Mr. Frank said he hoped to pass a bill "very soon" to give the federal government "resolution authority" to seize control, restructure and shut down troubled financial institutions.

I am all in favor of resolution authority: the issue is whether, in the case of a really big institution, the government would be willing to use it.

The only resolution authority we currently have that would prevent a financial meltdown involved tapping the Federal Reserve or the federal treasury.

To date, the Administration has failed to explain exactly how the resolution authority will work despite numerous letters from Chairman Bachus.

The "resolution authority" effectively permits the FDIC to borrow up to the book value of a failing institution.

Two years after Lehman and AIG, we still don't know - and the Administration hasn't explained - how the "resolution authority" would work.

But the "resolution authority" is silent on how this is supposed to happen.

Any way you theorize it, the Democrats' "resolution authority" is the institutionalization of bailouts in which taxpayers will be left to pay off the creditors of failed institutions.

For that reason, I am again asking the Administration to explain - in detail - how the "resolution authority" would work.

In theory, and in practice, how would "resolution authority" have actually resolved the difficult cases of 2008?