you, you know look your for transparency or not this is not one of those like you know can i find a place in the middle to be able to say that i am for transparent in policing in san francisco but at the same time community based along with the poa is doing i'm sorry not you can't have it both ways you know, we don't have a vote that automatically happens but should be clear that the people that vote against the substance of this resolution are people who have citing with the police officers association on the pressing issue of transcripts should we have transparency we vote against it portion of the resolution means you agree with the poa we shouldn't have that's what that means. >> thank you supervisor campos and supervisor cowen. >> thank you i wanted to get it on the record that i'm against dividing the resolution i actually agree with - >> i'm sorry to interrupt you supervisor cowen i've been notified by the clerk that the motion to divide the question is not debatable unfortunately. >> i'm deity it what i'm seeing saying i don't like it that's a statement just to be clear i be

but it's completely fair and transpare transparent.using it for decades, going on a century. it worked for abraham lincoln, dwight eisenhower, ronald reagan. the interesting thing is, look, donald trump has got 37% of the vote and 45% of the delegate. he's actually doing pretty well. he went into a state like florida that has 99 delegates, won them all because he was the highest vote getter and the state was winner-take-all. if you talk about fairness, a lot of candidates don't complain about the states until they lose them. >> what he sees is the party hsu planting the will and regard of the electorate. doesn't he make a legitimate point? >> no, he doesn't. the republican party is more democratic than the democrats. a fifth of the democratic delegates are party bosses. all of our delegates are voted by the people. >> shouldn't a candidate who arrives in cleveland with the most wins, the most votes, the most delegates leave as your nominee? >> well, i think traditionally that's been the case but again, that's ke shouldn't the person wh

wage transparency is not a new initiative. it enjoys support on both sides of the political spectrum. both president obama and hillary clinton are in favor of it. but not all transparency is created equal. earlier this year, the obama administration proposed a new regulati regulation targeting businesses with over a hundred employees. the labor department would use this rule to require businesses to submit large amounts of data regarding race, gender, and other statistics to the equal employment opportunity commission. the administration believes this will end discrimination. i believe this is just another government mandate that intrudes in the operations of the private business. we can't miscount the burden this will put on employers and job creators and every new regulation creates a new cost. i have doubts this raw data will give the administration what it is looking for. instead, it presents a distorted picture of pay data. moreover, it is unclear how the information would identify discrimination. theida data doesn't take

an inexcusable lack of transparency. here is what you need to know. 2004 report of the 9/11 commission concluded there was quote no evidence that the saudi government as an institution orsen your officials funded the organization of the 9/11 plot. but two 9/11 commission members, former senator bob carry and former navy secretary john layman have told me that the commission did not exonerate saudi arabia and before the work of the 9/11 commission, there was a 2002 joint congressional inquiry into the attacks perpetrated by 19 hijackers, 15 of whom were saudis as was the mastermind osama bin laden. 28 pages from that report have never been publicly released and some who have read them say they site evidence saudi officials living in the united states played a key role in the plot. the allegation is that a saudi government agent named omar provided assistance to 9/11 hijackers. president obama long promised to unseal the documents but hasn't and that's a disgrace. never forget that's the refrain we repeat with regard to events of september 1 1 but until

this will bring much-needed transparency to the council. fsoc is intended to be a forum for discussion and analysis on regulator issues but unfortunately the council has continually failed to address the failure of our main street banks. a single bank failure will not pose a systemic risk to the financial system. however, losing these small banks at an accelerating pace is a clear warning signal that the financial system is not healthy and losing community banks as a whole certainly qualifies as systemically risky. instead of closed door deliberations, the council, which is made of financial regulators, have been acknowledging this exact problem and should be working to address this pressing issue in a transparent manner before it's too late. this legislation is the logical next step in reforming the financial stability oversight council to ensure it actually addresses threats to our financial system. i'm happy to lend my support to this bill and encourage my colleagues to support this commonsense measure. i, again, thank the gentleman from

to have more transparency in our government and when we are losing all trust in our government.when you have something like this where the administration is clearly lying, it's clearly document that belong to us, not them and their secretary of state with her emails. we really have a problem. not just republican party, how are we going to conduct our government in the coming century? >> this particular operation we are still in different instances fin,w% guns tied to fast and furious. tied to crimes. far away from the underlying scandal we have come. i agree with everything that chaffetz is doing and i admire it. but the fact is and i'm cynical enough to believe this, this is further proof that stonewalling works. we can't even remember what the scandal was about. they haveko succeeded four years this stuff. it now has come out about nine months to go in the administration, this will get the minimal coverage in the mainstream media the story will be gone in a few days, and it%-o wil[( have zero effect on what happens in the real world between now and the next election as was j

, transparency in government. number of years ago he said -- quote -- "i believe in the principle of open government. lack of transparency in the public policy process leads to cynicism and distrust of public officials. as a matter of principle, the american people need to be made aware of any action that prevent a matter from being considered by their elected senators." close quote. he reiterated his beliefs just a few days ago here in this chamber, and here's what he said last week -- quote -- "the principle of government transparency is one that does not expire. open government is good government, and americans have a right to a government that is accountable to its people." close quote. so senator grassley's commitment to transparency is as shallow as the shallowest puddle you can find. all it took was one phone call obviously from the republican leader for sator grassley to abandon any pretense of transparency that shut the american people out of the supreme court process. shut them out. this is the same sena

our tax transparency plan also calls for a specialized tax enforcement unit. properly resourced, mr. speaker, and that has to be the key. since 2010, there have only been 11 prosecutions over offshore tax evasion, a situation the public accounts committee described as woefully inadequate. having slashed resources and cut 14,000 staff since 2010, will the prime minister today guarantee that resourcing her majesty's revenue and customs will increase in this parliament? mr. speaker, we support real action to end the abuses that allow the wealthy to dodge the rules that the rest of us have to follow. we need to ensure that trust and fairness are restored to our tax system and our politics. in the sense and the reality that there is one rule for the richest and another for everybody else. the prime minister has said tax dodging is immoral, but he clearly failed to give a full account of his own involvement in offshore tax havens until this week, or to take essential action -- or to take essential action to clean up the system, whilst at the same time blocking wider

speaker it could be forgiven for believing the only virtue is transparency.rivacy and quality are both important virtues that we value in this country. does the prime minister agree that given decision-makers in this country pay probably through service companies? if we are to set any principle, it should be with public principle we set any establishn we could privacy. then we can have a more wide discussion. mr. cameron: i agree with you, that there is a value in privacy, and that is why you have to have this balance, and i have tried to set up the way forward today. on his issue about private service companies, the chancellor will say something about that in the budget, and when public money is involved, there's a case to be made that people declare these arrangements in the proper way. the change the chancellor has been about is making sure whether someone chooses to have a private service company or chooses to be self-employed, the tax of they pay will be similar. m.p.: i welcome the prime minister's announcement there will be a new criminal offense apply

max, you are an expert from transparency international.veryone is calling for a global transparency initiative. now you have 30 seconds. tell me what that t could be lie and whether it couldld happen.n. bee, essentially everybody should have a national public registry of who owns companies, just knowing the ultimate o owner, which would be aggregated into a global register. it would only allow people to find who is the owner.it is a simple technical fix . governments have to do it. peter: is it going to happen? ursula: max:max: yes it will, in time. 10 years from now, this will be like smoking there are. [laughter] peter: what is the moral of the story we have been talking about today? malte: i think that you have to make judgment. you have to make judgment between keeping the right of privacy, for the benefit of rich and superrich to keep money field from the public and to keep aies, system alive and functioning, which makes it easier to tax evasion, terrorist financing, money laundering. this is an adjustment we have to make, and i think

fcc to makeor the this a priority and restore transparency to our democracy. additionally, if you invest your have thea company you right to know how and when that company is spending your money to influence the outcome of elections. anything other than full disclosure is stolen speech and incompatible with the freedom of speech and our constitution. it is time to stop this wave of dark money drowning out the voice of the people. i will join in voting no for the same reasons my colleagues have put forward today because the nominees for the fcc has not clarified that they understand and will advocate for the transparency that our constitution requires. i share the concerns of my colleagues on the political spending issue. what has happened to the campaign finance system in this country is a disgrace. the fcc has the authority to help. what it does not have is the will. this is wrong. it is wrong for investors and all of america. we need an fcc that will make spending more transparent. i have concerns about ms. purse's nomination based on her views about dodd fr

who can be against increased transparency? text chiefs, those who possess stolen works of art, smugglers, terrorism networks? because privacy alone cannot be an argument for doing nothing when the stakes for the common good are so high. in closing, the policy is established a high bar during times of conflict. it was a source of pride for general eisenhower who said it is our privilege to pass on to the coming centuries treasures of past ages. what then will be the art legacy? >> you are now recognized for minutes. >> thank you, good money. members of the task force come on behalf of the foundation of defensive democracies and centers on sanctions thank you for the opportunity to testify. before delving into into the issue of islamic state antiquities trafficking it's important to clarify how the trait fits into isis overall economic goals. one way to understand is to look at the strategies guiding the actions. one of isis aims is to win over locals who may be on the fence regarding committing to jihadist rule. this approach g

to have more transparency in our government and when we are losing all trust in our government. like this where the administration is clearly lying, it's clearly document that belong to us, not them and their secretary of state with her emails. we really have a problem. not just republican party, how are we going to conduct our government in the coming century? >> this particular operation we are still in different instances fin,w% guns tied to fast and furious. tied to crimes. far away from the underlying scandal we have come. i agree with everything that chaffetz is doing and i admire it. but the fact is and i'm cynical enough to believe this, this is further proof that stonewalling works. we can't even remember what the scandal was about. they haveko succeeded four years this stuff. it now has come out about nine months to go in the administration, this will get the minimal coverage in the mainstream media the story will be gone in a few days, and it%-o wil[( have zero effect on what happens in the real world between now and the next election as was just indicated the fact

about transparency and finally making some moves. putting in a u.n.t, how many violations of human rights there were in terms of rape against women, is not much transparency. and putti it on the website is pretty good but a lot of these people who are victims would know a website if they saw it because they are in remote parts of the world. i want to act out what has our defensive. i completely come from where they're coming from in fron terf us in the united states holding people accountable in some way if not at least by withholding funds are withholding funds until they comply with human rights. but here's the question. senator corker and i went to darfur and senator coons and i went to the congo. one of the many things i learned is rate is a military tactic in africa. it's not a violation of the law. they teach it. when we went to darfur you didn't see a man younger, i mean older than 12 or younger than 72 because they fled. everyone had a baby. i'm talking when you're 45, 50, 60 years old, or at least endured so much been it looked like they were

it's also important for transparency.d a lot about the need to maintain transparency in the nrc review process and the public doesn't always have the resources to be able to contest the hearing. even if there are very important safety issues that need adjudication. for those reasons we think mandatory hearings should be preserved. >> and i agree with you. there are mandatory hearings if you want to build a new house next door to somebody else's house. it's a public hearing not a town hall. here we're building a nuclear power plant and mandatory hearings for a construction permit, for an operating permit would no longer be mandatory? that just makes no sense whatsoever. that's an inherently dangerous technology that needs all kinds of tough questions to be asked about it. so i understand the wish list the industry would say no more hearings, no more questions asked by the union, scientists and public hearings questioning the underlying premise of building a nuclear power plant in somebody's neighborhood. i don't think the

regarding transparency.ou know, putting in a year-end report, how many violations of rape against women, not much transparency. and putting it on the website is good, but a lot of victims were ould not know a website if they saw one. they are in a remote part of the world. i want to echo what senator cardin and corker have said. holding these people accountable in some way, if not the least by withholding funds until they comply with human rights. but here is the question. senator corker and i went to darfur, one of the many things i learned is that rape is a military tactic in africa. it is not a violation. they teach it. senator corker: that is right. senator isakson: when we went to darfur, we do not see a man younger than 12 or older than 72. they had all fled. the women had fled. they had weathered and in due endured much pain. they look like they were that old. the army that came in raped the women to break the family. the son is conscripted to the family. this is an ongoing practice. i am not just spe

does it need more transparency? >> it is difficult for us to find out. ultimately that is a question to bring up with the governor. if i was the governor, i would not have done that. >> i spoke to officials and asked them, how can agency function if it only has transparency on the new york side? >> done 98 percent of what is in those bills of its own volition and prior sessions. having it embodied in law is fine. governor christie supports reform legislation for the port authority, a mirror image of what has passed in new york represented by senator mccain's bill. >> and the port authority officials pointed out that they are making efforts of transparency, even if the two governors might not see eye to eye. bill: sibile, it is such a joke to me. these guys are debating whether or not to put a band-aid over the spot where your arm was coming your limb was severed. it is so ridiculous. the bill makes no sense. it is a total patriot just machine. >> the whole point, the port authority is not a one-way mirror. it is a bistate agency, which means of the two s

we try to be as transparent to the marketplace as quickly as we can.nd when we act through supervision, which is a confidential process without violating the confidentially of institutions, we put out highlights that tell you what we found at banks and other institutions, what we thought violated the law, what we did about it, and people should take account of that as well. sen. rounds: let me slide is around with regard to the way you look at offering no action letters. i know you finalized your rules on the no action letters, but it seems like what we are challenged with here is, do you start out by saying, look, heads up on your enforcement actions, and that is the way we will be basically laying out the guidance of how we are going to be interpreting and enforcing the issues. yet to when you have companies that step back in and ask for guidance -- and by that, i mean in the bureau's rule making it is estimated it would issue no action letters, only in extraordinary circumstances, in anticipation of one letter per year. by contrast the sec has issue

the improvement mean a great deal of transparency and accountability to the nrc. we want the commission to make changes that allow stakeholders of various backgrounds and motivations to look at the commission's action and understand what it's doing. partic in particular, the agency must be more transparent and his budgeting and fee process. this. this is especially true regarding the commission overhead costs. when an nrc talks about overhead costs, it refers to activities that may be categorized as corporate support, office support, and mission indirect. at this point, our bill only ptthe corporate support costs because that is the only portion of the ct,dill overhead cost thn get the nrc to clearly label and divine. the nrc must endeavor to make its budgeting information more transparent and accessible. some amount of overhead is necessary for all organizations. nonetheless, the undersea needs to be able to clearly count for overhead costs and the weight uses it uses fee for licenses to support these costs. clear and transparent budget processes are required for

regarding transparency. finally making some moves. you know, putting in a year-end report, how many violations of rape against women, not much transparency. and putting it on the website is pretty good, but a lot of these victims would not know a website if they saw one. they are in a remote part of the world. i want to echo what senator cardin and corker have said. holding these people accountable in some way, if not the least by withholding funds until they comply with human rights. but here is the question. when senator corker and i went to darfur, one of the many things i learned is that rape is a military tactic in africa. it is not a violation. they teach it. senator corker: that is right. senator isakson: when we went to darfur, we do not see a man 12 or younger than 72. they had all fled. the women had fled. they had weathered and endured much pain. they look like they were that old. the army that came in raped the women to break the family. the son is conscripted to the family. this is an ongoing practice. i am not just speak

ur bill, nima, increases transparency and accountability. in the budget and fee structure through modernizing reforms that are based on years of epw oversight efforts. the measure also directs the agency to develop a technology inclusive framework enabling review of advanced set of technology. this bring as great deal of transparency and accountability to the nrc. we want the commission to make changes to look at the commission's actions and understand what it is doing. in particular, the agency must be more transparent in its budgeting and fee process. this is especially true regarding the commission overhead costs. when the nrc talks about overhead costs it refers to activities that may be categorized as corporate support and mission indirect. at this point our bill only captures one portion of these overhead costs. the corporate support costs. because that is the obble portion that we can get the nrc to clearly label and define. the nrc must endeavor to make its budgeting information more transparent and accessible. some amount of overhea

we have a ton of problems as well and i try to be transparent about it. in august, when i made my first book statements about the bank, we had a robust program of actions. we are doing it. the profitability is poor. the earnings are poor. we said we were going to do a bunch of things and we are doing them. the market took it as an encouraging sign. the market understands what our clients know, there is a ton of business for us to do. francine: impairments are better than expected? that i'm not sure what means. our stock has been up and down like a yo-yo. had overextended ourselves in a number of areas. concentrations in areas that were hardest hit. that's not a coincidence. there tends to be more demand for money that people who like to get into trouble. we identified the problem before i arrived and were very transparent. we dealt with it. year and that we are comfortable with our portfolio and we have a lot more to do. we have a portfolio of laugh -- assets to be liquidated. we had some concentrations that we are still watching. our portfolio is in good

have more transparency and there is no question about its. the security council threat, the see, the u.s., you would the smoke and it is more open with sensitive questions on know rights and we want to what they would do to stop the crisis in syria and address the refugee crisis and how they would make the u.n. more takentable and they will positions and we will remember that. i think that it is an improvement. there is a process and a democratic institution. i would say that it is an improvement. >> what are the main qualities that you would want to see? seethere candidates you going forward? saying goes that you usually want someone who will be more of a secretary than a general. looking at the government and the crimes in syria. the u.s. and protecting israel. they are very vocal on human rights issues. we believe in diplomacy in the itld and, to use effectively, you need someone who will be strong on human rights and someone who will speak for the charter and not just the member states. there needs to be someone who was willing to antagon

you, you know look your for transparency or not this is not one of those like you know can i find aplace in the middle to be able to say that i am for transparent in policing in san francisco but at the same time community based along with the poa is doing i'm sorry not you can't have it both ways you know, we don't have a vote that automatically happens but should be clear that the people that vote against the substance of this resolution are people who have citing with the police officers association on the pressing issue of transcripts should we have transparency we vote against it portion of the resolution means you agree with the poa we shouldn't have that's what that means. >> thank you supervisor campos and supervisor cowen. >> thank you i wanted to get it on the record that i'm against dividing the resolution i actually agree with - >> i'm sorry to interrupt you supervisor cowen i've been notified by the clerk that the motion to divide the question is not debatable unfortunately. >> i'm deity it what i'm seeing saying i don't like it that's a statement just to be clear i bel

regarding transparency. putting in a year-end report, how many violations of rape against women, not much transparency. but you on the website is good, but a lot of victims were not know a website if they saw. they are in a remote part of the world. i want to echo what senator cardin and corker have said. holding these people accountable in some way, if not the least by withholding funds until they comply with human rights. but here is the question. senator corker and i went to darfur, one of the many things i learned is that rape is a military target in africa. it is not a violation. they teach it. ur, we doent to darf not see a man younger than 12 or older than 72. they had all fled. the women had fled. they look like they were that old. the army that came in raped the women to break the family. the son is conscripted to the family. this is an ongoing practice. it is one place i know where it takes place. and unless there was a significant consequence of the united states funds, and this may impress your o

there isn't transparency right now. there are certain proprietary predictive policing technologies that don't share their information, and there's some that are recognizing that they needo and they will. and i think perhaps in the competitive advantage, those might win out. but the governments, the police who control the data, are not necessarily giving it up. and i think because of that, it's easy to label things as racial profiling where it's actually more complex. we're talking about loss of socioeconomic factors, lots of correlations and an attempt to remove race although you can't remove race from either policing or the realities. but without the transparency, we are left with those labels, and i think it's incumbent on governments and the federal government to lead the way to demand that transparency so we can see what is happening, pull it apart, have data scientists who understand it be able to pull it apart, and look at the consequences. and we don't have that now, and we need it. >> so i think that transparenc

it's also important for transparency. we heard a lot about the need to maintain transparency in the nrc review process and the public doesn't always have the resources to be able to contest the hearing. even if there are very important safety issues that need adjudication. for those reasons we think mandatory hearings should be preserved. >> and i agree with you. there are mandatory hearings if you want to build a new house next door to somebody else's house. it's a public hearing not a town hall. here we're building a nuclear power plant and mandatory hearings for a construction permit, for an operating permit would no longer be mandatory? that just makes no sense whatsoever. that's an inherently dangerous technology that needs all kinds of tough questions to be asked about it. so i understand the wish list the industry would say no more hearings, no more questions asked by the union, scientists and public hearings questioning the underlying premise of building a nuclear power plant in somebody's neighborhood. i don't th

and what is transparent. i held a workshop for the task force on technology with regards to searchable pdf's. at the time we were just scanning p df's an a picture and not searchable and understanding the law and which is necessary. nowadays everything is far more intense and complicated. i studied this. there is lots of really great software out there and just work flow on how to move information through technology and possibly help the task force keep track of things like past an easily searchable data base of passed orders. often someone doesn't know about a case in the past. you have precedent like in case law. it's a lot easier to understand what is in the past. this is something that is missing. something i have seen the rent board with their complaint file has been online with these really old mac in tosh a few years ago and everybody in the commission does that much as you have the ledge star application that does that for you. i will stop there and i have sent you my thought or interest. >>supervisor

we need an sec that will make political spending more transparent. i also want to add that i have serious concerns about this nomination based on her views about dodd-frank. i think it's dangerous to put anyone in an sec commissioner position, someone who will have to implement and enforce the law that seems to be so adamantly opposed to the financial reforms that congress put in place in the 2008 financial crisis. we saw what happened the last time we deregulated the industry paid the price tag was enormous. $14 trillion according to the dallas fed. we cannot go back there, not now, not ever. >> let's vote. the nominations on blog. those in favor say aye. those opposed saying nay. the nays have it -- the ayes have it, the nomination is agreed to. >> i want to be reported as no on the other --. >> the senator of new york no. >> i'm from massachusetts. >> and we feel strongly about this. >> she is probably a red socks fan. >> you can't do that. >> i voted no in all of them and i was saying why it was voting. >> i'm not sure en bloc we might need a rec

you, you know look your for transparency or not this is not one of those like you know can i find aplace in the middle to be able to say that i am for transparent in policing in san francisco but at the same time community based along with the poa is doing i'm sorry not you can't have it both ways you know, we don't have a vote that automatically happens but should be clear that the people that vote against the substance of this resolution are people who have citing with the police officers association on the pressing issue of transcripts should we have transparency we vote against it portion of the resolution means you agree with the poa we shouldn't have that's what that means. >> thank you supervisor campos and supervisor cowen. >> thank you i wanted to get it on the record that i'm against dividing the resolution i actually agree with - >> i'm sorry to interrupt you supervisor cowen i've been notified by the clerk that the motion to divide the question is not debatable unfortunately. >> i'm deity it what i'm seeing saying i don't like it that's a statement just to be clear i bel

who is against transparency? if we bring that in, we will not only cut down on trafficking or sources for organized crime or isis, but the internal revenue will be getting more than it's due having to carry the people trying to duck the system and return art to the place of where they were stolen. it's a matter of the will. you sound like a guy from snu. i yield my time back. >> thank the ranking member for your work on this topic and i was at the ceremony for the congressional gold medal and i was great to see the remaining monuments and their men and it was touching. i want to talk about motivation here. jnt isis or other motivation or the destruction or marketing of these cultural items really an issue of trying to establish interiority and what drivings people and looking at europe in world war ii, didn't he want to capture the art and having it and possess it? >> it's a significant factor. no question if you look over the 20th century and we do a study of history, the genocides that end up happening in world

the onus is on us to be really transparent.: i understand healthcare and what she is trying to do is hard. but after 12 years, does it seem like it should be more evolved at this point? anne: i'm hugely supportive of the idea that i can walk into any center and i don't need a physician. and i can just have a finger prick and can just get my information. i think people just want to see and understand the technology and understand the data. i get the concern. people are making life-and-death calls based on this data. they want to understand the why of how these things are happening. emily: the thing is this is a $10 billion company. people think it's a fraud. do you think it's a fraud? do you think it's possible what she is trying to do? anne: i'm sure it's possible. everything i know about elizabeth, she is somebody who works incredibly hard. i have seen her discipline and how much she is working. i'm not close enough to the company to know about the technology. but i think that's what everybody wants to know. everybody is excit

he promised full transparency when he became premiere. he was confronted with the revelations on sunday. he became visibly upset and stormed out of the room. he since denied any wrongdoing. the opposition is planning a vote of no confidence. in total, 11.5 million documents spanning four decades have been leaked from the database of the secretive panama-based firm, mossack fonseca. it's the world's largest ever data leak. among the other 11 former or current world leaders implicated in the leagues, are the ukrainian president, poroshenko. one lawmaker is now calling for him to face impeachment proceedings over his alleged use of offshore accounts. meanwhile, close friends and defendants of russian president vladimir putin are alleged to have moved $2 billion to offshore companies. media reports have speculated that it leads a trail back to putin himself. but the kremlin leads russia and the russian president are targets of a western media smear campaign. it has also hit the world of football. lionel messi and his father have been named in

about transparency and finally making some moves. putting in a year-end report how many violations of human rights there were in terms of rape against women, it's not much transparency. and putting it on the website is pretty good, but a lot of these people who are victims wouldn't know a website if they saw it because they're in very remote parts of the world. i want to echo what senator carden and senator cord have already said. they're coming from where i'm coming from, holding these people accountable in some way the least of which by withholding funds until they comply with human rights. when senator corker and i went to darfur and senator koonce and i went to the congo, one of the many things i learned is that rape is a military tactic in africa. it's not a violation of the law. they teach it. >> that's right. >> when we went to darfur, you didn't see a man younger than -- older than 12 ore you younger t2 because they all had fled. every woman had a baby. 45, 50, 60 years old, endured so much pain they looked like they were tha

and what is transparent. i held a workshop for the task force on technology with regards to searchable pdf's. at the time we were just scanning p df's an a picture and not searchable and understanding the law and which is necessary. nowadays everything is far more intense and complicated. i studied this. there is lots of really great software out there and just work flow on how to move information through technology and possibly help the task force keep track of things like past an easily searchable data base of passed orders. often someone doesn't know about a case in the past. you have precedent like in case law. it's a lot easier to understand what is in the past. this is something that is missing. something i have seen the rent board with their complaint file has been online with these really old mac in tosh a few years ago and everybody in the commission does that much as you have the ledge star application that does that for you. i will stop there and i have sent you my thought or interest. >>supervisor

if it's not subject to tax, that's policy issue, not kind of transparency issue. we are working globally to make sure that the shedding of tax information, you know, the word is now international were because the united states adopted the policy of making it obligatory on all countries to share tax information so that you can't hide. we are not all the way the the the base erosion work we did was critically important, but i seem to keep coming back to the meetings. another thing that came up that was quickly important was how weak the systems are internationally in so many countries and how much technical assistance countries need to build the kinds of tax authorities so that you can work with them to make sure those gaps don't develop. we have pledged to double our office of technical assistance support. we worked closely with the imf and other bilateral partners. but we are making real progress. we have more work to do. i think that the idea that there's different rules, depending on kind of where you are in the hierarchy is unacceptable. everyone has to follow

and in short, without transparency, real accountability was at best, inconsistent.s, finally, is changing. and senator, i share your outrage on this. to look back over so many years of words, rhetoric that has not resulted in true accountability is simply unacceptable. last year, usun led negotiations in the general assembly for a what i view as a breakthrough finally on transparency, gaining consensus among member states to support the secretary general in his intent to name countries in his annual report. those countries with allegations against them, a long-overdue step. and as of early march this year, the u.n. is now reporting on its website in real time, along with credible allegations and the nationality of the alleged perpetrators. and with this information, we are pursuing a comprehensive approach to track individual cases. and follow up with the appropriate authorities. in march, usun brought the issue of the security council, which adopted u.n. security council 2272 - another significant step forward for accountability. the resolution endorses the secreta

swat, safety with accountability and transparency. the focus is on building a "national review" system oriented, described by the people which are patrolled, our police. this is what happened where you are pulled over or any intervention with an officer, have an opportunity to review that officer's performance, ask questions whether the officer performed his or her duties by the book, based on whatever jurisdictional location you reside in. also ask questions, two or three questions about the general aspect in your community and some states it is still legal to do show colds or hogtie and add those. right now we are in the development and that is not pretty. our focus is to create a mapping system of police performance and our hope is cities like baltimore, chicago, dc, it would be nice to chat with you at some point. you want to provide statistics, metrics with which the way police are performing, based on individuals with whom -- it is pretty straightforward, later on we do a few things like automated complaints process, many of the

bring transparency to global antiquities. they believe they have the ability to use the authority to greater transparency to the art and antiquities market which i'll discuss in a moment. to detect and share information on patterns of behavior. these patterns have identified and signaled terrorism financing through looted art and cultural objects as well as trade based money laundering in the art industry generally. servicing the broad range of stakeholders from the financial markets lending against the asset class, capital markets investing in the asset class, in the nonprofit museum community as well as the trade. the problem is, of course, unregulated nature of the industry as you heard, transactions, all which obscures official ownership. it prevents market participants from identifying patterns in illegal steams. patterns is the core of the aml enforcement and compliance. compounding the problem is the prevalence of freeports as you heard alluded to. which are tax free zones designed to serve as a weigh station in valid

so is it -- is it your intent that the market will become fairer and more transparent by virtue of the disclosure of data? is that -- >> i think that's clearly what congress said to us by mandating this task. >> it is your words in the job description so that's why i want to understand your intent. >> i think it is a great opportunity and i hope you'll recommend candidates to us. >> so -- so my question is, is your intention that the bureau will limit the work in the small business lending space to the compilation of data? >> we don't have much authority in the small business lending area and so that is what our focus under our statute is individual consumers -- >> right. >> products for household purposes but there are a couple of places in our statute, you know, congress said it. not me. >> right. >> we have jurisdiction over small business lending under the equal credit opportunity act and a 1071 you identified here which is a mandatory job. congress gave us. >> yeah. >> to set up a reporting, data collection and data publishing regime for small business lending comparable to that f

take the limits off, total transparency.ou just have to recuse yourself if you take a large contribution. you would have a bunch of people that would only take $2000 or less contributions. that would free them to vote on anything they wanted. host: on the idea of contribution limits, different roles in different states that do this. we are talking about federal campaigns but the states becoming a laboratories for some of these different options. alabama, state that has unlimited individual contributions, unlimited state party contributions, unlimited corporate contributions, unlimited union contributions. no limits in alabama. arkansas, different system. $2700 limit for individuals. .2700 state and party limit and it goes on, that $2700 is corporateor pac and conservations and union contributions. there are a lot of states in between that have different contribution limits for those different types of organizations. again, check it out. ncsl has charts on all of this. you can see with the rules are in your state. we are taki

we should be tough on all of those who facilitate lack of transparency.ut we should be accurate in the way that we do it. as for what we are doing about the panama papers, we have a cross agency review to get to the bottom of all the relevant information. it would usually be helped if the newspapers and other investigative journalist now share this information with tax inspectors so we can get to the bottom of it. his final question on blacklists, we are happy to youort blacklists but shouldn't draw up a blacklist solely on the basis of a territory having a low tax rate. that is not the right approach. that is the approach the french of sometimes taken in the past. this government has done more than any previous one. have been specifically investigating benefit fraud have been300 hmrc systematically investigating tax evasion. surely we should care equally about people abusing the tax system and those abusing the benefit system. why has this government had 10 times more staff dealing with the poorest in society then with the superrich innovating their taxe