Mitt Romney Quotes

We need to repeal Dodd-Frank act. It is eviscerating small businesses and small banks.

I would drastically revise much of the Dodd-Frank financial-reform legislation, which I call the 'Bureaucrat Full Employment Act.'

Certainly, some of the anti-bank rhetoric has shifted a little bit, but on either side of the aisle, there seems to be different tacts. On one side of the aisle, you see a proposed scaling back of Dodd-Frank. On the other, a proposed reinstatement of Glass-Steagall.

We could repeal Dodd-Frank. I think that would be a big help.

There are elements of Dodd-Frank that clearly need to be curtailed.

My fantasy is to break up the big banks. I wish we would end 'too big to fail' in our banking system.

We now have power under the Dodd-Frank legislation to break up banks. And I've said I will use that power if they pose a systemic risk.

We certainly had an upheaval at the start of the Great Depression, and that resulted in a lot of financial reform, but it wasn't done in one stroke, and it wasn't done immediately. The Depression was in 1929 and resulted in the Securities and Exchange Act of '33, '34, '35, '37, '39, and '41.

Banks are concerned the central bank is imposing too many regulations. If the trend continues, we'll swing to heavy regulation. We need to have balanced regulation to encourage the economy.

I find it very difficult to see a scenario where financial regulation doesn't pass the Senate.

We need financial regulation that allows businesses and the banks they use to have access to the tools that help keep prices of consumer goods - like groceries and home heating oil - steady, while ensuring that the taxpayers are never again on the hook for the types of wild bets that helped crash the economy in 2008.

We need to repeal and replace Dodd-Frank. We need to make America fair again for all businesses, but especially those being run by small business owners.

If a bank's too big so that it can't fail without hurting our economy, well then, it's too big.

It is probably the case that some regulation of financing will make crises less likely, and I would say higher capital requirements are an almost fail-safe way to make banks safer. But there are a lot of other things that may not be doing that, and so we need to be careful about sort of, like, rushing to one conclusion or another.

Creating a regulatory system that reflects the modern-day realities of financial markets is not as difficult as it may appear.

Washington should revive international efforts begun during the Clinton administration to pressure countries with dangerously loose banking regulations to adopt and enforce stricter rules.

This country, of course, needs fundamental reform of our financial regulatory system, as I, and many other financial institution executives, have publicly advocated for a considerable period.

Financial regulatory reform is one of the top legislative priorities of the Obama Administration.

There's a lot of talk coming from Citigroup about how Dodd-Frank isn't perfect. Let me say this to anyone who is listening at Citi: I agree with you. Dodd-Frank isn't perfect. It should have broken you into pieces.

If the large banks can do this without breaking the rules, then the rules should be revamped.

The reality is that what we did in 2010 with the Dodd-Frank wasn't enough.

Dodd-Frank has disproportionately burdened community banks, despite their having no role in the financial crisis.

Regulatory reform must move beyond limiting the damage that the financial sector can do and ensure that the sector genuinely serves society.

To enable large U.S. banks to support their clients better, the Volcker rule should be clarified.

Wall Street's biggest fight with Obama was over the Dodd-Frank Wall Street Reform and Consumer Protection Act, which Obama signed into law in the summer of 2010.