the question is, didn't make it safer? the answer is no. i think we need much better legislation that dodd-frank. congress acted before it., not an affiliate pattern. betty: thank you so much for joining us. advisor toal presidential candidate governor jeb bush. much more ahead, diamonds in the broth. a year that saw nearly 700 funds shut down and it produced a couple of jams. we will show you the year's big winners in the hedge fund world when we come back. ♪ betty: we are live from bloomberg world headquarters here in midtown manhattan. i am betty liu. we are about to get breaking news on oil inventories. they have become more and more important as weeks go by and we see oil prices continue to slide near decade lows. oil inventories are out. rami innocenti of has the breaking news. : the survey we were expecting was 1.2 billion barrels -- million barrels positive. this is a huge turnaround we were no

>> guest: some of the language is about gutting, eliminating dodd-frank. don't think you need to defend every single claws. there are some things that are less effective than other things. i would hope that we come to a situation where changes could be made and so on, but i would certainly oppose to wholesale roll back. >> host: two biggest initiatist, legislative initiatives, affordable care act and dodd-frank, we work together on an insurance change on something called the colins rule but very little on dodd-frank. at -- if leihman brothers did that, was it as lesson not to do that? >> guest: coal of -- the goal of bankruptcy is to protect. unfortunately that was not the main purpose. when leihman collapsed, we weren't concerned about the stockholders. leihman was easily safed, but anyway, the trouble with bankruptcy laws is they are not focused on the principal public purpose in a financial crisis which prevents the collapse of the overall system. it gives discretion to fdic and regulators to do what's necessary to stabilize the company, to stabilize th

prohibits protection, dodd-frank protection from being removed by congress. for all practical purposes this means the bureaucracy is free to do whatever it wants in the broadest interpretation of its authority without fear of losing its funding or its leadership. this is a very dangerous recipe for petty dictatorship and its completely foreign to the american model. i always remind people lord acton's faith -- famous dictum power tends to corrupt. absolute power corrupts absolutely and notice he just attends. no better example of the corruption of power than this agency which is totally secret, totally unaccountable spending vast amount of money having huge cost overruns and doing what ever wants to to have to whoever feels like doing it too. we know this is dangerous because we have watched the bureau's behavior over the past four years. we have seen the contempt with which it treats congress and the american people. the cfpb is prohibited from regulating car dealers. it's done so anyway. it's an absurdly inaccurate technique which by the way in the private

there were a few things in financial reform that were not done in dodd-frank. we haven't figured out yet what to do with fannie mae and freddie mac, the housing businesses get i said we didn't nationalize companies but we sort of nationalized fannie mae and freddie mac. ever have government anyway, -- they were half government anyway. they are still in a state of purgatory. we haven't figured out what to do within. we have not fixed the rating agency problem. we haven't talked about that one of our battle off at the beginning of bunch of guilty parties. i left out the rating agencies which blessed a lot of these complicated and largely horrific security's with aaa ratings, which means safe enough to recommend to grandma. they work. -- they were not. and the problem has not been fixed. so there is work there. a huge problem that we were talking about early was the horrible mortgages that were granted. that's a lot better now, although you can start seeing crummy mortgages starting to creep back as the memory fades. went to watch the. we have to supervise, the go

they never acknowledge that dodd-frank's rule has reduced liquidity. it fails to mention that dodd-frank amplifies the threat by empowering the council to designate certain firms as too big to fail. it typifies not only the regulatory system but the unfair washington system that americans have come to fear and loath, powerful government administrators, secretive government meetings, arbitrary rules and unchecked power to punish are rewarded. oversight is paramount. the chair now recognizes the gentleman from new jersey, the chairman of our capital markets committee, mr. garrett. >> i thank all of our witnesses here today. i guess all of our witnesses -- you have gotten to know each other pretty well, because you meet regularly in closed door sessions where the public is not allowed to basically discuss to fundamentally change the u.s. economy. i thought i would take this minute to introduce ourselves to you. we're the u.s. congress. we were created by article one of the u.s. constitution. we're the ones who are actually elected representatives of the a

now also in 113 of the dodd-frank there are other risks you should consider. do you folks consider the risk to the small investor, a nurse in lewiston, maine, or a logger in dover-foxcroft, maine, that are trying to save money for their retirement or for the kids' education? are you considering the risk to them if the asset managers that run their money are so designated as sifi and they get dinged by about 25% in their rate of return? do you consider that? >> we have not made any -- even been given any potential recommendations so we have not considered any aspects of it. >> do you factor in the economic costs to the people we're supposed to help in this country in making these decisions in whether or not an asset manager should be so designated a sifi? >> we're not at the point of making that determination. >> time of the gentleman has expired. the chair recognizes the gentleman from arkansas, mr. hill. >> thank you, mr. chairman, i thank the witnesses for being here today. so many questions, such a distinguished panel and so little time. very frustrating. c

that's all that's in dodd-frank about my position.finally, the third section of my written testimony tries to go into my willingness to work with congress on how the role and authorities of the position can be clarified to strengthen the independence of the position in order for the holder of this position to be more effective in contributing to the work of the council. thank you. i'm happy to answer any questions. >> chair woman matz, you are recognized for the testimony. >> thank you. >> if you can hit the button, please. >> thank you, chairman hensarling. i appreciate the opportunity to discuss the financial stability oversight council. congress established the council in response to the 2008 2009 financial crisis. the crisis made clear that financial markets cannot quickly absorb the collapse of very large interconnected companies. fsoc's primary goal is to prevent system wide financial crisis. the council's multi-agency structure also ensures that a diverse array of views on risks in each financial sector is considered when makin

are you familiar with section 113 of the dodd-frank act? >> yes. >> good. okay, there are 11 different parts of that section of 113, ms. matz, one of them which deals with what you folks are responsible for in weighing whether or not an asset manager, mutual fund, pension fund manager should be so designated a sifi. one of them, and i quote "the degree to which the company is already regulated by one or more primary financial regulatory agencies." now, the s.e.c. is one of those primary regulatory agencies, right? from asset managers? okay. so my question to you, ms. matz, is that what in the world is fsoc even doing in this business? we have a regulator here that's been doing this for 57 years. you agreed there's nothing you can think of to add to her job but at the same time you voted along with everybody else to consider designating asset managers as sifis. so what am i getting wrong here? >> we didn't vote to consider -- >> speak up, please. my ears are bad. >> we didn't vote to consider asset managers as sifis, we voted to consider -- to have the staff

what changes are you willing give to dodd frank?- >> result of the implementation, we are reducing the risk of another financial crisis. -- insed in decimal estimable damage. one of the things about dodd-frank is it is not one size fits all. tiered to terms of applying standards that are appropriate i size of institution. we have encouraged regulators to use their flexibility to the greatest extent they can. tosome of this is going require an actual change. >> dodd-frank was a response to the worst financial crisis since the great depression. as a result of the implementation, we have a system that is safer and sounder. i think we have done an enormous amount to reduce the risk of another financial crisis that caused almost inestimable damage to individuals and the economy of the united states. one of the things about that, not one size fits all. regulators have a lot of tools to target what they do, how they do their business so that it is tiered in terms of applying standards that are appropriate by a side institution. we have enc

did the treasury secretary say anything about dodd-frank? brendan: one of the things we have been hearing is that small banks are constrained by dodd-frank. the rules are written for larger banks. smaller banks are looking for relief from that. aasked him whether that was possibility of changing dodd-frank with the administration. the answer was a pretty unqualified no. i don't know whether we have that quote or not. he seemed unwilling to budge. he did say there is a problem with regulators now, trying to figure out what the definition of small is. a bank with $100 million and access -- $100 million and ts.e he said laws, statutory changes can add some clarity on how we define things but it was a small crack in the door. he has wooden -- he has written up beds for not changing dodd-frank. alix: you spoke to the paypal ceo. what did he say? brendan: there is another challenge to getting people into the financial system which is, what is more important, brick-and-mortar locations where you can exchange cash or the digital technology that is e

dodd-frank is just the beginning. something she has said for months, but just reiterating it again.lso rolling out a plan on inversion. betty: i know on wednesday she's some more tax measures. just on what she said today in the op-ed, let's bring that up. she's talking about imposing a risk-free on banks with assets of more than $50 billion. giving the government more authority to break up tanks. -- breakup banks. -- she hashis already said this. is any of this going to go through congress? does she have any chance? >> it would depend on the dynamics of congress. headingthat things look into the 2016 election is that republicans are likely to maintain the majority in the house and senate. it's going to be a fight the same way it was for president obama after the first two years when democrats ran both chambers. this is not going to be a slamdunk. anything that does get through is going to be hard-fought and there's going to be lots of changes and it's probably not going to look all that much like what she's talking about right now. on wednesday, what are we going to hear about inver

the bigger question for dodd-frank is did it make it safer? no.uch better legislation than dodd-frank. this is not an unfamiliar pattern. hubbardhat was glenn who is an economic adviser to jeb bush. and to places -- chipotle says that they are fixing their methods. they say they will take extra safety precautions to make sure the food is in fact safety to eat. once that for instance, dipping onions in boiling water to kill germs before they are chopped. all changes will, in the coming weeks, but will it be enough to save them from a growing pr disaster. nick is here, he is a restaurant analyst joining us from los angeles. next, what do you think about the steps so far? what kind of a grade did you give them? 'c'probably ac plus -- a plus. the steps they are taking need improvement. i have not done a good job. they have been reactionary, so going forward a lot of things they are doing is not really ensure that these things will not happen again. and to me they are not being very up front about the things they are doing. locally sourced, it seems li

. >> what changes are you willing to contemplate to dodd frank?to the worst financial crisis since the great depression. as a result of the implementation, we are reducing the risk of another financial crisis. damage toinestimable the economy of the united states in the global economy. one of the things about dodd-frank is it is not one size fits all. our regulators have a lot of tools in how they do their business so it is cheered -- tiered to terms of applying standards that are appropriate i -- by size of institution. we have encouraged regulators to use their flexibility to the greatest extent they can. so they can be sensitive to the differences in risk. >> some of this is going to require an actual change. contemplate -- he would support something that excused banks under $2 billion in assets from the rule for example. is any change you would contemplate? reflectof the proposals a desire for clarity which legislation can provide. i think it's important for regulators to use the ability they have to provide the kind of flexibility that is nee

jack: as a result of the implementation of dodd-frank, we have a safer in sounder system. we have done an enormous amount to reduce the risk of another financial crisis that caused in estimable damage to the global economy in the united states. brendan: i really dug on the question. is there something that the and ministration is willing to contemplate in terms of changing dodd-frank? the best i could get from him was the possibility of a clarification of lang which. the answer i took from there was no. -- clarification of language. [laughter] betty: he is not willing to touch it. didn't mean to interrupt you, but i know you also talked to him about the reserve currency, the dollar, particularly in light of the move by the imf yesterday to include the -- brendan: i asked him straightforward -- the idea of theimf including that in special drawing rights basket is to encourage other central banks to consider adding it to their own foreign currency reserves. euro, and theng, yen. i asked the secretary whether he was wearing to add that to our own foreign reserves. he gave a l

. >> dodd/frank calls for annual review of designations. do you have a way for a company -- do we have a good process to allow companies to be de-designated particularly if they've reduced their risk profile? ms. white? >> i think there is a good process. you always want to keep looking at possibly enhancing it, but at least annually the council has to look at that. it was also made clear that the companies can engage with the staff on those issues and then every five years under some of the new procedures they're entitled to full hearing. >> i hope that you'd refine that process further. i yield back. >> time of the gentleman has expired. the chair now recognizes the gentleman from oklahoma, mr. lucas. >> thank you, mr. chairman. since we have this distinguished group together, i'd like to visit about my concerns with the basel 3 leverage ratio rule as it is applied to certain derivative clearance services and the impact it will have on the ability of my constituents to hedge risks. first i would turn, of course, to the derivative market r

one thing he weighed in on was dodd-frank.e implantation of dodd-frank, we have a system that is safer and sounder. we have done an enormous amount to reduce the risk of another financial crisis that caused inestimabestimable -- le damage. think wall street is safer, some of those reforms have had a positive impact. a lot of wall street is against those reforms because it is more regulation and more restriction. that is one of the things that flows into my firm, taking people out of those bigger companies and getting them to a point where there are not involved in a massive organization. the boutique business has been an island in the sea of radiation. is there a point where regulation creeps in and affects your business? typically,ects, investment business more so than advice. the bigger you get, the more you might be subject to. if you're going to grow, it depends on how you grow. if you grow from a straight advisor shop, you are fine. if we start investing in assets, that might be -- that can have an impact. doesn't hurt th

. >> how embedded in the financial system is dodd-frank at this point?en hillary call for doubling down on dodd-frank and others like donald trump saying he would repeal it if you were president. -- if he were president. >> dodd-frank has become a bit of a symbol for regulation more generally. david was asking a moment ago about commodities which of course are not really mentioned in dodd-frank. what we did on capital in 2010 was not explicitly called for by dodd-frank. specifywe all have to where the regulation we think needs some ways to go, where perhaps we would like to modify , and oftentimes that is within the province of the banking regulators, and where people think it's just about right. in there.re was a lot your reaction to the basic notion that we have overregulated the smaller banks and under regulated the larger ones. do you think bank regulation has been effective? matt: without a doubt it and i think you have to be careful and you say under regulated. if you look at the performance and whatgional banks investors think of them, they have o

a a lot of people talk about dodd frank.houghts in the implementation of dodd frank and how it impacted businesses? gov. kasich: you tell me a lot of people talk to you about dodd frank? i think you could swing a bowling ball around and not hit anybody that would know. i think the problem with it is it is really going to run the small and medium banks out of business. the rules are so heavy. if you are a big bank, you absorb the regulations, but if you are small, it crushes you. so what we are seeing is a lot of the small, community banks are the ones that are threatened. there is probably some aspects of it in terms of requiring big banks to hold the capital in regard to the risk they have. but, this is really hurting those people in the local communities. they are the ones that will loan money to people because they know them. kevin: would you repeal it? gov. kasich: i would get rid of a lot of it because i think there is too much. there may be portions of it holding reserving your capital , against your risk that is posit

did congress pull the liquidity rock out with dodd-frank?ity rug with dodd-frank, but that has been with us for a long time. erik: but the markets are not tested every day. >> why does a fund with a liquidity requirement indemnifying illiquid securities -- end up buying illiquid securities? they do thisw can six years after the financial crisis? >> liquidity equals stupidity in this case. >> quantitative easing and the money being printed. you can leave your money in cash doing nothing or you can be a seller of liquidity and at yield to your portfolio. loanl know a rolling gathers no moss. as long as there is money in the market, then it paid well. stephanie: are these hedge fund managers making poor decisions, when they should be in cash, not a liquid high distress markets, but they are not because they want to collect that 2 and 20? there are large parts of the high-yield market that are still doing pretty well. if you look at industrial corporate america or high-yield in europe, it is performing beautifully. there are parts of the market

and i think with the implementation of dodd-frank and a sort of international regulations on banking, so what are called under the rubric of baas sell iii, you've actually made the banking system a lot more stable -- basel iii. there still remain some holes in the regulation to the international financial system, and i'd say that it's -- you know, one of the things is we fixed problems in the sectors where we've seen the problems. it's likely that the next problem we see is someplace that we didn't expect it or we didn't apply regulations. i mean, one way of thinking about 2008 is, you know, it wasn't the mainline banks that were big problem. we'd regulated them in the 1930s in response to the problems of the great depression. but then we encountered a whole set of problems in the shadow financial system because individuals and firms and banks and other financial institutions have worked their way around those regulations, or, you know, used the term of financial innovation. they had innovated their way around the innovations. so we put in a whole set of innovations now. i think it's

congress responded by passing dodd-frank. we put in place new rules to bring stability to markets to ensure strong consumer investor protection to crack down on the reckless and irresponsible behavior of wall street. and, madam president, again to repeat, since 2010, we've seen 68, 69, 70 in consecutive months i believe the longest in modern history, consecutive months of job growth. one of wall street reforms most important was the creation of the consumer financial protection bureau. it serves as a counterbalance to the wall street lobby. it has an independent funding stream, created to ensure that never again would consumers be an afterthought in our nation's financial system. because of wall street reform banks are required to fund themselves using more of their shareholders money to hold more cash or assets than can be sold easily. we call that liquidity when they run into trouble, to undergo stress tests, strengthen risk management. that's why this banking system is more stable and safer than it was during the bush year

>> dodd-frank was a response to the worst financial crisis since the great depression.a result of the implementation we have a system that is safer and sounder. i think we have done an enormous amount to reduce the risk of another financial crisis that caused almost inestimable damage to individuals and the economy of the united states. is of the root things, it not one-size-fits-all. regulators have a lot of tools to target what they do, how they do their business so that it is tiered in terms of applying standards that are appropriate by a side institution. we have encourage regulators to use their regulatory flexibility to the greatest extent they can so they can be sensitive to the differences. >> some of this will require a substantial change, they would contemplate something that excuse banks under i believe $2 billion in assets from the vocal rule. is that going to be something that will be law-based changes? a some proposals reflect desire for clarity, which legislation can provide. it is important for regulators to use the flexibility they have to provide the f

. >> let me switch to a little-discussed provision of the dodd/frank act, for exempting certain companies from heightened supervision. to date no such regulations have been issued. this requirement represents a tool congress created to delineate between those that pose risk and those that do not and provide clear criteria for how they should conduct their businesses in such a way as to be nonsystemic. chair white, why has this provision never been used? >> i really can't answer that. it would have to come from the fed initially, at least. >> i guess in my last seconds, a show of hands, following on from my friend from texas, who among you has advocated for a class of financial company to be exempted from heightened supervision? if you could raise your hand, if you have advocated for a class of financial company to be exempted from heightened supervision. for the record, none raised their hand. my time has expired. i yield back, mr. chairman. >> the chair now recognizes the gentlelady from ohio, ms. beatty. >> thank you, mr. chairman. thank you, ranking member. let me associate my opening

the volvo role and dodd-frank have affected the high-yield. are we mistaken when we blame this on the vocal rule or dodd-frank? >> when you buy high, you are committed to selling low. that will play out again and again and again. i think the volga role has something to do with it. every problem is accentuated because you do not have people fitting as aggressively as you had. i do not know much about this business but i know, if you are quidg highway -- highly illi assets and redemption, it is not going to work. it seems to me they had a pretty good run, made about 50% compounded and now they give it all back. the federaloday, open market committee decided to raise the target range for the federal funds rate by one quarter percentage point, bringing it to one quarter to one half percent. this action marks the end of an extraordinary seven-year period during which the federal funds rate was held near zero, to support the recovery of the economy from the worst financial crisis and recession since the great depression. >> i think she nailed it. li

which of the activity to ask the secretary about the dodd frank act and what proposed changes to the bill would be. reflectof the proposals a desire for clarity, which legislation can provide. i think it is important for regulators to use the flexibility that they have to clarity.he kind of certain requirements in dodd-frank, suggestions have been made that a $50 billion .hreshold you have a $200 billion institution that is on the large brick to be careful not to get into a conversation where we -- thoseling back that protections that make our system safer. david: the secretary talking about the flexibility baked into this law. these five years old, rulemaking is still happening. and are using these regulatory offices around washington dc. you asked him about regional banks. i know there have been regional bankers saying that this law adversely affects them. >> it really comes down to how you define to small. as the secretary pointed out, he wants to take the threshold of $50 billion and raise it to $500 billion. that arelooks at banks smaller than $1 billion in assets and committed

the dodd-frank act.ct, sitting there in the audience and listening to the ceo panel, i was kind of envioud because i given this talk many, many times. and many of the people in the audience actually are in the financial business. and i said how many people here have encountered or no what i'm talking about what i'm talking about the dodd-frank act? and very few people understand. even in a financial business. they know that there's much more regulation. they know what they have to comply with daily, they don't understand is all the result of the new act, and that new act, the dodd-frank act, was adopted because of the diagnosis that the media, to a large extent, and the government itself has given to the causes of the crisis. we have been told that it was a lack of regulation of the private financial system that caused the crisis. i have shown you the data that indicates that actually it was the government, but most of the things you see in the newspapers suggest that it was the private sector and that i

dodd-frank has really affected the high-yield market.e will see more of this. >> are we overstating things that we blame this on dodd-frank? nobody wants to buy bad bonds in a good or bad market. >> when you buy the high you are committed to selling low. that will play out again and again. i think it has something to do with it. i would not underestimate that. every problem is accentuated because you do not have people bidding as aggressively as you had. i don't know much about this business, but i know if you are using highly liquid assets and offering daily redemption, that is not going to work out. it may take five years, it may take five minutes, but is not going to work out. it seems to me they had a pretty good run and may 15% compounded for five years or so and now they give it all back. >> earlier today, the committee district -- decided to raise the target range for the federal funds rate by one quarter percentage point bringing it to one quarter one half percent. this action marks the end of an extraordinary seven-year timefram