dr. evans. >> with all due respect, professor levenson has not done any research. when pressed to say what will happen to interest rates and so forth, the reaction was that we don't really know. what professor wright and i try to do was a steady. the particular study that professor levenson has pointed to is an analog. it was the best analog we could find. it was not perfect. it was something that was comparable to the cfpb. it provided a baseline for the imposition of credit to the economy. that particular study showed that another regulatory bill, as a result of state restrictions on banking and credit and so forth, led to an 80 basis point increase in interest rates. that is what you typically get with regulation. we did a comparison and made the point that cfpb would allow a greater set of regulatory restrictions on lending than that. we took that as a basis -- >> i have to give a professor chance to respond. >> what to to multiplied it by? some number yenta out of the air? that is not scho

dr. evans, you have five minutes. >> chairman and members of the subcommittee, thank you for asking me to testify. shortly after the u.s. department of the treasury proposed the act, professor john reichs from george mason and i started studying and the rational being put forward for it. early last year we published an intend to study. based on the research, i'm quite concerned the board could make it harder. just because someone puts the words consumers protection in the title of administrative agency doesn't mean that's what it's going to do. there are two reasons in my view to believe that the cfpb could become an anti-lending and borrowing bureau that could harm consumers and ultimately reduce economic growth. the first is that there's an anti-borrowing bias. professor warren wrote in 2008 and laid out the rational and agenda in some detail. she claimed that consumers aren't rational, consumers make lots of mistakes, and consumers end up in the end borrowing too much. professors wrote an ar

dr. evans and five minutes. >> chairman mckenrick, ranking member and members of the subcommittee thank you very much for asking me to testify on cfpb -- professor george wright and i started studying the legislation and the rationale as being put forward. early last year we published an extensive study on the proposed agency. based on their research, i am quite concerned that the cfpb could make it harder and more expensive for consumers to borrow money and for the small businesses to offer a line of credit cards and other lending products. just because someone puts the board's consumer protection at the title of the administrative agency doesn't mean that is what is going to do. there are two reasons in my view to believe that the cfpb could become an antilending and borrowing bureau that could harm consumers and small businesses and often reduce economic growth. the first is there is an antiborrowing body is built into the cfpb. professor warren cooperative long article in the university of

dr. evans, you have five minutes. >> chairman mechanic, members of the subcommittee, thank you for asking me to testify on the cfpb very shortly after the treasury department proposed the cfpb act, we started studying the legislation and the rationale being put forward for it. early last year, we published a study on the proposed agency. based on our research, i am quite concerned that the cfpb could make it harder for consumers to borrow money and for small businesses who rely on credit cards and other lending costs. just because someone puts the word consumer protection in the title of the agency does not mean that is what it is going to do. there are two reasons to believe that the cfpb could become an anti-landing and borrowing bureau that get hurt consumers and small businesses. the first is that there is an anti-borrowing by as built into the cfpb. professor warren co-authored a article that laid out the rationale for the new agency and its agenda in some detail. she claimed that consumer