mr. mulvaney: thank you. always nice to have folks some back home. anybody else? >> generalship hydro from pennsylvania. peggy for being here, mr. director. i appreciate the comment you made a moment ago with how you're looking to clever with the attorneys general. not to get into a particular case, but i wanted to drill down with some specificity for a moment. as you know, the consumer financial protection act actually allows states to pursue civil actions in federal court. i am wondering what your philosophy is on state attorneys ' general. not case-specific, but in general, continuing to pursue that. we have found that spin very helpful in pennsylvania. i will let my colleagues because themselves about their states. we want to continue to be able to do that. i'm curious about your philosophy. mr. mulvaney: the easy answer is law allows it. as a result we're all for it. , that's what we're in the business of. we execute the laws; right? that's our job in the executive branch of government as it is in yours.

mr. mulvaney: it's a tremendous increase in work force development. it actually starts taking a look at funding infrastructure. and it also does a lot of what we wanted, not everything we wanted but a lot of what we wanted on immigration. so all things considered, when we look at the bill, we have to weigh what we asked for and what we had to give away to get it. is it perfect? no. is it exactly what we asked for in the budget? no. were we ever going to get that? no. that's not how the process works. when appropriations bills have to have 60 votes in the senate which they do, you're going to always have to rely on democrat votes in a republican majority like we have. we need nine democrats to support this bill. there was no chance of everything that we wanted passing. this is probably a good opportunity to bring up the idea of a line item veto. if the president had that, this bill would look a lot different by the time it became law. but we do not have that opportunity. it would be a good time to welcome at the rules in the senate that drive us to the

mr. mulvaney did $10 million to $30 million. right now 1.5 million veterans live in household receive snap benefits. an increase in homelessness among veterans. are you going to pay for part of this parade rather than put money into veterans' health care, mental health, and housing? secretary shulkin: as you know, veterans day is a very important day to us. we put our resources and efforts into the recognition at our cemetery that day. we have no chance to change that. we haven't had any discussions at the white house about getting in the parade. mr. dent: i'd like to recognize the retiring gentleman from florida, our good friend, mr. rooney. mr. rooney: thank you to the retiring chairman. dr. shulkin, welcome. thank you. aware ornow if you are not, but over the last several years congressman tim ryan and myself both served as co-chairs of the military mental health caucus. it's had a few variations of different aware or not, names. essentially we have tried to hold hearings and have meet to discuss things that would help return

mr. mulvaney is now over there trying to dismantle is extremely important. we're working on issues trying to deal with the big banks and to implement the dodd/frank reforms that we have been involved in, to make sure that we never have another crisis like we've had where the big banks basically took advantage of so many of our citizens with these exotic loans and with these loans that resetting in a short period of time. we had foreclosures all over this country that we had to learn how to do modifications for and keep people in their homes. we need to be talking about these issues. we need to be talking about the sanctions. and why there is no implementation of the sanctions. why it is that teller son had $120 million. didn't spend a dime of it to find out about what happ had happened with hacking into our dnc. why it is mnuchin is supposed to help implement the sanctions is excusing himself and talking about oh, that's something the state department was supposed to do. this president in my estimation has a deal with putin where he agreed to lift the sancti

mr. mulvaney over there, who is supposed to be over at the office of management and budget, to basically destroy it. and so we cannot allow the members of congress to be tricked or fooled that somehow this is helpful that they're bringing in the consumer financial protection bureau. what they want to do is tie the hands of the consumer financial protection bureau and basically change their mission from protection for consumers to deregulation for the biggest banks in america. why do we have the consumer financial protection bureau? that is the center priest of the dodd-frank reform legislation that we worked so hard on. are we forgetting about what happened in 2008? are we forgetting about the recession that was caused by the big banks who had been involved with all of these exotic products and ways by which they homeowners, would-be homeowners to try and get mortgages? we can't forget about all of that we have to know that not only did we have a recession, we were headed for a depression. and dodd-frank reform has gone a long way toward eliminating some of the bad practices that were in

mr. mulvaney has, quote, rebuffed bank regulators at the federal reserve, the fdic, and the occ when they offered to help with onsite exams or credit bureaus in connection with the equifax investigation. can you confirm whether or not the consumer financial protection bureau has rebuffed offers by the fed to help them get to the bottom of the equifax -- >> no, i can't i hadn't heard that. >> if you can get back to us i mean, this is a publicly reported document. would you be willing to get back to us and let us know, confirm or say one way or another? >> sure. >> i appreciate that very much in terms of the impact on banks, you have the direct impact banks are also impacted when those that have less cyber protections, target, for example, are hacked, and as a result of that, the banks have to pay the credit card costs directly to consumers. and then they've got to go recor recoup that money from other entities one of the things i've been focused on and the committee has talked about is to try to get the sec to increase its oversight with respect to cyber attacks, and especially their respo

mr. mulvaney is rebuffed regulators at the federal reserve for the acrobat investigation. will pay everybody thought was that bad to help him get to the bottom of the up at the facts if you get back to is this is a publicly reported document. to get back to us and so one way or the other. i appreciate that very much in terms impact things also impacted but you have less cyber protections, target for example are hacked and as a result about the banks have to pay the credit card cost directly to consumers and then have to recoup that money from other entities something we have been focused is to get the fcc to increase its oversight with respect to cyber attacks and especially the responsibilities to disclose to the public in a timely manner. i would just ask you if you could work with us and any other regulators in trying to come up with disclosure requirements for the cyber breaches that just the public but banks and others as well gave you say that there will be very relaxing of the rules for word things. i just don't agree with that, that should they made it clear that t

mr. mulvaney's budget. it is important and members do work in a bipartisan way and i was just shocked by these statistics and hope that we can address it the best we can with your recommendations. thank you mr. chairman. >> thank you for that line of questioning. this time we are going to move to the second line of questions for those over here. with that i will recognize myself. you announced plans without top to bottom for the central office reorganization due by may 1 and the nationwide reorganization plan for the regional hospitals by july 1. could you quickly touch on the situation of the hospital and what led you to set in motion such significant changes and have your market assessments revealed systemic problems and are you considering getting rid of this level? >> very briefly to update you on the situation. back in april, the inspector general called me in and said i won't tell you about what we are finding in the review. the results were so concerning to me i removed to the medical center director

mr. mulvaney's budget and this is an important committee and members new york a bipartisan way and i was shocked by the statistics and i hope we can address it as best as we can with your recommendations. thank you, mr. chairman. >> thank you. >> thank you mrs. lowey for that line of questioning. we're going to move into the second round of questions for those who are here so with that i'll recognize myself for five minutes. on the same day last week as the release of the unfavorable ig report about the d.c. v.a. hospital you announced sweeping plans to reorganize vha from the top to bottom with a plan for central office reorganization due by may 1 and a nationwide reorganization plan for your regional hospitals due by july 1 1. could you touch on the situation of the v.a. hospital and then -- this is important. what led you to set in motion such significant changes and have your market assessments of different health care markets revealed systemic problems and are you considering delayering the vha in getting rid of the visn level? >> to update you on the washington, d.c. situation. bac

mr. mulvaney that in particular. i hope we don't see another repeat of it. >> dr. rivlin, when you were director president reagan had disagreements but it seems the tone of the disagreements were very different than the type of disagreements we see now and it would be great to have your perspective on what those disagreements were and the tone of the conversation today? >> i am generally distressed by the tone of political discourse these days. because it is become much more angry and less polite and civil than it used to be and particularly distressed by a president who hasn't just named the cbo fake news, it is appears to be anything he disagrees with. but that said, let me tell one story about the reagan administration. when they first came in, they didn't understand who cbo was and who they work for and they -- they immediately attacked. they meaning the staff around the president, not the president himself. and said we have to get a new director. and the congress immediately reacted and senator dole and senator demmin itchy and others who were republicans call

mr. otting the new comptroller of the currency. mulvaney thinks it shouldn't exist. randal quarles the head of supervision at the federal reserve, he said in the bush treasury department that things were fine in our country. these are the people we've entrusted to do the regulation, to hold back this dam that they have weakened legislatively. they are the ones charged withholding it back? mr. president, if we want to help community banks, let's help community banks. let's not try to sell -- the same way this majority sold the tax cut bill, we talked about the tax cut, this is a tax cut for the middle class. well, 81% of the benefits over time went to the wealthiest 1%, so it wasn't a tax cut for the middle class any more than this is a bill for community bankers. community bankers will get help. i want to do that. all of us on the floor want to do that. that is not what this bill really does. we want to help banks, let's help community banks. we want to help credit unions? let's help credit unions. we want to help raoepblg tphals tphals -- regionals like fifth third?