even barack obama it even though he was raising money from goldman sachs, that was the reported but the perception that he was not hillary clinton. i will say that for all of the coziness or common ground with big business coming hillary clinton would have been 10 times more, but he was not hillary clinton so people thought i am disenfranchised i will give him money and then day he gave there 10 or $20 to him. i will be happy to take questions i want to restate my initial the suspect every time the government gets bigger, somebody gets rich. i have tried to name all of the names and in a pattern to show that it is not an ollie but it is a pattern and the effect that obama has on the nation is not what people think that it is. thank you for your time. [applause] i am happy to take questions. stand up and wait for the microphone. police. >> talk about the revolving door in politics and big business the idea that when people lose an election or retire from politics they tend to go into lobbying and once they come bahe ben bernanke, and hank paulson are well known for this. can you talk abo

he took one of its $75,000 for a speech at goldman sachs. -- he took $175,000 for a speech at goldmansachs. they do not want us doing anything about exchange rates. one of the biggest lobbyists against manufacturing in united states is one of the biggest banks in new york. it is a good thing that of people who work on wall street are far away from the people who have access to pitchforks. host: someone from new jersey says they agree about the corruption in congress. the situation was at least as bad and the republicans. is there no hope for reform? guest: it is hard to say that the treasury department has changed from the bush to obama administration. the difference between the treasury department's is the difference between the sixth and seventh floor at goldman sachs. the sixth floor has republicans. the seventh floor has democrats. they just switch them around. we have a basic problem in that the treasury department is not run by someone who is particularly knowledgeable about economics or banking. it is largely controlled by goldman sachs. guest: we do have some people in congres

he took one of its $75,000 for a speech at goldman sachs. -- he took $175,000 for a speech at goldman sachs. they do not want us doing anything about exchange rates. one of the biggest lobbyists against manufacturing in united states is one of the biggest banks in new york. it is a good thing that of people who work on wall street are far away from the people who have access to pitchforks. host: someone from new jersey says they agree about the corruption in congress. the situation was at least as bad and the republicans. is there no hope for reform? guest: it is hard to say that the treasury department has changed from the bush to obama administration. the difference between the treasury department's is the difference between the sixth and seventh floor at goldman sachs. the sixth floor has republicans. the seventh floor has democrats. they just switch them around. we have a basic problem in that the treasury department is not run by someone who is particularly knowledgeable about economics or banking. it is largely controlled by goldman sachs. guest: we do have some people in congre

morgan or goldman sachs.e reason you saw so much anger a couple of weeks ago when goldman sachs executives were quoted in the "vanity fair" magazine saying they thought they would have been fine without the ability and would not have gone under without government assistance -- the first-rate people in washington to no end. the entire financial system of the u.s. would have collapsed, and goldman sachs right along with it. Ñito hear them saying banks, but no things and we did not need the help -- in washington that is the height of arrogance. you have wall street's problems looking at washington with no understanding. you have this culture clash with all at stake. lloyd blankfein will be there at the white house. goldman sachs announced last week that they are changing composition of their top executives, the 30 most powerful will now get special stock instead of cash bonuses at the end of year. it is designed to keep their interest in line for the next five years or so with goldman sachs, so they don't get pa

morgan or goldman sachs.he reason you saw so much anger a couple of weeks ago when goldman sachs executives were quoted in the "vanity fair" magazine saying they thought they would have been fine without the ability and would not have gone under without government assistance -- the first-rate people in washington to no end. the entire financial system of the u.s. would have collapsed, and goldman sachs right along with it. Ñito hear them saying banks, but no things and we did not need the help -- in washington that is the height of arrogance. you have wall street's problems looking at washington with no understanding. you have this culture clash with all at stake. lloyd blankfein will be there at the white house. goldman sachs announced last week that they are changing composition of their top executives, the 30 most powerful will now get special stock instead of cash bonuses at the end of year. it is designed to keep their interest in line for the next five years or so with goldman sachs, so they don't get p

goldman sachs isn't worried. you mean small businesses may suffer? banks may go under if we make those decisions? i'm sure the men and women at goldman sachs, they think every day about the poor american public and the risk they put us through. if you believe that, then do nothing. if you believe we should protect the american worker each and every day and make sure there is a pension, and make sure there is a home, then i say support this bill. thank you very much. the chair: the gentleman from oklahoma is recognized. mr. lucas: i yield to the distinguished the gentleman from indiana, mr. burton. the chair: the gentleman is recognized for three minutes. mr. burton: i get into that. shakespeare, a rose by any other mean would smell as sweet. when we talk about socialism, go look in the dictionary and see what it says. my democratic colleagues have moved to take over the auto industry, the health industry, the energy industry and now they are trying to do it through the bureaucracy and the banking industry and the financial institutions. when the gove

this will not cause goldman sachs to collapse. >> chairman, you understand this. when you decide it is necessary to prevent default, you prevent the fault. if aig had not met its contractual obligations to its counterparties it would have defaulted. it would have been downgraded and the company would have collapsed and would have been to what they did in the worst financial storm in generations. there was no feasible way to selectively default on its counterparties without bringing the whole thing down. >> mr. secretary, we did not@@@) >> wheat backed up aig. >> that is not true. we acted to prevent their default because there was no other way to protect the system from the damage of that. the consequence of preventing the default was aig met its contractual obligations perdue cannot selectively default on contractual obligations without according collapse and downgrade. >> the consequence of what you have just described is you are telling me that these counterparty obligations, these financial instruments that are bought by their recent history parties, are going

it doesn't surprise me to see trouble in goldman sachs. they've been taking a lot of negative press. i personally think that bank of america and some of these other names, i think things still look good for them. >> the thing about the bank of america trade was that for the first time when we had one of the second tier names, it wasn't an opportunity to sell calls. the last time we had somebody raise a bunch of money, it was just a free for all to sell calls. we didn't see that in bank of america today. the stock was strong. there was a lot of call activity. but, you know, that was just -- that's natural, that's normal. that's real call activity. >> bank of america is in the books and you mentioned, we are all looking ahead towards who's next. wells fargo is certainly one of the names out there. >> war len buffet who owns 7% doesn't think so either. this stock has underperformed other banks. it's the only large bank down on the year, down 9% year to date. it's kind of troubling, stuck in a range here. and i think that t.a.r.p. is a very bi

if he had come from goldman sachs that would have been different. so that's true. but also think that he's not a very pretentious person and when you're telling people the world is about to end and you are not known as a high-priced people tend to say you must really mean it whereas if he had been one of these people who pronounced every third day as the most extraordinary day in american history that would have been different. >> host: let's come back to the question of why so few people saw this financial crisis coming. you and i are presumably among the culprits. we were not in a responsible public positions but i watched the economy and the markets and i've been with the fed and you've covered the economy and especially the fed for "the wall street journal" for many years and so far as i know neither of us were out there issuing donner warnings and 06 or 07. why did this crisis catch so many people by surprise? >> guest: that is a very good question and i'm not sure i have a complete answer. i mean, some of my colleagues in the press will take a question like t

. >> guest: if he had come from goldman sachs that would be different. so that's true. but i also think that he's not a very pretentious person and when you're telling people the world is about to end and you are not known as the hype artist people tend to say you must really mean and whereas if he had been one of these people who had pronounced every third day as the most extraordinary day in american history that would have been different. >> yes. let's come back to the question why so few people saw this financial crisis coming. you and i are presumably among the culprits. we were not in her responsible public positions but i watched the economy and markets and had been at the fed and to cover the economy and especially for "the wall street journal" for many years and so far as i know, neither of us were out there issuing dire warnings in 06 or 07. why did this crisis keep so many people by surprise? >> guest: that is a very good question and i am not sure i have a complete answer. some of my colleagues in the press will take a question like that and point to half a

you know, the people who were running merrill lynch, goldman sachs, j.p. morgan chase, some of them saw it coming and some of them didn't. but what were they thinking and how did they account for the fact that they have such big enterprises with so many people, and so much skill and so made computers, and so much talk about how they were managing risk if they got it so wrong. and i'd like to explain. so in your my mind, what did you get? i guess that's it. i can't wait to see this commission go to work and i hope their success because there's a lot of important questions that have to be answered if we're going to understand how to avoid this. >> i listen to you all the time. my question is, the point of capital market is to allocate money to the highest and most viable use. how is it such a huge amount of money went into housing which is consumption? for people borrowed money on their houses for consumption, instead of eggs invested in activity that would allow people to get jobs? >> the u.s. government for decades, going back to hoover and roosevelt, writ

if we can be allowed goldman sachs we can bail them out, too and they should be assertive about their right to receive those benefits. >> next question right back here. >> cnn. congressman cleaver mentioned focus on banks to big to fail at the expense of smaller people who were too small to matter. given that president obama was a member of the black caucus before he became president are you surprised or disappointed there wasn't a more targeted effort in the big stimulus package that passed earlier this year? >> let me say first of all i'm very proud of the financial services committee members, all ten congressional black caucus members who led a very forceful and very honorable fight in the financial services committee to make sure this bill but we are debating right now leaves no one behind. let me ask congressman maxine waters who led the fight come speak to what was included in the legislation. .. we have been loyal members of that committee. we have responded to and supported the administration and the leadership consistently. and so, we finally are waking up to the fact that de

this will not cause goldman sachs to collapse. >> chairman, you understand this. when you decide it is necessary to prevent default, you prevent the fault. if aig had not met its contractual obligations to its counterparties it would have defaulted. it would have been downgraded and the company would have collapsed and would have been to what they did in the worst financial storm in generations. there was no feasible way to selectively default on its counterparties without bringing the whole thing down. >> mr. secretary, we did not step then and back up all of the counterparties, all of the trades. we pick aig and aig alone. and backed up 100% on the dollar in repayment. .. >> these financial institutes are going to be treated effectively like deposits in checking accounts. >> absolutely not. >> they ended up he effectively with 100% on the dollar guarantee, which they will never pay. >> the fcc does two things. there is no other way within that storm. looking forward, we do not want to have a situation -- we do not want investors in the future to live with the ex

that is exclusive to -- >> goldman-sachs now a bank. is it not? >> no.epository institution is only a subsidiary of the larger bank holding company structure. this has been a problem for us. and another positive thing we think the house bill does is gives us backup authority over everything in the holding company. right now it's only over the piece that has the deposit insurance which is not the whole thing. >> do you think that there needs to be some ability to regulate and have oversight of these balance sheets liabilities? >> absolutely, yes. >> what are your plans to do that? >> well, fortunately the accountants have done a lot of it already. we are implementing 156 and 167, requiring these off balance sheet exposures be count and balance sheet. so you have to hold capital and reserves against them. we will be finalizing rules next week to make clear that you need to hold capital in reserves from the regulatory capital that we will treat those as on balance sheet assets. on the derivatives area, the otc derivatives area i think congress needs to act

and goldman sachs has repaid its rescue loans. but it said thursday its top 30 executives would not receive a cash bonus this year, despite record profits. >> -- they objected the feinberg plan will cause a brain drain. >> those employees who feel they are worth more or the market feel these are worth more could end up leaving the company where the caps are impressed weakening the company which imposes more risk, not less and in the end could hurt the ability of those companies to restore themselves and help the market. >> holman: bonuses have also been an issue in europe this week. french president nicolas sarkozy said thursday his country would follow the lead of britain. which announced a tax on bonuses awarded to bankers between now and april. >> woodruff: the public anger over pay and bonuses remains a major issue. and that topic is likely to come up when president obama meets with bank executives at the white house on monday. we take a look now at today's action on pay, and the larger picture, with kenneth feinberg, the trea

we can bail out goldman sachs, we can bail them not to n and they need to be assertive about their rights. >> the next question i think right becker. >> congressman cleaver mention the focus on banks that were too big to fail at this bends of smaller people who were too small to matter. given that president obama was a member of the black caucus before he became president are you surprised disappointed that there wasn't a more targeted effort in the stimulus package that passed earlier this year? >> first of all i am very proud of the financial services committee members, all ten congressional black caucus members who led a very forceful and very honorable fight in the financial services committee to make sure that this bill that we are debating right now leaves no one behind. let me ask congresswoman maxine waters to lead that fight to come and speak to what was included in that legislation. >> i want to thank congresswoman barbara lee for the tremendous effort she has put forth to organize this jobs package. this is extremely important, and i suppose what you are saying is not only a re

this will not cause goldman sachs to collapse. >> chairman, you understand this.when you decide it is necessary to prevent default, you prevent the fault. if aig had not met its contractual obligations to its counterparties it would have defaulted. it would have been downgraded and the company would have collapsed and would have been to what they did in the worst financial storm in generations. there was no feasible way to selectively default on its counterparties without bringing the whole thing down. >> mr. secretary, we did not step then and back up all of the counterparties, all of the trades. we pick aig and aig alone. and backed up 100% on the dollar in repayment. .. of that storm to protect the economy from that failure. now looking forward in the future, we do not want a system looking for work the, this is why we need resolution authority but we do not want investors in the future where the firms these particular firms to live with the expectation. that is the challenge by financial reform is so necessary. now, chairman, nothing would have made me happier

showy make goldman sachs even richer? what do we do about medicare and are expanding aging population? what we do about national health insurance? should there be a public option? how to get out of this recession. all the major questions facing the united states today have c. wrote to to with judges. there will never be a judicial opinion on any of them that matters. both the republicans and the democrats have tested too much energy in worrying about federal judges and i'm inclined to say too little energy worrying about what is good for the united states. yes, sir. >> members of congress and people who hold high positions in the executive branch seldom offer documents they sign. this is example hult truett and supreme court in the assistance that clerks do in creative writing? >> it dairies by judges. runquist demanded an opinion by his clerks in ten days, and then what extensively reright, as this john paul stevens, but the last, i think the last two justices who did their own work were hugo black and william o. douglas

[applause] of course bill george ten-year resumes, he also served on the board of goldman sachs, serves on the board i believe the exxonmobil and served on the board of target and several other companies. most notably about bill george he grew a company from a billion dollars, medtronic switch does medical devices among other things, one of the medical devices that, for which your book is part of his collection for gold. to 60 billion, with an average return of 35%. he did that well running a company with a good reputation and something that is not known to the public he took 30% of his income in his highest grossing economic years and fought it into the build of the george foundation. that foundation has 60 years $70 million a day and every day they invest $5 million back into the community with no credit, no fanfare. they just do it because it was the right thing to do so i met bill george at harvard. sorry, i met him at harbored through the young global leaders a program that the sponsor their of yon global leaders that goes to the course of two weeks and it was from that that bill e

the wall street banking giant goldman sachs will not give cash bonuses to 30 top executives this yearhe company paid back its federal rescue loans last summer, allowing it to escape curbs on compensation. just yesterday, britain announced a one-time tax of 50% on bonuses for high-paid bankers there. and today, the leaders of france and germany embraced the idea as well. treasury secretary geithner today defended his decision to extend the bank rescue program until october. the $700 billion tarp program had been set to end this month. but geithner told a federal oversight panel he needs more time to wind down the effort without doing economic damage. >> we will keep the government out of the business decisions of these companies and we will exit from our investments as soon as is practical and return ownership to private hands. this strategy requires a limited temporary extense of the authority provided by by the congress under the emergency economic stabilization act. it would be irresponsible to do otherwise. questioned >> sreenivasan: the oversight group was created by congress. cha

the wall street banking gian goldman sachs wi not give cash boses to 30 top executives thisear.e company pa back its federal rescue lns last summer, lowing it to escape curbs compensation. just yesteay, britain announcea one-time tax of % on bonuses for high-paid bankers ere. and today, the leadersf france and germy embraced the idea as well treasury secretary geithne today defeed his decision to extend the bank rescue progr until octor. the $700 billionarp program d been set to end this month but geithner tola federal oversit panel he needs more time to wind down the efrt without doing onomic damage. >>e will keep the government out of the busess decisions of these companies and we wilexit om our investments as soon a is practicalnd return owrship to private hands. is strategy requires a limit temporarextense of the authority ovided by by the coress under the emergency economic stabilizati act. it wou be irresponsible to do otrwise. questioned >> sreenivasan: the oversit group was cread by congress. chrwoman elizabeth warren and others questioned e need to keep t tarp going. sh

they really do sympathize with goldman sachs, with jpmorgan chase, with morgan stanley, with bank of america, city corp and, yes, hedge funds of about $10 billion. these wonderful, healthy companies, why should they have to pay for the bailouts? because they benefit from that safety net. and going on to say the funds shall be available with use for the dissolution of a financial company to cover the costs incurred by the receiver to -- and to cover the costs of systemic stabilization actions. the funds shall not benefit any director of such company. and it says earlier on when we talk about the establishment of that fund on page 288, it can only be used the money that comes from morgan stanley and goldman sachs and jpmorgan chase. we won't have anybody to come play football because they have been told not to speculate. it says that such action -- they can only do this if such action is necessary for the purpose of financial stability and not for the purpose of preserving the covered financial company. and if there is a loan from taxpayers it makes it very clear, any funds from taxpay

we can bail out goldman sachs, they should be assertive about their rights. >> next question back here congressman cleaver mentioned banks that too big to fail at the expense of smaller people who were too small to matter. given that president obama was a member of the black caucus, are you surprised or disappointed that there wasn't a more targeted effort in the stimulus package that passed earlier this year? >> i am proud of the financial services committee members, auld ten black caucus members who led a very forceful and very honorable fight in the financial services committee to make sure that this bill that we are debating right now because no one behind. let me ask congresswoman maxine waters who led that fight to speak to what was included in that legislation. >> i want to thank congresswoman barbara lee for the tremendous effort she has put forward to organize this jobs package. this is extremely important. i suppose what you are saying is not only renewed effort but renewed strategies that we are employing in order to make sure we are addressing the needs of our community. co

that's something that we're looking at at freedom watch and everybody should look at, and look at goldman sachs. they benefited from all this money that went to aig and the others, all these big banks and investment houses are doing tremendously well. and i'm in new york today, so i can attest to that. but yet the little bank, the little bank owned by people throughout this country like the publisher down in sarasota, they're on the ropes because they can't get the money that the big banks that helped elect president obama got. and i can assure you that in -- if mccain had been predicted to be the winner of the last election, mccain would have gotten the same money that obama got. it makes no difference democrat or republican, they bribe them both. so that's why we are at a state of revolution, and that's why i want you to read the book, "whores," because we need to wage that second revolution or we'll have no country yet. >> host: larry klayman's been our guest, he's been joining us this morning from new york. thanks for being with us. >> guest: you're welcome. thank you, god bless. >> larry k

so that investors are now saying, let me understand, if i invest in bank of america or goldman sachs,worry because the taxpayer will be called upon to bail us out. this is not just hypothetically speaking. the rating agencies themselves have talked about the difference in how they rate the big companies based on "with guaranteed" citigroup has and a based on with -- "without guarantee" it has a "c >" this makes the whole economy riskier. >> is there a word for your emotions -- host: is their reward for your emotions, mood watching all of this? guest: yes, i think i alternate between a furious and astounding. i am stunned by this. and i will tell you something else that astounds me. a little over a year ago, the financial institutions -- let's face it, they were insolvent. there were crashing over the edge. they turned to the american tax payer and we did something we have never done before, not at that level with those kinds of numbers, and revealed them out. and right here in washington, those same financial institutions are spending huge amounts of lobbying dollars to have the senat

brothers has been absorbed by bank of america, have you been in to examine the bank itself, like goldman sachscific institutions. right now we have backup authority only for insured depository institutions. even though they might be part of a broader holding company structure, we have no authority there. >> goldman sachs is now a bank, is it not? >> no, because the insured depository institution is only a subsidiary of the larger bank holding structure. this has been a problem for us. another positive thing we think it does -- it is only over the peace that has the deposit insurance, which is not the whole thing. >> the thinker -- neon >> what are your plans to do that? >> fortunately, the accounts have done a lot of it already. it basically requires that the off-balance sheet exposures now be found on balance sheets. we will be finalizing rules next week to make clear that we need to hold capital in reserve from the regulatory capital, that we will treat those as nine balance sheet assets. tal that we will treat those as on balance sheet assets. on the derivatives area, the otc derivatives ar

a former goldman sachs executive host: back to the phone. win gate, new york carolina. caller: fot caller just called about all the money obama spent. obama's money is coming back in. i know you know better. this bombing thing, i think that was a joke. he tried keep them bringing detainees into new york. that's all that is. thank you. host: baltimore, marlede on the line for inds. go ahead. caller: this has been the perfect decade of reaping what you sew. bush, i don't blame him for being an idiot. i think he's a product of what the ivey league schools are teaching you. i really don't blame him. he's a paun in the whole system that has been created. host: do you think there has been any lessoned learned we carry into the next decade? caller: i hope it is being good on the golf course doesn't make you a good executive. you have to actually take the test yourself. that's why i like obama and why i voted for him not because he's black but i think he can think. >> thanks for your call. >> terror attacks at finle changed our nation. host: back to the phones. maryland on the

and the biggest perpetrators of this disaster, bank of america, citigroup, wells fargo and goldman sachs have gone from controlling 30% of all deposits in this country to 40% now. the big five are eating us up and taking bigger bonuses, too. it estimated they will reward themselves with $145 billion in bonuses this year. credit remains frozen across this country seizing up economic recovery and this bill calls itself the wall street reform bill. this bill will not meet the serious challenges crippling our financial system and will not give a good signal to the future. congress said the tarp bailout would save us from depression, but tarp passed and the american people went into depression, only the big banks were saved. the bills passed by congress to date protect wall street and their shareholders, main street pays the price. is this bill a reform bill, no? it will not break up the big banks or create a strong independent financial institution regulatory agency and will not separate speculation from investment activity. it will not require loan workouts to stem foreclosures. it will rec

that is exclusive to -- >> goldman-sachs now a bank. is it not? >> no.ecause the insured depository institution is only a subsidiary of the larger bank holding company structure. this has been a problem for us. and another positive thing we think the house bill does is gives us backup authority over everything in the holding company. right now it's only over the piece that has the deposit insurance which is not the whole thing. >> do you think that there needs to be some ability to regulate and have oversight of these balance sheets liabilities? >> absolutely, yes. >> what are your plans to do that? >> well, fortunately the accountants have done a lot of it already. we are implementing 156 and 167, requiring these off balance sheet exposures be count and balance sheet. so you have to hold capital and reserves against them. we will be finalizing rules next week to make clear that you need to hold capital in reserves from the regulatory capital that we will treat those as on balance sheet assets. on the derivatives area, the otc derivatives area i think co

a former goldman sachs executive host: back to the phone. win gate, new york carolina. caller: fot caller just called about all the money obama spent. obama's money is coming back in. i know you know better. this bombing thing, i think that was a joke. he tried keep them bringing detainees into new york. that's all that is. thank you. host: baltimore, marlede on the line for inds. go ahead. caller: this has been the perfect decade of reaping what you sew. bush, i don't blame him for being an idiot. i think he's a product of what the ivey league schools are teaching you. i really don't blame him. he's a paun in the whole system that has been created. host: do you think there has been any lessoned learned we carry into the next decade? caller: i hope it is being good on the golf course doesn't make you a good executive. you have to actually take the test yourself. that's why i like obama and why i voted for him not because he's black but i think he can think. >> thanks for your call. >> terror attacks at finle changed our nation. host: back to the phones. maryland on the

chairman bernanke concludes that, quote, america needs a strong nonpolitical, think, goldman sachs, and independent, think secret, central bank with the tools to promote financial stability in the midst of a horrendous financial crisis and to help steer our economy to recovery without inflation. this belief is a dream that one day will become a nightmare for all americans unless we come to our senses, stop our wild spending, run ji away deficits, printing press money, massive bureaucratic regulations and our unnecessary world empire. a crucial step toward fixing these problems will be transparency of the federal reserve. i yield back the balance of my time. . the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman yields back the balance of his time. congresswoman miller from michigan. congresswoman miller from michigan. the the gentlewoman from is recognized. >> this house passed what is known as cap and trade legislation that would place limits on co-2. and the reason needed is that global warming poses a grave threat to the future of our planet. we have been told that the debate is over and the scien

you were sitting at a board room table on wall street today you might hear the employees from goldman sachs discussing their billion dollar profits and bonuses or citigroup talking about bonuses for their executive or that the stock marketes that gone up 60% since this spring or hear words like economic recovery or rebound. so if you are sitting at that board room table on wall street you might think that the economy is fully bounced back and out of the woods. you might believe that there is nothing but smooth sailing ahead. but if you were at a kitchen table on main street in my home state of maine you will hear a different story. rather than talk of large profits you'll hear about bank accounts that has nothing. you might hear cutbacks on food or health care instead of hearing terms like economic recovery and rebound, you'll hear terms like high unemployment and economic debt. the economic recovery may be at hand. but for the millions of unemployed workers and thousands of small businesses who are struggling to get by, the economic recovery is still a long way off. madam speaker, in my st

that involve making sure that if you have got these really big companies, the jpmorgans or the goldman sachsyou know, the companies have been called to big to fail. you better have a bunch of safeguards that we do not have to bail you out if you make bad mistakes. [applause] so, that is one part of the reform. another part of the reform is a consumer watchdog that actually has some teeth. because everybody here has a story to tell about a credit card company that suddenly jacked up your rates for a loan that had a fine print that you did not understand. there is a balloon payment someplace. we want to make sure that regulatory framework is much more effective. we want to set in place mechanisms so that if there is a big bang that it -- a big bank that is getting into trouble, or for that matter, an insurance company like aig that is getting into trouble, there's a way of quarantining them so they do not infect the rest of the financial system. if we get this package passed, then we will have the safeguards in place to be sure this stuff does not happen again. but i want to tell all of you, a

host: "top 30 ed goldman sachs will not get a bonus.areholders have been given a vote on compensation. the policy comes as some of the world's financial capital ways steep taxes on the employees of banks during the credit crisis. -- credit crisis." and other banking story -- "france yesterday said that they would follow the lead of britain by levying a super tax on the bonuses of business people in french -- france." pa., stephanie. independent line. please go ahead with your comment. caller: several little things. first of all, capitalism and the free market has led the regular people down. it is only good for the top 20%. another thing is i think we need to get rid of the congress people who think that legalized bribery is bilal of the land. you want to talk about the constitution? that is not in the constitution, when they take these bribes from anyone that they can. healthcare is the reason that all of the workers are discriminated against. even though they are the most dependable and experienced, they cannot get work. health care i

previously, he spent almost 30 years at goldman sachs, found in the firm's equity capital markets grouphe duke university board of trustees, and holds a degree from duke university and an m.b.a. from the university of chicago. i want to thank all of you for coming and i would first recognize mrs. bourne and then go down the line 3 and you are recognized for as much time as he may consume. [inaudible] [inaudible] congress passed a statute in 2000 that eliminated virtually all regulation of the over-the- counter derivatives. it was called a modernization that. because of that statute, the federal or state regulators currently has oversight responsibilities or regulatory powers over this market. the market is totally opaque and is often referred to as the dark the market. it is enormous. in june of this year, the reported size of the market exceeded $600 trillion in value. while over-the-counter derivatives have been justified as vehicles to manage financial risk, they have not practiced, spread, and multiplied -- they have in practice bread and multiplied risk throughout the economy. lack

they probably paid these companies, may be a goldman sachs or somebody like that, the nominal value,face value. they might have even been worthless or worth 10 cents on the dollar. it is very important, especially when you finally come to the conclusion that this is the source of the problem, this mischief of the fed creates a business cycle, causes inflation, causes unemployment. they say they do not want transparency. they want independence. independent means the secrecy. at the american people are waking up and realizing that congress has a responsibility. they created the central bank and they are to act more responsibly in what they're doing. host: how with the american economy function if there were not k-fed? guest: better -- if there were not the fed? guest: a lot better. in 1913 when the fed came into existence, it was not to in the years later they gave us the depression. starting in 1913 day and created an excess of credit, have interest rates too low. that was full world for i. but they still understand -- understood they could not keep doing this. it kept inflating and t

that is why goldman sachs was making so much money, they are reviewing all of these contracts and cleaning like the federal government help clean up the major banks. now the major banks are cleaning up the major parties and customers all related to the same thing. it is not giving to the people, that's why. host: yesterday the speaker of the house had an end of your briefing. here is the front page story -- host: next is a call from nyack, new york. angelica on the independent line. caller: i think giving a tax credit for businesses to become more green is a great step. also the private sector needs to be supported to put solar panels and things like that in their house. however, i don't think it is enough. i think we need to get the suv's off the road and minimize the carbon footprints, single people lived and 3000 square- foot home, it seems ridiculous to me. host: tell us what kind of choices you made about a home you live in an car you drive? caller: i drive a scooter. we have one car and a scooter. i work locally so i am lucky i can take the scooter. i don't live in a home, i rent, so

and as a result of all these banks, citigroup, goldman sachs, jp morgan, morgantown stanley and a.i.g., they received $200 billion in taxpayer money. the wall street reform and consumer protection act attempts to prevent that from happening again. the bill will require over the counter trading to be conducted through clearinghouses and make sure there is are sufficient protection from a reckless behavior that these too big banks engage in. clearinghouses are a good idea. think of them as financial police stations. that's the function they are intended to serve. some describe them as a blast wall that will prevent the failure of a derivatives deal from impacting a real economy. however, the problem is, and this is a huge problem with the bill in my view, the bill would allow these same big banks to purchase the clearinghouses that are being created to police the big banks in their derivative trading. thesehouses -- the big banks will be allowed to set the rules for how their own derivatives deals are handled. my amendment would prevent those big banks and major swap participants like a

paulson net with the entire board of goldman sachs in june of 2008? this was on c-span tv. and then? july and august the a.i.g. president went to them and asked them if they could become bank holding companies and primary dealers so they could reap the benefits of their own companies going broke several months down the road we have supposedly a shock and they took all their stocks out and we the taxpayers are the ones that paid for it. were you aware they had this tarp written up? guest: the question is if they had the tarp written up as a bill before the crisis occurred, if that's the question, i know that treasury ordered certain studies to be made and they do this all the time. they do this in the pentagon. they have war plans for every nation in the world. in treasury they have contingency plans for everything that might happen. and certainly what happened in september, which was the final straw that broke the camel's back, that wasn't the first occasion that we knew we were going to run into and were running into a financial disaster. we'd actually had it occur almost

goldman sachs, $14 billion like they did in a.i.g. merrill linch, 6.2. deutsche bank could walk with $8.5 billion. u.b.s., $3.8 billion. these are the counterparties on credit default swaps to a.i.g. and their legislation would replicate it, madam chair. there is nothing in their legislation that would prevent the entire a.i.g. fiasco from repeating itself and if anything, it would triple it, up to three years, up to three years of bailout authority there. . not only is the death sentence commuted in their bailout fund but not unlike the g.m. or chrysler cases, we could have a lazarus-like resurrection. not unlike old g.m. and old chrysler, you flip a switch and you take care of your political allies, the united auto workers, you got new g.m. and new chrysler and they keep on trucking along. it's an interesting metaphor to call this a death penalty. what it is is a bailout. here we are, madam chair, at a very tough time in our nation's economy, 3.6 million of our fellow citizens have lost their jobs since the president told us if we passed this stimulus

they probably paid these companies, may be a goldman sachs or somebody like that, the nominal value, a face value. they might have even been worthless or worth 10 cents on the dollar. it is very important, especially when you finally come to the conclusion that this is the source of the problem, this mischief of the fed creates a business cycle, causes inflation, causes unemployment. they say they do not want transparency. they want independence. independent means the secrecy. at the american people are waking up and realizing that congress has a responsibility. they created the central bank and they are to act more responsibly in what they're doing. host: how with the american economy function if there were not k-fed? guest: better -- if there were not the fed? guest: a lot better. in 1913 when the fed came into existence, it was not to in the years later they gave us the depression. starting in 1913 day and created an excess of credit, have interest rates too low. that was full world for i. but they still understand -- understood they could not keep doing this. it kept inflating an

they probably paid these companies, may be a goldman sachs or somebody like that, the nominal value, a face value. they might have even been worthless or worth 10 cents on the dollar. it is very important, especially when you finally come to the conclusion that this is the source of the problem, this mischief of the fed creates a business cycle, causes inflation, causes unemployment. they say they do not want transparency. they want independence. independent means the secrecy. at the american people are waking up and realizing that congress has a responsibility. they created the central bank and they are to act more responsibly in what they're doing. host: how with the american economy function if there were not k-fed? guest: better -- if there were not the fed? guest: a lot better. in 1913 when the fed came into existence, it was not to in the years later they gave us the depression. starting in 1913 day and created an excess of credit, have interest rates too low. that was full world for i. but they still understand -- understood they could not keep doing this. it kept inflating an

reasons are incompetence or a desire to secretly funnel more money to a select few firms, notably goldman sachs, merrill lynch and a handful of large european banks. i cannot understand why you do not seek european government's contribution to this bailout of their banking system. from monetary policy to regulation, consumer protection, transparency and independence, your time as fed chairman has been a failure. you stated time and again during the housing bubble that there was no bubble. after the bubble burst you repeatedly claimed the fallout would be small and you clearly did not support the systemic risk that you claim the fed was supposed to be looking out for. when i come -- where i come from, we punish failure, not reward it. that is certainly the way it was when i played baseball, and it is the way across all america presently. judging by the current treasure secretary, some may think washington does reward failure, but that should not be the case. i will do everything i can to stop your nomination and drag out this process as long as i can. we must put an end to your and the fed's fai

when you use the term "cadillac," what the implications are, maybe we will get some guys from goldman sachs who have this off-the-wall outlandish benefits package. when the c.w.a. did a bit of work on this, what their estimate is that as health care costs continue to rise and we're seeing 6%, 7%, 8% increases every year, obviously the way the language of this legislation is written, it will impact more and more health care plans. by the year 2019, it will burden one out of three health care plans in this country. does that sound like a cadillac plan? one out of three plans. and eventually as health care costs continue to rise, it will impact virtually every plan in this country. so the bottom line that we're talking about is, yes, we need to raise money. how do you do it? you do it by socking it to the middle class and working families. and as the senator from ohio has indicated, many of these workers have given up wage increases in order to maintain a strong health care benefit. and those are the people we're going to tax. or you tax the top .02%, many of whom received generous tax breaks

merrill lynch, goldman sachs, morgan stanley, these big institutions were not basically a financial conglomerate. they were investment banks, and they underwrote a lot of this stuff and help get us into trouble likewise, if you look if the big banks, the only true financial conglomerate was sitting group, but the rest of the big banks were not really commercial investment stakes, so i do not view this bill which eliminated the other -- which have largely been removed -- now i do not view that as of precipitating cause. it is a separate issue. did it allow some institutions to become larger? if you look of the names of just rattled off, they're pretty vague, so i would conclude by looking at the recommendation which says let selectively look at an institution and say if its plan is not satisfactory, then selectively we could force the divorce you are talking about, but i would not mandate it by law, and they're not that many regulated financial institutions anyhow. that is one of the ironies. we thought there would be financial conglomerates, and it turns out there were not many. >> do you have a

my colleagues would rather give gold to the corporate goldman sachs rather than put silver and gold under the christmas tree of ordinary americans, bah humbug. they would stand with corporate executives and thousand dollar suits than those in the unemployment lines. they would rather bail out the big banks rather than americans keep their homes on main street. bah humbug. they would like to protect the pensions of bill corporate executives and stand with hedge fund managers who are betting on the price of oil going up and price of food going up and americans failing to pay their mortgages rather than helping those families that are sfang in lines at food banks this holiday season, bah humburg. this bill will help and will protect small businesses and from the unnecessary risk by wall street risks and speculators and brings transparency and accountability to a financial system that has run amuck. this bill is about instituting commonsense reforms, holding wall street and big banks accountable. now republican leaders would rather vote to rescue big banks on wall street than find it in their

reasons are incompetence or a desire to secretly funnel more money to a select few firms, notably goldman sachs merrill lynch and a handful of large european banks. i cannot understand why you do not seek european government's contribution to this bailout of their banking system. from monetary policy to regulation, consumer protection, transparency and independence, your time as fed chairman has been a failure. you stated time and again during the housing bubble that there was no bubble. after the bubble@@@@@ @ @ @ @ @ the fed's failure, and there is no better time than now. your fed has become the creature from jekyll. thank you. >> care to respond to that? [ laughter ]. >> let me just correct one point. first, i'm not sure -- i think there was some misunderstanding or misinterpretation of the sig t.a.r.p.'s report. we believed the failure would impose enormous damage on the entire u.s. economy and on every american. it is not reasonable to talk about letting large firms fail as if that would have no effect on credit extension and on the broader economy. the lehman example should be enough for

caller: why did they not put the executives from goldman sachs and jpmorgan chase -- when they neededtaxpayer bailout money, why did the executive said billion dollars, why did they not use their own money to get liquidity in into the back into their own company instead of using taxpayer dollars? or else break the company's down like they were supposed to. everybody knows it was fraud. guest: that is a good question, too. there are very few executives who have a personal net worth anywhere near the amount of the bailout. because there are very few executives, i cannotñr think of any, personal net worth anywhere near the size of the bailout. they needed a lot more money than anyone executive could possibly have in his own bank account. but this question of bank -- breaking up the banks is what we heard a lot. there were reformers is said these banks are too big, and the idea of too big to fail, if a bank were to collapse it would ruin the entire global financial system and therefore we have to inject it with money. reformers to say just right of the banks. instead of having one's citig