Elizabeth Warren

What is the metric for success?

I have a feeling I am going to hear the same answer, but let me just try it again with second liens.

What I am hearing you say is, no reason to change anything. We will stay steady on the same course.

You set aside $50 billion and what do you have to show for it?

We must also evaluate whether Treasury has diligently measured the impact of its efforts, using credible metrics to measure the success or the failure of its programs.

I have been calling for this for a while--is the creation of a homeowners advocate within the Treasury.

Is that a successful program?

The question is HAMP is designed to deal with families facing foreclosure.

Do you have any concerns about what this means? Now we are doing commercial real estate. Now we are moving on to second mortgages?

The American taxpayer ended up in the insurance business here.

Okay, so where do you anticipate between this optimistic view of AIG repaying the American taxpayer in full, and the position where we are today, which is they can't pay the dividends owed.

Well I'm hearing so much optimistic news I--

But--since I see you wince and hesitate on the second number, that is you feel confident about the $83 billion repayment, a little less confident about the $49 billion.

You treat the guarantee from the American taxpayers as if it costs nothing.

That's why I asked a time question.

So government help--you had to evaluate it, evaluate what its impact was going to be.

So I just want to ask you. Now is this only for the financial--for the thrift, not for the larger----

What is the value of the guarantee that the American taxpayer put into this?

I'm not sure I'm comfortable with, as a citizen, with the Federal Reserve using that power to pick and choose winners.

I understand all this.

So let me just get started here, I want to walk through this. I'm hearing you say that it is very likely that the American taxpayer will be repaid in full from AIG?

So the reason we asked this panel to come is that we wanted to probe that claim.

Right. Now you say in your written testimony, I've gone through your written testimony, you talk about not having the regulatory tools that you needed during this time period, is that right?

I want to make clear that I strongly support what I understand is one of the main goals of this panel: increasing the transparency and the public's understanding of the TARP.

I just want to make sure I'm following the timeline here.