the rate of noninsurance in massachusetts before it was less than 10%. but if you look at california, the rate of noninsurance is 20% of the population in that state. in florida, it's 25%. in texas, it's 27%. these are the people that we're going to help? and once they find out how much washington is helping them, i don't think they're going to appreciate it very much. in fact, instead of dictating to these people, we should be listening to them. there's a reason that they're not buying coverage. and it's not just affordability. 1/3 of the uninsured are already ill eligible for free medicaid. they found out once they enroll in a program, they still can't see a doctor because medicaid pays doctors so little that very few doctors will take it. so they roll down to the e.r. just like they did before they were on medicaid. so what's the point? why bother having coverage? why bother enrolling when nothing in your life changes? and in fact, for schip program, a third of the uninsured charne that are currently eligible for schip, had been enrolled in a program

it was a noninsurance financial subsidiary of a.i.g. that led to the debacle. a.i.g.'s insurance business remained pretty healthy. the problems were in the financial services unit. and i don't think it's a coincidence that unit was regulated by the office of thrift supervision primarily which has been long recognized as the weak sister when it comes to bank regulators. that's where both my bill and the effect of the president's proposal is to do away with that regulator and to have a consolidated regulator. fifth, i need to learn more about the president's proposal to consolidate consumer protection for financial products into one agency. the current financial regulatory agencies -- whether the bank regular livetheregulators or thd exchange commission -- all have an important role to play in consumer protection, a role that has not always been played adequately in the last few years. is the answer, however, to the problems that we've seen, simply to remove consumer protection from the bank regulators' responsibilities? i'm not sure that's the right response. i think we