could face senate vote next week. jill dougherty is joining us live. john, into the lion s den, he s going up to new york, as he did two years ago, carrying that message about now, financial reform. it s a very important priority for the president. and some of the points that the white house says the president is going to make are that the bill draws from bipartisan ideas. that s important. he wants, of course, republican support. he ll also urge wall street to join him in reform, not fight it. and then finally, he ll push foss the passage of a bill, the white house says, that protects consumers ends too big to fail and brings transparency to those derivatives markets that are a very complex financial instruments. they also released a quote from the president s speech that will be coming up in a couple of hours. i believe in the power of the free market. i believe in a strong financial sector that helps people to raise capital and get loans and
great to have you here. great to be her. what is ocean acidification? americans love our oceans. we love our sport and sea life. a large part of our economy comes from oceans. one of the things scientists have realized as we ve increasingly used fossil fuels is that the impact on the oceans which we didn t know about is is that the carbon dioxide mixing with seawater forms carbonic as acid. so the ocean is 30% nor acidic than at the start of the industrial revolution. unless we curb carbon emissions which congress is enacting a bill, hopefully, to curb carbon emissions, if we don t do that, within another 50 years, some of our most precious sea life, you know, the whole chain of life that makes shells will be unable to make those shells. it will be 30% even more acidic than it is now.
economy. but billions and billions of dollars were bet, and in the end, the people who lost the bet didn t have the capital to pay it off. and the taxpayer became the banker of last resort. this bill would put those bets on the public eye. they would be transparent. they would have to be backed by capital. they couldn t you couldn t find out at the end, for example, aig was $80 billion short on september 16th, 2008. right. what would be prevented. so my view is, the most important part of this bill is stopping the betting transactions that had nothing to do with the real chi. and taking them off the table. okay. i want to ask jill, do you agree? you you used to trade derivatives right, back in the day? yeah, my first job on wall street. i think the derivative market is important.
michael, i want to break down into the three main pieces of the legislation right now that are perhaps controversial and things that both sides are going to go back and forth on. one is the regulation of derivatives. these complex instruments. and the as christine says, call them bets on the future of assets. also the place to unwind to markets. the bad financial institutions without taking everybody down. sort of the too big to fail notion. and also a consumer protection bureau. so when we take a look at those things, michael, would this bill have stopped the collapse we saw in 2008? i definitely believe it would have stopped the collapse in 2008. you ve highlighted the three parts that are the focus of the bill. but right now, the battleground is over derivatives. and as you mentioned in an earlier segment, the goldman sachs which was essentially telling bets on whether the housing market would go up, whether it would go down, had nothing to do with the real
what we re talking about is, derivatives in this light really don t have any social utility. in other words, there s no usefulness in our society in the capital structure. they really are just bets as opposed to, let s say, you re buying oil futures because you re in airline and you need to hedge your exposure to rises or falls in the price of gas, right? so that s different. the concern i have about this bill is it still does not deal with this too big to fail notion. what they ve done is say, okay, you know what too big to fail is? it s where we are right now. that doesn t seem reasonable. these companies sorry big and so interconnected even if we see what they re doing on variation exchanges, it doesn t mean we can t have a bubble. even though we re finding some way to wind them down, why are you letting them get so big in the first place? and i fear that s something that will plague the system. you feel the too big to fail asset doesn t go that far, jill? absolutely. in my fear