Richard Shelby

The Federal Reserve has provided assistance to several large financial entities, according to their words, 'in order to ensure financial market stability.'

The economic and financial climate has deteriorated significantly since our last monetary policy hearing in July of 2008.

Regulators also need to make sure that they do not stifle innovation or unduly restrict consumer choice.

Limiting the ability of consumers of low and moderate means to obtain credit could have unfortunate consequences.

While I believe that there are many credit card practices that need reforming, I also believe that regulators need to be especially careful in this time of financial stress not to take actions that unduly restrict the availability of…

I hope you will not, once you flesh out your concept, it will be a TARP II or something like it. If it is, you are headed down the wrong road again.

Would you as the Secretary furnish this committee a detailed report of all the debt, where it is, the exposures, the guarantees and so forth, so we know what road we are traveling down?

You are not telling us there is no risk to the taxpayer here.

Do you believe, as Secretary of the Treasury, unlike the TARP deal, that the American people need to know, should know the truth of the debt, where this money is being spent, and the risk to the future of this whole economy and the debt…

I do. And I believe, and Senator Dodd knows, in this committee, we are going to have to restructure our regulatory system.

This might be important or something like this, but that straightening out the banking system, bringing trust, making loans to the communities, I mean the people in the communities, was 1,000 times more important than this stimulus package.

How do we restart the securitization of markets, which you think is so important to our financial--how do we bring thrust back to that, because securitization worked so well until it was abused and misused.

Is this plan conceptually a 180-degree turn from the Paulson plan, or is it kind of the 'son of Paulson'.

What elements of the Geithner plan can be implemented immediately.

I think cost is important here.

I see the conceptual idea, but I don't see the details yet.

I hope you are smarter than that.

The financial system remains badly damaged, and the economy has deteriorated sharply as it has become clear that TARP is not the magic bullet its supporters, Mr. Secretary, claimed it would be.

TARP has been marred by lack of initial planning and ad hoc implementation and a flawed premise.

The program has failed, Mr. Secretary, to mend our ailing financial system, despite having spent nearly $350 billion in taxpayers' money.

Is this plan, conceptually, a 180-degree turn from the Paulson plan? Or is it kind of the son of Paulson?

Is this plan conceptually 180-degree turn from the Paulson plan? Or is it kind of the son of Paulson?

We should not keep banks operating that are insolvent.

I don't believe that the Congress should try to fool the American people.

I think that the TARP program was induced by panic.