to look at with some neighborhoods and we're doing this neighborhood plans, looking at a more granular data. i do look forward to being kept up-to-date on that. i am excited about a lot of the economic revitalization happening. i am from baltimore and you have an area where tons of the city is still boarded up and vacant and you cannot bring any businesses there. the areas that have been revitalized have a mix of people and diversity and jobs, etc. it is important not to get out -- ghettoize populations and provide opportunities and other places for jobs where people were. that is why they ended up in that circumstance to the extent that there is that local hire provision in the tax benefits and all the different agreements as we look at looking -- moving forward. creating incentives for the local -- a lower level jobs. is really important. -- creating incentives for the lower level jobs. it is important. commissioner moore: this is an extremely sensitive and thorough piece of work and i appreciate its timeliness. the city place has found a new owner and we are hearing positive things. ther

yes, these little granular bits of data matter.veryone is tweeting about whether the spanish bond auction is good enough. simultaneously while watching the markets trade up this morning. i got one eye on the s&p futures. they're not jumping as much as i thought on spain's auction. a-ha we can't match yesterday's rally, maybe there's no secret deal. after 2 1/2 hour of actually watching every tick of the future in the so-so european markets, satisfied that europe wasn't going to hurt us that much even though it might not help us that much either, i jumped into the shower. i had had enough. i had to get ready for my day! from my forensic analysis, right between time i shampooed my hair and pretended that it mattered that i apply conditioner, china cut its rates. a real cut, first cut in years, impact. sure enough the u.s. futures exploded higher, literally tripling from where they were before i turned the water off. couldn't find the wash cloth. that's why we rallied hard most of the day. not because i couldn't find the washcloth. no

world would we drop from the bill the transparency and accountability provisions that get the granular dataeed to make this assessment? i guess we'll never know. congressional oversight can help highlight the process that is working well at the f.d.a. recent g.a.o. reports over the past year have underscored these points and why that right matrix must be reported to paint a full and complete picture. now all of a sudden we've got the general accounting office -- the g.a.o. they're saying the same thing that all these third parties have said. why in because they're the ones that we turn to when we want to ask them to do an evaluation of the f.d.a. and they are taling congress, hey, don't miss -- and they're telling congress, hey, don't miss this opportunity to get this stuff in there. you actually can get the data that we can't get because it's not in the statute. every five years when we pass the final user fee package, f.d.a.'s authority and responsibilities grow. think about that. more employees, higher costs. it seems like things would be getting b but without the may treks -- it seems l

granular level, they have no chance. >> could i -- i'm sorry, could i just suggest we link the data question to some of the incentive questions too. if in fact we had access to these data and the purpose was so say you're a bad guy and you're a good guy, obviously physicians are concerned about. but suppose we shifted the incentives and we're talking about managing real populations and we said gee, there is a population in an adjacent county where in fact the number of coronary angiograms done is half as many as you do. and by the way, the incidents of obstructive coronary disease is three times higher, suggesting that you're doing angiograms on people who in fact don't need them. in fact, we could ascertain that as well. if we went to that community and said gee, we're actually changing the payment structure from fee for service, notwithstanding the sgr issues to one where you in fact will receive a case rate or a global rate for your community. and by the way, by looking at this cms data, we in fact can assure you that by reducing utilization and being a little more thoughtful about a your use of angioography, you in fact c

get the granular level they have no chance. >> adjust suggest we make the data question to the incentive questions? if we had access to these data and the purpose was to say you are a bad guy and you are a good guy that physicians are -- we shift the incentive and talk about managing populations and there's a population and adjacent county where the number of coronary angiograms is not half as many as you do and the incidents of coronary obstructive coronary disease is three times hire suggesting you're doing angiograms on people who don't need them and ascertain that as well. if we went to that community and said we are changing the payment structure from the for service notwithstanding the s.g. are issues so you received a global rate for your community and by the way by looking at the cms data we assure you by looking at utilization and the more thoughtful about your use of and geography and 25 other tests you in fact put yourself in a position where you could responsibly assume risk, financial risk without compromising the care of your population. for a lot of these issues you have t

what the data has done is it's given us a window into those exposures in a much more granular way, but it also helps us understand the risks that are, exist within fund portfolios, and we have, in fact, hired a former money market fund portfolio manager to help us work through this data. we've noticed some interesting things, i will say, that some fund managers are taking on significantly greater risks than others, although all their share prices are still priced at a dollar. we have learned that while most funds significantly reduce their exposures to european banks in light of all the problems in the eurozone, some funds did not and were actually able to capture higher yields which is very enticing to investors. and, but, again, shows you that the $1 share price can be a little bit misleading. the risk that funds are taking are not prohibited by our rules, um, but it's very important, obviously, for us to have a good handle on what those are. so we look at the data very carefully, and i will say we worry about some of it. >> which one or two provisions in the 2010 reforms do you beli

at the granular level, they have no chance. >> if we had access to these data and the purpose was to say you're a good guy or a bad guy, and we talk about managing real populations and said there is population were the number of coronary angiograms is half as many as you'd do. the incidents is three times higher, suggesting you're done angiograms on people who don't need them. we went to the committee and said we're changing the payment structure -- we went to the community and said we're changing the payment structure and we can assure you that by being more thoughtful about your use of angiography, you can responsibly assume risks without compromising the care of your population. we did think about the palin solutions and combine some of the issues we have been talking -- >> if we can make that data available to people, we had two large cardiology groups. we went to those cardiologists and we showed them their data compared to the next county. if we had set that out to them and not engage them, there would of thought we were doing a good job. now their practices are exactly what th

granularity. currently it shows the name of the bank and the type of complaint, so that's down to two words. if you're a consumer with a bill or a late fee, the data base will show where you have a parallel with other consumers that filing this type of complaint. >> do you not agree? >> sure, we're all about making sure the customer is happen. 80% of the complaints have been processed around, and 50% had come through fruition, so we're not avoiding taking care of customers, that's what we're in the business to do. but putting the name of the bank at the very beginning when allegations are occurring is not the right thing to do. the consumer is protected from the internet, shouldn't the bank be protected at the same time. >> you're saying until you have evidence, the names should not be there. >> that's right, and they said they could not validate that any of the claims are valid. why put them up there until the jury is done. >> that does create an opportunity to just put banks names out thereto so everybody pe speculates, what about that? >> i think this is a contest about the nature of the individual banks. as consumers make choices, they have to