they can even live with sarbanesarbane sarbanes/oxley.nced through individuals and their sweat equity. but the middle market is burdened under sarbanes/oxley. it's not that we don't want any regulation. we don't want to tell the world that republicans are against all regulation. regulation is necessary to make a free market work, but it has to be updated and modern and it has to have at its objected, not just finding the few bad guys, but also encouraging all the good guys. you know what, corporations are made up of people, employees, shareholders, customers are going to succeed and the private sector is where it's going to happen. >> in this heavy load that the presidential might well be, the time comes when the very difficult decisions are made when there are life and death decisions, and you've taken all the information in from each side of the argument and you have to finally say to all the advisers, now i'm alone with my decision, can you tell us how you would do that? >> 30 seconds. >> well, i'm a highly analytical guy. i look at al

in addition, i would repeal the dodd-frank bill and i would repeal sarbanes-oxley. those both are killing jobs. i would dramatically expand american energy. we have a great capacity to produce all the energy we need in the united states. that would create billions of dollars in additional federal revenue with no tax increase and would create hundreds of thousands new jobs. one estimate as membership as 1.2 million jobs in the energy field alone. >> woodruff: just quickly, on your web site, when you write about the contract-- i was reading it today-- you say you see this as a fight between on the one hand the american people and on the other hand you talk about hostile elites who have contempt for the american people. who are you talking about? >> when people go to newt.org, when you have burrcrat as e.p.a., who issue rule rules abt dust on dirt roads, you talk to any person in iowa of either party and they'll tell you this is a level of arrogance and a level of being out of touch with reality that is amazing. when you have a federal judge in san antonio who rule not

second, repeal sarbanes oxley, a bill which raises the cost of doing business in america without producing any new information that is useful. third, replace the epa with a new environmental solutions agency that focuses on economic rationality on cooperation with communities back home and on modern science. the best example is in iowa. someone in washington who had never been on a farm has written a regulation involving dust. part of the regulation suggests dirt roads should not create dust. [laughter] just look at what senator grassley has been saying. you cannot imagine an agency this out of touch with reality. i don't think it can be fixed, or twice a to replace it. finally, i would replace the current fda with a 20% for food and drugs administration who a specific job is to be in the laboratory learning science and to accelerate getting new knowledge to the patient and not tendering it. -- not hinder it. as people get well, they want to live longer and live better. the u.s., if it had an fda that encouraged the developer of new solutions, we could dominate the world health market. if

second, repeal sarbanes oxley. third, replace the environmental protection agency with a brand new environmental solutions agency that focuses on rationality in cooperation with kennedy's back home. frankly, common sense. the best example is here at home. some people in washington who have never been on a farm are writing regulations involving dust. writing regulation suggesting that your gross should not create dust. just look at what is senator grassley has been saying. you cannot imagine an agent that is more out of touch with reality. finally, i would replace the qana fpa with -- current fda with a 20% three food and drug administration whose specific jobs -- 21st century food and drug administration with specific job is fundamentally opposite of the current fda. if you want to create jobs, help the biggest economy in the world. if people want to get healthy, they will live longer. we will dominate the health market in the world and if we can do so, those are very high- value jobs that pay very well and produce

release of its implementation of a very controversial and often-reviewed rule, section 44b of the sarbanes-oxleyact. the sec estimated that the rule would impose -- this is at the time the rule was adopted -- an annual cost of $91,000 per publicly traded company on average, $91,000 was their best guess. in fact, a subsequent study five years later found average costs of $2.87 million per company. that's a big, um, miss in the mark in a big way. that error in judgment only applies to estimates of direct costs. the sec gave no consideration to the more important category of indirect costs and the much larger cat four. the impact of the rule on new volume of ipos on u.s. exchanges n. business round table v. sec alone, the sec estimates it dedicated over $2.5 million in staff hours to a rule that was struck down. that represents an estimate of about $100 an hour for sec time. now, for securities lawyers of that experience, i think most would agree that $100 an hour is probably a very conservative estimate of their, the hourly opportunity costs of their time, but let's assume that estimate, $2.5 mill

we did that in sarbanes oxley. think there needs to be some penalties for those who perpetrate a crime, often times the athletes being fairly innocent. host: alexandria, minn., on our line for democrats. you are on with tom mcmillen. caller: good morning. i am a big fan of the show. i think that one of your callers had it right. these guys come a man and ladies, they are professional. they are providing a service, performing for the school, and they are being compensated by room, board come and tuition. do not call them amateurs. call them what they are, professionals. there are two levels of players. you have those that are there as a steppingstone to the next big thing, professional sports. you have those that are there that need the money to help them go to school, get an education, and get a job. host: how would you decide who gets the money? is it just the athletes playing in revenue sports like basketball and football? would it be sports across the board including track, tennis, swimming? how do you decide? c

instead it takes sort of a punitive sarbanes-oxley kind of approach to the private sector that we think really creates the wrong incentives and what we really need is a positive and gauge meant with their government partners as opposed to a punitive name and shame model. that is not going to provide the source of investments that we really need nor to create a sustainable system of cybersecurity. >> host:>> host: and in fact a e from the internet security alliance when the proposals first came out, it would be much better if companies were proactively incented so that they wanted to find cyber attackers. if you are subject to some of these name and shame penalties, i think that would be a mistake. what would be proactively incenting a company? >> guest: ironically when president obama released his cyberspace policy review, which was in march, i am sorry, in may of 2009, he and his own document cited a number of these things. so we are talking about using liability incentives. we are talking about using procurement incentives. the president at that time, in 2009, suggested we needed to p

sarbanes obsolete -- oxley. we are behind one back from the early 1990's.he patriot act was bare spots to keep -- catch terrorists. do you know what the probability of us catching a terrorist is close to zero. if there are that dumb, they will get caught anyway. if we caught a terrorists, -- the only significant conviction of the patriot act is eliot spitzer. he was convicted of soliciting prostitution. in some ways, that is humorous and in some ways, that is poetic justice. in other ways, it should scare you. what is the terrorist risk of the governor of new york? why should that be used? what information is being gathered under the patriot act? i will tell you that your privacy is being invaded on to the patriot act. there is a huge focus on the mathematical modeling. all the mathematical models failed. we were told numerous times that if we just had mathematical models, we would be in great shape. they can be very useful tools, but they have something called detail. -- call the tails. if something is one% probable, gives it enough time. if you build your

second, repeal sarbanes oxley. third, replace the environmental protection agency with a brand new environmental solutions agency that focuses on rationality in cooperation with kennedy's back home. frankl common sense. the best example is here at home. some people in washington who have never been on a farm are writing regulations involving dust. writing regulation suggesting that your gross should not create dust. just look at what is senator grassley has been saying. you cannot imagine an agent that is more out of touchith reality. finally, i would replace the qana fpa with -- current fda with a 20% three food and drug administration whose specific jobs -- 21st century food and drug administration with specific job is fundamentally opposite of the current fda. if you want to create jobs, help the biggest economy in the world. if people want to get healthy, they will live longer. we will dominate the health market in the world and if we can do so, those are very high- value jobs that pay very wel and produce a lo

. >> [inaudible] [applause] >> i think you need to repeal sarbanes oxley as well as part of that. >> that was my next question. h r 1489, do you support reinstating that? >> you have to. we have blurred the line between investment banking and commercial banking. there are people in the big bank will batter into things they should not be into. dodd-frank does go after some of these, but if it is with regulating sometimes, people believe it is worth over regulating. timothy geithner testified before the small business committee that i said on, ask a simple question -- when are we going to go back and review dodd-frank and clean it up to make sure we are not penalizing small community banks, and he told me he would look into it. [laughter] >> julie is obviously concerned about some of the spending in washington, d.c. she says can congress cut off their ridiculous -- [applause] >> do not mess with julie. >> julie wants to know if congress can cut off the travel allowance to the president and his family? [applause] >> this is on c-span, isn't it? look, i think that is something that -- yo

sarbanes obsolete -- oxley. we are behind one back from the early 1990's. the patriot act was bare spots to keep -- catch terrorists. do you know what the probability of us catching a terrorist is close to zero. if there are that dumb, they will get caught anyway. if we caught a terrorists, -- the only significant conviction of the patriot act is eliot spitzer. he was convicted of soliciting prostitution. in some ways, that is humorous and in some ways, that is poetic justice. in other ways, it should scare you. what is the terrorist risk of the governor of new york? why should that be used? what information is being gathered under the patriot act? i will tell you that your privacy is being invaded on to the patriot act. there is a huge focus on the mathematical modeling. all the mathematical models failed. we were told numerous times that if we just had mathematical models, we would be in great shape. they can be very useful tools, but they have something called detail. -- call the tails. if something is one% probable, gives it enough time. if you build yo