There was no reason to develop a business model that put tricks and traps in back and you pretended to compete on things that were not real.

What I have suggested is an agency that offers plain vanilla products that provide a safe harbor on regulation.

I think it is time for change. We need someone in Washington who cares primarily about families, who cares about consumers.

If one offered a very gentle stress test and the consequence were that the stock market responded positively to the good news that emerged from that, surely you wouldn't say that that changed any underlying reality.

the consumer credit market is broken.

Well, my view is, if you cannot explain it, then you probably should not sell it to customers. I think that is destructive.

It is essential that this new agency have real power, that they have flexible rulemaking authority, that it be adequately funded, not subject to the starvation by Congress, and that it have real enforcement authority.

I strongly support the concept of an independent agency that concentrates solely on consumer financial services issues.

The point, Congressman, as I see it, is that it is all about disclosing them.

I think that is extremely destructive.

In order to be more transparent, in order to have greater accountability for these banks, why not run the stress tests again under more difficult circumstances?