oxley and passing a bill, which was derided as insufficient and senate republicans rejected the house republican bill. in 2007, the democrats a majority to the bill, which mr. wallace then said with a very good bill and that bill which led them to be putting into conservatorship. but then go back to john and from illinois. the republicans press for reform and they were unable to achieve it. when they're able to achieve if they don't press for her. they were in power from 1995 to 2006 and passed a bill in the house, which mr. wallace and president of the united states drive isn't sufficient. lasher they pushed hard for a bill we were told was the answer in this year it appears they're now waiting for the administration. the gentleman from illinois said the administration has avoided the tough choice is. if that's the case, resembles the republican who are making tough choices either. what is stopping them? the fact is that n-november it became clear to republicans who had controlled the house and i'm still waiting to see the bill. i guess i won't understand what happened that bill. but

i'm thinking oxley, even dodd-frank to some extent. clearly there would be some crisis, the event that will change those attitudes and my prompt action in terms of our public finances. and of course, we hope it won't be a crisis of greek nature, but something that will rally. what that might be? do you envision something had been that may change the perception in the public opinion, in the political spectrum? or do we really need to wait to become greece before something is done? >> i'll take a fair shot. look, t.a.r.p. was a crisis. congress generally waits for the crisis information basically threw the voters to act in a decisive manner. 9/11. you go back and take a look at these crises. that is when you e-mail the sudden a of legislation after those kinds of things. there's very little reward the political business for getting on a issue. i.e. clinton on health care back in the 90s. so i think will take some kind of crisis. i would note that a lot of this u.s. debt is short-term debt. this is not long-term debt when you take a look

odd regulation i mean during the bush era we had sarbanes oxley which made it you know incredibly tough for smaller public companies to list so i mean yeah we certainly revise regulated but i think everybody deserves deserves a due process here ed ever a lot of people made misjudgments during the crisis the government which is sort of encouraged to the loads the people who. greenspan was just insane and lower interest rates everything get a whole thing john thanks so much a concert last night talking with president obama he's take a page from ronald reagan and through thousands of bankers in jail during the us now crisis in the one nine hundred eighty s. let's lock these guys up. still out of the big picture what fundamental human right is america denying to many of our citizens i'll tell you this. turtling truth about just how many people in our nation don't have access to clean water. twenty four seven live streaming news tells what to do about the ongoing financial hardship unlimited free high quality videos for download. and stories you may never find on mainstream media. the. most

oxley is the one the senate rejected and the president said was too weak. the argument he gave about we are going to overwhelm it with money, yes, that was an accurate quote from secretary paulson under the bush administration, and he was doing that to a bill for which mr. neugebauer voted after the amendment that somewhat weakened in mr. paulson's viewed went to any we and i ask my remaining time go to mr. scott. >> mr. space? >> thank you very much, mr. chairman. welcome, mr. secretary, and i wanted to just make a couple of points on the options that were presented in the obama administration's report. for one, it says that option one particularly on the privatization -- i would like to know if you're concerned about whether or not private capital can meet the needs of the housing market with any kind of sufficient liquidity. it seems to me to be unclear whether or not there is enough private capital willing to fund such a system. because under this option, the report is running on the assumption that of the government support for the housing market is ev

i'm thinking sarbanes-oxley, even dodd-frank to some extent, clearly there will be some crisis that we change those attitudes and might prompt action in terms of our public finances and of course we hope it won't be a crisis of great nature but something we still hope to rally. what that might be, do you envision something happening that may change the perception in the public opinion, in the political spectrum or we need to wait to become greece before something is done. >> i will take the first shot. t.a.r.p. was a crisis. congress generally waits for the crisis and permission. basically from the voters to act in a decisive manner. you go back and look at the crisis that is when you have seen a proliferation of the legislation after it was kind of things. there's very little reward in the political business for getting out in front of an issue. clinton on health care back in the 90's when they try to get in front of it and got punished so i think it will take a crisis and there's a lot of this debt its short-term debt, not long-term debt when you look what's out there. so it wouldn't

passed a bill that carried through this committee under republican leadership of the former chairman oxley explained would have prevented this crisis and it was on the other side of the capital where others blocked it. finally, if we go bad bank/good bank and profits the long to someone else rather than those profits being used to pay what we hope is less than $75 billion in losses doesn't it make sense to make sure not only that future operations are profitable but those profits are used to repay the taxpayer? >> i agree. i have seen a good bank/bad bank version that achieved the objective of minimizing losses. >> mr. secretary, you talked about a continued wind down in fannie and freddie at rate of 10% annually. some of that is wind down. some of that will be selling into the marketplace which we discussed before. what has been done in that regard and does this mean we are going to be selling off 10% of fannie and freddie in the marketplace in the balance of this year? >> i can't tell you precisely the mix between the natural run off and an actual sale but i can say that based on the exp

those loans in the bill, the "wall street journal" denounced us and said we had created a sarbanes-oxley restriction for housingment i just want to make it clear that there was no direction by any entity of the federal government. the gentleman appears to acknowledge that when he said fannie and freddie -- i'll finish my sentence first. when he said that fannie and freddie allowed it, that's a long way from saying that it was directed. now i yield. >> i appreciate that. i'm curious, though, how getting back to this particular amendment in this particular bill as we are removing this program, why is this program so vital if it was authorized in 1975, and in 1995 the clinton administration under h.u.d. used this language -- mr. frank: i got time. >> the language that they said, they wanted to remove this outdated obsolete -- mr. frank: taking back my time. the gentleman's using up with the papers. here's the deal, 1975 is when it happened in pennsylvania, not america. if you had been listening carefully. secondly, in 1995, we didn't have the foreclosure crisis. third, as to just a new prog

i'm thinkingsarbanes-oxley, even dodd-frank to some extent, clearly there will be some crisis that we change those attitudes and might prompt action in terms of our public finances and of course we hope it won't be a crisis of great nature but something we still hope to rally. what that might be, do you envision something happening that may change the perception in the public opinion, in the political spectrum or we need to wait to become greece before something is done. >> i will take the first shot. t.a.r.p. was a crisis. congress generally waits for the crisis and permission. basically from the voters to act in a decisive manner. you go back and look at the crisis that is when you have seen a proliferation of the legislation after it was kind of things. there's very little reward in the political business for getting out in front of an issue. clinton on health care back in the 90's when they try to get in front of it and got punished so i think it will take a crisis and there's a lot of this debt its short-term debt, not long-term debt when you look what's out there. so it wouldn't

oxley is the one the senate rejected endlessly tweet and mr. can mr. wilson to write as we two-week heard mr. newco bower, the argument that will overwhelm with money was an accurate quote from secretary of the treasury paulson under the bush administration and he was doing that pursuant to a bill for which mr. newco bower boated. i would ask her many times to mr. scott. thank you, mr. >> thank you, mr. chairman. >> welcome, mr. secretary. donuts make a couple points on the options that were presented in the obama in the station's report. and for one, it says that option one particularly on privatization i think i would like to know if you're concerned about whether or not private capital can meet the needs of the housing market with any kind of liquidity. it seems to me to be unclear whether or not there is enough private capital willing to fund such a system. because under this option, the report is running on the assumption that if government support for the housing market is eventually removed, then private money will replace it. that's what we hea