is also the multi donner fund the world bank is hosting. the donor funds into a centralized place where there's coordination and there's oversight of these projects. the fund has been established the world bank put some money and to establish it, the brazilian government gave $55 million recently to it. however, the amount of money that we expect to s in that fund is only about half a million dollars of the 10 billion we have seen pledged so although the mechanism is there and they are going to be -- there are always technical challenges need to be utilizing that further. i just want to go back a little bit becuse we're talkng to a colleague from usaid so i will take this moment to talk about some of the work that we have done free earthquakes looking at the u.s. aid and i think this is critical as we are talking as the rhetoric has changed as the machinery is changing how are we going to actively catch up and one of the places there is a lot of talk is the reform that is moving forward but i just wt to give you a snapshot of u.s. food aid a

also the muti donne fund the world bank is hosting. l the donor funds into a centralized place where there'scoordination and there's oversight of these projects. the fund has been established thworld bank put some mony and to establish it, the brazilian government gave $55 million recently to it. however, the amoun of moy that we expect to see in that fund is only about half a million dollars of the 10 billion we have seen pledged so although the mechanism is there and th are going to be -- there are always technical challenges ned to be utilizing that futher. i st want to go back a little bit because we're talkingto a colleague from usaid so iill take this moment to talk about some of the work that we have done free arthquakes looking at the u.s. aid and i think this is critical as we are talking as the rhetoric has changeas th machinery is changg how are we going to actively catchp and one o the places there is a lot of talk is te reform that is moving forwardut i just want to give yo a snpshot of u.s. food aid and atudy we did last a

food security initiative that we announced last year, including by launching a special fund at the world bank, which will strengthen farmers' productivity, and we may progress to invest more than $20 billion to reduce hunger and promote agricultural development. the g-20 leaders renewed our commitment made in pittsburgh to use fossil fuel subsidies. the united states and laid out our plans for this goal, and we are thinking this is one the most important steps we can take to create clean energy jobs, increase our energy security, and address the threat of climate change, and i am pleased that we endorsed my proposal in the fight against corruption. in too many places, there is a break on -- brake on growth. this will be more broadly shared. many include by saying that i know that much of the focus coming into these meetings was on whether our nations would be divided by different approaches, but as we have proven repeatedly over the past 18 months, our nations can and have come together through the g-20 to build on the foundation of our shared interest. indeed, that is the purpose of these me

the british on introducing a bank levy. the one group of people who are isolated, and who say that we have to wait for the rest of the world before we can ask our banks to make a proper contribution, is the party opposite. once again, they have no proposals to fill the enormous black hole that the government are getting to grips with. >> anne mcguire. >> the o.n.s. reported that while the richest 10% spent 1 pound in every 25 pounds of their income on vat, the poorest 10% spent 1 pound in every 7 pounds of their income on vat. how, then, can the prime minister justify his oft- repeated refrain that we are all in this together? >> what i would say to the honorable lady -- it is an important point and the red book sets it out -- is that the richest 10% will pay in cash terms 15 times as much in vat as the poorest 10%. the important point to take into account and look at is the budget as a whole. in the budget as a whole, we can see that the richest pay the most both in cash terms and as a percentage of their income. what we have done, by massively increasing child tax credits, is to ensure that there is no increase in child p

for example, the world bank or the canadians choose to look at the education sector. the french may choose governance, for example. the u.s. may choose housing or long-term local government issues, or continued food assistance. there is any number of possibilities, because haiti basically means everything. >> free-lance journalist jessica stone was in haiti in april. some 230,000 haitians died as a result of the january earthquake, and more than 2 million are displaced, living in settlements. to watch this program again and other programs on haiti, go to our website, c-span.org. in the upper right corner, click on the video library and type in the keyword "haiti." here is our schedule. next, remarks from the ceo of the national rifle association. after that, president obama nominates a new director of national intelligence. later, federal response coordinator thad allen hold a briefing on the gulf of mexico oil spill. sunday on "newsmakers," the secretary of agrrculture talked about farm policy. he is interviewed by ellen ferguson of "congressional quarterly." watch "

financial services industry, and that is the very structure of the banking industry and the question: how can britain be home to the most successful and global banks in the world, without the british taxpayer being exposed to the most unacceptable of risks? should we restrict or split the activities of banks? has our banking industry become too concentrated and uncompetitive? now i know there are some who are frustrated that these questions are even asked. but how can they not be when so many millions of people are paying the price for what went wrong? there are real issues of fairness. and that is why we will introduce a bank levy and demand further restraint on pay and bonuses. but there are also fundamental issues of protection for an economy still reeling from a crisis that in britain saw the biggest bank bail out in the world. there are passionately held views on all sides of informed opinion. some of the most fervent believers in free markets are the most ardent proponents of structural separation, including the man who more than almost anyone created the modern city of london - nigel lawson. i have sat at this dinner in past and listened to the then cha

if that had happened in a bank robbery, where people walked in with guns blazing, that would have been headline news all over the world kroft: and the bank probably didn't want it known. >> henry: certainly, when there's a network breach, the owners of the network are not keen to have it known that their network was breached, because of their concern that it might impact their business. >> kroft: the case henry mentioned didn't involve just one bank; it involved 130, all of them victimized through an international network of a.t.m.s, an international caper that required dozens of participants on three different continents. how did they do it? >> henry: it was a sophisticated operation, clearly organized, where adversaries accessed a computer network, were able to gain information from multiple accounts. they were able to decrypt pin numbers, and then taking that data, able to manufacture white plastic that enabled them access to get into a.t.m. accounts. >> kroft: what's white plastic? >> henry: take a piece of plastic that's similar in size and shape and weight to an a.t.m. card. >> kroft: they've got the card, they'

>> that would make us the only country in the world without a central bank. he question would be what would you put in place? >> i would let the money grow at about 3% at the rate of the increase in population. >> there are serious alternatives. milton friedman gave that particular idea and there is a gold standard and other things. i don't know if i can test your patience but for various reasons, my own research was on the great depression. one of the contributions that i and others made was that the malfunctioning of the gold standard which tied together the monetary policy of every country was one of the major causes of the depression when it became international. there are many dangers and risks to the gold standard not to mention practicalities that would be difficult to put in place. there are good reasons why we left the gold standard in the 1930's and got rid of it entirely later on. my question would be that the fed is not a perfect system but compared to what? there does not seem -- the evidence of 180 countries in the world, there are a couple that

the world to these standards over time. we decided to move together. now, we have a very difficult challenge ahead in negotiating a new set of capital standards for the globally active banks and that will be the critical test of our capacity. again, to pull the world to a higher standard. but we come to that with a remarkably strong position because we were able to move so quickly in the united states to recapitalize our system with private capital, replace the government's investments early and, therefore, our firms on most measures have less leverage, more capital, more the kind of capital you need against future losses. and that gives us a very strong position in those discussions. again, the best way for us to shape that consensus, to make sure we come to the table having acted to fix the things we got wrong in the united states, and we are, i believe that the reforms congress will enact will be a good model for the world and will give us enormous credibility in trying to pull the world to those higher standards. >> are there other examples like capital where thh u.s. has to act to be a first mover if there's not a global concert on that particular area? >> again, we

previously, he has served as secretary of the treasury under president clinton, as chief economist at the world bank, and as president of harvard university from 2001 till 2006, where he continues as a tenured professor. let me turn this over to you. [applause] >> thank you. i am glad to have this opportunity. the story of the subject that i'm going to talk about is that -- is one that should give inspiration to researchers and academia. this idea started, at least to my knowledge, with work that ronald did in the late 1950's. in the aftermath of his work suggesting that spectrum be auctioned or allocated by the market, two fcc commissioners declared that he was as likely to get his policies adopted as the easter bunny was to win the preakness. [laughter] hundreds of billions dollars later, around the world he is looking good and those two fcc commissioners are not looking so forward-looking. he was inspired by his work in this area to invent the theorum, which the nobel prize committee was inspired by and awarded him the nobel prize. those of you with ideas that have not caught fire, i implore you

caller: my contention is that it was set up by the world bank, david rockefeller, to make as one nation -- make us one nation, with canada, which is a socialist nation -- host: we are talking about the north american union br. we always get north american union calls. are you behind the north american union, the jumbled and behind all this? -- the gentleman behind all this? guest: we need to recognize the importance that the mexican and canadian economy have for national prosperity. just talking about mexico, 22 states depend on mexico as their first or second largest foreign source for their exports. texaco itself -- mexico itself is our third largest trade partner. canada is, depending on how you total it, the first resected. -- the first or second grade both of these countries are absolutely indispensable for national prosperity. the produce things that are incorporated in our manufacturing base, which are re-exported to the world, and our ability to use lower manufacturing costs in mexico makes many of our businesses globally competitive. we really are intertwined economically to a

previously, he has served as secretary of the treasury under president clinton, as chief economist at the world bank, and as president of harvard university from 2001 till 2006, where he continues as a tenured professor. let me turn this over to you. [applause] >> thank you. i am glad to have this opportunity. the story of the subject that i'm going to talk about is that -- is one that should give inspiration to researchersnd academia. this ideatarted, least to my knowledge, with work that ronald did in the late 1950's. in the aftermath of his work suggesting that spectrum be auctioned or allocated by the market, two fcc commissioners declared that he was as likely to get his policies adopted as the easter bunny was to win the preakness. [laughter] hundreds of billions dollars later, around the world he is looking good and those two fcc commissioners are not looking so forward-looking. he was inspired by his work in this area to invent the theorum, which the nobel prize committee was inspired by and awarded him the nobel prize. those of you with ideas that have not caught fire, i implore you to pers

>> we would be the only " -- country in the world without a bank. what would you suggest? we could increase the rate of taxation. >> i do not know if i can test your patience, but for various reasons, my own research, for example was on the great depression. one of the great contributions that was made was trying all of the monetary policies to the gold standard was one of the reasons that the oppression became international. there are a lot of dangers and risks with the gold standard, not to mention a lot of practicality issues. i guess my question would be, the fed is not a perfect system, but compared to what? at this point, i mean, just the eminences of 180 countries in the world, there are a couple that share a central bank, but i do not know of any that do not have a social rank and used someone else's currency. if someone is going to run the monetary policy, then someone has to deal with the policies that will be issued. i hope that in the united states it will be an independent and how to qualify the central bank that does it. >> i cannot see because of the lights.

the world to these standards over time. we decided to move together. now, we have a very difficult challenge ahead in negotiating a new set of capital standards for the globally active banks and that will be the critical test of our capacity. again, to pull the world to a higher standard. but we come to that with a remarkably strong position because we were able to move so quickly in the united states to recapitalize our system with private capital, replace the government's investments early and, therefore, our firms on most measures have less leverage, more capital, more the kind of capital you need against future losses. and that gives us a very strong position in those discussions. again, the best way for us to shape that consensus, to make sure we come to the table having acted to fix the things we got wrong in the united states, and we are, i believe that the reforms congress will enact will be a good model for the world and will give us enormous credibility in trying to pull the world to those higher standards. >> are there other examples like capital where thh u.s. has to act to be a first mover if there's not a global concert on that particular area? >> again, we

>> we would be the only country in the world without a central banking system. at would you put in its place? >> the rate of growth would be around 3%, they said. >> there would be serious alternatives. milt friedman gave that an idea and there was the gold statement, and i don't know if i can test your patience, but for various regions, this is a short question. my own research -- my own research on the great depression was that the malfunctioning of the gold standard, which tie together the monetary policies of every country on the gold standard, was one of the major causes of the depression when it became international. there are a lot of dangers with the gold standard, not to mention practicalities that need to be put in place. there's good reason why we left the gold standard in the 1930's. i guess my question would be, it is not a perfect system, but compared to what? and there does not seem to be at this point, the evidence of 180 countries in the world, i don't know of any that does not have a central bank unless they have an open currency. someone has to

the imf and world bank were called in to bail america out. america began a decline in 1963. it led to the rise in all kinds of civil disobedience, and this term about "drill, baby, drill," that is a slight on the "burn, baby, burn" era of the 1960's but it led to a march on washington that shut down at washington, ran all the politicians out of washington. that led to the election of jimmy carter. that example is what the american people, especially caucasian people in america, need to wake up and find out what they need to do to get a government-back -- they government back -- host: you need to connect the dots, because i am not sure i follow your analogy -- caller: people are in bankruptcy and they have no jobs, and now -- host: 08 jet -- go ahead. caller: well, i disagree with that. it is frustrating. thank you. how do you deal with his frustration? guest: you deal with bank failures. the fdic is on track to take over more than 100 banks this year because of the lingering economic problems. many are real estate-related and it will take a while before that worked through th

the chinese to loan banks to loan to small businesses in this country. and a lot of folks, i think, understand that kind of how we got here was that the whole world, small businesses, individuals and governments, have been on this borrowing and spending binge, borrow and spend, borrow and spend, and quite honestly that's how we wove this web where we are our financial markets in somewhat of a wrinkle right now. and while i applaud the gentleman's amendment, i still go back to the fundamental point here that, one, this bill will not help small businesses have any additional capital, but more importantly we are going to go spend $33 billion that we don't have and i don't think that's the right prescription for our country. with that i reserve my time. the chair: the gentleman reserves. mr. green: thank you, madam chair. let me simply say in response that the bill anticipates that loans will be repaid. if not -- it's not a circumstance where persons are going to receive or businesses will receive loans that are not going to be paid. and the bill causes banks and lending institutions to make the loans because they will receive a better interest rate upon ma

the u.s. financial system and that will send a powerful system to every country, company, and bank in the world that they should think twice about doing business with the oppressors of the iranian people. it also sends an unequivocal and powerful message to the people in iran who are demonstrating and working peacefully for their human rights, that we share their interests and their struggle. we resident simply focused on the regime's nuclear program, although that remains a key concern, nor are we solely focused on the regime's support for terrorism, though that, too, remains a high priority, we're also making the human rights of iran's people an equal priority of our government. now more than ever, it is urgent and essential that we support the peaceful aspirations of the iranian people. one year ago, the conventional wisdom in the west held that the prospect for political evolution in iran was dim and distant. but as it often is, that conventional wisdom was utterly wrong. after the iranian people were denied their right to a free and fair election, the world watched in awe as a sea of prote

the vocal world. the notion that we ought to say+ banking companies can outdo proprietary trading, cannot invest in hedge funds, -- cannot do proprietary trading, can on invest in hedge funds because there is a problem. it essentially requires that%% derivvtives dealers not be within a bank holding commanies, barack and leased -- bt at least there be somebody at the banking lobby -- bank holding companies. could you explain the position today? >> members of the committee, including chairman lincoln and chairman daud,,or carefully going through theese provvsions to be sure we come to an appropriate balance perido. we want to follow our key objectives. one is, as you said, the banks are unable to take risks like proprietary trading. or if they use derivatives for proprietary trading, they could imperil the stability of the bank, or allow them to benefit from the access to the safety net that the bank enjoys and extend the benefit of those activities that we do not believe are essentiil for baking. the other thing to point out -- for banking. the the thing to point out is that an essential part of banking i

the chairman for his leadership. mr. speaker, this bill has peace, real peace, great big, nasty sharp teeth that are finally going to force businesses and banks around the world to choose between the american economy and financial system or business as usual with iran's dictatorship. this bill has real sanctions. not maybe sanctions, not sort of sanctions, but real sanctions. this bill has real sanctions investigations requirements, not maybe we'll look at and not we'll try to get it -- to it when we can. but clear and legal requirements to investigate potential violations. in short, this is a bill that forces the question, will the world watch passively as iran crosses the nuclear arms threshold or are will we join together to compel iran to pull back from the nuclear brink? we cannot guarantee the success of these measures. ultimately the choices lie with the regime in tehran. but it should be clear that we are doing all we can to impose on iran the highest possible cost for its defines that we are demonstrating by our actions and by our efforts, the depths of our commitment to peacefully ending iran's nuclear activities. we are try diplomacy, we are trying

the native vegetaon but they will not eat this. that is another advantage. >> talk about why this plant is used in third worlcountries. there are third world countries that use this to be able to keep the banksthe rivers in place to protect their coast from demise. why is this being used but here where it is needed, especially if we spent $350 million in building a land berm, we wanted to stain place. we want to have a species that will hold the wetlands in place. >> there have been cases where it will sp sediment runoff which was killing wreaths and killing shellfish. it was used in cases like that. in 10 years, the reefs are healthy again andhellfish are flourishing. they're using it in 100 countries right now. >> literally. >> scientists are ung microorganisms to treat the sediment. if we know there is grass out there that would be resilient to hydrocarbons and be able to hold the islands in pla, what is the holdup? the science is there. you guys are involved in this. what is the problem? >> what is the holdup with the dredging of those terms? same thing. politics. what is the holdup? politics. we have good science on our side to say we can start doing this today. and planting this today.

one of the challenges we have here today is we are continually muddying what is a bank and what is a financial institution. after all, not in the years i've visited chrysler factories around the world, i never saw them as a bank, not once. in the years that i was a vendor for general motors and their quality-control people came in to inspect me, i never once had a banking conversation with general motors and specter. they wanted to know about product. they never offered to finance me as they took 60-90 days to pay. the fact is we have a muddied it the difference. the fdic exist for good reason. confidence by people of our trusted members of the bank. they provide their money as depositors, not stockholders. we, if we go forward with this amendment, are simply creating a situation and where little by little the bankruptcy laws is whittled down into who gets government money available. ultimately, the fund is not limited to the fund they build up. we're finding that in the gulf coast as we speak. it is the full faith of the american people, if necessary. i would ask all of you to look at this again. if you cannot accept the amendment as it is, strongly consider what is wrong with it.

the examination of this critical systems. title 8 would bring a payment, clearing, and settlement functions in line with international standards as well. currently, all g-10 central banks around the world except the u.s. federal reserve have some form of statutory responsibility of fourth of pcs oversight. all of them other than the federal reserve also have the ability to offer accounts and settlement services to non-banks fmu's. title 8 would give the fed is set -- similar authority which would allow them to manage their setup -- settlement process cheese and a safe and sound manner. central bank oversight of these functions is, threat the largest economies because the role that central banks play as the settlement bank to the nation's banking system. the fact that payment clearing and summit utilities have not been a source of systemic problems to date is no guarantee of continued strong performance, as markets continue to grow and congress encourages the greater use of central clearing, the financial system will be increasingly reliant on the performance, integrity, and soundness of the of pcs systems. for all of these reasons, we believe that the ouse offer to strike title 8 shoul

it is being used by third world countries to make sure the banks of the river stay in place. talk about the uses and we will kick into why this would work -- get into why this would work. >> it is planted where every to have coastal erosion and a problem with keeping the soil together. they are using it in hawaii. there is using it all over africa. they have used it in south -- in central louisiana. >> once this is planted, it grows very rapidly. within three months, you could not pull out of the ground. the root system would be about 7 feet and three months. what happens is it maintains itself where it is very resilient. it stands up well against flooding come up against drought. it can go for long periods of time in water, without water. you can burn it. but it will grow back. it takes the nitrates and phosphates out of the soil and water. it takes the heavy metals out of the water. >> in this case, with our weapons being inundated with heavy crude, this would be ideal to not just plant on the sand berms we want to build but as we build back our wetlands, this would be the

world as it is. and i hear people saying, yes, we are down on wall street -- like jobs, etcetera, etcetera -- but this has something to do with war -- the mortgage and the banks cause people to be unemployed in the united states. and i wish to general mcchrystal of the fortune in the world and general petraeus is going to need a lot of help. host: from page of "the washington times." again, that is the front page of "the washington times" this morning. on the independent line, richard from laurel, maryland. caller: i am a very idealistic best thinking person but also been around longer enough to know -- idealistic-a thinking person but also been around longer enough to know that nothing can change in this country overnight, as far as getting out of afghanistan. yes, i would like to see it happen, but i know it won't simply because it is about the only thing going in our economy right now that is keeping things afloat. there is a tremendous military industrial complex that is being more of less catered to at this time. and the other issue is that, as long as the war is going on, the president has a more stringent set of powers that he is not willing to give up

the vocal world. the notion that we ought to say banking companies can outdo proprietary trading, cannot invest in hedge funds, -- cannot do proprietary trading, can on invest in hedge funds because there is a problem. it essentially requires that derivatives dealers not be within a bank holding companies, barack and leased -- but at least there be somebody at the banking lobby -- bank holding companies. could you explain the position today? >> members of the committee, including chairman lincoln and chairman daud, or carefully going through these provvsions to be sure we come to an appropriate balance perido. we want to follow our key objectives. one is, as you said, the banks are unable to take risks like proprietary trading. or if they use derivatives for proprietary trading, they could imperil the stability of the bank, or allow them to benefit from the access to the safety net that the bank enjoys and extend the benefit of those activities that we do not believe are essential for baking. the other thing to point out -- for banking. the the thing to point out is that an essential part of banking is

in the early weeks, getting money to people in haiti was our real channel -- was our real challenge. mobile banking has the ability to reach hundreds of thousands of people around the world. this new effort will make haiti a hub for the mobile banking revolution. we are also working to strengthen haiti's resilience against future natural disasters by helping local construction firms learn how to direct low cost, but stronger homes. a practice we learned from an earlier earthquake in peru. at president obama and secretary clinton's insistence, we are undergoing audits by the officer of the inspector general in -- on the ground in port-au-prince. the effort is just starting. development is a difficult long- term endeavor and we face significant challenges, especially as hurricane season approaches. in some cases, we did meet -- need much more capacity as an agency to respond to a crisis of this magnitude. the early results of the government's effort has been encouraging and it has helped shape the agenda for reform for the agency at large. i learned that we needed to unleash the pent up entrepreneurial energy within the agency and within our staff. we need to apply the lat

the world is a terrible place. now i find out we own the banks and the major corporations and control the world. some of you may remember the good old days when conservatives were complaining that the supreme court had just gone off the rails. it was interpreting laws in a way that really took dramatic departures from what the law said, what congress meant, that it was interpreting the constitution in ways that were really at odds with what we understand the constitution to mean. these are as long ago as 2005, to the as in the six colleges thousand seven -- these were as long ago as 2005, 2006, 2007. you are talking about at different times how polarized and is and how difficult it is to get things done. a lot of panelists have talked about the court is on a mission to be ddsingenuous and do things that violate the intent of the congress. i listen to that and i live in a different world where congress is 535 people, each of whom has its own views, their own constituents. the court is nine people who do not agree and do not line up the same way. i

make haiti the hub for the mobile banking revolution and the innovation that needs to take place to develop the kind of breakthroughs that we need to solve this problem around the world. we are also working to strengthen haiti's resilience against future natural disasters by helping the local construction firms learn how to arrest low-cost yet stronger homes to a practice we learned in part by helping peru rebuild from the year earlier earthquake and paul was the mission director. and at president obama and sector clinton insistence, every penny we spend is subject to concurrent audit by a member of the usaid office of the inspector general on the ground in port-au-prince. so haiti's recovery is just starting and will take many years. development is a difficult and long-term endeavor and we face significant challenges especially as the hurricane season now approaches. and in some cases, we did need much more capacity than we had as an agency to respond adequately to a crisis of this magnitude. but the early results of the entire government effort have been encouraging and they help me shake my agenda for reform for the agency at large. i learned that to bring out the

bigger development i'm talking about is being activeey promoted by, well, all the major international banks. bank, e.c.o., world bank and so on.. also by china, india, pakistan and all the entral asian countries, saudi arabia, japan and so forth. in other words, this is happening. what i am speaking about is going to break through. whether the question is whether the u.s. is savvy enough to put itself at the head of this to be the coordinator and convener for the efforr that opens the cork which afghanistan now presents. to this system as a whole. if we do i think we're on the road to success in afghanistan. if we don't all the efforts commandable suggestions thatt have een made here with regard to transport will be or naught. thank you, sir. >> thank you. great food for thought. let me start with mr. schwartz. when you count the contractors in the theater, is there any way that you count the people that might be part of the commander's militia if they are not registered? do we assume every number that you count plus a whole lot of other people that is working as militia forces? >> there is questions raised to

the banks. verisimilar, believe me, all of the world. whatever happens here all over the united states, it immediately has an impact in the world. that is exactly why we believe global solutions will have to be found for all of these problems. at the same time, as i said, we not introduce a bank tax. why? we know very well that banks also have to make a fair contribution. that is what is called a fair burden sharing. the last 10, 15 years, banks have made enormous profits, so now we are negotiating with them. we don't want to impose on them solutions but we tried to negotiate. i think that is the way, the approach that has to be followed on a european and also global level. host: thank you very much for making c-span part of your visit to the united states. i appreciate your interaction with our callers. i am going to turn to domestic issues as we wrap up. first we will have open phones, and you can, and anything you have heard. we have had a lot on the table. but if you want to bring of a new issue, feel free. before we get into open ph

the financial systems in that part of the world are largely informal. they are not formal banking systems. it's a great challenge. we have a lot of people working very hard on that issue, trying to determine where the ransom money goes, and where the financing originates to buy the weapons and the boats. there has to be a major financial network. this is not a simple enterprise. this is a major, international enterprise. host: baltimore, independent, good morning. caller: good morning. thank you for the opportunity. america is not addressing the root of the problem. i'm originally from africa. i know exactly what goes on in our continent. the truth of the matter is that there are nuclear weapons dumped on the shore of somalia by international companies. you have fishing vessels that come on the shore of somalia and taking all the fish. the people are hungry. what do we expect them to do? die? [inaudible] the environmental damage is done. nigerian people are dying. that is what we go through in africa. the whole world sit and watches. host: we will hear from donna hopkins. guest: i

counterparty positions and immediately would have put at risk most of the major banks of not only the united states but of the world. now, when that was happening and that occurred after other failures in the united states occurred, we had several choices. we could have sat by and say, well, the market will cure all things. and i guess if you're a curist that's not a bad a position. i'll concede to that. i'm one of those people that favor affecting the market and taking actions that will in some instances short-circuit the effects of the market when the effect of the market will be so seve on our population that it warrants such action. and that's exactly what happened in a.i.g. if we sat back and allowed that to occur and the ripple effect around the world, we would have collapsed the economy of the united states and the world, probably some of our best economists in the world indicated within 72 hours we would have been in position of not knowing what the world's economy would look like. we were called upon to take certain actions, and that was way back in september, october of 2008, and many of us came back to w

the vetero-grass. >> talk about how this plant is used in third world countries. there are third world countries that use this to keep the backs of their rebars and protect -- to keep the banksvers and why is this plan being used by here where it is needed, especially when we are going to spend $350 million, if we're going to build our wetlands back, we want a species that will hold the land in place? >> they have used the vetero- grass to stop sediment runoff which was killing reefs and shellfish. within 10 years after planting it, the reefs are healthy again and shellfish are flourishing. it is just amazing. they use it in 100 countries right now. , literally. >> if they want to use microorganisms and we know there is vetero-grass out there that is resistant to hydrocarbons and will hold the islands in place, what is the holdup? the science is there. you guys are involved in this day in and day out. what the problem? >> it is all politics. what is the holdup? politics. we have good science on our side to say that we can start building land today. we can hand plant this today and build land and hold a seventh and trap the sediment and trap the oil, more importantly, go to t

the chairman for his leadership. mr. speaker, this bill has peace, real peace, great big, nasty sharp teeth that are finally going to force businesses and banks around the world to choose between the american economy and financial system or business as usual with iran's dictatorship. this bill has real sanctions. not maybe sanctions, not sort of sanctions, but real sanctions. this bill has real sanctions investigations requirements, not maybe we'll look at and not we'll try to get it -- to it when we can. but clear and legal requirements to investigate potential violations. in short, this is a bill that forces the question, will the world watch passively as iran crosses the nuclear arms threshold or are will we join together to compel iran to pull back from the nuclear brink? we cannot guarantee the success of these measures. ultimately the choices lie with the regime in tehran. but it should be clear that we are doing all we can to impose on iran the highest possible cost for its defines that we are demonstrating by our actions and by our efforts, the depths of our commitment to peacefully ending iran's nuclear activities. we are try diplomacy, we are trying

the gulf, big banks on wall street. we have seen the cronyism, the score for government, the world that of regulation, the corruption ofatory agencies. in the case of mineral management services, in bed with the companies that were supposed to police. conservatives had their way and they got it wrong. and americans are paying the price. but the drill baby drill crowd is unapologetic. the right seeks to return to power with the same ideas and the same policies that threw us off the cliff. there is no chance of that. -- we will have to fight. they can succeed only if we step aside. we have to provide an independent movement, the energy and activism that forced the majority in the first place. that means we have to stop waiting for obama. we have to stop taking the president's temperature. we have to stop being critics and analysts and start being an -- actors once more. it means taking the battle of ideas to the right. taking on conservatives in both parties and reminding them of the temper of this act of this space. those who are standing in the way must understand there are no free passes. tomorrow in arkansas, we will

the banks were smart enough to bundle some of these loans up and sell them overseas. that is why it became a world was basically a u.s. cent housing bubble -- a u.s. housing bubble. the government forced banks to give loans to people. social security -- we have problems for social security. how many people are on social security that have never given one dime to social security? i will give you an example. gay people from mexico, over illegally -- come over illegally and they say they are being persecuted. it automatically get social security benefits. -- they it automatically get social security benefits. i am a union worker. my money is going to so many different things. it is going into programs that i really do not agree with. host: thank you for your call. this was a comment on our earlier discussion dealing with the deficit, the debt, and the economy. "spent directly on jobs. jobs = revenue equals deficit reduction. jobs = increased gross national product = decrease deficit. -- deficit." what to do with the oil and waste that is coming ashore in the gulf of mexico? it is a day of prayer for

the people in charge of those organizations did not seem to or bank -- understand that thh world was anging and they needed to evolve. but the world changing i am not talking about 2002. the conservative movement build itself up as a cohesive of a starting in the 1960 proxy, 1970's, and 98's. 30 years in we would start getting a hand that being in our own silo's was not working. in the late 1990's we have the rise of the first truly progressive group, which i think was move on. it was started because of the impeachment. you saw the blogosphere come up. . lot dferent. at that time, it was very sma andand we were attention or took us seriously. t we were group -- but we grew and we were holistic. the news of the democracy alliance command and to organizations cropped up that arfunded by new donors. the center for american progress, media matters, s forth. these organizations or holistic in nature and so there was progress. we were starting to emulate what the right wi had been doing in starting to have a sense of life and pe that maybe things would get better 2004 came and we lost. that

we, the greatest country in the world, with the strongest economy, and that we needed to act immediately. the response from the bush administration was a bailout of the banks. and a 24-hour, 48-hour period they produced a bill, $700 billion that they asked the congress to pass to bail out the banks. it was necessary to do. because of the recklessness of the bush administration's economic policy, because of the lack of supervision, discipline and regulation, the recklessness on wall street had taken us to the brink of a financial crisis of such magnitude that the chairman said there wouldn't be an economy by monday. took us into deep recession where 8 1/2 million jobs were lost, the people lost their jobs , therefore in many cases their health insurance, they lost their pensions, they lost their savings, they had to live off savings and lost their investments for their children's education. because of recklessness on wall street, joblessness was rampant on main street. one of the reasons was there was no credit, it's interesting to hear my colleagues talk about the importance of credit to main street, but not one of them voted for the credit, the small busi

the big banks? the guest: yes, it was, because bgest bank -- j.p. morgan, sachs, bank of america, them have huge operations of hedge funds. j.p. morgan is actually -- it operates the largest hedge fund somee world, according to rankings. so, they would really be forced their hed fund operations, separate them from businesses, sell them off. also have major investments in those funds and the private equity, especially equity. vate they invest heavily, along with their clients. they still have to scale those but it not going to be as they steer it was going to be. host: 202 is the area code if talk about theto regulations deal that was reached at 540 -- 5:40 a.m. by the conference committee of the house and senate. the democrats voted for it at all republicans voted against it. yalman another contentious issue was the issue of derivatives. senator blanche lincoln had a big role. what happened? guest: senator lincoln, who year, atlection this really -- this on for about going two years now starting at the house and the senate. she proposed that the derivatives operations of the banks would be completely off -- it would be in the not havet would it, becausedo with it insured banking institutions. -

the class of 2010 banks you for your generosity and supporting our education beyond high school. to the class of 2010, tonight is our night to face the world have the courage to succeed and the dedication and perseverance to make our dreams come true. i remember when i first arrived here on a chilly night in january. i was physically and mentally exhausted after a long flight. when i came out of the airport, there was no one there except for a few cars going by. i was not enthusiastic about moving. i was worried about starting my life over in a different city, state, and country. like many people, i tried to avoid this new challenge. however i soon realized that i could live outside my comfort zone. i could not deny reality forever. and after four years, look where i am standing. [applause] this coming fall, we will start our new life. we will meet new people, make new friends, and learn new things. some of us might be scared of leaving behind the comforts of home, but we will start our new life with confidence. that is what i learned from moving to kalamazoo. there's nothing to be afraid of as we move ahead. we will keep with us the memor

the biggest bank -- j.p. morgan, goldman sachs, bank of america, all of them have huge operations of hedge funds. j.p. morgan is actually -- it operates the largest hedge fund in the world, according to some rankings. so, they would really be forced to spin off their hedge fund operations, separate them from their main businesses, sell them off. and the also have major investments in those funds and the private equity, especially their private equity. they invest heavily, along with their clients. they still have to scale those back, but it is not going to be as much as they steer it was going to be. host: 202 is the area code if you would like to talk about the regulations deal that was reached at 540 -- 5:40 a.m. by the conference committee of the house and senate. all the democrats voted for it at all republicans voted against it. yalman onaran from bloomberg, another contentious issue was the issue of derivatives and senator blanche lincoln of arkansas had a big role. what happened? guest: senator lincoln, who faces reelection this year, at the last minute really -- this bill has been going on for about two years now starting at the house and the senate. she propose

in the country and the world and the businnsses that would like to hire people can't keep their lines of credit open anymore. you've got this administration's regulators telling banks, now you better not keep extending that line of credit to that business because even though they're still hiring people, seem to be doing well and have never missed a payment, we're concerned that maybe someday they will and you don't want your bank to be under the scrutiny that we'll put on it if you keep extending lines of credit to this company. . they can't borrow money or grow their business. if you aren't growing, you are usually dying. and so it's just interesting. i did not expect four yearss after i heard my friends across on the other side of the aisle yelling and fussing about $200 billion deficit in one year, just outrageous, unconscionable. you're right, we shouldn't be deficit spending. i really expect them to stop. and this year, it's expected we'll have a $1.6 trillion deficit by the federal ggvernment, in one year. who would have ever dreamed that the same people who said just short years ago thatt $160 billion deficit was reppub billion deficit was republic hence i b

banks might still be too chicken to lend. putting credit out of reach of many a small business , no matter how earnest its efforts. >> brown: and now to the world cup in south africa, where tensions are rising in some surprising ways. after oh, so many low-scoring games there was a sudden glut of goals today as portugal poured it on north korea 7-0. but it's been the poor performances of several european powers that has stolen the headlines so far. england and italy have both played two lack luster ties. then there's the french who seem to be out to set the wrong kind of world cup record for the bizarre. this weekend french striker was dismissed from the team after a heated argument with the coach . in response, his teammates refused to practice. >> no one can permit themselves to act like that either in the dressing room or elsewhere. the exemplary nature of high level sportsman is something important especially in football. no one can act this way. >> brown: today the coach said some of his players may refuse to play their final group game against host south africa tomorrow. as to south africa, if it loses that match, it would become the firs

treasury now, wasn't smart enough or educated enough in the ways of the world that when you go out and say, we're going to have a depression, banks are going to fail one after another, when you create panic yourself, it is a self-fulfilling prophecy. and that's why when they went out and he talked, bless his heart, talked president bush into going out, joining ranks with him and getting on the chicken little brigade, that the financial sky was falling and scared america, when you go out and have the president and secretary of treasury saying that, if they don't pass this particular bill, whatever bill, it wouldn't matter, they don't pass this bill on monday in the house, the market's going to crash like worse than 1929. it's self-fulfilling prophecy. it fell, people panicked, many republicans got talked into voting for the people and joining most of the democrats that voted for the tarp bailout bill and it should have been ended long ago. it was a big mistake. but, boy, everybody needs to feel good, though, goldman sachs had their biggest profit year in their history last year so their jobs are scrure, they're doing good. but the

the nation has to deal with. we are very proud at bank of america that our new building in new york city is one of the great his buildings in the world. we have a co-generation plant, we use low-cost electricity at night to generate ice to cool the war occurred during the day. we take water from the wash basins and recycle it for toilets. i think there are examples and i am proud the bank is doing that, taking steps to make a difference. host: edward on the democratic line from wisconsin. caller: on the advisory board -- they are talking about $10 million investment from taxpayers. the government -- taxpayer should on the money. just like a gamble that money to bank of america toobail them out. we own part of it for a little while, and now we don't, if we have any innovation that comes from the taxpayer money, the taxpayer should on that. host: we should have shares of whatever comes out of it, a business comes out of it? caller: exactly. we should not have to buy it back from the private -- from the private sector. guest: we are in agreement. i think it is important of the government makes these investments, that the taxpayer get it