>> that is what the volcker trying to address. it strengthens those provisions on banks and banking companies as well. that is important, given the fact that a number of investment banks have become a bank holding companies. the tools are there to make sure that deposits are not used ever for a proprietary trading. some would suggest going further -- separating south commercial banks. i do not think it is necessary. but we do need to reinforce the volcker restrictions. >> but with regard to iodd- frank, does the debate about the lack of job creation and a sense of recovery have the potential to overtake implementation? >> there again, i would implore the media to relieve drill down when people are starting to blame financial regulators for broader economic problems. i'm sorry, much of this has not been finalized yet. that has not had any impact. it seems to me this is an effort to blame the regulators for something that they have nothing to do with and it is completely outside our control. what the regulators are trying to do now

let me begin with the volcker rule. the volcker rule was passed with the hope -- the help of chairman volcker that other nations would follow us, this will was ill-advised from start because proprietary trading is not responsible for the financial crisis. indeed, it was a source of probability. now it could have effect in making u.s. firms less competitive internationally. there is still time to dampen its potential effect, however, because finding papers house boundaries of the prohibition falls with the regulars. they can and should take a narrow approach to defining proprietary trading to preserve our competitiveness. but the derivatives world, there are major areas in which the u.s. proposals will be e.u. or the major competitor in this area. the differences include standards for membership in an ownership and control of clearing houses, the scope of the end-user exception, and possibly accounting standards. we should put aside for now the initiatives we're taking that are in conflict with the e.u. these areas can b

rule the volcker rule is being immediate in being implemented in the way that banks have already started cutting their prop this if they don't want to do it and they're worried about the money that's going to be lost as a result of those cuts well you know i think at the end of the day they may be worried but it's going to be hard to find some sympathy for american people i really do appreciate you for your time thank you so much that was a business insider reporter felt. all right now the casey anthony murder trial is going on as you would know if you turn on any sort of t.v. screen since that believe story on every single channel right there behind me and we don't see casey let's see there we go. casey anthony i guess there's nothing really important going on like i don't know a war in libya perhaps the congress today voted to the authorize the united states from fighting that conflict but first it's not going to do anything and no reason to cover the conflict even though people continue to die and all the mainstream media is snoozing when it comes to all this we are not r t is an ocea

we will begin with dhaka volcker rule. it passed with a hope other nations would follow us but none have. the rule is to start because proprietary trading is not responsible for the financial crisis indeed it was a source of profitability. now it could have the effect of making u.s. firms less competitive internationally. there is still time to dampen its potential effect, however because defining the precise boundaries of the provision regulators and they can and should take a narrow approach to defining proprietary trading to preserve our competitiveness. for the derivatives rules there are major areas in which the u.s. proposal from the proposals of the e.u. are the major competitors in this area. the differences include standards for membership in its commercial and control of clearinghouses, the scope of the user exception and possibly accounting standards. we should put aside for now the initiatives we are taking that are in conflict with the e.u.. these areas can be defined in concert with the e.u. and should be the

the volcker rule applies to banking entities. it would depend on the structure of a particular insurance company. >> before the august recess, the -- will hold an oversight hearing. i hope we have a representative on f stock, which would be helpful. with that, i yield back. >> thank you. i understand that is something that many of our members are concerned about with that position still and i know that the demonstration has put some ethical considerations out that -- bun of them was that they had not been involved in insurance operation. at this time, the first panel is discharged. we appreciate your testimony. the fact that the hearing was not a long hearing doesn't mean we have your testimony which will be of great value to us. we look forward to working with you in the coming months as we try implement dodd/frank. thank you. the company stands in recess until the votes are over. >> on today's "washington journal" a conversation on the role that unions will play in the 2012 elections. service employees international union presi

dodd-frank has the volcker rules, and exchanging swaps. it is collateral for trades.just a few examples. because of that, risk capital and jobs going overseas impairing our economy and competitiveness, the overreaching policies cut of 5 in dodd-frank incentivize other countries to do what we think they do. increase tactical revenue through strategic regulatory arbitrage. deregulations may be hard to measure but that is what they do. what is the cost of this regulation in the form of jobs and economic growth? with these address real problems and which ones had costs and this cost benefit analysis must be done now because the stakes are too high to get wrong. with that i yield back. >> putting a chart up i apologize it is a small chart but this is the 50 top financial firms, over on the right side in 2003 the u.s. was -- had 51% of the total capitalization. you move into 2006 it dropped to 35% of market capitalization and u.s. companies in 2010 moved to 24% market capital with china going from 1% in 2003 to 22% in 2010. you see a little bit of shrinking in the e.u. and

paul volcker, in 1979, we have high interest rates, and he said, "we have to save the dollar, and wehave to say the interest-rate." he was the one who was restrained, so his approach is different. criticizing the central banker is. they are trying to manage an unmanageable system, and the flaw is that they trust the system, and they are not capable of doing it. they just do not have the information. only the market knows what the interest rate should be. if you have somebody who is the elderly and trying to save money, the market rate of a cd should be maybe 6% or 7%. they get 1% or 2%, so they get cheated, so it is a very unfair system, no matter how well- intentioned they are, they cannot manage it, because it is a deeply flawed system. >> so should we go back to the gold standard? >> i do not use those words, but the constitution says about the tender, and that has not been repealed. much of what i had written a white the fiat, but -- i had written, like the fiat, i think it should be gradual, so i am not foreclosing the fed down as much of allow and competition, legalizing the co

>> paul volcker men would have said $2 trillion.here was no word about the implications of that for people's confidence. keynesian tend to look more at the short run. what is important is the political incentive. hayek worried about who is drawn to power and what happens to them once they get in power. the plans of politicians do not always and up at the economics department drawing board. they tend to respond to political incentives. hayek emphasize that. they will get the goods. >> let's watch some more. before we do that, how long is this video? >> if you include the credit, this is just over 10 minutes. >> some more music. >> ♪ but >> where did you do all of this? >> we filmed the entirety of jersey. this is just part of that. filmmaking is like a giant construction job. drew offered a nice big auditorium where we could stage the boxing scene. it had a chapel light feel of it. that is not the point of it. there was a classic environment or we could have our timeless congressional hearing. >> when did you do it? >> two long days

consists of former presidents and prime ministers coming from mexico greece brazil people like paul volcker former chairman of the federal reserve and george shultz ronald reagan's very own former secretary of state now the commission calls for a move away from criminalization and towards public health that's even something that we've heard president barack obama say in the past during his pretty presidency and recently well he's been the commander in chief. but i think there's an. entirely legitimate topic for debate i. am a strong believer that we have to think or. approach as a public health. but the thing is the obama administration has already dismissed this report so let's ask again what's with a flip flop and even a distinguished and high ranking panel like this can't make a dent and will anything earlier i caught up with an experienced host of young turks university i phones first told me to think about a few statistics the war on drugs has lasted forty years has cost one trillion dollars and i want to know if she could think of a better way that money could have been spent. absolut

reserve federal reserve chairman paul volcker and these guys are no shrinking by i mean they're the third screaming liberals and our way of current and former heads of state law from nations like mexico brazil and greece included a report that the global war on drugs is an ultimate is an utter failure and it's time to look into legalization commission paid particular attention to the u.s. war on drugs recommending that our nation may want to look at ways to treat addiction like you better health care and not like prison sentences its former colombian president sezer your arena. we hope the united states at least starts to think there are alternatives we don't enjoy seeing the us evolve in a way that is compatible with our country's long term interests so what is the result what is the rest of the world scene that we don't see in america when it comes to the war on drugs joining me now to talk more about this issue is shawn doug duncan a former d.a. analyst and now a speaker with the organization of law enforcement against prohibition shawn welcome and my apologies but i just mangled your

>> paul volcker men would have said $2 trillion.bout the implications of that for people's confidence. keynesian tend to look more at the short run. what is important is the political incentive. hayek worried about who is drawn to power and what happens to them once they get in power. the plans of politicians do not always and up at the economics department drawing board. they tend to respond to political incentives. hayek emphasize that. they will get the goods. >> let's watch some more. before we do that, how long is this video? >> if you include the credit, this is just over 10 minutes. >> some more music. >> ♪ ♪ we could have done better if we only spend more. too bad that only happens if there is a world war. do you deny we were cut short of the recession? >> you are jumping for joy. wars only destroyed. there was the multiplier. concession just rang. >> when that wars spending and dick, your friends try disaster. >> where did you do all of this? >> we filmed the entirety of this and video in madison, new jersey. this is just p

the first narrative best articulate i think by paul volcker, holds money market funds as the culpritpart of the shadow banking system. that's what that term is used. the other narrative articulated by paul stevens, president of the ici holds money market as victims. beginning with the subprime crisis and moving on to lehman brothers. and again, which inherited you hold, and there's some truth to both, on where you are, if you're narrative of the first and your first as paul volcker, let's turn these things if the bank obligations, issued by banks, that, of course, involves extraordinary extension of the federal safety net, deposit protection system, to cover practically $3 trillion of assets in money market funds, and that would be a substantial change from the way money market funds are currently managed. the second, they're simply a liquidity crisis created by an economic short-term markets that occurs once every generation or so, suggest the issue is liquidity. we need a way to inject liquidity into the markets that would provide liquidity to money market fund. the ici's suggestio

larry summers, and paul volcker, they have all left, and the team on the economy, and the only fellowd for the whole thing, geithner. >>shepard: still around. >> gerri, thank you, we are watching you at 5:00 eastern, an hour and 17 minutes from now on fox business network giving you the power to prosper and if you don't get the f business network, demand it. >> fox news is america's election headquarters the former minnesota give pawlenty bashing president obama's handling of the economy, and that was in the president's hometown of chicago where he lectured at the university of chicago law school. pawlenty argued the plan to combine lower tax rates with spending cuts is a better deal for america. and now is the plan of pawlenty substantially different from other republican presidential candidates? >> some of the tax cut packages are similar but he does ask for sunsetting of all federal regulations unless specifically preserved by congressional vote. and, check out this one, he says as president he would ask congress for the authority, emergency authority, to be able to freeze spending

. >> now that we have the volcker role we should be getting it to the that. >> we are already gearing towards it but it is already being gamed to death. we will see. >> i am a reporter with "huffington post." my question is -- when you talk to policy-makers in washington about the market concentration, you point to the top four or six. they say, well, it is not like it is in the u.k. or in switzerland. it is not that concentrated. double the size of the economy. i am curious to know why the current level of the new -- in the u.s. is dangerous. what is the counter of the argument that it is not as bad? >> not as bad is not my standard. we have had -- the u.s. economy has been the most innovative, has -- if you look at our history you have a distribution of financial institutions similar to the distribution of industrial companies. and you can meet the needs either at a local or national level. now we are concentrating it increasingly where the small business and the community has to have some way to deal with this very large institution because that is soon become their only choice. th

commission included former treasury secretary george schultz and former federal reserve chairman paul volckerhers. in pakistan, islamic militants from afghanistan battled pakistani security forces at a border checkpoint for aecond day. officials reported at least 63 people had been killed in the fighting. the class erupteowin t aclinn in kistan's upper dir district, just across from kunar province in afghanistan. police said 25 troops were killed, along with 35 militants and three civilians. fighting raged through the night in yemen's capital, sanaa. tribal militias and troops loyal president ali abdullah saleh traded artillery and gunfire, forcing the city's international airport to close for a time. 30 miles to the north, at amran, thousands of tribal fighters skirmished with saleh's forces, and waited for word to march on sanaa. there were new killings in central syria as heavy guns again blasted a town that's been a center of protests. activists said 15 more people were killed in rastan for a total of 58 in the last three days. the latest victims included a four-year-old girl. the killing

. >> the volcker pragmatist would say give them enough rope. we have another. >> thank you. perhaps the one recent college graduate in the room. [laughter] still bright guy and bushy tail i will play the generation card and i suppose a two-part question. current communication technologies used by cellphones and email m. blog post and twitter arguably enable us to have greater discourse and dialogue and ever before. so he quipped with these communication technologies, why have we not had the foreword moving conversations that you talk about, the dialogues that results and policies? and is my reading of this historical moment with particular new and unprecedented abilities? is that true? or have we seen the introduction of radio or television or the printing press? >> it is right. it is qualitative the different. three things come to mind immediately her have never met barack obama but yet i get an e-mail from him on a regular basis. [laughter] i suspect others do as well. he is communicating with us at some moments also with a it wider audience. [laughter] i don't know how mu

the national commission on the public service, commonly known as the volcker commission, has gathered some very illuminating statistics. they differ a bit from some of the statistics that the chairman has given you, but what they -- because he's using c.r.s. -- but what they show is the enormous increase in the number of positions that are now subject to senate confirmation and approval. when president kennedy came to office, he had just 286 positions to fill that had the titles of "secretary," "deputy secretary,," "under secretary," "snrants secretary"senate secred "administrator." there were only 286 when president kennedy assumed office. by the end of the clinton administration, there were 913 positions with those titles. and today, according to the congressional research service, there are between 1,200 and 1,400 positions in total that are appointed by the president that require the advice and consent of the senate. too often that large number of positions requiring confirmation leads to long delays in vetting, nominating and confirming these appointees. and i would also point ou

application of the volcker will have on the capital markets. these are important questions i am pleased we are to distinguish panels of witnesses with us today to answer them. i look forward to the discussion and we now recognize the ranking member. >> mr. chairman, how much time to have quick >> with 12 minutes on a side. >> and i will yield myself five. >> i appreciate -- ask her if that the testimony of mr. zubrow the wheel here later. i was pleased to hear him say in its first case, certainly the financial crisis post a response and u.s. regulatory system, particularly the dangers of unchecked labor and arbitrage. most of the reforms in the week of the financial crisis by market participants in the congress will improve the soundness of our system of allowing u.s. firms to allow competitive. i appreciate that because that's the framework in which we operate. within that framework there are several things you might do, first of all to make sure the capital is adequate. secondly, not that american institutions at a competitive disadvantage. t

compared to paul volcker, 1979, we have high inflation rates and he said we have to save the dollar. he took interest rates up to 20%. he was forced to restrain. his approach was different. i tried very hard, even in criticizing the various central bankers -- i criticize the system more than anything. they are trying to manage an unmanageable system. the flaw is that they trust in the system. they are not capable of doing anything. they just do not have the information. only the market knows what the interest rate should be. the banks benefit if someone is elderly and trying to save money. the market rate of the cd should be 6% or 7%. they get 1% or 2%. they get cheated. it is a very unfair system. no matter how well intended they are, they cannot manage it. it is a deeply flawed system. >> should we go back to the gold standard? >> i do not use those words. but the constitution says we can only use gold and silver as legal tender and that has not been repealed. much of what i have written about it -- i do not think we need it. but the transition should be more gradual. i am not fore

compared to paul volcker who in 1979, we had high inflation rates and he said we need to save the dollara straight up to 20%. he was one was forced to restrain. his approach was different, but i terps -- i try very hard even though and criticizing the very central bankers, but across the system more than anything, but they're trying to manage an unmanageable system and the flaw is that they trust the system. they are not capable. they just do not have the information. only the market as with the interest rates should be. make it 1% or 2% so they get cheated. it is a very unfair system. there is no way, no matter how well intended they are, and basically i am sure they are well intended, they cannot manage it. >> should be about to the gold standard? >> i do not use those words, the constitution says and it should -- it has not been repealed. much of what i have written about the fed, i do not think we need that, but i always say that the transition should be more gradual. i am not foreclosing the fed down as much as allowing competition and legalizing the competition in the currency. tha

the volcker rule -- it's important given the fact that a number of major investment banks have now becomeer at depository institutions. so i think again with the volcker rule, the tools are there to ensure deposits are not used for proprietary trading and another area where we need very vigorous and robust implementation. some have suggested separating out the investment banks. i don't see that getting traction here in the u.s. though i have suggested it's part of these resolution plans that the regulators will be requiring a very large financial organizations that perhaps part of those can show greater legal and financial autonomy between the investment bank and the commercial banks to reinforce the volcker restrictions. >> so with regard to dodd-frank, someone saying now there does seem to be so much political pushback. i might ask you a question about that in just a moment. does the debate about the lack of job creation and the status of the recovery have the potential to overtake implementation? >> well, there again, i would implore the media to really drill down. when people are just

federal reserve paul volcker and various former latin american presidents.iminalization marginalization and stigmatization of people that use drugs but do no harm to others and recommend governments experience with models of legalizing drugs to reduce the power and influence of drug cartels. >> they don't consider any more -- drugs a crime. they consider it is a problem of the health system. opened the health system to people so people can go and try to find the solutions to the problem. >> reporter: a spokesman for hazelton that operates treatment centers for drug and alcohol addictions agrees the war on drugs has been a pailure. and applauds the roar's conclusion for treating drug use as a health issue. the group strongly opposes legalizing drugs. >> if i can speak professionally has somebody that works for the hazelton foundation but i also know in my personal life whatever the drug of choice is, when you put that into the mind and into the body of an addict or alcoholic like me, they lose the power of making the right choices. >> reporter: the white hous

distinguished former presidents from brazil, mexico, the european union, switzerland -- even paul volckerame out with a report that was devastating in u.s. and global drug control policies. they say that the reliance on criminal justice institutions devon's -- developed into an enormous disaster, empowering criminals, spreading disease and addiction rather than impeding it. they called for a paradigm shift. saying that people that used drugs without hurting anyone else should be left alone and that we need new law enforcement strategies that focuses on reducing the power and intimidation rather than drug markets. quite importantly they said that there must be support for experiments in legally regulating drugs, especially marijuana. but even with others, they said. let's try to find intelligent ways to regulate these drugs so that we can reduce the harm of drug coalition and drug abuse. host: what evidence is there from the results that these people wanted to see? guest: the first is the obvious failure of the current approach. when you see the amount of drug abuse around the world, susta

paul volcker and a bunch of other wise men. it has not happened. on the to keep problem strictly relevant to the effect that they can have on promoting financial stability, mainly global payments imbalances, we are still a long way away from where we need to be. the problem is not an alphabet soup of financial regulation. if this that the international soup we have a suit then to make a meal. this is where we are. >> let me ask a couple of clarifying questions. first of all, you hear at the wayne -- echoing that there is a resistance to some of the capital requirements that are considered essential. on an international basis, the results of been disappointing. does this provide a further incentive to the united states going it alone to strengthen its own financial regulation? our regulators more likely to keep american financial institutions? >> the short answer has to be yes. if they have activities in the u.s., they are competing with u.s. banks. vinnie get a competitive distortion. how serious is this? how much of a concerned should it be to u.s

distinguished former presidents from brazil, mexico, the european union, switzerland -- even paul volckerchard branson, many others, they came out with a report that was devastating in u.s. and global drug control policies. they say that the reliance on criminal justice institutions devon's -- developed into an enormous disaster, empowering criminals, spreading disease and addiction rather than impeding it. they called for a paradigm shift. saying that people that used drugs without hurting anyone else should be left alone and that we need new law enforcement strategies that focuses on reducing the power and intimidation rather than drug markets. quite importantly they said that there must be support for experiments in legally regulating drugs, especially marijuana. but even with others, they said. let's try to find intelligent ways to regulate these drugs so that we can reduce the harm of drug coalition and drug abuse. host: what evidence is there from the results that these people wanted to see? guest: the first is the obvious failure of the current approach. when you see the amount of

thwe had high inflation and rats with paul volcker. he was one that was forced to restrain.erent. i try very hard -- i criticize the system more than anything. they have a more manageable system. the flaw is that they trust the system. they are not capable of doing it. only the market knows what the interest rate should be. the banks benefit in trying to save the money. the market rate of a cd should be 7%. it is 1 or 2%. they get cheated. it is a very unfair system. no matter how well attended they are, they cannot manage it. >> should we go back to the gold standard? >> i do not use those words. much of what i have written about, i do not think we need it. the transition should be more gradual. i am not for closing the fed down as much as allow one competition, legalizing the competition and the currencies. to allow people to use gold and silver. i think there will be a currency in place. there were flaws in the gold standard in the 19th century. we can learn from it. i was like to go to a commodity standard going forward. >> how many books have you written? >> it depends

secretary kofi annan, ronald reagan secretary of state george shultz, and paul volcker, said that the drug war was a failure. that it needed to be readdressed with new priorities and suggested this country get out of the federal marijuana possession business. it is for that reason and others that i'll be joining today with congresspeople ron paul, john conyers, barney frank, jared polis, and others to introduce a bill to get the federal government out of possession of marijuana and into interstate and international shipments of marijuana and allowing states to decide like alcohol how they should deal with it. better they should deal with it as a health policy and not a criminal policy and not stigmatizing young people for life that might deny employment and taking police officers away from haven't crimes. i yield back the balance of my time. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman yields back the balance of his time. for what purpose does the gentlelady from california rise? without objection, the gentlelady is recognized for one minute. ms. sanchez: thank you, mr. speaker. mr. speaker

go beyond the volcker rule? do you want to go to narrow banking? do you want to go to your former boss' mantra about self-regulation. you need to offer us what it is that is behind your conception of less complexity. >> yeah. self-regulation works as long as you don't pair that with too big to fail, by the way, morris. and so i think the answer is i would point you to the testimony i gave for chairman dodd, before dodd-frank, and argued among other things that you needed consolidation of supervisory agencies so you wouldn't get that sort of regulatory arbitrage. you need better accounting rules that don't allow basically the splintering of balance sheets. since harry potter is back in the news for the three people who get the line, it's sivs that allow you to sprinter your soul. so consolidation of regulators, simplification of charter of accounting consoles and simplification of tax treatment go a long way but if you're going to consolidate i would have an office of financial research who have to report regularly on opportunities for market utilit

distinguished former presidents from brazil, mexico, the european union, switzerland -- even paul volcker, richard branson, many others, they came out with a report that was devastating in u.s. and global drug control policies. they say that the reliance on criminal justice institutions devon's -- developed into an enormous disaster, empowering criminals, spreading disease and addiction rather than impeding it. they called for a paradigm shift. saying that people that used drugs without hurting anyone else should be left alone and that we need new law enforcement strategies that focuses on reducing the power and intimidation rather than drug markets. quite importantly they said that there must be support for experiments in legally regulating drugs, especially marijuana. but even with others, they said. let's try to find intelligent ways to regulate these drugs so that we can reduce the harm of drug coalition and drug abuse. host: what evidence is there from the results that these people wanted to see? guest: the first is the obvious failure of the current approach. when you see the amount

the volcker rule strengthens prohibitions on uninsured banks and holding companies as well which is important companies in a larger depository institutions. so again covers tools are there to make sure insured deposit are not used for proprietary trading in another area where we need to very robust implementation. suggested to go further and separate out investment banks and commercial banks they don't getting traction here in the u.s. though i have suggested as part of these resolution plans at the regulators will be requiring a large financial organization not perhaps part of those shows greater legal and financial autonomy between the investment banking commercial banks to reinforce broker restrictions. >> with regard to dodd-frank, there does seem to be so much political pushback and it might ask you a question about that specifically a moment. as the debate about the lack of job creation and study says the recovery have potential to overtake implementation? >> there again, i would implore the media to really drill down when people are just starting to blame financial regulators for a bro