then we have dodd-frank, and let me start with sarbanes-oxley. sarbanes-oxley comes out, again, reaction the scandal, worldcom, so now they come up with this massive bill which instead of going sarbanes-oxley should be called the account enrichment acted as basically every emerging topic of all my companies want to go public. spend over $1 million in one time fees to become sarbanes-oxley compliant. been close to a million dollars in additional audit fees every year to make sure things like, there's a duplicative passwords in your foreign office. they changed every month. all important things like the. that's not what happened at worldcom. it was abroad. this thing hasn't stopped any project. it's a total waste of companies the money, although not allegedly in the public interest. then it comes to dodd-frank. dodd-frank, the talk about opportunity, employment at dodd-frank. know, they're talking about risk. mortgage trade back securities. as opposed to putting registrations in place for them, lobbyists a good. they now put one across all american

it moves, however, that sarbanes oxley didn't kill the ipo market if they want to go public. >> neil:e' to you. that's what makes adam-- >> and ideals of history makes a point. this is good news and i want to see 5 million dollar ipo's, we don't get those anymore, sarbanes oxley, and did kill it and that's why a lot of companies are going public in hong kong and-- >> and adam included the winds at their back. >> at whose back? >> i don't know. (laughter) >> the things, things are picking up. >> they are picking up, but there could be so many ipo's fyou want to raise 5 million dollars right now in an ipo you can't. we've killed that. >> just asked me for a loan. >> this is the future of the company. the value and our wealth is in ideas, intellectual property. we need to not be so hung up about the manufacturing jobs that have gone elsewhere not coming back. and this is our future and our wealth. >> neil: so, all the factories have left and you're okay with it. >> not auto jobs, we do good jobs at making cars. >> neil: and dagen, she is he' leaving now. (laughter) >> and facebook, our g

so just briefly, sarbanes-oxley is a key one.s i mentioned, the aol experience is less common these days, and that's a problem because 90% of job creation happens after companies go public. so having an onramp and essentially raising -- when that was put in place, people said, look, there should be a carveout for smaller companies. they just picked a carveout that's too small a market cap of $75 million. jobs council recommended it be a billion dollars, the white house proposal last week, i believe, was $700 million. that, i think s the right sum, and there are a number of things that will deal with both raising that cap and having an onramp which is a big deal in terms of job creation. the second, which also has bipartisan support, again, initially led by the house, is what's called crowd funding, allowing these new internet platforms that have developed to form projects like a documentary, to also fund businesses with sufficient precautions. and so the current proposal that i think has some, some support, some momentum is, esse

sarbanes-oxley is a key one. the aol spirit is less common these days, and that is a problem because much of a a well business of aol's happened after it went public. there are a number of things in the house and senate bills that will deal with raising the cap and having an on-ramp, which is a big deal in terms of job creation. the second, which also has bipartisan support, is called crowd funding, along platforms used to fund projects like a documentary to also fund businesses, with certain precautions. the proposal has some support. if you are raising less than $1 million and the individual investments are less than $10,000, they essentially have been carved-out. that is a big deal that a lot of companies that have a problem because they rely on their own money and informal friends and family money, from that point to real venture-capital it is quite challenging. third, which i think is the most important, but i recognize the most sensitive, is immigration. we have got to win the global battle for talent. the

. >> if you go back to sarbanes oxley and dodd frank, they love to put the large complexity on the system and muck everything up. look at tax code, thousands of pages and everyone feels like they're getting screwed and look at the dodd frank legislation, trying to do complicated things with separating proprietary trading and they could have done something simple and elegant if they want today and bring back the separation between the investment banks and banking and wouldn't let the businessmen work for lawyers and accountants and lobbyists and everyone feeding at the washington trough, they don't do that and-- >> even worse, that would take power out of washington. >> absolutely. >> i'm not, this is not a conspiracy theory when you say this, that part of this administration's goal is to basically get all the power in one place. it's to basically centralize power, that's what you do with dodd frank, you create massive, it doesn't force the banks to break up as neil said. you're mixing risk with insured institutions and why do you want to do that. all i remember' doing is basically central

we went overboard and we always do, just like with sarbanes oxley and get back to reality.lete overreaction on this legislation. >> all right. thanks, guys. and thank you to steve for joining us, we appreciate it. >> our pleasure. >> prices on nearly everything, going up. but there is one thing you're not hearing about, that's actually going down. and there's one name, about to take because of it. what's this? it's progresso's loaded potato with bacon. it's good. honey, i love you... oh my gosh, oh my gosh.. look at these big pieces of potato. ♪ what's that? big piece of potato. [ male announcer ] progresso. you gotta taste this soup. but does bringing a floor back to life really make us heroes? [ chuckles ] yes. yes, it does. ♪ call 1-800-steemer >> predictions? gaur i-- gary b, you're up. >> gm came out with great earnings. but it's ford for cause or effect, in the driver's seat. >> brenda: bob, red or green light on that one. >> it's a red light. i don't like the industry, i just don't like the american automobile. >> brenda: what do you like? what's your prediction, bob

c also was the ones that created the original internal control procedures and sarbanes oxley procedures way back when the company was called refco. he'd have you see has an enormous number of conflicts with this particular issue and they're not being called to account they haven't yet been called to testify even though the rating agencies have they know where the company stood from a segregated assets perspective at the end to a report period in march at the time when the bonds were issued in august they had to file special reports with the f.c.c. they had to file special reports with us the f.t.c. and those reports are no longer on file at the f.c.c. or the c f t c so we as a public or the investors or the customers can look and see what did peter b. c. say or do about any kind of weakness in controls at any point in time in the immediate future or immediate past now one name that keeps popping up all the time is j.p. morgan what was their role in all of this interest only enough peter b. c also audits j.p. morgan and you have pete obviously also auditing the law firms that the trustee

we're not for sarbanes-oxley, which would require independent directives. we're not for dodd-frank which would require severing parts of the banking system. so i can't ever come up with any reconnection that seems to satisfy what are my conservative friends. i'd love to hear if there are any. >> well, since you just made -- let me take a try. yeah. on this question of performance and reward and the bailouts, i don't know anyone except for maybe jon corzine and a few others on wall street who are happy with what had to be done in 2008. i know president bush wasn't. this was recognized by all as a massive deviation from what capitalism should all be about. massive deviation from what capitalism should all be about. done under necessity. and i don't think anyone, conservative or liberal, you know, would cry that much to say that those people, morally, should never have been bail ed out and were only bailed out because it was said to be necessary. it's something you do when you hold your nose. on the other hand, here's the point. we've held our our nose and we'

sarbanes-oxley is a key one. the aol spirit is less common these days, and that is a problem because much of a a well -- much of aol's business happened after it went public. there are a number of things in the house and senate bills that will deal with raising the cap and having an on-ramp, which is a big deal in terms of job creation. the second, which also has bipartisan support, is called crowd funding, along platforms used to fund projects like a documentary to also fund businesses, with certain precautions. the proposal has some support. if you are raising less than $1 million and the individual investments are less than $10,000, they essentially have been carved-out. that is a big deal that a lot of companies that have a problem because they rely on their own money and informal friends and family money, from that point to real venture- capital it is quite challenging. third, which i think is the most important, but i recognize the most sensitive, is immigration. we have got to win the global battle for tal

i will ask them to pass the repeal of sarbanes oxley which is crippling american benefits with no netfits. my goal is to have all three bills sitting there waiting so the minute i am sworn in i can sign all three and we're off to a pretty good opening morning. those three promises are conditional. we have to win the senate by a big enough margin to manage it. help me do that. let me tell you some things. we will put this together in a way you will be able to see in writing. there are a series of executive orders that i can issue that congress cannot stop as long as they are within the law. the first executive order will abolish all of the white house czars as of that moment. we will issue immediately and it said he did order -- all this inaugural address, ok? before we go to the various balls, we will have a work period. i may not get in as much golf as obama, but i will get in as much job creation. i will tell you up front. i am not going to compete with obama in singing. i am not running for entertainer and chief. i am running for president. i would say to him now, you can not seein

as a matter of fact, we're even sarbanes-oxley compliant. and contrary to the understanding of most americans, the postal service is not supported at all through taxpayer dollars. we generate all of our money from the sale of postage products and services. that means the postal service must compete for customers. we must sell, not just offer, but actively sell and persuade people to buy our products in a very competitive marketplace. and unfortunately, while we have the mandate to operate like a business, the reality is that we do not have the flexibility under current law to function like a business. america needs a postal service that can operate more like a business. consider the example of a post office. most retail companies would close retail stores that fail to turn a profit. roughly 25,000 out of our 32,000 post offices operate at a loss. we've got thousands of post offices that bring in less than $20,000 of revenue in a year that cost more than $60,000 to operate. and many of these are within a few miles of the next neighboring post

sarbanes-oxley is a key one.rit is less common these days, and that is a problem because much of a a businessuch of aol's happened after it went public. there are a number of things in the house and senate bills that will deal with raising the cap and having an on-ramp, which is a big deal in terms of job creation. the second, which also has bipartisan support, is called crowd funding, along platforms used to fund projects like a documentary to also fund businesses, with certain precautions. the proposal has some support. if you are raising less than $1 million and the individual investments are less than $10,000, they essentially have been carved-out. that is a big deal that a lot of companies that have a problem because they rely on their own money and informal friends and family money, from that point to real venture- capital it is quite challenging. third, which i think is the most important, but i recognize we force them to start companies and other companys that compete with us. it's as if we said why don't

i'm coming back to tampa, and then he outlined i'm going to repeal sarbanes oxley.is like in the first two hours obamacare is gone this is gone that is gone. as i watched that speech i thought here is a guy whether you like him or you don't, who is coming with a bulldozer if he wins. and the thing that terrifies me that i believe him. right? whereas president obama oh what is congressing to say, and oh ben nelson i even texted them i don't know. i feel a certain degree of respect that the guy has that kind of will power and belief but i think his agenda is horrible and it scares the living daylights out of me. >> newt gingrich is a guy who has a vision and will do it. i think they are all awful ideas. i think he represents what mitt romney represents. i think that one thing i think that may be working in mitt romney's favor, i really mean this. is newt gingrich makes mitt romney look likable. he may be one of the angriest candidates, the most driven candidates, but i don't think he has got likability. and in some ways he kind of humanizes mitt romney. >> no, not pos

it will have repealed sarbanes-oxley.ll three of those are job-killing bills which centralized bureaucracy in washington, d.c. and increased the corruption of the political system. all three should be repealed and held at the desk until i'm sworn in. that afternoon on the very first day, we should sign the appeal of all three. that's a reasonable start. two hours after the inaugural address. that's just the hors d'oeuvre. we haven't gotten around to the serious work yet. two hours after the inaugural dress, i'll sign presidential orders and findings all published by october 1. the country will know precisely what this campaign is about. the very first executive order will abolish all of the white house czars as of that moment. [ applause ] we will sign that day an executive order which as of that moment approves of the canadian pipeline to houston, period. my message to prime minister harper and the canadian government is simple -- you do not need a partnership with the chinese. give the american people a few months. when

we will have repealed sarbanes oxley that is -- on january 20 within a couple of hours after being swornn, we will already be signing three major bills starting to get rid of the obama administration's imprint on the one. [cheers and applause] we will go further than that. on the first day i am president i will sign a series of executive orders. all of them will have been published by the first. the election will be about whether or not to do it. the first executive order will abolish all of the white house czars as of that moment. [cheers and applause] i will also sign an executive order implementing the keystone pipeline as of that date. [cheers and applause] i want to say to our friends in canada, you do not need a partnership with china. you'll have a new president and agreement. you will be able to build the pipeline right through the united states. [applause] on that very first day, i want to sign an executive order that moves the american embassy to jerusalem and recognizes israel's right to exist. [cheers and applause] we want to run an american campaign. i am running for the rep

there are other provisions that allow for a carveout on the sarbanes-oxley issue so we can give small businesses a fighting chance to get off the ground. larry, we know small businesses are a job engine of this company and over the last three years it's been a 23% decrease in the number of start-ups. that's what this package is trying to get at. >> that's the thing. i want to distinguish even from a small business, start-ups are literally start ups. this is the absolute seed corn of the business world. you have to make it easier for them to make money and register. as i understand it, democrats in the house have voted in favor of most of these provisions and lo and behold, i believe with my own eyes president obama praised a plan today. is such a thing possible, sir? we'll wait and see and in addition to that, we have majority leader reid in the senate indicating he will move on comparable package in the senate so it might seem to me that the stars are beginning to align and aligning on the one thing that we need to be focusing on and the one thing america wants to see happen which is

going to pass a repeal of obama care, pass the repeal of dodd/frank bill, pass the repeal of the sarbanes-oxley. abolish white house czars, deployment of keystone pipeline. pass an executive order and do this all before going to the inaugural balls. >> well, gingrich gets criticized for having ideas that some may say are a little out there or wacky, but you've got to give him credit for having ideas and policies and proposals. i think at some point it would probably be helpful for romney to begin mentioning some things that he would actually do in the white house other than these kind of as hugo said platitudes about replacing obama. i think it's important for him to begin now telling the american people what exactly he would do to deal with the economy that he says is so bad and has hurt so many americans. >> and that's where gingrich wins that moniker of being the ideas guy, right, because he's putting this stuff out there, never mind that these ideas are hugely questionable. >> people want to know what their president is going to do. >> that's why everyone is calling on romney to do this. >>

the federal government only spending 18.2% of gdp if we get rid of t.a.r.p., if we get rid of sarbanes-oxley to get rid of t.a.r.p. but unless you can make people grow younger, i don't see how you can do 18.2. i could probably pick some games for you. we could put some things off budget and then we'd be at 18.2%. but you know, much of what we spend is on people getting older. and i'm sorry, we're getting older. >> dean baker, i'm kind of crushed to hear this because i thought you wanted to abolish the deductions and the special carve-outs. i thought you were a tax reformer. and i want to add to that, what about the corporate tax? i'm going for a 25% corporate tax. that would put us even with canada if they have federal and provincial. i had dinner last night with the ambassador. 25%. get rid of the -- >> larry, i'm sympathetic to that but -- >> 100% expensing provisions and have territorial -- obama except for the territorial, obama's going to try to punish companies operating overseas. that's a terrible mistake in my opinion. however, obamas other tax reform stuff is not going to be too far

[applause] it will have repealed sarbanes oxley.e are jobs killing bills with centralized bureaucracy in washington d.c. and increase the corruption of the political system. all three should be repealed and held at the desk until i am sworn in. that afternoon, we should sign to repeal all three of them. that is a reasonable start. [applause] two hours after the in our gellar address -- two hours after the inaugural address, i will begin signing executive orders and findings. all of them will have been published by a october 1. the country will know what this campaign is about. the very first executive order will abolish all of the white house czars at that moment. [applause] we will sign that day in executive order which, as of that moment, approves of the canadian pipeline to houston, period. [applause] [cheering] my message to the canadian government is simple. you do not need a partnership with the chinese. give the american people a few months. when we beat obama on election night, you can start buying equipment because we will

in that case dodd/frank and sarbanes-oxley. 30 seconds until europe closes across the pond.about what happened and explain why we're obsessed with the letters ltro. >> if we're allowed to mention them on the network. what i think is really interesting, as we come into the european close, the power of the fed and the power of ben bernanke. you know, the world is watching what you see on capitol hill. let me show you where we are on the bond market. we have to mention of course this huge dump of liquidity that will come through tomorrow. in excess of $710 billion deposited into the bank accounts of 800 banks around europe, equal to 5%, 6% of the annual output of the eurozone economy. that's why you can see they're making way for that on the bond markets. yields falling today. we'll see what happens tomorrow when the cash is increasingly around for them to use. take a look where we are on the equity markets coming into the closing. this is what i mean about the power of bernanke. this is how we've traded today, as you can see. this is when the announcement came out what the ecb

it would have repealed sarbanes-oxley. all three of those are job killing bills which centralize bureaucracy and increase the corruption of the political system. all three should be repealed and held at the desk until i am sworn in that afternoon on the very first day, we should sign the repeal of all three. that's a reasonable start. two hours after the inaugural address -- that was junior the or deserve. we haven't gotten around to serious work here. two hours afc, i will begin signing presidential orders, all having been published by october 1st. the very first executive order will abolish all of the white house czars as of that moment. >>> we will sign that day an executive order which as of that moment approves of the canadian pipeline to houston, period. >> my message to prime minister harper and the canadian government is simple. you do not need the give the american people a few months. when we bead president obama, you can start buying equipment, because we will approve it on january 20th. there will be an executi

to immediately pass the repeal of the don frank bill and i will ask them to pass the repeal of sarbanes-oxley. it will abolish all of the white house czars as of that moment. >> so bob, obviously, his ideal agenda there. what is different about what we were hearing from newt gingrich last night in that speech and in what he was saying as opposed to what we've heard in the last contest? >> well, it was a much different contest in south carolina. gingrich came out swinging there. he clearly won the debates there. romney had a very bad time in south carolina. a lot of his own doing, but he hired himself a debate coach, he managed to turn these debates around. i wouldn't be surprised if mitt romney wouldn't agree with everything that newt gingrich said in that statement there. certainly, he's talking about doing away with the president's healthcare plan and some of that other stuff. but just saying, i'm going to ask the congress to do that is one thing. he would have to have a republican congress to be able to do any of that. he couldn't do it by himself because, you know -- >> any reason to beli

sarbanes oxley, the sec is being active in that space. there are a lot of assumptions in your scenario that need to be proven. another day. what did the ceo know? is it clear these transactions are bad? it takes a lot of knowledge to know that. a lot to decree that you cannot be in that business. one example of where that was done as part of a criminal alternative was in the execution agreement. as part of that, that firm had to go out of the tax shelter. there are available remedies. we have to be really careful about thinking we know enough as prosecutors to enforce people. >> i want to be clear. i do not want this to be -- both as a defense lawyer, as i was for many years, nell as an -- now as an ahe, we cannot discount the deterrent effect. the ceo or cfo for major institution feels he is subject to criminal liability, when we interviewed them, we put them in the grand jury, they have lawyers. this is hanging over their heads for years. at the end, we may decide not to prosecute. i think it is inaccurate to suggest that does not have

president bush signed the sarbanes-oxley act which was supposed to guarantee protections for workersl fraud and abuse. this was after the enron worldcom scandals, everybody applauded, everybody said, this is great. as i report in my book, i tell the story of a man who is a bush supporter, a conservative, christian man who is also the officers at a bank. he suspected fraud. he reported it. he was fired. he went for -- he went to the administration review board, an agency that was staffed by bush appointees. he lost. he was not alone. t"the wall street journal" reported between 2002 and 2008, 12 people who maybe -- maybe 17 people -- who went to that board, won their cases, of something like 1,200. another 800 simply didn't have their cases heard. >> and this was supposed to be the method by which whistle-blowers were protected under sarbanes? >> right, whistle-blower who is blew the whistle on fraud. then we get the 2008 crash. so you think, things are going to change, whistle-blowers will finally get some protections. well, dodd/frank has some protections that strengthen whistle-blow

if we do that, running the table, repeal, dodd-frank, sarbanes oxley and all of those things will lay a foundation where we can write some rereasonable regulations on our financial institutions and open our country to do business again, mr. speaker. and i think it would be appropriate of this congress to remove the repeal of dodd-frank that michele bachmann has introduced. and she is the lead on repeal of dodd-frank and it would be a great way for her to come back to the conference after a brilliant run to the presidency and bring the repeal bill to the floor and it sends a message, mr. speaker. the message that it sends is that the house is for repeal of dodd-frank and send it over there to the senate and see what they want to do about it, but getting that marker down helps encourage the presidential candidate, this congress is in and will be in lock-step with the republican nominee. those principles that are universal among all republican candidates should be moved by the republican majority in the house of representatives. for example, passing officialening lir. 87% of the people i