And so, as that is what we are going to urge you to do and with all of our energies we are going to keep on this case. We simply cannot spend years negotiating treaties, the treaty partner pokes holes in them. Allow the courts in switzerland to interpret their value away or minimize their value, to watch people we go after the provided the kind of immunity we have provided to them without insisting that we get the names from the banks we are providing amnesty to. All about the names, not about the hints. It is not about the Treasure Hunt. It is the Treasure Hunt. The treasure is the money that belongs to the u. S. Government. I use the word Treasure Hunt in two ways. One way, it is what we cant do, be diverted to a hunt with clues. In some sense it is a Treasure Hunt and if we win the treasure that is owed to uncle sam we are going to need a very Aggressive Department of justice and irs. We thank you both, thank you for your service, your work for our government. We urge you on with greater strength and we would ask you to keep informed of the ways the we requested. Thank you for this hearing, thank you for your thoughts. We share your goals and your frustration and tried to build a pretty good hand which hopefully will show, thank you. [inaudible conversations] [inaudible conversations] clean up their act in the future. We have tax evasion which has gone up. We have to go after the tax debaters. We should have swiss cooperation to do that. Will link to turn over the names except its government wont. Shame on the government that wont let the banks turnover. You are going to retire soon. Is this your legacy . No. We are going to hold another one on the other side. There will be more periods. Not necessary in this subject. There will be other hearings, tax avoidance. You think u. S. Bank regulators should revoke the charter of these banks . Independently what it would be a question for the department of justice. Not independent connection or cooperation with the department of justice. The law is pretty clear. You want to operate in the United States you have to abide by our rules. Operating in switzerland we should abide by swiss rules. What about the ubs . We got some results. Ubs model that we want the Justice Department to follow here, it is all models that involves using our tools, tools of grand juries, using salmons and subpoenas and indictments that then produces the results. Otherwise it is just negotiation year after year after year which you see finally an outcome which does not produce what you need to go after the tax evaders which is their names. In the Swiss Parliament passing a law, it says you have to prove Something Else unilaterally. You have to prove that the bank that you think has the names of the tax evaders you have to prove that they have substantial participation in some wrongdoing, no way to shows that unless you have the names of tax evaders who they are aiding and abetting. A chicken and egg problem the Swiss Parliament law has put us in. Was anything said to you that convinced you they would be more aggressive in pursuing . Tasted didnt say anything that convinces me. Have they done anything recently . This hearing may be helpful. What do you take away from the hearing . Very much worthwhile. You think theyre more aggressive . They are going to i think they will feel something for this hearing. I hope they do, they will. Not just for me but my colleagues and feelings that heat will make a more aggressive in terms of the use of our laws to go after people who violated our laws. I cant say is they said a lot which will persuade people reading it, but i think people who get the feel of this hearing somehow or other, folks like you will realize this is not something they want to go through every week. You deliver your message . Oh yes. 5 00 in the afternoon. Is president met with joe biden yesterday and discussed that and said that joe biden agrees with him that it should be treated as Something Else and they should move forward. Looks like it shouldnt be. For two reasons. You want to collect taxes the worlds tax evasion and tax avoidance are worldwide issues, they are high up on their agenda. This is an issue whether or not governments are going to have resources for the people. There is a fairness issue too. For people to be able to get away with tax evasion while other people are paying taxes is wrong and undermines confidence in the system and also you have to have accountability if you are going to have future compliance and people see year after year nothing happening. There has been letters, target letters that stemmed three years ago and nothing happened. If people start sensing that, a lot of folks out there are going to think the heat is off and i can get away with stockings my fund, not at Credit Suisse any more, they told us this morning that is not true but other banks, there are other banks in other places in switzerland, believe me that are more than happy to take the money from tax evaders and keep it hidden. This is injustice was problem. Switzerland has a lot of major banks and a lot of money from outside switzerland comes into switzerland. Credit suisse has taken the position that they wont let it happen anymore without a form being filed that will lead to taxes being paid in the country of the account holder and that is good. That is good. It wouldnt have happened without ubs. They acknowledged as much this morning. It took this kind of a hearing to get us to the next stage, to create a model, ubs model that produced 6 million basically, because of the ubs hearing. A lot of them paid for that so maybe this hearing will take us to the next step. Maybe hopefully get the department of treasury folks to use the tools at our command to go after banks, get the past tax money owing to. Other reasons i mentioned, it is owed to the treasury. Fairness, and if you are serious about the future, all of us want to talk about the future, you better have accountability. The name of the account holders. Is it sufficient the Obama Administration might be delaying or not going after the names because it could become politically problematic for the administration, wilkens represented the Bankers Association at one point, eric holder had ubs as a client. I see no evidence of that. The banks which do participate in the program should be treated fairly. I am always in favor of fairness. Trying to figure out what they dont have more will to go after you know the answer to that . Because obviously it is complex. You got to go to court and say we want to enforce this and the other people on the other side, argue why you shouldnt do it and some of the banks, not Credit Suisse, will say we cant do that because of our law and hopefully you have american attorneys will say you are operating here. In switzerland swiss law should govern. In the United States the United Statess law should govern. I shouldnt heard any reason for the lack of passion and lack of aggressiveness hear other than what we heard there. It is complex in swiss law. That is all you hear. Swiss law. That is not what i want to hear. I know about swiss law. I know too much about swiss law. I know about bank secrecy which is still on the books in switzerland. Cant turn over the name. There is an exception for these treaties. These treaties have the loopholes and you go to court to implement the treaty and each one of these treaties and agreements and programs have loopholes in them. I had a nice list of loopholes right here to give you some in case you ask them and i will do it from memory. The Settlement Program is fundamentally flawed because it doesnt get names, which supplement program . The bank Settlement Program with the 106 bank it comes forward. It is flawed and a number of ways. It doesnt give you the names of people who aided and abetted or e evaded tax law. It doesnt get you that because it doesnt go back to the time which was the most virulent time probably between 20002008 according to our records of tax evasion through these accounts and you cant get that money which is owed to uncle sam. That is the huge failure in my book. That is just one. It doesnt get to that. There is another problem, that yellow sheet. You get two of them. Theres also another one. Not just no names before 2009, not just for one of the programs, not just what the Swiss Parliament has done but also the way in which if i can remember the other loophole. In terms of this is in the program. The program, so the program, why not just direct . Why not just simply say under this program if you get immunity you are going to turn over names . Why does it have to be we are going to give you immunity and banks get 110 banks or whatever it is will be given immunity, but they dont have to turn over names, they have to turn over information which might be a sleuth like Sherlock Holmes to find out who is then they are talking about. Stop that course of action because there deploying a lot of resources into that. Clearly thinks that because they think it is the best they can get because using our tools and our toolbox, the summons and the subpoenas and indictments, those are complex. They take work too. I cant give you an explanation. They havent given us a good explanation. Since these target letters have gone out nothing has happened. 14 banks. That program is a ubs model . Dont mind paying get out of the program, they are not mutually exclusive. The next thing number 3 of ubs john mccain said under the immunity level bankers weigh in and that is the case. What do you think of that . It is the exception that proves the rule. I did not buy it all from Credit Suisse, the testimony in many cases was good testimony. The idea of the small cobol in this part of their bank. That doesnt work. That is perjury i didnt buy that. We talk about perjury, you are talking about a different area that is not our particular area of responsibility. Oversight of committee and whether or not people why under oath or dont why under oath, something we make findings about. Senator mccain said 800 million to settle the criminal case is inadequate. It is not up to me to make that judgment. The thing that strikes me, that is a pretty global figure given the number of accounts. The ceo of Credit Suisse said their conduct was agreed this. Hard to explain in a way what the concept was, i use the word agreed this, a client comes in and a customer comes into a bank, you help that plant created fictitious corp. Shell corp. A and going to be the named depositor in your own bank. It is incredible. One person did that. You know what he said . Name two people, two people have already been indicted. And he turned back to somebody back there and said there are three and he also said that the Justice Department has those names. These facilitate in the most egregious way you can tax evasion. The conduct was not limited to that one as a l area of that bank, 50 bankers. He ended up saying mainly limited or another word he used. Used an adjective, mainly or principally were mostly or Something Like that. Struck a role for that. I was surprised, the department of justice should have been able to know whether or not there was a policy that asked the Federal Reserve to remove a license or whatever the right word is for people if they are in violation of a court order. Seems to me that is pretty obvious solution which would scare the dickens out of any company that would lose their right to operate if they dont abide by a court order. I would think the folks in switzerland understand that too. Hard for me as a parliamentarian to believe if someone came here and said they are in switzerland, the law in switzerland is they have to do a, b and c and if we dont exit that approach in the United States they have no choice, they want to operate in switzerland, i would understand readily, wanting to operate in switzerland, they want to abide by their laws. I dont claim anything for the United States as i would claim also exists in every other country. People who wants to operate need to abide by their laws. I dont think any greater claim for that right here in defense of any other country deals with companies that do business in that company. It is so basic and fundamental and i think the swiss government would understand that is the way the law has to be. And you cant use the loss of one country to as an excuse violate the laws of the country in which you want to operate. That is an area which needs to be explored but should have been explored long ago by the department of justice. Thank you. On this weekends newsmakers iowa senator tom harkin talks about the debating congress over raising the minimum wage. The democratic lawmaker, the chair of the Health Education labor and tension committee and the author of a bill that would set the minimum wage at 10. 10 an hour. You can watch the interview at 10 00 a. M. And again at 6 00 p. M. Eastern on cspan. The new cspan. Org web site makes it easier than ever to keep tabs on washington d. C. And share your find on facebook, twitter and other social networks. Easy search functions let you access daily coverage of events, new tools make it simple to create short video clips and share them with your friends on facebook, twitter and other social networks or you can send links to your video clips on email, find the share tools on our video player or look for the green icon links throughout our site. Watch washington on the new cspan. Org. If you see something of interest clipped it and share it with your friends. Cspan2 providing live coverage of the u. S. Senate floor proceedings and keep Public Policy events and every weekend booktv. Now for 15 years the only Television Network devoted to nonfiction books and authors. Cspan2 created by the cabletv industry, confronted by your local cable or cat lite provider, watches in hd, like us on facebook, follow us on twitter. Yesterday the Brady Campaign to prevent gun violence recognize the 20th anniversary of the socalled brady law which created federal background checks on firearm purchases from licensed dealers with in the u. S. This event took place on capitol hill and highlighted the laws benefits and was enacted in 1994. This is 40 minutes. Good morning and welcome. I am dan gross, president of the Brady Campaign to prevent gun violence and we are pleased to be here to commemorate the 20th anniversary of the brady law and to release our new report but before we got to those things we wanted to begin by showing why we are all here. Why our mission is so vitally important and why we cannot ever give up. Good boarding. My name is kenny barnes. I lived in washington d. C. I am a victim of senseless gun violence. This is a picture of my son. He was killed sept. 242001 right here in washington d. C. He was a victim of senseless gun violence. My name is eddie weinerguard. On february 22nd, 1981, my mother was shot to death in front of me. The gun was also turned on the and unfortunately malfunctioned. I am here today with other victims and survivors of gun violence to demand that the job be finished. I am dr. Crystal kirkindoll here on behalf of my husband who was robbed and murdered on august 11th, 1972, in streets of east orange, new jersey. It still seems like yesterday. My family still misses him. On behalf of other families, lets finish the job. My name is peter reid, my daughter mary was one of 32 students and faculty shot to death on the campus of Virginia Tech on april 16th, 2007. We believe with better and fully implemented background checks these kinds of tragedies can be prevented. My name is raven burgess, a survivor of gun violence. I was shot may 29th, 2013. I am here to promote and help to ensure that this ends. Thank you. My name is alex westerly. I am here for my sister who got killed by a stalker who purchased the gun on the internet. Without any kind of background check. I am here to prevent this happening. Thanks. Good morning. My name is Sherialyn Byrdsong, i am here in honor of my husband, rikki, the northwest basketball coach. He was killed in 1999 by a man who was the convicted felon and in spite of that was able to buy a gun from an unlicensed gun dealer wihout a brady background check. Sarah brady and im here on behalf of my husband jim brady who was wounded in the assassination attempt on Ronald Reagan in 1981. My name is dan gross and i am here for my brother matthew who was shot in the head atop the Empire State Building in february of 1997 and for our dear friend christopher burkemeister who was killed that day and 90 americans who are killed every day by a bullet and for every one of us who just wants to live in a safer nation. Today as i said were here to mark the 20 Year Anniversary of what could fairly be called the greatest, most significant step forward for that goal of a safer nation, but brady handgun violence prevention act which took effect 20 years ago today. To introduce this special report, to introduce this special report that we have issued, to celebrate the success of the historic legislation and to define the critical work that lies ahead, 20 years of brady background checks. We are finishing the job to keep america safe for. First i would like to thank some of our special guests here. Of course the victims and families that have joined us here today. I know i speak for all of us and so many across america when i say how much you all inspire all of us to continue our work, a lot of which is on behalf of the loved ones youve lost. Our very important partners from the Law Enforcement community, we really appreciate your strong representation here today, your voices are very important in these efforts. Our