I am not a supporter of the eminent domain proposals that exist.

I find that baffling.

I want to publicly state my appreciation for Senator Casey and the terrific working relationship that he and I have.

We are fully committed to continue to work with this Committee to ensure that the remaining vacancies are filled.

He is universally acknowledged as very, very well qualified, and I am very confident that he will be an outstanding judge.

I think we should not overlook that risk that taxpayers bear.

But there could be other differences that might explain part of that as well.

I do believe that this political mandate to expand mortgage lending to people, including some who were not able to pay back those mortgages, was absolutely at the heart of the financial crisis that we just went through.

That is, with respect to this idea that some municipalities have floated that they will, under the justification that they give citing eminent domain, they are threatening to confiscate certain private-label mortgages from investors.

Or it might be maintained but at a higher rate.

If you have a Government guarantee, it is necessarily a political process to define the terms under which one has access to that guarantee.

I am concerned that the operational challenges and potential remaining tax consequences of this would create a huge disincentive for firms, for institutions to use this very valuable tool, and I hope you will keep that in mind as you…