and then at 8:00 p.m., university of texas professor stephanie cole on the life and work of social reformer lucretia mont, a leader of abolition and women's rights. and on sunday at 8:00 p.m. eastern on the presidency, douglas brinkley discusses jacqueline kennedy as first lady with david rubinstein. they focus on her preservation and cultural work, especially the white house renovation. watch american history tv this weekend on c-span3. chair jay clayton testified before the senate banking, housing and urban committee about oversight and talked about digital currency and shareholder protections.

>> this hear willing come to order. this hearing is another remote hearing by video, and a few of the video conversationing reminders again. once you start speaking, there will be a they on your screen, so don't be bothered by that. before you are displayed on your screen. to minimize the background noise, i again remind you to click the mute button until it's your turn to speak or ask questions. if there's a technology question, we will move to the next senator until resolved. i remind all senators that the five minute clock still aflies. you should have a box on your screen labeled clock that shows how much time is on your screen labeled clock that shows how much time is remaining. but we have had some troubles, and i have had senators who can't find that box or don't see it. and so, in fact, last hearing one of the senators ask me again to get a reminder, i will

do that at this time for everybody. so at 30 seconds left on your clock, there will be a tone, a bell ring, to remind senators and the witnesses that their time has almost expired. at the end of the five minutes, a bill will ring. that way we can all know how the clock is working, even though we don't find it on our screens. today we will receive testimony from the security and exchange commission chairman jay clayton, regarding the work and agenda of the sec. i thank you chair clayton for your appearance before the committee today, which is essential to our oversight of the sec. and welcome. you last appeared before this committee in december of last year. the covid-19 pandemic hit the united states shortly after that hearing, and the sec has taken many important steps to help limit the economic shot to our markets of governments have attempted to confront this unprecedented event. the sec used tools such as the

market wide circuit breakers for the first time since the adoption. when markets dropped 7% from the loss -- s&p 500 index. there were a number of uses of limit bound circuit breaks, when overnight stock futures hit their 5% limit, which resulted in halting further downward trades. despite the high levels of volatility, or volatility, it is my understanding that the current mechanisms in place serve their intended purposes of increasing market stability. additionally, in order to comply with cdc guidelines, you oversaw an unprecedented temporary closure of physical trading floors. this business continuity measure supported orderly trading while ensuring the health and safety of market participants. the sec has continuously pursued enforcement actions including a number of actions against those seeking to take advantage of investors, during this vulnerable time.

remarkably, all of this has been done while the sec is working remotely. it is commendable that despite the covid-19 disruptions you have continued to advance the items on your regulatory agenda, which are the result of many months, and sometimes years of diligent stuff work. they finalize the minutes to update and improve the definitions of the credited investor and qualified institutional buyer. which will now take into consideration education and expertise. ultimately increasing investor participation and private offerings. and expanding access to capital markets. the sec recently modernized exempt offering framework, which will be a lifeline to small and medium sized companies. navigating the previously complex system. these clear and concise rules will allow smaller companies to focus on getting their businesses back on track while improving the consistency of investor protections.

commissioner in market participants and crafting modernized shareholder proposals, thresholds and proxy voting rules. these modernizations no longer permit a small number of they will allow companies to better focus their efforts on covid-19 recovery. they streamline the information collected for regulation disclosure, it had been more than 30 years since these disclosures have been reviewed. last year the sec finalized a package of rule making, sierra's relationship summary and two relationships under the advisories act. the rules began in june 30. since june, the sec has been reviewing compliance efforts and identifying additional areas for improvement through up stakeholder engagement.

another effort underway at the sec is the creation of the hub for technology, which is critical under the coordination and dissemination of information to the public regarding initial coin offerings and other cryptocurrency matters. currently, they've been busy, and i commend you for your balancing emergency covid-19 response is well balancing critical rule making initiatives. riskiest initiatives, and issuer and fun filings. i look forward to continuing to work with the sec to make sure that u.s. markets come back from the covid-19 disruptions more strongly. more liquid and more dynamic than ever before. in closing i also want to thank chairman clayton for his service, and wish him the best of luck as he departs the commission in the coming weeks. the will and drive the show brought to this draw but have

allowed to bring about many significant improvements that were long overdue. i wish you the best of luck in your future endeavors, and thanks again for your service. senator brown. >> thank you mister chair. i believe this is your last year, if it is, thanks for the relationship we've had and our ability to work together and our corporation was standing any disagreements. thanks for your service. the -- across the country, it is clear that people want financial watchdogs who look out for them. not make life easier for american ceos. it's time to turn the page on this failed administration by at least 5 million votes, and work together to build an economy that works for everyone. that means an economy we're all workers can save and invest their hard earned money for a

down payment. senators to community college. that is how you grow the middle class. it's time that everyone had that chance to join in. that means finally working in a real way to eliminate the wealth gap means that we have to enlist everyone in our government in this project including the sec. if you are the -- did important work in the middle of a public health crisis. and the economic crisis. we thank you and all of them for that. monitoring for fraud and misconduct related to the pandemic, continuing their work to protect investors maintaining orderly market, and promoting capital formation. these efforts helped working families investing today, and but i'm confident in the future. but i believe we should aim higher, than simply making markets more stable. we can do better than present preventing crashes and fraud, we need to make markets work

for people. over the years i've raised concerns about how your leadership has left behind the people who say things are at stake in the markets, denying the ability to hold executives accountable. withholding critical formation about how companies are run and how they affect the interment of the communities. and try instead of reducing transparency eve undermined the protections that we do have even in the face of strong opposition from long and strong advocates. from employees across the country scrapping and saving to help put money into their retirement accounts to pensions. they are in a worse place since been in office. that doesn't even include those that want to save for their retirement and they just can't because their paycheck isn't enough. the wealthier get wealthier in the middle class shrinks. you push for what you call regulation best interest. your term. a new standard that applies

when brokers give advice to clients that doesn't put mom and pop customers first. a few weeks ago you dismiss the sec's initial reviews that -- went into effect in june. even though you said that firms are making, in your words good faith efforts, their staff reported compliance, and disclosed disciplinary issues to clients, it seems that you can't -- under a suspicious but. getting [inaudible] . a clear example of the administration taking the side every single time and this committee we talk about, this everything the time we know, this every single time people get in line to do this. the administration taking the side of corporate interests over american saving and investing for the future. over the, years shareholder engagement has forced important conversations to happen in boardrooms. we need to focus on

implementing better governance, and addressing climate risks, your gender is attempting to stifle these important conversations. last, week the north american securities -- organization wrote to you because watchdogs wrote you about a boardroom that would facilitate unlicensed intermediaries in the private market. that's a polite way of saying that they are very concerned about rampant fraud. not only are they worried that you're putting their constituencies at risk their upset that they didn't get a heads up. you are advancing one bad rule after another. you can take the opportunity to make sure the public companies disclose the risk that climate change poses to their businesses. you did the opposite. when he tried to improve the private workforce disclosures

that failed. -- identified the number of full-time workers compared to part-time workers. we're never going to be able to under the corporate framework -- if we can't put out accurate information. by relocating staff to review the test you managed to record results. i hope that my concerns about the uncertainty created by your recent change to the rules don't undermine the obvious successes of that program. more broadly, even though the sec has aggressively pursued covid related scams and frauds the last year of enforcement focused on a few big cases, rather than looking under the hood you see to many cases to take individual accountability. last, week the sec charged

wells fargo for deceiving investors as part of the account scandal that was uncovered in 2016 that was a rare and long overdue. cat 2016, where your agencies held someone accountable for breaking the law and ripping people off at a big banker corporation. when you are a nominee you assured us that, -- you don't get better behavior by taking years, all taking years to hold -- accountable for intentional, god knows it was intentional deception. american voter sent a clear message and selection. 80 million of them. they're tired of economy where big companies are wealthy. big ceos play by a different set of rules. they each rollback important safeguards. disenfranchisement of

shareholders. updating. the rules people are tired of the political spin. when you say reform, it seems that you make things a little more difficult for the little guys. we need to modernize you make it that much harder to hold powerful ceos accountable. we need to update you seem to mean further entrenched the wall street business model that explodes workers. we know they do. 80 million americans rejected your agenda in this election. i hope we can address. that he prepared to change the rules so much you will have to really learn security and elementary -- when you move into private practice. i said it before, it should begin with a simple concept of putting their interests first. i'm disappointed, since a decisive majority of the company surely sees it that way. thank you.

>> thank you senator brown. now we will turn to you chairman create -- clayton. you may make your opening statement. >> thank you. i appreciate the opportunity to testify today about the work of the men and the woman at the sec. over the last year including our work to address the effects of the covid-19 pandemic, to begin i want to thank you for the support and the assistance that you provided sec during my tenure. i have enjoyed the thoughtful and candid engagement. you have provided adequate and additional resources to help expand and modernize our investor oriented efforts. i wish the circumstances would've allowed us to get either in person and i hope to get that with you bilaterally the time we have left. work alongside the dedicated men and women of the dedicated commission is a privilege of a lifetime. i'm honored to call them colleagues and friends and it

couldn't be more proud of the work that they've done each and every day on behalf of investors. especially this year. in the face of incredible professional and personal challenges. their dedication combined with our strong time tested, and flexible regulatory framework allowed the sec to respond quickly to the health, economic, and unexpected challenges that we face this year. i am pleased to report that while the pandemic significantly impacted how we do our work it didn't negatively impact the work itself. with respect to covid-19 the sec responded quickly by one providing targeted regulatory relief to make sure the continued operation of our markets. two dedicated significant resources to covid examination efforts. three investment oversight and engagement in key areas of

stress and for working with our domestic and regulatory counterparts. the mitigate the impact of covid-19. here i must thank the treasury. federal reserve and congress for their swift action. providing liquidity and provide support for the economy more generally through the cares act. in addition our traditional mission oriented work carried out with rigor, vigor, and transparency. recognizing the value of our time tested regulatory framework the agency is focused on modernizing the rules and regulations that implement that framework. some of which have not been meaningfully updated in many, many decades. as just a few examples, this year the commission moved forward on a number of initiatives to improve the proxy voting and shareholder proposal process, facilitate access to capital in our public and private markets and in particular with respect or

small and medium sized businesses. three, modernize the disclosure and regulatory framework with a investor approach, number four improve our equity market structure. despite our mandatory teleworking form and we have also continued our strong enforcement and -- programs. focusing on areas that are most impactful to mainstream investors. including from our teachers and serviceman initiatives. dedicating resources to address covid related frauds and other matters. in addition, by leveraging technology we have continued our robust outreach and engagement with entrepreneurs, and a array of market entrepreneurs. finally, as the importance of diversity, inclusion, to this is siding more generally was brought into stark relief by the events of 2020. putting on a strong foundation,

provided by my gather things the office of minority and inclusion and diversity and inclusion strategic plan we have continued to advance initiatives to further our collective commitment to these principles and us at at the sec. thank you for the opportunity testify about the work of the commission, the fantastic work of the men and women at the commission, and i look forward to your questions. thank you chairman clayton. again thanks for the service that you have given to us as the chairman of the sec. as i remarked and the opening statement i am amazed by the rules that you are able to improve in your ten years as chairman. your regular career continues to be ambitious. in your marks there's not much work that needs to be done. other areas where you think that the sec should continue to focus on areas where you think that congress should take a closer look at the statute? >> senator let me take off a

few -- first corporate hygiene i think in the pandemic and the stress we have seen areas where corporate hygiene could be better. we could remove any uncertainty that corporations are operating with rigorous governments, and transparency, if you could be -- pressing, and when i called information gap. i think that these are things that my views and this area are things that most good corporations follow. but the formation out. there had discussions with members of congress. i think that's an area that we can learn from. we can also learn a lot from our mandatory teleworking vermont, and not only the efficiency but the importance of electronic communications. we need to move our regulatory framework forward for all of the investors to a electronic framework. if this had happened ten years

ago, we would have had a problem. we would have had a problem particularly communicating with a retail investors. not to take your time but i think the proxy process needs improvement. our proposal revealed that companies do not have sufficient access to their shareholders base. we need more access to the shareholder base for what benefits most companies. in the area of esg need to be rigorous in our approach to this disclosure area. i welcome the report from onb. these components. discuss this in. details look forward to doing so in the future. >> the summary. where you think that the sec should focus on the areas you think we should focus on as well as what congress needs to be paying attention to. i appreciate that. the sec was quick and decisive in the taking action in

response to the covid-19 pandemic. the tools that were used like the wide circuit breakers. oversight of physical floors of the nation's stock exchange is being closed in order to comply with cdc's guidance. undertaking swift enforcement actions to prevent fraud and illicit schemes, and other misconduct. providing temporary relief in other areas. my question is as you reflect the actions that the sec has taken in response to the pandemic, how do they shape the way the sec should move forward? are there temporary relief actions that you believe the commission should consider making permanent? the short answer is yes. there is this shift to mandatory tele-work informant across our critical infrastructure showing the importance of being able to conduct business electronically and remotely. we provided a host of relief.

we are assessing whether or not that affected market integrity. where it hasn't in many cases it increased it. work hasn't, we should make it permanent. it's that simple. that said, there are people that prefer paper at the end of the day. i think for those retail investors we should continue to provide access to paper. the system is better off if we are all on a level of electronic playing field. >> thank you. my last question is too long to get up with the answer to this but i'm gonna ask the question and you can please respond in writing. it has to do with the labor force prevention act which passed the house by a vote of 400 to six. there's somewhere bill that contains a number of restrictions intended to punish

those responsible for the horrific human rights violations occurring in china's uyghur autonomous region. my question to you which i would like you to answer in writing is this legislation creates essentially a new disclosure regime at the sec to deal with this issue. a concern about whether that's the right approach. whether the existing channels available for the treasury, state, and commerce. is it your view that the sec should -- disclosure regime, rather than focusing on existing regimes for punishing this behavior. so again, i would ask you to answer that question in writing. but it is very critical. i think congress needs to get it right. i would like your advice on that. >> thank you. senator brown.

>> chairman, i echo the representatives request on the question. i thank you. -- chairman clayton, it has to provide collateral. is that correct? >> that's correct. last month of the sec issued a no action letter assessing that certain brokers are failing to provide collateral. violating we think the sec's protection rules that it's okay as long as they fixed within six months. is that with that no action letter said? >> i think it is much more nuanced than that senator. for the purposes of this discussion i think it's a fair way to say. it we have 86 month period for people to adopt practices that were clearly in line with customer protection. this was particularly motivated by ensuring that this was civic protection applied in this case. >> how widespread is this

problem in your estimation? why do firms need six months to do this one in the past they hadn't? >> it isn't clear that they need six months to do it, but what is needed is time for those types of transactions, stocks and the like to be on way owned in what i would say is a orderly way so as not to adversely affect customers on the market itself. our staff at the division of trading and markets made a assessment that this was not a particularly situation situation where people were up particulate risk, but he's my words we needed better hygiene across the stock market but i would say is ecosystem. >> i understand what she said. i think it again plays into the believe that the sec and this government are in a deeper swamp than it was four years

ago. folks on means treat feel like their odds are stacked against them. >> i can quickly respond to that in that as soon as i became aware of this it was days when this action was taken. >> thank you. >> let me turn to stock buybacks. the sec brought a case against companies with inside information about a merger. insider trading most definitions. you call it a failure of internal controls in the legal department signed off on the buybacks. congress is calling this at the stock buyback rules. doesn't it make sense to have clear standards for companies to use instead of expanding resources on weak law enforcement activities? >> let me say this about stock buybacks. as i mentioned in my response

to chairman cripple, i believe additional hygiene in this area is appropriate. buybacks provide a very efficient way from a companies standpoint. they can be applied with good corporate hygiene, including policies and procedures to ensure that when they are put in place or restarted the company doesn't have to share non public information. four executives, i'm a proponent of a cooling off period. when you put your plan in place, so you do it in june, there are no purchases or sales, and most cases it is sales, with an executive it can be a -- program, for a period of time. whatever it is, that gives everyone comfort that timing wasn't planned ahead, for two

80 wasn't intent, and i think that something that we should all explore. >> thank you. i've worked on legislation that's a little bit late that would create guard rails. it would prevent these kinds of failures and abuses. i think it comes our appropriate. we allow customers to buy backs but they have to provide full transparency. they don't always have to reward shareholders. all disclose briefly in the statement. we saw earlier the pandemic pushing our families and the economy, how the market seized up on the sec's recent report of interconnectedness -- insights but no real policy recommendations. i know that you and vice chair -- senate have commented that the reforms were not good enough. it's clear that your successor, the next banking regulators are

going to have to reduce -- access leverage to the economy may depend on it. thank you chairman clayton. thank you. >> sandra to me. >> thank you mister chairman. welcome back. on what i gather is your final appearance in the committee. let me take a moment to say i appreciate the work that you and don, the leadership you have provided at the sec. in my mind you have clearly advanced the mission that the sec is responsible for. the investors, providing orderly markets, facilitating market information, i particularly appreciate your efforts to expand investment opportunities for average investors. i appreciate the work that you've done to create an environment where it is easier

for companies go public. and i also want to take a moment to tip my hat to you and your colleagues for the extraordinary. really extraordinary accomplishment of how we got through the unprecedented period where we should down our economy. we sort of voluntarily closed our economy. we forbid people from going to work. and yet, during that period of time. during the worst of that period of time, after a brief period where they completely froze up, and then response to our legislation, our capital markets reopened, they thrived. we set all-time records in debt influences across the credit quality spectrum. we had no settlement problems. we had an amazingly efficient -- in fact we return to being the most liquid capital markets so far. we did it with everyone working

from home. the sec working from home. while there are a lot of people who deserve a lot of credit i think that you deserve a lot of credit. thanks for all that you've done for the service in the country. up to because chance for you if i could. the first is about companies going public. as we all, know there are fewer of them than there once was. right? computer -- companies delay going public as long as the count seems. it seems that ipos now are more a liquidity event than a couple raising event. we have far fewer capital raising events because we have fewer locally traded companies and -- on the part of the companies that i believe that's not a viable option. so my question for you mister chairman, just a couple of free thoughts if you have them. is there more that we can be doing in congress to create an

environment where it is more attractive to go public earlier, so that that is and viable option for growing businesses, and it's a viable investment option? what else can we do to restore more vibrancy to our public markets? >> thank you. thanks for the really kind words but the work of the commission. i think of the american people saw with the men and women did in the month of stress they would be extremely impressed. your question is one that is kind of front of mind for me at all times. we have taken the jobs act which was a terrific piece of legislation which did facilitate the move from being a company to a public company. we've expanded access to the job act to the companies. i believe that's made a difference overtime in the choice between staying private

and becoming public. i'm not going to take a victory lap yet, but we are up on ipos. that may be market driven. maybe a result of our efforts. maybe a result of many different things. i'm hoping that choices a better one. we have to recognize that one size doesn't fit all from a disclosure and regulatory perspective. i have no problem with many of which people would call for the restrictions, whatever you, want for large companies. can it be adjusted here and there? are we doing that? sure. medium sized companies. 100 million to a couple of billion or more. the same rigor and life that applies to a company with a 500 billion dollar cap does it make sense and we need to recognize that. >> thanks. i'm going to run out of time here. that's quite all right.

i would suggest the jobs act has been remarkably successful. the vast majority of companies that go public actually used emerging growth avenue that we have created. i think we want to expand that avenue so that more companies can take advantage of it. i think we also want to be very careful about the extent to which activist groups are trying to use corporate governance as a way to advance a social political agenda that really ought to be advanced through the accountable branches of government. thanks for services. i look forward to continuing the discussion. >> locate the center is with us. i think he may have had to go off line for a minute. let's move on to senator warner. >> thank you mister chairman. appreciate this hearing. mister chairman. before i turn to questions i also want to take a moment and think the chair for his

service. chairman clayton has been someone i have had a great working relationship with for three and a half years. can you hear me all right? >> yes. >> while we have not always agreed by any means i appreciate the partnership that we have worked on. enforcement tools. -- which appeared to get to the end of my comments but i want to zero in on something that i first talked to as you came into this job. that is the question which i think is fundamental and will be one of your legacy items about human capital reporting i think that we all know that we have seen an increase of

pandemic aid and transformation and investment strategies. we have seen that companies are investing much less intangible goods. and much more in intangible goods. oftentimes those intangible goods are human capital. we have talked about the need for potentially tax -- maybe a little further down the path for you on some of those issues. i appreciate that you have taken on the issue with -- , and really lead deal the first step. putting forward you're revised regulations that finally for the first time, for the first

time and years to go, requires some level of human capital metrics for companies to report with. when you talk about -- every ceo talks about the assets being their workforce but there's no place that that is reflected on their balance sheet. there's no place that that's reflected in their sec firings. i think by these revised tools you are starting us down a path towards a more worker-centric management structure in my hope is a think -- principled approach that we will both see a increase in the quantity of this reporting as well as the quality and i think it is important that we ultimately get enough data in place where there is allowed to

be a baseline that would allow some comparison between industries on a important topic. we have to start someplace and you have started that discussion. you wrote in your testimony that you believe the approach would lead to -- and deemed the information confidential material. can you talk about how you see that occurring in practice? and how we make sure that this isn't just nice to have in that more and more firms will actually leave this human capital proponent that falls into the materiality component and is treated with the seriousness that i know you do, and we hope that the committee moves towards. >> thanks. i believe the disclosure requirement that we put in

place facilitates qualitative disclosure. like you said, in a number of industries it can be the entire company. it could be 30 or 40% of the value on the balance sheet. depending on the industry, i would expect turnover. turnover in particular areas to be metric the people might show. it's a ministries that's not very relevant but in others it is. sector specific skill sets and company engineers are people the ringing on board. had difficult it is. quantitative and qualitative disclosure. we should understand what management believes drives business from human capital perspective. that's the core requirement. it's the way that i look at things at the sec. what is our turnover? from a topic that is current today, from a inclusion standpoint we are tracking

those metrics at the sec. i'm a public company i would expect to disclose them. >> i appreciate that. and again, you are the guy that set the framework to get this out of the discussion staged to start adding -- putting the reporting in place. you have heard my colleagues say that -- we need to go further. i've pointed out the problem in terms of tax, and accounting, a company buys a robot. you get a tax credit. the robot is on the balance sheet. the captains have recognized that. the same company invests in two different human beings. they're not given the same tax treatment. that investment isn't in a category on the balance sheet as a asset class. -- i don't want to get you for the

out of your skis but i want to put you on this a little bit. my hope would be that you are at least open to ongoing engagements. the commission has a rule of overseeing -- that we actually have discussions, about human capital, i think we ought to look at tax treatment. human capital. do you think that we are -- you took the first step by having the members reporting. i think the next step would be the accounting review and i would love to give my last minute or two -- >> actually your over senator. >> i thought you putting a clock up here. i was trying to be really brief. >> i will let clayton. since we've had the discussion

repeatedly, that's on the record, if you want to help, -- on a going forward basis. things for your service. i think you did a great job. look forward to continuing this. >> the tune that i told everyone i would play doesn't seem to be working. >> i know. i was waiting for the music. i've got someone in my ear saying that's a great question. keep pressing. >> i guess i will have to try to remember to tap the clock. we are going to try to solve this. thanks mark. senator scott. >> thanks chairman for the 12 minutes that i now have. thanks so much for my time. i'm gonna use every minute plus 15 on top of that. thanks so much. check clayton, thanks so much

for your service to our country without any question. having the opportunity to work with you i know that your agencies focus has been on mr. and mrs. for a one. came the average investor in the country through the retirement funds may not appreciate the way that you have really focused on simplifying some of the language and making it easier for a investor to engage in a mr. and mrs. 401(k). -- or the tweet to the 40 act that allowed them to see flee and affordably access the visor products that allow them to meet their investment goals. i'm so glad that you and your colleagues at the sec have been so focused on protecting the investors. that's a really big key. you think about the fact that only half of u.s. households own stock at all, and the average portfolio is hundred

thousand dollars, that's a important engagement when the average investor can understand and appreciate in a simplified manner what they are investing in and the rules of the road so to speak. you take that number and don't buy 31% for minority investors, for african americans that number drops precipitously. fortunately technology has increased the visibility of simple and low-cost platforms that can be accessed by investors with a smartphone for as little as 20 dollars now to see their dreams come true. a broad chunk of young and diverse americans are now engaged in the stock market. including many millions who are doing so from -- for the very first time. can you chairman clayton, discuss the benefits of increased participation. and if the organizations --

are keeping up with the pace of innovation. >> thank you congressman scott. it being connected to our financial system. having a bank account. having a investment account is essential to participation in our society. we saw this in the cares act relief. you could get relief faster to people who were connected. we want to increase those connections, preserving investor protection and as you mentioned driving down costs. we are hell-bent to get fraud and prevent fraud. we have 1000 people in the investment division. we can reduce costs for the average american by 30 points

over the course of their retirement, the benefits to society are astronomical. technology should enable us to do that. get connected. get educated. and get the frictions down. on this note, trying to respect my minute and 30 seconds that we have left, access as you have just discussed is so critical. it has never been more accessible than it is today. i was talking to my nephew who is a resident he and his friends are now engaging in investments using multiple platforms, in a way that was an unimaginable, and frankly cost prohibitive ten years ago, 15 years ago. so we are moving to it that where the average person can have access to the stock market. the most important point with that ex increased access this having integrity in the system. so thank you for taking your

quality time insulating those smaller investors by ensuring that there's lots of integrity. my definition of integrity in this case would be transparency, and digestible. making sure that the language is such that the average person -- i heard the bell. senator warren just ignored the bell. continue to work really hard and making sure that the average investor has confidence in the system. and i appreciate your office taking the average person's perspective on something that is very complicated, and sometimes hard to understand. with that, i yield back my last three seconds. >> thank you senator scott. senator. >> chairman clayton. thanks for your service. best of your luck as you move forward. last time you were here we were talking about how foreign

actors could invade the -- under section de. the negative effects that could have on publicly traded companies. particularly in the media and technology sectors. and how that could affect national security overall. the pandemic and ensuing economic crisis, we need to be vigilant against any malign for an actor that could be looking for a opportunity to purchase a particular -- significant state of a -- as we discussed this last year. have you identified any statutory impediments that prevent the agency on sufficiently monitoring and protecting section d. >> senator i agree with you. i think our friends in the treasury would agree with you that understanding beneficial ownership and whether there is

any in -- of section is important. we took a recent measure that i will highlight for you. we just put out what i would call guidance. but you can also call it good hygiene in corporate accounts. foreign accounts. accounts that mix ownership of different parties outside the u.s.. and trade through a single pipe into the u.s. i believe that they've been used to mask ownership. we need to ensure that the u.s. broker dealers. this comes out in the areas of thinly traded and appropriate securities are doing -- on this foreign accounts. but i can do is ensure you that we're focused on this area. we're not just studying it. we are doing things about it. whati appreciate that. i'm particularly concerned about media technologies that

are concerned about -- in these times they play a special role in disseminating critical public health information so we can get the pandemic under control. i hope that your successor will continue to prioritize this. i have seen elements of foreign entities purchasing -- and having significant controlling interest. and you know, in and of itself is not a terrible thing but understanding the nature, having the disclosure so that we know who is affecting these public nature channels is incredibly important. i'll turn to other topics. studies have found that greater diversity on executive teams lead to greater profitability and greater outcomes for shareholders. mackenzie's most recent report found that companies with more gender diversity in their executive teams were 25% more likely to have a above average

profitability then companies with non diverse teams. that same report found that companies with, that were the most ethnically diverse executive teams are 33% more likely to outperformed their peers on profitability. so do you agree with the statistics acts that teams with more diverse members are more profitable? >> i've looked at the report. let me say what we do here at the sec. we do it we believe and have acted on diversity and inclusion is not only the right thing, but value enhanced. saying i've seen firsthand as we have increased inclusion here it's led to a better performance. >> i appreciate that. but i would like us to go beyond that. i think that in a marketplace. forget about doing the right thing. simply in a marketplace where

you have a trillion plus dollars of domestic spending and hispanic community for example. younger than by a decade than the rest of the american population. more loyal than any other group. as a business proposition i would like to be on them like white on race. understanding however that nature of humanity, having senior people on corporate boards. and corporate executives. the bottom line. my final question. section 596 requires the sec the federal reserve, to jointly proposed executive rule to prohibit unsafe and unsound compensation plans. during your time as the sec chair, have you all stepped out together to discuss this rulemaking. >> we have. if you consider concerned --

conference call sitting down together we have. >> what did these discussions ultimately lead to? have you decided to move forward on the proposal role? >> would i can say is that we were -- all sit on this way. we were in advanced stages. beyond with has been constrained in some areas -- particularly that kind of bandwidth has been constrained by the work of the day. >> it seems sometimes at the bandwidth we don't want to deal with is the most constraining. thank you. good luck in your future. >> thank you senator. >> thank you for your final appearance. i'm sure you hope so.

thank you for your service to our country in the sec. thanks for being a good partner in the office when we agree, especially when we don't agree. i want to speak today about a topic that we discussed from the past in these hearings, and directly one-on-one. that's the concept of regulation by enforcement. that's something that has become infamous under president obama to the act of using administrative decisions. making changes in the rules. -- under the administrative procedures act. it means that enforcement decisions are based on things that regulators may or may not like. things that remain opaque and sometimes even unknown to regulated players. do you agree that enforcement actions should only be taken when a actor in the market violates rules? rules that have been violated

in a law or passed into regulations? >> senator. i do. i want to qualify that by saying that some rules rely on fact and circumstance application. to the extent that you are asking me should we expand authority or regulation without going through notice and comment? no we should. we should do that. i think it is a fundamental principle of the rule of law which in some way predates the concept of self government that it's hard to have ordered society without clear and established rules in advance that all citizens can obey and uphold. that's acceptable whether you agree with the rules or not. it's vital that we have established written rules and advance. one that we discussed before,

that i want to discuss here today, is the sec shared class disclosure initiative. under that initiative, several partners listed three items in the disclosure. one in the 12 be one phase. two -- were available. three purchasing sheers when -- would adversely affect the clients return. [inaudible] these may be best practices for financial disclosures. we are talking about not having clarity in advance of any enforcement decision. can the sec sign a public document we're all three of those elements were listed in advance of any the enforcement actions mister chairman? >> i don't have a document like that to hand. i understand the issue very well. this was investment advisers

engaged in their clients. they have a duty to those clients not to put the investment advisers interests ahead of the client. they also have the duty of candor. this was a stark case. it tells somebody i'm going to put you in the best option for you. from a cost perspective. when you have two choices one has a higher cost, one is a lower cost, but they're exactly the same. there's no doubt that that's a violation of that application. but the share class disclosure issue, what we set up to do was officially deal with what we saw was a widespread practice that we saw was inconsistent with. la sandra these are all facts and circumstances situations and i understand some people felt that they were within the balance of the law when we felt that they were not. i am hopeful that there is been clarity brought to this. more clarity brought to this.

but i'm also comfortable that the enforcement division pursued this believing, and having that belief based on rigorous analysis that they were on the right side of the law. but i very much take your point that we should not you know use ambiguities or uncertainties in the law to our advantage. >> lot enforcement division in this case, something that commissioner pierce said, >> -- have never been tried before the judge. they violated the disclosure obligations and sore short circuited the rulemaking process by -- through enforcement rather than regulation. do you disagree with commissioner pierce on that point? >> i agree with part of what she said. in our administrative courts, for matters like this, we need to do so cautiously, if at all. i wish the president were in a medical three court.

>> i will cut it off there because we are hearing bells ringing. [inaudible] really >> that's right. you may not have been on when i say that is having a tone issue. some senators don't seem to be able to find a clock on their screen.

that big companies must navigate. policies moving us toward clean energy will have a big impact on companies who are still dependent on dirty energy. so while the crisis has gotten worse, the s.e.c., under your leadership, has done nothing. and that's resulted in multiple uniform standards for climate risk. chairman clayton has the sec established a mandatory uniform standard for reporting on climate risk so the investors can compare companies head to head. >> if you mean a standard metric, like a carbon emission

metric drawn across our 6000, whatever the number is -- >> a mandatory uniform standard. however you do it. a mandatory uniform standard. >> to the extent that climate related risks are material to the company's performance and prospects, they have to be disclosed, and with outstanding guidance to guide companies -- >> i understand you have guidance, but i've read that guidance. that guidance does not establish a standardized framework. i'm asking about mandatory uniform standard, and i think your answer here, one word, yes or no? >> it depends on what you mean. we have a -- >> you don't know it a mandatory uniform -- >> you could take it how you want. >> you have no uniform standards for reporting. what about at least mandating that companies report something? chairman clayton has the sec mandated all publicly traded companies report something about climate risk, so that investors can compare those

companies head to head? >> to the extent, it's material to investments. >> that's not what i asked. i asked about requiring all publicly traded companies to report something. they may decide to report that they have no risk at all. do you require that? >> we do not required under the reports. >> right now, we've got these huge gaps in the disclosure olds that basically allow a company to be to conceal or downplay climate risk from investors, so how do the investors feel about that, the pension funds, the university endowment that are trying to make long term investments are socially responsible investments feel about the sec's failure to require full and consistent reporting of climate risk? well, this summer 40 major investors collectively managed over one trillion dollars an assets joined with nonprofits, businesses, and former

regulators and sending you a letter. arguing the climate crisis is material and a systemic threat to our economy, and asking the scc to mandate corporate climate risk disclosure. then, just last week, the federal reserve's financial stability report stated that, quote, increased transparency through measurement and disclosure could improve the pricing of climate risks. in other words, more information on climate wrist is good. we chair clayton, how do you explain to these investors, these businesses, these nonprofit and even your fellow regulators that they are somehow better off with less information about climate change? >> that's not what i would say to them. i would say you are better off with good information. i can tell you that i was up early this morning for a lengthily discussion with my

friends, mark carney and others that it's been ongoing as to how to actually address, and i am supportive of the federal reserve's report, and i actually address this issue in a meaningful way. we >> let me just ask, you are defending the letters from investors asking for a climate risk information. they are not getting it, or they wouldn't be asking. i want to know, have you've been getting letters we from people representing over one trillion dollars in investments? have a sent to public letters asking you to shield them from getting climate risk information? >> no, but they've asked me to get good information, good decisions -- >> those who said they don't see climate risk -- we >> what people want is decisions, useful information. >> that's why they sent you letters asking for climate risk information we. i have a bill that will force you to do your job and require

companies to disclose information about their climate risks. the sec doesn't have to wait for congress to pass a law. you have the authority to require companies to provide this information, and he refused to ask. chairman clayton, on climate crisis, it's an existential risk. limawe need a new scc scc chairo will put this crisis at the top of the agencies. thank you, mister chairman. >> thank you. >> thank you, mister chairman. chairman clayton, let me begin by saying congratulations on the upcoming end of year ten years as chairman, thank you for all the hard work you've done serving the scc. you've accomplished a great deal as chairman, but in terms of development, but i like to highlight is the scc's expansion of people and amenities that qualify as accredited investors under the regulation the.

i was pleased with that the scc expanded regulation d that include a native american tribes. this will make it easier for tribes to participate in investment opportunities, but also put native american trials with more participants. considering the changes to regulation d as it portrays american tribes, doesn't help the scc level playing field with native american tribes? >> the short answer is yes, and this is an issue i wasn't aware of when i arrived here, but i had a nice meeting with a representative from a number of tribes, and realized they weren't being treated fairly under our investor definition. some of our other definitions that provide acts as an opportunity for institutional investors, in short. they should be treated like any other institutional investor like a pension fund or the like.

and i believe we are going to be doing that, going forward. >> great, thank you. look, i appreciate that. i know the tribes in south dakota have an interest regarding that, and i appreciate the work you've done. i'm also sure you've been following the conversation we and city councils about the transaction tax on security trading. these developments concern me for a few reasons. both mainstream devisers and -- like the retirement fund. south dakota is a business friendly state, and like to see that any of the businesses that may fall victim to a financial transition test from the united states whether you are an exchange in manhattan, a data operating center, or commodities trader in chicago

who are welcoming south dakota. chairman clayton, how do you see our securities market evolving of one or more state and local jurisdictions imposed a financial transaction tax? >> you know, a couple of things to highlight, to think about. one is that transaction taxes whether they are in financial services or other places. the incidents, largely, falls on the end user. in our case, the investor. some of the services and media thierry's, but at the depth that day, they should be approached with that mind. the incidents attacks wasn't the person who uses the investor at the end of the day and the other thing, if we have a piecemeal approach to who transaction attacks, you will have tax policy adjustments, and if we have our critical infrastructure moving from one jurisdiction to another four or

more favorable tax standpoint, i creates more opportunities than we think about. >> thank you. with regard to proxy, and advisory firms, there has been discussions about their impact, whether or not there should be more disclosures. in broad terms, for the time i have left, what is your thoughts, regarding any regulatory activity that should involve proxy advisory firms, and where are we at right now in your own opinion? other other issues or concerns you would like to express to this committee, regarding the firms, the impact they have, and whether or not additional regulatory activities should occur regarding them? >> let me level this other perspective going forward. i won't be here in the future, but a proxy process is designed to approximate the quintessential shareholder meeting, and if you have somebody at that shareholder

meeting who is soliciting votes one way or another, you want to know their interests. what we have done, our rulemaking, is apply that concept to the proxy advisory firms and extended the material, material conflicts that a reasonable person could believe would affect your advice, we should tell them. that paradigm is a good way to look at it. also, let's plan opportunity for engagement so that shareholders can hear both sides, or multiple sides, or a diversities, and make an informed decision. that's how i look at it. >> thank you for your service, and thank you, mister chairman. >> senator schatz? >> chairman clayton, i want to thank you for your public service. our engagements have always been a good and respectful,

sometimes we even find areas of common ground. i will follow up a little bit on our ongoing conversation about climate risk. last year, we discussed the sec's enforcement of its 2010 guidance on climate risk disclosure. you and senator warren had a brief exchange about that 15 minutes ago. where is the division of corporation finance on the enforcement efforts? could you give me an update? >> here is where we are, senator, and i want to make it clear that this is an area where for certain sectors and companies, we all believe disclosures are hard. it is material. different sectors, different ways. but we have been doing, and like i said, i got off a long conference call this morning with oscar go, a task force.

how do we drive the standards that are meaningful? i think we are all gravitating towards a view these need to be secretary specific. it's very hard. it's all forward-thinking information, and i'm sorry i'm taking time, but i need to say this. it's really hard to make forward-looking disclosure that it is going to be accurate overtime. we know that, and we need something to disclose against, and whether that's carbon new trail by 2050, however going to get companies carbon new trail by 2050? whether it's some other regulation, you need something to disclose against. we are working on that. we and i believe, for example, the property and casualty industry, and in certain industries, you could start to see metric so people will gravitate towards -- as regulation changes. but this is a vexing issue. we are on it.

>> sure, and the area of common ground, and it's worth lingering on for a moment, is that these risks are material. the sec does not need additional statutory authority to require these disclosures, but this stuff is hard and we are going to need some uniform platforms and disclosure requirements so it's not everybody inventing their own disclosure technique either by sector, or by individual company. we have a fair amount of common ground here. as you know, it would require companies to disclose the financial impacts of climate on their businesses by 2025, and this is where we may have a disagreement. it's not against potential regulation, it's against what is currently happening. you have -- >> it's both. what we see now and the future.

>> this is not just about regulatory risk, political risk, this is about physical risk to farms, aviation, tourism, whatever it may be. a question i have for you is, how deeply are you engaging bilaterally with your international counter friends on their plans? i think it is fair to say other countries, and other regulators are a little further along. they're not going to be wrapped along the acts for that question, but how deeply are you engaging your international counterparts, and what's the next up for the sec? >> weekly, if not monthly, at a substantive level, because we need to be humble about this. let me give you a financial comparison. backlog. a company discloses backlog. that's a forecast as to how much they are going to be sell in the next two years. backlog numbers usually prove

to be meaningful. but somewhat inaccurate. we need to try to get disclosure of people recognize is forward looking, gives you a assessment of the risks. people aren't going to be held to precision. or they won't be held to metrics. that's a very important way to approach this. this isn't having to do last quarter, or what were the effects. it's what were you thinking going forward? i was advocate. i believe we can get better disclosure and move things forward, if we have a safe harbor. you can't fraud, you can't lie, you can't do those kinds of things, but people need to know if they do those things, in a good faith, way we need that forecast information. we can't deter it with you know what i'm saying. >> i do. the one thing that i will close with here is that we actually moved along quickly -- pretty nicely because we got to a point where i think we can all agree this stuff is hard,

it's highly technical, there's a lot of work that needs to be done for the financial system, the back of -- bank of england, with sec is, doing where we were three to five years ago is because the stuff is difficult it's unknown bubble and not permissible to put the risk at zero. the disk -- risk may be difficult to quantify even in terms of ranges but everyone knows that the risk is and zero, we have to put pen, paper and do the hard work. i appreciate your work hard work. >> senator tell us. thank you mister chair. senator clayton, thanks for being here. i want to thank you for great work in your tenure, my staff have greater guard for the people that they've been able to work with over there. before i ask you a few specific questions, when you were first moving into this role i was trying to emphasize regulators that were going to go out, take

a look at the organization, and right size some of the regulatory or guidance requirements that your particular agency is responsible for. can you tell me a little bit about what you've done internally? but you've taken up yourself? which are most happy with under your tenure? >> it is nice of you to ask that question. we have looked across the landscape of our rules and see which ones haven't been touched in the years, and try to modernize them and bring rationality to them. in some cases we have increased regulation, we've increased the regulation of broker dealers when they increase -- significantly. in some cases we have patchwork that's been built up over 30 years, you know, we made the seams between the patches a lot less rough. so you don't need a army of

lawyers to figure out how to get clear really qualified investors into a investment. >> i for one thank you've done a great job, and there are some specific, things you and i have had more than one conversation over. the one in particular was the rollback, excuse, me back in july over privacy advisers. can you explain why you think that was worthwhile, and important to people who may be watching this? >> i think anytime that you have a participant in their marketplace who is soliciting votes, or providing investment advice, understanding their conflicts, is important. their material conflicts. that's really important. to the extent that you are participating in a shareholder meeting, you want that

engagement at a shareholder meeting to be as meaningful as possible. in many ways we cut a five best practices, broad transparency, and i hope it will lead to better decision-making by investors. >> i want to talk more about the shareholder process. i appreciate the work you've done there. you have also worked on updating the rules regarding shareholder process, would you mind expanding, excuse me, on the steps the sec has taken under your leadership on this issue? >> sure, sure. part of that process, material part of that process have not been updated since the fifties. so almost 70 years ago. that is when the days of the meals and the like. so what we did was on the proposal process we look at what's a demonstration of a meaningful state in a company is such that you can take up the time and attention of other

shareholders. this is a amazing system. you can be one shareholder having to million dollars or more, and if you've held it under our new rules and under three years you can take the time and the attention of all the other shareholders. that's part of our system. but what is the amount that you need to do to demonstrate that level of commitment that allows you to demand that tampa detention of all the other 20, 30, 40 shareholders for them to go through the proxy. we update that. we say you have 2000 dollars, that's a good minimum threshold, if you had less, you need a little bit more of a financial commitment, because we are proposing changes for the long term, you should demonstrate that you are in there with those other shareholders. and on the recent-ness of thresholds, they were updated, you could get less than 10% of shareholder, or the 90 voting against, it used to have the opportunity to really submit it. if you've got more than 10%

after a few times you can submit it. for lack of a better term into perpetuity. we cleared, those we said if you're out for every of the take a timeout. i think we did a very good job. >> just a final question. i have some other ones that i might try to submit to the record. what is next? what else should we expect in your remaining weeks on the job? well, continue to focus on covid and the integrity of our markets. we have a few more rulemaking's, just business as usual. . >> again, chair clayton, i appreciate the great work you've done. i especially appreciate how accessible you have been. i'm sure i join the majority of my colleagues and thinking it's been a great run, and i appreciate your service.

thank you mister chair. >> senator van hollen. >> thank you. i too want to start by thanking you chairman clayton for your public service, for the open lines of communications that we have had, whether we agree on the issue or disagree. i want to talk about another -- a couple areas where i think we agree, but i have been frustrated that we haven't made more progress recently. and maybe he ups of action items including maybe the sec going forward. these are all designed to do what i think we all want, which is to provide accountability for insiders, corporate executives, and transparency for investors. so on the issue of accountability and making sure that insiders aren't unfairly exploiting information to.

have you already mentioned the sec rule. which allows executives eight affirmative defense two insider training if they provide a schedule for their stock sales. but we have seen a number of incidents recently which at the very least i think undermine public perception that people are not using insider information. most recently was the pfizer time stop. you know the sale occurred on the very same day that they announced their breakthrough on a covid-19 vaccine. that stock sale had been scheduled in august, when the ceo change their scheduled sales plan. i heard you mention earlier putting guardrails up against this. maybe three months or six months. i really think we need to act. we also saw a similar situation

with moderna. we are after announcing their progress towards a covid-19 vaccine, their stock sale, the stock price increased, and then certain moderna executives changed their 10b51 plans and then made a additional 4.5 1 million dollars. again this is legal. but i believe it undermines public confidence in the system. i would like to know whether you agree and whether you would encourage us to work to put up tighter gird reels against potential abuse. and certainly, the public perception that undermines confidence. >> i want to be very clear. i'm not part -- commenting on a particular case, but as a general meddler i agree. i think that there are people

that have different views. let me say it this way. for senior executive officers using 10b51 to sell stock, i believe in a cooling off period between when it's materially changed and when the transaction could occur, whether that's four months, until the six, quarter i could make arguments for, either i think we should do. it >> -- i appreciate. that -- encourages the sec to look at this and do rule making, past a need bipartisan basis in the house. i'm going to -- , if you could be passed at the end of the year. let me ask you a question about transparency and country by country reporting. you have stated at a hearing in the house on june 25th that quote, i want to be clear. it, you're referencing country

by country reporting is becoming a increasing part of how sophisticated investors are looking at investors, unquote. we have seen that 100 percent of investors manage a trillion dollars and assets weighed in on the report urged the country to use country by country reporting on the gap. is this area where you would also agree that more transparency would help investors? >> let me say this. i'm not sure i can give you this specific an absolute of answer that i did to this. one to the extent that in managing the boardroom people are looking at managing programs on a country to country basis i would hope that in the nda section of disclosure that companies would be disclosing that to their investors. it's not a company specific issue but yes.

>> right. another area we're again there is legislation to provide that kind of transparency, which it seems to me that it's hard to argue. -- investors with that useful information. mister chairman, i will pull up with a question for the record we're getting something that senator moral raised regarding stop buybacks and insider trading. i spoke -- with about this issue before one of his former colleagues, commissioner jackson was involved in this. since his findings, lenore apology, no at the roosevelt institute issued a paper finding a very clear correlation between stay -- stopped activity, and i think this is an area we should really look at going forward, mister clayton, we can work

with you. get your input. >> thank you. i love mark. love investors. happy to help. >> thank you. thank you mister chair. >> thank you sir. senator kennedy's next. senator kennedy. >> thank you mister chairman. i am in a judiciary committee here, we are in the middle of a vote, so i just wanted to use this opportunity rather than to ask questions to make a short statement, specifically to chairman clayton. i want to thank you for your service mister chairman. [inaudible] we also found that you're going to be leaving your post at the

end of december. i just want to give you my point of view. you have been one of the best sec chairman's our country has ever had. you have been fair. you clearly care about investors. you also care about the investments. you have exercise intelligently and materially. we've always been responsive, he have been frank with all of us. if you think our ideas have merit, you say so. if you think our ideas don't have merit, you say so. and a very tactful way. we are going to miss you, mister chairman. and i wanted to say it's been a genuine honor and privilege to

serve with you. thank you, and best wishes to you as you go back to the private sector, and sort through when i'm sure our many opportunities there. >> thank you, senator kennedy. working with you and your staff has been tremendous, and in particular, i want to thank the stanford victims for being willie to continue to engage with us to try to get them at least something back. you are too nice to say it here, but we didn't do a good job for them, but that won't happen again. >> godspeed. >> thank you, senator kennedy. senator cortez masto. >> think you, ranking member brown. i too, chairman clayton, want to thank you for your service. it's not an easy task under the current environment. we haven't always agreed on policy, but i too so appreciate

your service to the country. let me ask a question. i know you are leaving at the end of this year, we will have a change in the administration with new president elect biden. what is it that you are preparing for right now at that transition? are you undertaking any type of work with the transition team, or coordinating with them in any way, whatsoever? if you are, can you talk specifics? >> in terms of transition to a new chair, and the like. let me say this, i will be available that the predecessor was available to me, in terms of the ongoing work to the commission. we are very transparent, i've a few other commissioners with no drowned of that is transparent. on the time comes in terms of

leaving restrictions and ability to engage with folks, we will do so. >> thank you for that. it sounds like no transition was happening until you get through the legal restrictions that by this current administration. let me ask you about 13f, the proposed rule that's been very controversial. is the sec planning to finalize this, role making it prior to you leaving? >> the short answer to that is, no, but if i can elaborate, this proposal has taught us something, the proposal for 13-f, which is there for a market market integrity of you, it finds out how much investors have in particular stocks, how it changes quarter to quarter, and if there's a container. it's an outdated way to do that. what we found was deplore using 13-f for two different things that it wasn't intended for. one is so that companies could find their shareholders, it's

an incredibly inefficient way for that to happen. we need to fix our proxy system, fancy terms for got to go through intermediate or use system to make it easier for companies to access their shareholders. the other thing is to track people's trading strategies. someone looked at the 13 f reports and crack their trading strategies. i'm not sure we want regulation for strategy tracking, is proprietary, it wasn't the intent, but if we do, 13-f is an inefficient way to do it. it's, there has only long positions. investors should understand if they are looking at 13-f as a robust indication of trading strategies, it's not. >> chairman clayton, let me jump to another issue that is present of mind.

i understand senator scott spoke about this, and i have a rules committee going on as well, so i've been trying to attend both of them. investor protection for unsophisticated investors, and it's the issue of too many young people being able to trade online in this environment where it's trading on platforms no fee. it amplifies the stock market into a playful environment. we've seen horrific coverage of a young man, called student, who is trading on an online platform doing the on pandemic, and he received a text message that he understood to mean he had a negative cash balance of 730,000 dollars, and fearing financial ruin, from the reporting, he was so distraught he committed suicide. this is horrific, and this is an area where we need to understand what is happening with these platforms, and young adults who are not sophisticated enough to be on

these platforms, thinking there are some sort of a gainful environment going on, so my question is what has the sec done to avoid such financial devastation for investors, and what are you doing to respond to some of these platforms that are no feet online, that are incentivized kind of environment? fee online that kind of >> we have long allowed to direct access for investors to what we call a self directed accounts. that's been that way for a long time. to the extent that when i would say is technology has facilitated that, and people home with the pandemic, and you have people, who i would say, is trading, not investing. the risk goes up. in particularly, we options are other complex products. one specific thing we have done recently is we have put out

guidance, commission guidance and are looking other ways to tell people, not only brokered to dealers and investors, but those platforms you make sure you have people who are training on those instruments, have the compete a ability to understand those instruments. don't be using these options unless we understand them. >> there needs to be more education around this, and more involvement on these platforms, and responsibility for young adults. more needs to be done definitely. thank you again, my time is up, i appreciate your service. >> thank you, senator cortez masto. i see senator crapo on the floor. the next people in line are senator moran, they see here, by chance? or senator jones?

or senator smith? is anybody here who wants to ask a question? i don't know what to do. >> [laughs] last question. >> greg, if you are would respond somehow to whether i should wrap the hearing up, or if senator crapo would like to return, i assume there may be a couple of members. let's do this, chair clayton, anybody that didn't get to ask because of the votes, we will send your questions in writing, as we always do. thank you for always being responsible, we've been a great public official and seven that way, and let's then wrap this hearing up, and i will close it up. i have one short statement i wanted to make, that of course i can't find now. i guess i want people to find.

give me 30 seconds. let me close with a statement, and we will wrap this hearing up, check they did, and i am sorry. these things sometimes happen. like i said in my opening statement, your agenda in my view has submitted transparency and protection. the increase of the shareholder proposal thresholds resulted in the last shareholder engagement and management accountability, the new requirements of privacy investors will raise cost for institutional investors, and make proxy voting harder, regulation best interests that we talked about earlier, and my earlier commitments doesn't point mainstream customers first. the proposal, and it will's unregistered finders to act without investor protection. your proposal to shut down transparency reports for 90% of investors will lead company investors in the dark,

eliminating financial disclosures while calling for climate wrist in response of a couple of questions you've got those also brought out i'm ignoring calls for climate risk. to ignore what investors have been asking for. i know you and others will argue that less is more, and all these draw backs and improvements. to me, more is more likely then less as well, just less. so, thank you, mister chair, for coming in front of our committee. anytime, good luck as you pursue your interest in the private sector, and this committee is adjourned. thank you. >> weeknights this month, we feature american history programs to preview what is available every weekend on c-span 3. tonight, a panel of historians analyze the secret white house tapes of john f. kennedy, london be johnson, and richard nixon. the tapes provide an inside look into how presidents conducted their day-to-day business, and we hear their candid assessments, watch

beginning at 8 pm eastern and enjoy american history tv every weekend on c-span 3. >> the food and drug administration needs an open session to approve the pfizer biontech covid-19 vaccine. live coverage thursday at 9 am eastern, and live coverage of the fda's approval for the moderna vaccine is next thursday at 9 am eastern. watch live on c-span three. story live and on demand at c-span.org or listen at the c-span radio app. >> american history tv on c-span three, exploring the people and events that tell the american story every weekend, and coming up this weekend, saturday at 8:30 am, live on american history tv and washington journal, a look back on bush v. gore, 20 years later. we will discuss the landmark decision with washington post

columnist dj dion and the bull marketer william crystal. there are co-others of the book bush v. gore. the court cases and the commentary. at 6 pm on the civil war, the gettysburg college civil war institute hosted a discussion on the wartime career of union general george mead. at 8 pm, on lectures in history, university of texas at arlington professor stephanie cole a life and work of antebellum social reformer, a leading advocate in the number of benign seen century causes, including abolition and women's rights. on sunday at 8 pm eastern, on the presidency. historian douglas brinkley discusses jacqueline kennedy's tenure and legacy as first lady. a businessman and philanthropist dave reuben's time. they focus on her historic preservation and cultural work, especially the white house renovation. watch american history tv this weekend on c-span 3.

>> but some to c-span's podcast the weekly. our guest is don richie, senate historian americas. he joins us to discuss the constitutional steps that still need to be finalized before president elect joe biden is sworn in. find it spans the weekly, where you get your podcasts. >> the federal agency that watches over the nation cybersecurity found no evidence of widespread fraud in the presidential election. president trump fired the director. former cybersecurity and infrastructure security agency director christopher krebs talked to the washington post about the 2020 election. >> welcome to washington post live, i'm david ignatius, a columnist for the washington post. today is my pleasure to welcome christopher krebs, the former director of the cybersecurity