jo you did that. >> i read greenspan's turn lance. he was pretty good as exposing what went on. there's some questions i still have that is related to the history during the clinton years and the transition. the big question is this, what happened to the $700 surplus, was it spent and did the surplus actually exist? >> you mean when he left the office? >> the bush tax cut t the same time that the war spending wenup board. >> can i taketwo minutes to tell the store which we have not told until today? and that is -- we keep wanting to know the future, and in fact we do not we ner get the future right. when that did the second story on bullish about how he decided to go to war -- on bush about how he decided to go to war in iraq? i asked him, how do you think history ll judge the iraq war? and he takes his hands out and shrubs like only bush can and says, history? we will not know. we will all be dead. [lauger >> and for it -- and with that we want thank you for having us. [applause] >> i rely knew that we wer't done. >> real quick -- that was the tension. we goto get you home to y

greenspan pointed out, to the proposition , as mr. royce stated, just get out of the way, they will discipline themselves. frankly, the split end that leaves two seconds early because the referee is out on the field is not a bad person. he's trying to get an advantage. that's the difference, i think, between our perspectives. i understand that difference of perspective so i agree with you that we do have a difference of perspective. i believe this strikes the right balance, and i yield to the gentleman. mr. frank: i say to the gentleman from new jersey, i only judge what i see. when the house voted on this bill last december, the minority had certain amendments made in order under the rule. in the end they had the motion to recommit over which they had complete editorial control. the motion to recommit on this version of this bill that passed the house last december from the minority said no regulation, no reform of regulation. it has one provision. it said kill everything in the bill. it didn't say do it differently. it didn't amend

greenspan for ideological reasons simillr to some of those argued here argued the maaket should not regglate and to intervene, refuse to use the authority. in 2004 and 2005, two of my porth carolina colleagues move to try to regulate subprime mortgages by statute because th+ fed would not use the authority. we were frustrated because the republican house leadership sent word not to do it. it was not until 2007 when the democrats came back to the majority that we passed the bill through the house to regulate subprime mortgages. my friend from alabama voted for it and many of the republicans here voted against it. after we did that, mr. bernanke finally decided that it was time to use the authority. the fact is, for all the talk we've heard here, 12 years of republican rule, zero legislation to regulate fannie mae and freddie mac. the bill has passed. the gentleman from alifornia tried to tighten uppand toughen the mr. oxley's -- tough and a mr. oxley's -- toughen up mr. oxley's bill. paul volcker says that sweeping financial reform legislation before congress would make the u.s. a model for t

even alan greenspan, who rationalized large tax cuts to avoid the supposed danger of paying down the debt too quickly, and does anybody remember that deep concern that we had about paying down the debt too quickly? well, the certain -- the bush administration certainly saved us from that lternative. they acknowledged in the "wall street journal" this month that that policy helped wipe out the surplus and led to higher interest rates. that is the kind of honesty we all need to show if we want to head off a crisis. and slowly but surely, that honesty is spreading to congress. this month, senator george voinovich candidly so that republicans cannot sign norquist's anti-tax pledge and take on the debt at the same time. that was not a democrat. that is the steny hoyer. that was senator george voinovich of ohio. interestingly enough, what do governors have to do? they have to make real decisions because their decisions have senator voinovich was absolutely correct. that pledge is inconsistent with the oath of office that they took when they became members of the united states senate. that

since your careers spanned the same years of greenspan's career, had you thought about doing a biography of -- you have done that? i have read "age of turbulence" and he was pretty good at exposing what went on. there are some questions i still have. they are related to the history that happens during the clinton years and the transition. >> you have one big question. >> what happened to the $700 surplus? was it spent? does the surplus actually exist? >> you mean the $700 million -- do you mean the $700 million surplus when he left office? i will give part of the answer and then bob can finish off. >> the war happened. the tax cuts kicked in at the same time as the spending for the war went up for it. it pretty much accounts for most of it. >> can i take two minutes and tell the story? we keep wanting to know the future. in fact, we do not. we never get the future right. when i did the second book on bush, it was about how he decided to go to war in iraq. he's standing in the oval office and the has his hands in his pocket and i just passed, how do you think history will judge this iraq

and the mistakes made by alan greenspan and other regulators. those hearings showed government regulators were asleep at the switch while wall street banks drove our economy off a cliff. change is necessary and i believe this legislation to strengthen the federal government possibility to prevent and respond to future crises. there are a number of issues that are important to my current committee, the committee on energy and commerce. we have consumer financial protection, regulation of electricity and other energy markets. i strongly support a new consumer finance protection agency that is independent, has strong role making and enforcement authority and has broad jurisdiction over the entities that provide financial products and services to consumers both for the house and senate. our challenge will be to produce a consumer financial protection agency that has all of the tools it needs to be successful. our economy and our families across the country are suffering from the abuses of wall street. our job is to prevent these abuses so the econom

alan greenspan spoke about it a few days ago.they say those already addicted, we have to give them another domethadone. that explains what you see as a contradiction. ron pulse is the best. those who are already now addicted to government subsidies and money must be taken care of. they must be. it is only right, moral, but we do not need to go on forever making more addicts that we cannot take care of guest: i think you have a sophisticated view, and i do not think it is of view that is widespread, frankly, among the tea party people. you are essentially saying we ought to cut the government with a grandfather clause. so anyone getting the deal now gets to keep it, but you don't give it to anyone else. that is one way to get change because you essentially keep the people benefiting now happy. i think it is not a fair way to do it. i think there ought to be some mutuality of the sacrifices. if you never get a penny from social security or medicare, even though you have been paying in large amounts of your entire working life, then

the nation is starting to recover from the recession, starting last september, according to alan greenspan. i remember observing that report. and it came out of it -- the state came out of the recession back in january. the recovery phase will be awhile for us, but president obama did warn the nation that 2009 will be the year we commence recovery proceedings with a stimulus at. the first few months will be painful, the second six months will be very painful, then there will be six months to a year of an uncomfortable period. we are staying on course regarding the fact is -- the fact is, i cannot account for all of new england being out of the recession, but massachusetts is. and i really think we will reap some political and economic changes, i think. we are at unemployment for 9%, but we have added about 16,000 jobs in massachusetts. host: to you know what industry most of those jobs came from? caller: i applied for a job, but did not get one. half those jobs came from the census bureau, i guess. we are still at 9% unemployment. i do feel independent, very optimistic, i am sorry, that we

in the meantime, greenspan created a great deal of liquidity because of the recession in 2000, 2001. so what you had was this real estate bubble where a lot of people were putting money into houses, the housing prices were going up rapidly. everyone was flipping these home loans and making lots of money. as long as the music was playing, everyone was happy. when the music stopped there was not a lot of chairs for people to sit down in. this tremendous bubble that ended up bursting in the home mortgage area was not something that took everybody by surprise. many people took advantage of it. many people were hurt very badly by it. but it was not something that people didn't understand was going on. in fact, on september 11 in 2003 which goes back quite a number of years now, president bush saw this coming. and so he is recorded here in "the new york times" -- not exactly a conservative oracle -- saying that the bush administration today recommended the most significant regulatory overhaul in the housing finance industry since the savings and loan crisis a decade ago. what the president

and the mistakes made by alan greenspan and other regulators. those hearings showed government regulators were asleep at the itch while wall street banks drove our economy off a cliff. change is necessary and i beeve this legislation to strengthen the federal government possibility to prevenand rpond to future crises. there are a number of issues at are imptant to my current committee, the committee on energy and commerce. we have consumer financial protection, regulation of electricity and other energy markets. i strongly support a new consumer finance protection agency that is independent, has strong role making and enforcement authority and has broad jurisdiction over the entities that provide financial products and services to consumers both for the house and senate. our challenge will be to produce a consumer financial protection agency that h all of the tools it needs to be successful. our economy and ouramilies across the country are suffering from the abuses of wall street. our job is to prevent these abuses so the economic security, har

greenspan refused to do it. he apologized for that err. the questionas, not whether or not thereas a general lack of physical -- discipline, but a particular lack ever discipline in containing bprime mortgages. the f.h.a.oesn't do th inact, at a time when because of geral ideological opposition to regula of the mortgagearket outside the banking syst tere, was very little legislation of subprime mortgages who made no down payment, who dn't ha to document their income. because of a othat, we ran into these problems. and the f.h.a.'s percentage went down. that's a maj reason why the f.h.a. went down. the f.h.a. has never been guilty of that laxity of practice. partf the incree in the f.h.a. share is that we have been able, filly, tout back on the subprime mortgas being granted imprudently. and the f.h. has ch stricter standards. i wanto stress, and this is a major cause of the fannie ad freddie problem, they were pued into buying subprime mortgages that never should have been given in the first place. that's nothe f.h.a. 's ao the case that t

and those questions are not necessarily self-evident because if you remember the defense that alan greenspanmounted against the fact tha said during theeveral major bubbles was how it is impossible for the licy makers to spot a bubble. well i would disagree with that. the bubble rises when there is a significant diversion between the market pce of an asset and fundamental value is value that is determined by, you know fundamentals in the case of equities, it is reasonable to understand and understand that there is a bubble when share prices became unhinged from any reasonable expectation of value future cash flows and pofits. it is perfectly reasonable. in the internet bubble the only way the pric on th.com stocks would be described bynalysts is if there was a new valuation basis and the valuation basis was oddballs. i decided to test the thesis. i ry to pay one mortgage payment with a check made out and i lost dee dee for-- eyeballs a my mortgage servicer did n even see the humor in it. in the case of housing in terms of the housing price. i mean, basically we know the housing price is wort

the mistakes were made by alan greenspan and other regulators.those hearings show government regulators were asleep at the switch, where wall street banks drove the economy over the cliff. the aaility to respond to future crises, there are a number of issues important to my current committee, the committee on energy and commerce. we have consumer financial protection, regulation of electricity, and other energy markets. i strongly support a new consumer financial protection agency that is independent, has strong rule making and enforcement authorities, and has broad jurisdiction over the entities that provide financial products and services to consumers. both the house and senate bills have good provisions. our challenge will be to take the best of both bills and produce a consumer financial protection agency that has all the tools it needs to be successful. our economy and our families across the country are suffering from the abuses of wall street. our job is to prevent these abuses so the economic security, hard-working americans will -pnever

even alan greenspan, who during the bush administration advocated for, or at least rationalized, largexes to avoid the supposed danger of paying down the debt to quickly -- does anybody remember that the concern we had about paying down the debt to quickly? the bush administration certainly saved us from that alternative. the acknowledged in "the wall street journal" this month that that policy helped wipe out the surplus and lead to higher interest rates. that is the kind of honesty we all need to show it want to head off a crisis. and slowly but surely that honesty is spreading to congress. this month, a senator said that republicans cannot sign norquist;s anti? cash -- anti-tax pledge and take on the debt. that was not a democrat. that was the republican from ohio, a governor. governors have to make real decisions because their decisions have real confident -- real consequences. that pledge is inconsistent with the oath of office they took when they became members of the united states and a. i agree. it is because i take my own of so seriously that i take our common danger so seriou