Continuing resolution, defund the federal government, for 45 days in early on the brink, and no later tonight tonight hello this is fox news live and i am eric shawn. Arthel hi and i am building a are considering, could mean ditching money for Border Security in ukraine, minority leader, and theres Hakeem Jeffries there getting a standing ovation, from his supporters there on his side of the aisle, meanwhile, there is drama within the republican race, net gates will he is hinted that he would Kevin Mccarthy, has House Speaker if the government shuts down congressional correspondent, is live on capitol hill, with the latest and aisha and mccarthy seems to say, bring it. Reporter hey good afternoon to you, this pretty much what he said, when he was asked if, what would happen if mask gates are some of the else file the motion to vacate anys absolutely not worried about it and he said bring it on and meanwhile what is happening right now, with that i would have if it ever even having this
Their own studies show the main drivers of default are loan devalue, borrower credit score. Everything else is literally a rounding error. And so of course, the final doddfrank rules essentially abandon the things that actually drive default. And endless servicing requirements, again making it near impossible to foreclose. My opinion is the rule increased foreclosures last time around rather than decrease them. And the harder it is and the mission has nothing to do with financial stability. The mission is to use the the regulatory system to force prudent borrows to subsidize imprudent. We all knew the crisis was quite costly. It also will provide a cover for massive expansion and government powers. One minute. Im not even go i think to need that. So i would say and would say avoid financial cryises. I think a repeal is not enough. The presystem was broken. It was flawed. And to me one of the real flaws of doddfrank is it extends the precrisis system. The theme of doddfrank is, lets exp
Minerals for firms not only firms getting the actual hard commodities there, but also for firms well down the supply chain, who have no idea where the aluminum in the electronic parts came from. So i think its telling when a liberal law ultimately convinces the Washington Post Editorial Board that it was a bad idea, which they have come out against conflict minerals. Its time to revisit the motion all together of including immaterial disclosures in security laws. Both by legislative fiat and by the sccs own power. And republican and democratic chairmen have both been guilty of this. I think it should be a binding constraint on any rule making. And business round table stands for the proposition. How is a mandatory immaterial disclosure going to provide benefit to investors . None. By definition fails cost benefit analysis. We have ways to measure immateriality. Methodology that has gotten great in the last ten years. I think it should be a binding constraint, the same way for litigants
Can be accomplished [ inaudible ]. Why dont you go ahead and take it. So let me first say, i think you touch upon an important observation about too big to fail which so much relies on the discretionary decisions of government and government decision makers, whether it is the d. O. J. Or the s. E. C. There is nothing about too big to fail economists. It is by political decisions and of course when eric holder goes before congress and said that somebody is too big to jail, that reinforces that perception. And on the data point, so again i would start with data can be suggestive as best and during the crisis we saw suggestive data that the funding advantage for the largest institutions had expanded and yes that has contracted but in my opinion you would expect that to contract post crisis. I think you could compare the funding cost today versus precrisis over time. People forget before the crisis, say in 2006, the largest banks paid more to borrow than the smallest banks. It was complete
Pursuant to the order of the house of january 7, 2014, the chair will now recognize members from lists submitted by the majority and minority leaders for morning hour debate. The chair will alternate recognition between the parties with each party limited to one hour and each member other than the majority and minority leaders and the minority whip limited to five minutes, but in no event shall debate continue beyond 11 50 a. M. The chair recognizes the gentlewoman from florida, ms. Roslehtinen, for five minutes. Ms. Roslehtinen thank you, mr. Speaker. I rise today to strongly oppose the december 17 announcement by president obama on policy changes toward the cuban communist regime. The cuban regime from day one was planning on using alan gross as a pawn to receive concessions from the Obama Administration and their strategy worked. In april, 2013 when asked about a possible swap for mr. Gross secretary kerry testified before congress that, quote, we have refused to do that because the