Richard Cordray: What His Appointment Means For The Consumer Financial Protection Bureau
http://thedianerehmshow.org/shows/2012-01-09/richard-cordray-what-his-appointment-means-consumer-financial-protection-bureau
Last week, President Obama bypassed congress and appointed Richard Cordray as the chief of the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau. Senate Republicans blocked a confirmation vote on Cordray last month. The recess appointment raised the ire of the GOP who say it was unconstitutional. Cordray has promised a strong agenda, warning financial institutes there would be "real consequences" if they break the law. The CFPB focuses on abusive, unfair or deceptive practices in the financial sector, including education loans, prepaid credit cards and mortgage services. Diane and her guests look at the CFPB, why opponents may challenge Cordray's appointment and what this means for consumers.
Guests
Mark Calabria
director of financial regulation studies, Cato Institute.
Travis Plunkett
legislative director, the Consumer Federation of America.
Bruce Fein
former associate deputy attorney general, Republican counsel during the Iran-contra hearings, and founding partner with the Lichfield Group
Laurence Tribe
Professor of Constitutional Law at Harvard University and author of more than 100 books and articles, including "The Invisible Constitution,""American Constitutional Law," and "On Reading the Constitution."
Comments
Please familiarize yourself with our Code of Conduct and Terms of Use before posting your comments.
The only answer that Washington can offer to this or any problem is additional bureaucracy. As taxpayers, we will allocate and spend billions of dollars to fund this agency. It is money that we do not have and must borrow from the Chinese. Is this sound domestic policy?
Why do we need another federal agency for this, we have the FTC. It appears this another case of the Obama administration trying to make themselves look good by spending millions on another money waisting scheme to buy votes with our money.
The Federal Trade Commission (FTC) is an independent agency of the United States government, established in 1914 by the Federal Trade Commission Act. Its principal mission is the promotion of consumer protection and the elimination and prevention of what regulators perceive to be harmfully anti-competitive business practices, such as coercive monopoly
I'm in it with the People on the bottom, and even I suspect the Consumer Financial Protection Agency is window dressing. Maybe it's intended to protect what's left of the real estate speculation. Its cost is negligible so far and the same is true of the SEC which is too underfunded to do much of anything.
It's like a pie cooling on the window sill the help will never taste, because in this one party state the fixin's are reserved for the Owners; and the scraps are for after dinner entertainment, for the Owned to fight over. That Plantation though, she's in big trouble, 'cause a tsunami of payback is on the way. (Even if Massa do disable the warning system.)
Oh, this panel has gridlock written all over it. Maybe they can shut down the show. Place your bets. Two red roosters versus two blue roosters, and I thought cockfighting was illegal in DC.
A huge shout out from Ohio for former Ohio Attorney General Richard Cordray. A man who bases decisions on facts, justice and accountabiliy. Finally President Obama throws the Republicans hypocrisy back in their faces with this recess appointment
My question for your guest specifically Bruce Fein. President OBama has said that there have not been any prosecutions of the Wall Street Banksters who brought the US economy to its knees. Obama has said that what they did was within the law. Professor William Black stated at the L.A. Occupy Wall Street teach in that during the Savings and Loan scandal that I believe he was one of the head litigators for that there were 10,000 prosecution referrals and that over 1000 individuals were prosecuted for finance crimes.
Is it true that everything that say Goldman Sachs Lyod Blankfein etc participated in was LEGAL under regulations at the time?
Can Cordray do anything about what took place during the Wall street fiasco? Where is the OBama's justice dept on this?
I would be interested in knowing the specifics of why your guest from CATO feels Cordray is not qualified?
Is the real reason that he was a strong advocate for consumers and leader in going after banks and mortage brokers when he was Ohio AG?
During the most recent Richard Cordray Senate hearing. Republicans Senator Shelby and Corker were trying to cover their hide ends by saying that they had objections to particular provisions in the CFPB. Senator Sherrod Brown politely called them out.
Still do not get what their alleged objections to the CFPB are.
Can you explain in detail what those objections are.
Hanns ...great question
A huge shout out to Mark Calabria for pointing out all the things that are wrong with how the CFPB has been structured and funded.
It seems that Wall Street learned from the Savings and Loan scandal. According to Professor William Black there were 10,000 criminal referrals that the agency he was working for made during that financial scandal and that over 1000 individuals were prosecuted. It seemed like what they learned was how to protect their own financial ability to completely take advantage of the financial system as well as change legislation in their favor blocking deep investigation into what they did in the sub prime fiasco and the alleged inability to hold them legally accountable.
In Cordrays new position can he hold anyone accountable for the latest finacial scandal since the OBama Dept of Justice has not
A huge shout out to Bruce Fein for explaining WHY this appointment is an end-run around the Constitution and the authority of the Senate.
The good professor is not explaining WHY the Senate filibustered. Negotiation of what he wants is anathama to this President. That is all the Senate wanted and it was a reasonable request.
The representative from Cato made the unchallenged statement that Federal deposit insurance was to protect banks. I thought it was to protect depositors.
The representative from Cato made the unchallenged statement that Federal deposit insurance was to protect banks. I thought it was to protect depositors.
The Republicans have been trying to "gut" any regulatory action of Congress. They acted to bury CPA when President Obama put forward Elizabeth Warren, who incidentally did 2 years of hard work to design and build the agency @ President Obama's request. They went after her with shameful behavior. Please extend the conversation to include this background.
The Financial/Banking interests in this Nation do not want this regulatory agency under any conditions and are acting in creatively devious ways to accomplish it's diminuation.
It matters little which political party is at work, or at fault here. They are all one and the same the monied, landed gentry. The truth is that the enemies of the common man are perpetually busy at the business of making sure that the wealthy and investor classes protect what they have.
Scream about how the constitution has been violated….you might just as well be howling at the moon.
A big shout out from millions for President Obamas recess appointment of Cordray
Come on the Republicans looked like fools blocking Richard Cordrays appointment and if they take his decision into the courts they will look like even bigger fools. Cementing that they do not want financial oversight. They will confirm their support for the 1% at the cost of losing any credibility that they have left...which is not much.
This seems to be a losing battle for the Republicans. They are exposing their support for the 1% vs at any cost if they take this decision into the courts
Since when does it matter what the President does or doesn't do with permission from Congress? Was it not President George W that brought us to war without permission 9 years ago?
There are already plenty of checks and balances in place for the CFPB. It does not, as has been pointed out on air, have an unlimited budget and it is subject to Presidential and Congressional oversight. Plus, the prudential regulators of banks have the ability to overturn any CFPB regulation that they all consider a serious threat to the safety and soundness of banks.
We need the CFPB to protect consumers from unscrupulous non-bank institutions and abusive bank practices. All of the Republicans so-called "accountability" measures are just designed to weaken the agency and make it easier to be pushed around by financial institutions and other special interests. For example: see the OCC. Speaking of which, all of those state financial laws which the gentlemen from Cato mentioned are overridden by the principle of preemption: the lack of OCC regulations trumps the presence of state regulations for all nationally-chartered financial institutions.
The CFPB is essential and Republican arguments about "accountability" are the most pathetically transparent attempts to get their financial backers off the hook for everything like horrendous disclosure, sky-high interest rates, and extortionate fees.
kathleen wrote:
"Cementing that they do not want financial oversight."
A big shout out to plays to the emotion with statements that are patently false.
With congressional approval at 9% seems like this recess appointment speaks for the American people in support of financial oversight of Wall Street
Having the vaguest and shortest constitution among all advanced countries creates the climate for all these pseudo-constitutional gimmicks being created by congress.
So John why block Cordray and then threatening to take this to court? Republicans do not want oversight...
Uh lauren plenty of Dems gave the Bush administration basic permission when they voted for the 2002 Iraq war resolution. Although the resolution does say "exhaust all other means" and the Bush administration did force on the ground IAEA inspectors to leave Iraq before they completed ongoing inspections in Iraq.
With respect to the Congress, as a taxpayer I expect Congress to put in a full day's work for a fair wage. Opening the session only to close it is not what I call work.
While we're on the subject, I also expect Congress to work a minimum number of days (full work days parties and don't count) for their pay as well. If Congress was made to work like any other business, then our representatives would have definitively been either in-session or out-of-session rather than in quasi-session.
lauren2566 wrote:
"Since when does it matter what the President does or doesn't do with permission from Congress? Was it not President George W that brought us to war without permission 9 years ago?"
Yeah. Let's replay the Iraq war every day on the MB shall we? Right after we replay the 2000 election.
Move into the present, lauren. Move into the present.
Of course Cordray's appointment should be blocked. Any agency created to protect consumers should be abolished. Consumers and average Americans do not deserve any protections. Financial Institutions should of course be allowed to take extraordinary risks and endanger our entire economy without consequence again and again. The only interests our government should be concerned about is of course that of the top highest couple of percent of income.
Our country is awash with $, and as the result of trickle-up economics, it is mostly concentrated at the top. If you wish to live in a country whose government is about the interests of majority of citizens, you may want to consider a move.
kathleen,
Mark Calabria laid out the reasons at the beginning of the show. The structure of this agency needs to be better defined. That's one of the things Republicans were looking for - plus financial oversight by the House which SHOULD be holding the purse strings - NOT the Federal Reserve. These are reasonable requests. The President will not address them because the agency represents a power-grab for him.
This is not about "Republicans not wanting oversight". Again, that is a play to the emotions not to mention a shallow analysis - if analysis at all. Republicans want EFFECTIVE oversight.
The real bottom line here is, Dodd-Frank is bad law. I get the intent. It's just been poorly crafted. Republicans are trying to improve it.
DrewKelly wrote:
"Financial Institutions should of course be allowed to take extraordinary risks and endanger our entire economy without consequence again and again. "
The CFPB will do nothing to control large Financial Institutions. It mostly addresses thinks like Pay-day lenders and other "pseudo" banks.
Such protections ARE needed for the consumer. But let's do them right, shall we?
OBAMA'S TROJAN HORSE
We independents voted for Obama for a new kind of government. Then, just like the Trojan horse, he handed over the government to Pelosi and Reid for whom we would never have voted. Then they embarked on Obamacare with all the beaurocracy and inefficiency of BIG GOVERNMENT. The tea party said, "WE CAN'T TAKE IT ANYMORE!" Liberals seldom address the abuses and incredible inefficiencies of big government. Where were the regulators when the big financial institutions were out of control? Everyone wants government to work! The only choice now is to tear it down and see what we really need and then rebuild it.
The right wants deregulation EXCEPT when is comes to social issues! Human rights, right to choose, gay marriage, etc.
The right wants to regulate individuals' social lives and deregulate financial markets and large corporations.