If you have a loan that is made or guaranteed by the Federal Government through a vehicle like the Ex-Im Bank or more directly, and you have two loans, identical in all terms, but in one case the borrower was a large multinational AAA…

And failure to do so would absolutely mislead about the nature of those risks.

So if you use that methodology for different borrowers, is it fair to say that that methodology fails to capture the different credit quality of different borrowers?

There is a systematic risk that we are underestimating the risks of the assets that we are claiming.

I think CBO's hands are tied, is my understanding, into a methodology that does not sufficiently take into account the different range of credit risks that we take as a government.

I think everybody on this committee is painfully aware of this problem.

It would take a significant step, I think, in the direction of diminishing the risk of diversion.

I really, frankly, cannot think of too many higher priorities for this committee in the near term.

The administration has consistently urged Congress to pass legislation that would give Medicare the same authority that Medicaid already has.

I helped to start a small bank in the Lehigh Valley of Pennsylvania and the western part of New Jersey with the goal of lending to small businesses and local residents.

Unfortunately, new regulations are straining the business of continuing to bank rural customers.

Congress and the President attempted to deal with threats to our financial system, threats that were posed by a handful of the largest institutions in the world in 2010 through Dodd-Frank.