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 completely flipped. And today the largest banks get about a 2530 basis point advantage. And there are a number of reasons for that. But the data suggests that too big to fail has not ended. Touch on a couple of pipes that you made. One was with respect to enforcement and prosecution in the role that could play in the aftermath of the crisis. I worry about the the muddling of actual fraudulent culpable action with bad Business Decisions. I dont think we want to be a nation that prosecuted bad Business Decisions and i think a plausible explanation of the crisis is people believe ben bernanke when he said there is no housing crisis. A lot of disclosures prosecuted as fraudulent in Mortgage Backed security deals have involved disclosures that ben bernanke was saying so i have trouble seeing this was a crisis perpetrated with fraud. And of course there is instances of fraud, certainly we should prosecute it. But i think with respect to the enforcement issue another problem is we dont have enough clear doctrine followed by s. E. C. And d. O. J. In charging decisions on collective se emter. And when it goes to trial and when you develop case law, there is a good doctrine that we should do more work on. The idea is when do you attribute bad action by individuals to the corporation. When the board and the ceo decide to do something bad, it is the corporations fault. When some distant employee in a division overseas does something wrong that is not necessarily Corporate Action and so i think the s. E. C. Should do an interpretative lease and that would resolve the bad actor exemption debates going on right now. Let me pick up on j. W. s point. When former chairman bernanke said there was no housing crisis when the housing crisis was already started that was an incredible mistake but not a crime. Right. I had a question here but then a gentleman over here. Wait for the microphone, please. Hi. Rath boya. Thank you for this fascinating panel discussion. I understand this is quite complex given the number of too big to fail banks and regulation and a number of agencies with power and a number of Financial Products. My question to you is if you look at all of the advanced countries, which advanced country do you think has come up with reasonable regulations that encourage Economic Growth in light of Financial Products but at the same time have reasonable tools and measures in place to prevent the financial crisis are effectively manage a financial crisis where you would be like i think this is good enough that would satisfy you. Anybody want to take that. A look around the world, who has done the good job. Ill start with the qualification, nobody anybody lives up to my standard i think canada and switzerland do a well job with banking regulation. Other thoughts . I would tend to agree with mark on switzerland, especially because of the Capital Requirements they impose on the Banking System. And i also think that since the peso crisis in the 90s in mexico that the mexican Central Banks and security have taken significant steps to shore up the integrity of the Financial System and to make sure that system is not susceptible to massive downward price movements in oil. Peter . I would like to make a comment about the Housing Systems that others have used too. Because we want to keep the focus on what caused the financial crisis here in the United States and it was not the inadequacy of regulation of the private sector. It was the policies of the u. S. Government. For example, many other countries had large bubbles as we did in housing. And when those bubbles collapsed, as we know in the United States, the results were catastrophic because there was so many subprime and other very risky loans in our Housing Finance system as i pointed out, more than a majority, it was actually 56 of all of the loans in the Housing Market were subprime or risky loans. But in other countries that was not true. And so when their Residential Mortgage bubbles collapsed their losses were much smaller. A study by professor javy from berkeley shows the greatest losses occurred in the u. K. And were about 3 or 4 and the United States the losses for fannie and freddie were 13 to 17 and for some of the private institutions were even higher than that. So thats the point we have to keep focused on here is that there wasnt really a need to redo our entire regulatory system here. It was a need to redo our Housing Finance system and understand what went wrong with that. Id like to add, because chris got me thinking about this, the example of mexico is a fascinating one, in that postpeso crisis, mexico went from 15 provided by foreign banks to 80 or so today. You could joke a little bit and say the mexican Banking System is the canadian Banking System with the extension of Nova Scotia Bank and others there and it was pushed because the domestic banks failed to badly you wouldnt have Banking Services unless you opened up the borders and you had extensive competition and domestic constituencies feel less strongly about bailing out foreign banks so i think scotia bank will not be bailed out. And i say this because many of the discussions about Financial Regulation and trade and what were seeing really is a kind of pulling up of the draw bridge where we dont want european banks here and you view the top from the fed about the dangerous from european banks entering the u. S. And such. I think we should have more foreign competition on u. S. Banks is my bottom line there. Thank you. Thanks for the question which stimulated the panel. Well take a question here and this will be our last question for the panel . No . Anybody . Okay. Were going to wrap up the panel. And lets show our appreciation for their excellent comments. [ applause ] well, peter, thank you for your very very kind words. I believed about half of them. Im told cspan is filming this live. If so, i think my wife and children with watching back in dallas and they probably believed even fewer of them. But nonetheless, thank you for those very kind words. We know that those on the left have been known to occasionally travel into factfree zones. And for them occasionally story telling has replaced truthtelling but not with my dear friend peter wallisson. His work on the true causes of the financial meltdown is really a paradigm of scholarship, if you have not read his work, hidden in plain sight, i highly recommend it. And it is required reading to be a member of the House Financial Services committee. We need more of this Solid Research done. And so peter thank you for everything you do and helping us on the Financial Services committee so much. Im sorry in a Arthur Brooks could not be here today. Im a huge fan of his. I love the title of his new book and i was very happy to find a copy on my desk, the conservative heart. I assume it was designed to be intentionally ironic since conservatives have no heart and liberals have no brains. So should that be true there might be very little arthur can do to help those on the other side of the political spectrum but there is much that he has done to change the misperception of conservatives or create or restore a conservative language that speaks to the heart and not just the head. As we all know, the founders were deeply conservative and yet they spoke a powerful language of personal worth and happiness. It sparked a revolution of equal rights and liberty under the law that is still transforming the world today. Because it is the conservative movement that lays down the foundation for meaningful work and family and community and faith. The institutions that make it possible for every human being to pursue their godgiven right to happiness. Now im told this is authors 11th book, clearly im not keeping up. He is writing them much faster than i can read them but nonetheless there is the august district work period coming which is traditionally when i catch up on my reading. I look forward to catching up on his latest work at that time. Again thank you for inviting me to aei. I have been long an admirer of the work done here and for your noble purpose. Ive already thanked peter, but also scholars like alex pollack who is here. Paul coupy ac, a frequent contributor to the efforts of the majority in the House Financial Services committee and their works are very very admired. And although wearing a different brand, mr. Clay burn, welcome to you as well. Ladies and gentlemen regrettably something is changing in america and not changing for the good. The animal spirits of Free Enterprise and entrepreneurial dream chasing that have identified us as a people are regrettably being tamed. This corresponds not only to the challenging Economic Times that we continue to see but through the perceptible loss of freedom in america today. My remarks are focused today on the unhappy results of the doddfrank act, the socalled wall street reform and Consumer Protection act which was signed into law five years ago today. No need to be the first one in your neighborhood to throw a celebration. Weighing in at over 2300 pages promulgating 400 new administrative rules it represents simply the most dramatic sweeping rewrite of our financial laws since the new deal. At the time, the proponents including the president promised it would lift our economy in too big to fail and promote Financial Stability yet five years later the evidence continues to mount that our society is now less stable, less prosperous and less free. The financial panic of 2008 clearly caused much anger against Financial Firms and the bailouts courtesy of the taxpayer that they received. The liberal story has been an al kehmy of wall street greed outsides risk and massive washington deregulation almost blew up the planet. This in the liberal narrative insisting on enormous bailouts and Capital Markets by federal regulators courtesy of doddfrank. Although faults, the narrative has permeated the body politic. Im reminded of churchills remark history will be kind to me for i intend to write it. To our detriment we have allowed the left to write the first history of the 2008 financial panic. Thankfully peter has written the definitive history of the 2008 financial panic. Other scholars at aei and other good committed conservatives have followed as well. It is clear now that the financial crisis did not result from deregulation but instead resulted from dumb regulation. In fact, statistically total regulatory restrictions on the Financial Services grew every single year in the decade leading up to the financial crisis. Including such landmark laws that were held for stopping abuses sarbane oxley, just to name a few. But washington failed to prevent the financial crisis, in many ways, it led us into it. Washington promoted bad loans supported by fannie mae and freddie mac to meet the Affordable Housing goals which were put on steroids. Lets remember that more than 70 of the subprime in alt a mortgages that led to the crisis. We break away to take you live to the Justice Department and a news briefing with loretta lynch. Were here today to announce that a federal grand jury in South Carolina has returned a 33 count indictment against dylann roff charging him with federal hate crimes and firearms charges for killing and attempting to kill africanamerican parishioners at Emanual Church in charleston, South Carolina because of their race and in order to interfere with their exercise of their religion. As set forth in the indictment, several months prior to the tragic events of june 17th roof conceived of his goal of racial tensions and seeking retribution for perceived wrongs he believed africanamericans had committed against white people. To carry out these twin goals of fanning racial flames and exacting revenge, roof further decided to seek out and murder africanamericans because of their race. An essential element of his plan, however, was to find his victims inside of a church. Specifically an africanamerican church, to ensure the greatest notoriety and attention to his actions. As alleged roof set out the evening of june 17, 2015, to carry out this plan. And drove to the church in charles ton, South Carolina another as mother emmanuel it was his destination specifically because it was a historically africanamerican church of significance to the people of charleston of South Carolina, and to the nation. On that summer evening, dylann roff found his targets. Africanamericans engaged in worship. He met with welcome by ministers and he joined them in the bible study group. The parishioners had bibles, dylann roff had his. 45caliber glock pistol and eight magazine loaded with hollow point bullets and as set forth in the indictment, while they were engaged in religious worship and bible study, dylann roff drew his pistol and opened fire on them ultimately killing nine church members. Now as you know, the state of South Carolina is also prosecuting roof for the murders, attempted murders and firearms offenses hes believed to have committed. We commend them for their quick response. But it is important to know that South Carolina does not have a hate crimes statute and as a result the state charges do not reflect the alleged hate crimes offenses presented in the federal indictment returned today. Specifically, the federal indictment returned today charges roof with nine murders and three attempted murders under the Matthew Shepherd and james bird hate crimes prevention act. This federal hate crimes law prohibits using a dangerous weapon to cause Bodily Injury or attempting to do so on the basis of race or color. The shepherdbird act was enacted specifically to vindicate the unique harms caused by racially motivated violence. Roof is charged with nine murders and three attempted murders under a second federal hate crimes statue that prohibits the use or threat of force to obstruct any persons free exercise of religious beliefs. Finally, roof has been federally charged with multiple counts of using a firearm in the commission of these racially motivated murders and attempted murders. For these crimes roof faces faced penalties up to life imprisonment or the Death Penalty. I note no decision has been made on whether to seek the Death Penalty in this case. The department will follow the usual protocol to thoroughly consider all of the factual issues relevant to that decision which will involve counsel for the defendant roof. In addition consultation with the victims families is an important and vital part of the decisionmaking prose and no decision will be made prior to conferring with them. The family members of those killed an the survivors were informed of these federal charges earlier today. I would also note that this indictment contained allegations. It is not evidence of the defendants guilt. Now as you will recall, this federal grand jury indictment follows an announcement that i made on june 18th of 2015, that the department of justice was conducting a hate Crimes Investigation into the shooting at e manuel ame. Immediately following that, the experienced prosecutors in South Carolina along with experienced attorneys from our Civil Rights Division began working closely with the fbi, atf state and local Law Enforcement officials including the South CarolinaLaw Enforcement division or sled, the Charleston Police and the Solicitors Office for the ninth circuit of South Carolina in thoroughly investigating the crimes. I would like to thank the many state an