What does that look like and how are we addressing some of the things that Bo has really just brought up here in some of these situations that are going on in the industry right now?

When I wake up in the morning and come into work at CSBS, one of the things that excites me about the job is the impact that our supervisors have on their local communities.

The choice of a charter, whether you choose to be a state charter, whether you choose to be a national bank, whether you're licensed as a money transmitter or mortgage originator, our state supervisors have a tremendous impact on the economic well-being of their states And that local control, that local decision making, really the local accountability of supervisors, of our state supervisors to their financial institutions, really is a hallmark of the U.S. dual banking system.

And one of the things that concerns me about where we're headed now is this false premise I think that you have to have one size fits all standards, one size fits all supervision to allow for innovation and to provide for certainty.

If you want to talk about innovation, then you all look at the history of the state system.

ATMs, check cashing, peer to peer payments, the stablecoin networks that were developed over the last decade were all due to state supervision.

And so when you ask me about the future of where we're headed, I say, you know, we need to have a vital state system just to push back on this one size fits all perception.

What do you think?