Everybody, please have a seat.

Thank you very much.

Well, thank you.

It is good to be back.

(applause)

It is good to be back in New York,

it is good to be back in the Great Hall at Cooper Union.

(applause)

We've got some special guests here that I want to acknowledge.

Congresswoman Carolyn Maloney is here in the house.

(applause)

Governor David Paterson is here.

(applause)

Attorney General Andrew Cuomo.

(applause)

State Comptroller Thomas DiNapoli is here.

(applause)

The Mayor of New York City, Michael Bloomberg.

(applause)

Dr. George Campbell, Jr., president of Cooper Union.

(applause)

And all the citywide elected officials who are here.

Thank you very much for your attendance.

It is wonderful to be back in Cooper Union,

where generations of leaders and citizens have come to defend

their ideas and contest their differences.

It's also good to be back in Lower Manhattan,

a few blocks from Wall Street.

(laughter)

It really is good to be back, because Wall Street's the heart

of our nation's financial sector.

Now, since I last spoke here two years ago,

our country has been through a terrible trial.

More than 8 million people have lost their jobs.

Countless small businesses have had to shut their doors.

Trillions of dollars in savings have been lost --

forcing seniors to put off retirement,

young people to postpone college,

entrepreneurs to give up on the dream of starting a company.

And as a nation we were forced to take unprecedented steps to

rescue the financial system and the broader economy.

And as a result of the decisions we made --

some of which, let's face it, were very unpopular --

we are seeing hopeful signs.

A little more than one year ago we were losing an average of

750,000 jobs each month.

Today, America is adding jobs again.

One year ago the economy was shrinking rapidly.

Today the economy is growing.

In fact, we've seen the fastest turnaround in growth in nearly

three decades.

But you're here and I'm here because we've got more work to do.

Until this progress is felt not just on Wall Street but on Main

Street, we can't be satisfied.

Until the millions of our neighbors who are looking for

work can find a job, and wages are growing at a meaningful

pace, we may be able to claim a technical recovery --

but we will not have truly recovered.

And even as we seek to revive this economy,

it's also incumbent on us to rebuild it stronger than before.

We don't want an economy that has the same weaknesses that led

to this crisis.

And that means addressing some of the underlying problems that

led to this turmoil and devastation in the first place.

Now, one of the most significant contributors to this recession

was a financial crisis as dire as any we've known in

generations -- at least since the '30s.

And that crisis was born of a failure of responsibility --

from Wall Street all the way to Washington --

that brought down many of the world's largest financial firms

and nearly dragged our economy into a second Great Depression.

It was that failure of responsibility that I spoke

about when I came to New York more than two years ago --

before the worst of the crisis had unfolded.

It was back in 2007.

And I take no satisfaction in noting that my comments then

have largely been borne out by the events that followed.

But I repeat what I said then because it is essential that we

learn the lessons from this crisis so we don't doom

ourselves to repeat it.

And make no mistake, that is exactly what will happen if we

allow this moment to pass -- and that's an outcome that is

unacceptable to me and it's unacceptable to you,

the American people.

(applause)

As I said on this stage two years ago,

I believe in the power of the free market.

I believe in a strong financial sector that helps people to

raise capital and get loans and invest their savings.

That's part of what has made America what it is.

But a free market was never meant to be a free license to

take whatever you can get, however you can get it.

That's what happened too often in the years leading up to this crisis.

Some -- and let me be clear, not all --

but some on Wall Street forgot that behind every dollar traded

or leveraged, there's a family looking to buy a house,

or pay for an education, open a business, save for retirement.

What happens on Wall Street has real consequences across the

country, across our economy.

I've also spoken before about the need to build a new

foundation for economic growth in the 21st century.

And given the importance of the financial sector,

Wall Street reform is an absolutely essential part of

that foundation.

Without it, our house will continue to sit on shifting

sands, and our families, businesses,

and the global economy will be vulnerable to future crises.

That's why I feel so strongly that we need to enact a set of

updated, commonsense rules to ensure accountability on Wall

Street and to protect consumers in our financial system.

(applause)

Now, here's the good news: A comprehensive plan to achieve

these reforms has already passed the House of Representatives.

(applause)

A Senate version is currently being debated,

drawing on ideas from Democrats and Republicans.

Both bills represent significant improvement on the flawed rules

that we have in place today, despite the furious effort of

industry lobbyists to shape this legislation to their special interests.

And for those of you in the financial sector I'm sure that

some of these lobbyists work for you and they're doing what they

are being paid to do.

But I'm here today specifically --

when I speak to the titans of industry here --

because I want to urge you to join us,

instead of fighting us in this effort.

I am here --

(applause)

I'm here because I believe that these reforms are, in the end,

not only in the best interest of our country,

but in the best interest of the financial sector.

And I'm here to explain what reform will look like,

and why it matters.

Now, first, the bill being considered in the Senate would

create what we did not have before,

and that is a way to protect the financial system and the broader

economy and American taxpayers in the event that a large

financial firm begins to fail.

If there's a Lehmans or an AIG, how can we respond in a way that

doesn't force taxpayers to pick up the tab or, alternatively,

could bring down the whole system?

In an ordinary local bank when it approaches insolvency,

we've got a process, an orderly process through the FDIC,

that ensures that depositors are protected,

maintains confidence in the banking system, and it works.

Customers and taxpayers are protected and owners and

management lose their equity.

But we don't have that kind of process designed to contain the

failure of a Lehman Brothers or any of the largest and most

interconnected financial firms in our country.

That's why, when this crisis began,

crucial decisions about what would happen to some of the

world's biggest companies -- companies employing tens of

thousands of people and holding hundreds of billions of dollars

in assets -- had to take place in hurried discussions in the

middle of the night.

And that's why, to save the entire economy from an even

worse catastrophe, we had to deploy taxpayer dollars.

Now, much of that money has now been paid back and my

administration has proposed a fee to be paid by large

financial firms to recover all the money, every dime,

because the American people should never have been put in

that position in the first place.

(applause)

But this is why we need a system to shut these firms down with

the least amount of collateral damage to innocent people and

innocent businesses.

And from the start, I've insisted that the financial

industry, not taxpayers, shoulder the costs in the event

that a large financial company should falter.

The goal is to make certain that taxpayers are never again on the

hook because a firm is deemed "too big to fail."

Now, there's a legitimate debate taking place about how best to

ensure taxpayers are held harmless in this process.

And that's a legitimate debate, and I encourage that debate.

But what's not legitimate is to suggest that somehow the

legislation being proposed is going to encourage future

taxpayer bailouts, as some have claimed.

That makes for a good sound bite,

but it's not factually accurate.

It is not true.

In fact, the system as it stands --

(applause)

-- the system as it stands is what led to a series of massive,

costly taxpayer bailouts.

And it's only with reform that we can avoid a similar outcome

in the future.

In other words, a vote for reform is a vote to put a stop

to taxpayer-funded bailouts.

That's the truth.

End of story.

And nobody should be fooled in this debate.

(applause)

By the way, these changes have the added benefit of creating

incentives within the industry to ensure that no one company

can ever threaten to bring down the whole economy.

To that end, the bill would also enact what's known as the

Volcker Rule -- and there's a tall guy sitting in the front

row here, Paul Volcker --

(applause)

-- who we named it after.

And it does something very simple: It places some limits on

the size of banks and the kinds of risks that banking

institutions can take.

This will not only safeguard our system against crises,

this will also make our system stronger and more competitive by

instilling confidence here at home and across the globe.

Markets depend on that confidence.

Part of what led to the turmoil of the past two years was that

in the absence of clear rules and sound practices,

people didn't trust that our system was one in which it was

safe to invest or lend.

As we've seen, that harms all of us.

So by enacting these reforms, we'll help ensure that our

financial system -- and our economy --

continues to be the envy of the world.

That's the first thing, making sure that we can wind down one

firm if it gets into trouble without bringing the whole

system down or forcing taxpayers to fund a bailout.

Number two, reform would bring new transparency to many

financial markets.

As you know, part of what led to this crisis was firms like AIG

and others who were making huge and risky bets,

using derivatives and other complicated financial

instruments, in ways that defied accountability,

or even common sense.

In fact, many practices were so opaque, so confusing,

so complex that the people inside the firms didn't

understand them, much less those who were charged with overseeing them.

They weren't fully aware of the massive bets that were being placed.

That's what led Warren Buffett to describe derivatives that

were bought and sold with little oversight as "financial weapons

of mass destruction."

That's what he called them.

And that's why reform will rein in excess and help ensure that

these kinds of transactions take place in the light of day.

Now, there's been a great deal of concern about these changes.

So I want to reiterate: There is a legitimate role for these