Subscribe to Common Dreams News Updates
Most Popular This Week
Popular content
Today's Top News
GOP Senators Vow to Block Any Nominee for Consumer Bureau
Nearly every Republican senator is vowing to block any presidential nominee to head the new Consumer Financial Protection Bureau (CFPB) unless major changes are made to the agency.
CFPB architect and presidential advisor Elizabeth Warren has said any attempts to change the agency are mere efforts to "defund, delay and defang" the bureau. (REUTERS/Kevin Lamarque)
In a letter sent to the president Thursday, 44 GOP senators said that any pick to become the first director of the CFPB, regardless of political affiliation, will be unacceptable unless the bureau is significatly altered to reduce its "unfettered authority."
"The Dodd-Frank Act failed to provide any real checks on the CFPB director’s powers. Once confirmed, the director effectively answers to no one," the lawmakers wrote.
The demands sets up a high stakes showdown between the Senate GOP and the White House, which has yet to name a nominee even as the CFPB works to get up and running by July.
"The CFPB as created by the deeply-flawed Dodd-Frank Act is set to be one of the least accountable and most powerful agencies in Washington," said Senate Republican Leader Mitch McConnell (R-Ky.). "The reforms outlined are necessary before we will consider any nominee to head this agency.”
"This about accountability," added Sen. Richard Shelby (R-Ala.), the ranking member of the Senate Banking Committee. "The bureau, as currently structured, lacks any semblance of the checks and balances inherent in the Constitution."
Specifically, the lawmakers are demanding the top of the CFPB be changed so that instead of being run by a single director, it is headed by a board of directors. They also want the CFPB's budget to fall under the jurisdiction of Congressional appropriators — currently the CFPB is set up to receive its budget from the Federal Reserve. And finally, they want other regulators to be able to block CFPB regulations if they deem it could endanger the safety and soundess of banks.
The list of demands is comparable to legislation currently pending in the House and Senate that would curb the CFPB's power. A subcommittee of the House Financial Services Committee advanced three bills Wednesday that would make similar changes, and companion legislation has been introduced in the Senate.
Congressional Democrats have blasted the bills as surreptitious attempts to kill the agency before it is started. And CFPB architect and presidential advisor Elizabeth Warren has said any attempts to change the agency are mere efforts to "defund, delay and defang" the bureau, which was hotly contested by the GOP in the debate over the Dodd-Frank financial reform law that created it.
65 Comments so far
Show AllNot content with having nearly destroyed the world economy during the Clinton and Bush2 presidencies, the republicans insist on setting the stage for future financial crashes. Why would anyone greet their proposals with anything but ridicule and contempt?
Jim Shea
It's not honest to put all the blame on the Republicans. Even now, Obama is pushing for three NAFTA deals and his Treasury Secretary wants to lower the corporate tax rate.
Democrats certainly don't seem to be in any hurry to end these wars and bleeding the citizens--both literally and figuratively--to death. I don't see a significant distinction between Democrats and Republicans these days, and I'm always amazed when someone picks one party over another, instead of looking outside the box. It's time to think about Ron Paul. Yes, he's a flawed candidate, but he's much more viable than Obama. If you vote for any D or R candidate you might as well be carrying a sign that says: "I support Goldman Sachs and all of Wall Street!'
Obama and his Treasury Secretary are not Democrats. Obama is a fake Democrat, a Democrat in name only.
The lack of significant distinction is between Obama and Republicans, or as many observe, between corporatist Democrats and corporatist Republicans. Not every Democrat is a corporatist. Still, when you move away from the corporatist "center" of politics to the flawed-candidate edges, I prefer the Bernie Sanders agenda to the Ron Paul agenda.
Perhaps more importantly, at the state and local levels I prefer the Democratic pro-labor/public interest agenda to the Republican Koch-sucking/pure greed agenda.
Naturally.....you're spot on again.....but if you want a positively fine example of what you've just said about (the difference in) Dems & Reps.....watch for ALL our politician's position on the upcoming Patriot Act extension.
Not entirely sure of your meaning, but I know that state and local politicians will not be taking a vote on the Patriot Act extension.
Yes, vote for Ron Paul if you want to repeal women's rights, get rid of Social Security, Medicare, Medicaid, unemployment insurance, and the FDIC underwriting your savings and checking accounts, let the corporations and banksters operate without gov't oversight, and maintain the idiotic War on Drugs, since Republican Paul is against legalization, unlike the Libertarians he is sometimes credited as supporting. Whoopee.
But let me ask you the question I've asked on other threads, lefttown: If there's no 'significant difference' between the Republicans and Democrats, why are wealthy corporatists like the Koch brothers spending hundreds or millions of dollars to defeat Dems? Seems to be a massive waste of money if you already own them.
BTW, the topic of this article proves there is a difference; no Republican Congress would propose a Consumer Financial Protection Bureau, and no GOP president would hire Elizabeth Warren.
RSJ:
"But let me ask you the question I've asked on other threads, lefttown: If there's no 'significant difference' between the Republicans and Democrats, why are wealthy corporatists like the Koch brothers spending hundreds or millions of dollars to defeat Dems? Seems to be a massive waste of money if you already own them."
Good question. It's probable that this is part of the pageant show put on for the commoners, so they don't guess what a sham our "democracy" really is. They probably all have cigars and a good laugh together at the end of the day after attacking each other in the media.
@ Donnalou: My point is they could have done it much cheaper if it's just a sham; just a few million in sofa change instead of hundreds of millions. The Koch's and their wealthy buddies don't stay rich by tossing away money on people they already own.
Democrats caving in 3...2...1...
The elite are scared to death of letting even the slightest blemish appear on their complete global domination. Elizabeth Warren is David fighting Goliath, Bambi vs. Godzilla.
It's interesting that Elizabeth has gotten this far. It's extremely difficult to imagine her actually succeeding, but we can hope.
Nah. The elites will not stop, and they have solidarity (complete corruption). They will press on until they win. They always do.
==It's extremely difficult to imagine her actually succeeding, but we can hope.==
Please don't. The =success= for which you pine is her form of slow suicide. Where are her elder brothers?
Trylon
@ peacemaker: It should be noted that David defeated Goliath and, as far as I know, the match between Bambi and Godzilla has yet to be a 'major motion picture.'
The monied elite, and the GOP that represents their interests, are losing their grip -- just look at what's happening in the Rust Belt states. They now have cops and firefighters voting against them, previously two very conservative and Republican voting groups.
RSJ,
We are all impressed with the Wisconsin rallies in the great town of Madison, but Scott Walker got his laws passed, even if he had to cheat to do so. Paul Ryan (aka Eddie Munster) continues to get elected by large margins in a very blue collar jurisdiction, go figure.
Nationally, the GOP creamated the Dums in the midterms and the K Street project has gone exponential. The script seems to be: radically cut Corporate taxes and regulation, and gut social programs and entitlements; do all these things as fast and as brutally thoroughly as possible.
There is simply no way for We the People to play the game in DC, and the GOP is firmly entrenched in the rust belt. We the People have no lobby to payoff Congress and/or fight the increasingly draconian legislation and rules being written by the Corporations themselves (via PACs). The evil governors of WI, IN, OH, MI are all in charge, and seem to simply ignore protests until they just go away. Michigan's "emergency laws" are being used to shamelessly shred protections and social support systems. Indiana has always been a GOP stronghold and The Tom's dismal performance will only further strengthen the shrub's ole buddy, Mitch Daniels.
That said, I appreciate your optimism and am grateful we are on the same team. We can all get as radically involved as possible on a local level and be ready to act quickly, and in unison, if We the People ever begin to gain critical mass.
Go Elizabeth!
@ peacemaker: Much of what you say is true, but there is some reason for optimism. Walker is likely to be recalled in a year, and at least six Wisconsin GOP lawmakers in June, which will give the Dems the majority in the statehouse. Walker's laws are being challenged in court, and a new governor can reverse them.
I just heard on the radio yesterday that the 'late' ballot bags in Waukesha County that gave GOP Supreme Court Justice David Prosser his miraculous 'winning' margin were not properly secured and sealed, a serious breach of WI voting law. The bags were apparently in a condition where anyone could withdraw or deposit new ballots in the bags. Here are a few paragraphs on the story from the WisPolitics Election Blog:
"The objections raised today pertained to bags containing Brookfield votes, and Bill Hotz, representing the Kloppenburg campaign, objecting to the first five bags to be counted. They showed holes along the top, on either side of the bags’ seals, along with some seals that were pulled apart.
"In addition, the numbers on two of the bags did not match those on inspectors’ election night logs.
“The integrity of the ballot count is only as good as the integrity of condition of the bags,” he said."
-- http://elections.wispolitics.com/2011/05/kloppenburg-campaign-contines-to-raise.html
In the DC/NY 'Village,' the various courtiers and conmen, along with their kneeling supplicants in the media, are nearly completely divorced from the way the rest of the country lives -- they are as clueless and arrogant as the aristocrats in King Louis XVI's court. As Paul Ryan and the other Republican stumblebums found out, even their base is angry as they watch their jobs, pensions and the retirement benefits that they paid for stripped away to give some soft billionaire another couple of hundred thousand he doesn't need, and as they see their schools, roads and bridges fall apart because some crass private corporation can't make a profit on them.
There is a lot of buyer's remorse across the nation at the miserable job the GOP is doing and I think they'll pay for it in the next election. We hope.
Of course, we'll have to watch for open ballot bags and no-paper-trail machines counting the votes, but that's gradually changing, too.
Yep. Go Elizabeth and those like her.
.
Last July Elizabeth Warren was a 61 y-o woman who looked 50 or less; review some interviews by men (except Charlie Rose).
Since then, Elizabeth has kicked and pummeled a Tar Baby to exhaustion. Now, she is so stuck and thrashing and angry that she fully intends to bite its neck.
Oh, Elizabeth.
Trylon
Can they become any more brazen in their support for wealthy intersts, or their contempt for the worker?
And, there will be no opposing Democrat to ask them: "Have you no shame???"
the democrats are constantly calling the republicans out on this
so let me ask you, "have you no shame?"
@ pjd412: As a matter of fact, Sen. Al Franken asked a similar question not long ago and Independent Sen. Bernie Sanders who caucuses with the Dems read the GOP the riot act on the Senate floor just a couple of months ago. There are also a whole slew of Dems in the House, members of the Progressive Caucus such as Jan Schakowsky and Marcy Kaptur, who ask questions similar to this on nearly a daily basis. You should really try to keep up with the news, pjd.
Republicans are evil treasonous criminals. There is no such thing as a good republican. They have all sold their souls to the devil. They have no love for our country. All they do is lust for power and money. Isn't it time to put a bounty on republican hides, just like they used to have for wolves and other predators?
Yes, Thomas, and Democrats care for the average Joe and despise their corporate contributors, and generally stand up for people, the middle/lower classes, unions, the environment, peace, and so forth.
And I am the King of England.
Be sure to hold your nose when you are voting for your "lesser of two evils" next year, if you go to the polls at all.
Opposing Republicans is not the same thing as favoring Democrats, as you falsely imply.
No, it isn't. But since both parties are equally enthralled to the corporate Plutocracy, by only singling out the Rethuglicans and not even mentioning the Dems' equal complicity, the implication is fairly obvious in his post.
"Equal complicity" is rhetoric that serves Republican interests. We've seen the result in the 2010 midterm elections: wacko right-wingers now occupy governors' mansions and state houses, and control the House of Representatives, because demoralized left-leaning voters stated home. The wackos are bent on banning abortion, taking away union rights and transforming Medicare, education, parks and libraries into for-profit rip-offs.
Obama is complicit with Republicans. ALL Democrats are not complicit with Republicans. Judge people, not parties.
"Obama is complicit with Republicans. ALL Democrats are not complicit with Republicans. "
I believe you mean: NOT ALL Democrats are complicit with Republicans.
Which is true. On the other hand, such Democrats are relatively few in number, and the party leadership is, for many of us, insufficiently indistinguishable from the Rethugs to merit support.
Correct. But, by "party leadership" I'm sure you mean at the national level. (And I blame Obama for that.) However, at the state and local levels the two parties are very distinguishable, and the Dems do merit support (e.g. Wisconsin, Ohio and New Jersey).
I suspect that few big time DC politicians started at the top, most began at the local level....and from what I've seen of the politicians of this small town their # 1 priority is getting re-elected. They don't give a rat's ass about the taxpaying citizens so long as they get their picture in the paper glad-handing some other politician. Funny, that is the one characteristic they carry all the way to the top. Outside of Bernie Sanders and Dennis Kucinich I don't see an honest man inside the Beltway....and I'm older than all of them. Surely looking forward to June 20th when Keith Olbermann gets back in the saddle.
@ Demonstorm May 6 2011 - 11:35am: Your response is facile and false. There are good Democrats, such as the 14 in Wisconsin who left the state to try and stop Walker and the Progressive Caucus in the US House, and then there are the despicable Blue Dog Dems. Elect the former and get rid of the latter. On the other side, I can't think of one Republican who has the public interest at heart. If you can think of one, let me know.
The power of those 14 Wisconsin Democrats within their own party is ably demonstrated by the President's reaction to the whole blowup in Wisconsin.
The Progressive Caucus in the US House is a powerless minority within the Democratic Party.
@ corvo: Hate to disagree, but the Dem Progressive Caucus in the House is actually the largest caucus in Congress, so I've heard, but it's true that they had very few members controlling committees of any importance when the Dems were in the majority.
As far as Obama not marching in Wisconsin, I think Thom Hartmann had a point: if Obama put on his 'comfortable shoes' and went to Madison, the media focus would be on him and, instead of a truly populist uprising of workers, it would be all about Obama and how it he was trying to use the protests for political purposes. I've also heard that some of the protest organizers quietly asked the White House not to get involved -- they thought it would do more harm than good since some of the people who voted GOP in 2010 but have changed their minds still dislike Obama.
And now the Democratic Progressive Caucus has no power at all -- neither in Congress, nor in its own party. I really don't see how you can dance around that annoying little fact.
Now as for Thom Hartmann making excuses for his dear corporate torturer President, well, I daresay that just demonstrates how he doesn't have a clue about the United States post-1790.
Christ, give it up already with your backing of the corporate whore Dems. Tout the few little progressives among them all you wish, but it means absolutely nothing. Funny how the Dems controlled the White House and both houses of Congress and yet still didn't pass a single "progressive" piece of legislation. Hmmm...I wonder why. Same as when they are in the minority. Hmmm....see a pattern there? Eh? Could it - gasp - be that the Dems and Rethugs are playing on the same fucking team?
Lesser of two evils, my ass.
Sen. Harry Reid is a terrible majority leader, in the back pocket of insurance companies, etc., but the Dems never had a true 60-vote majority in the Senate to break filibusters anyway -- at least ten of those votes were Blue Dog Dems like Blanche Lincoln, Mary Landrieu and Max Baucus, and the '11th' was Independent progressive-hater and McCain pal Joe Lieberman. Those are DLC Dems definitely playing on the same corporate money team as the GOP. However, in the spirit of not tossing the baby out with the dirty bathwater, we should concentrate on getting rid of the Blue Dogs and electing progressives -- it's sure is a hell of a lot easier than electing third party candidates and I know that because I've worked to try and elect third party candidates. If we split the vote in 2012, the Republicans will win and America will look like Michigan -- that's how serious the GOP is about completing its agenda as soon as possible. Look, did anyone prior to the 2010 election predict what damage the GOP governors and statehouse majorities would do in the Rust Belt states? That's going to be the entire country should we get a Republican president and more Republicans in the Senate. It wouldn't surprise me if the GOP simply suspended future elections due to domestic 'unrest' or 'terrorism' -- look how Walker tried to crack down in Wisconsin; imagine if he had the Pentagon working for him. This is their playbook. They know they're losing popular support and they're ready to go to the mat to protect the corporate power structure that employs them. We were a hair's breadth from overt and complete fascism under Little Bush; if the GOP gets power again, that hair will disappear.
I disagree on several points. The Senate didn't need 60 votes to break filibusters. That's a myth. The Blue Dogs are not the problem so much as Obama's leadership: he's a Republican, pursuing a Republican agenda, with Republican allies and grudging support from his namesake Democratic party loyalists.
Since large majorities oppose the Obama/Republican agenda on so many big issues, if we vote for a populist third-party candidate we can actually win.
The fascism you fear is currently being ushered in by Obama, who has the unique power to marshal Democratic support for his fascist agenda. Even in the event of a strong third-party presidential candidate invigorating voters and then falling short, the result may be a Republican president and a Democratic Congress, and that may well be preferable to an Obama second term.
@ Naturally: Where did you get the idea the Senate doesn't need 60 votes to break a filibuster. That's news to me. Do you have a source for that claim?
You wrote: "Since large majorities oppose the Obama/Republican agenda on so many big issues, if we vote for a populist third-party candidate we can actually win."
Large majorities may, indeed, oppose the GOP agenda, but that doesn't necessarily translate to them voting for a third party. Who is this popular populist third party candidate who is going to sweep away the GOP and Dems? And where will he or she get the hundreds of millions of dollars to counter the two major parties?
What fascism has Obama been ushering in? He's a pragmatic centrist Democrat who has passed a few decent bills, such as the Huddie Ledbetter law, the credit card legislation and getting rid of DADT, and is failing on such things as the war on terror, war on drugs and reining in the banksters but, compared to what we're seeing the fascist GOP do in the Midwest, he's practically Eugene V. Debs.
We had a Dem majority in 2006 and 2007 and they didn't seem to be able to stop Little Bush; what makes you think things are going to be any different in 2012? I'm saying we should elect Dems this time around to give us time to build a strong third party -- there isn't time between now and 2012 to collect enough money and draft a presidential candidate who will get the attention of the media and most Americans will feel comfortable voting for -- it's just not realistically possible.
I saw what they did to Eugene McCarthy in 1968 and George McGovern in 1972 -- this time around it will be a thousand times worse.
There were no filibusters, only threatened filibusters, and the Senate could have ended that charade with a rule change. A hundred essays have been written on the subject.
The rest of your post is too transparent to merit response. You were an Obamabot in 2007 and 2008, and you are still an Obamabot. I wasn't fooled the first time.
Well said, Naturally. And the very fact that the Dems "caved" to their "opposition" at the mere THREAT of a filibuster shows just how unserious they were at opposing the Rethugs. If they were really, truly serious about standing up for the "average Americans against the evil Republicans" they would have made them actually carry out their filibusters, then they could stand on very high ground and advertise to the American public "look what the Republicans are doing - THEY are the ones filibustering this progressive legislation that a majority of Americans want. THEY are the ones stopping progress. THEY are the bad guys."
But they didn't. Hmmm...I wonder why????
You are correct, he is an Obamabot til the end. There is literally no difference between the midless Bush-worshippers who stood by Bush no matter what he did, and the mindless Obama-bots who stand by him and the sleazy Washington Generals Democrud party no matter what they do - or don't do.
No. Difference. At. All.
@ Naturally: That's wrong. The number of GOP filibusters between 2007 and 2011 stand at over 60. (See the chart at Think Progress.)
http://thinkprogress.org/2009/03/31/republican-filibusters-skyrocket/
Sure, the Senate could have changed the rules, and then if the GOP ever gets a majority in the Senate, it's all over but the shouting. If the filibuster rules had been changed in 2004, Medicare, for example, would have already been privatized.
In 2008 I supported Obama because he was the best chance we had to get out of this mess. In four years what has any third party done? They are in the same shape or worse than in 2007 -- still infighting and without enough money to mount a serious challenge to the two majors and you are persisting in the delusion that some third party candidate is going to emerge with enough name recognition and money to seriously challenge the GOP and Dems. It's just not going to happen. For someone who claims they 'weren't fooled the first time' it appears you are fooling yourself into thinking that it doesn't matter if a Republican wins the presidency in 2012 because the Democrats and Republicans are the same. Tell that to the people in Wisconsin, Ohio, New Jersey, and Michigan. The Democrats are screwed up it's true, but there are some good Dems and a chance to turn the party left; the GOP has gone completely over-the-edge crazy and while you falsely claim I'm some kind of mindless 'Obamabot' -- I have criticized Obama in these threads many times and am well aware of his flaws -- in four years under a Republican administration any talk of third parties may be moot -- the GOP will no doubt have outlawed them or made it even more difficult for a third party candidate to get elected by then.
Aside from that, even if some to-be-named-later third party candidate were somehow miraculously elected in 2012, what could he or she accomplish with the Congress dead-set against him or her? You're not going to get universal single-payer health care, or increased spending on social programs, or a deep cut in the Pentagon budget, or the end of the MIC or any other progressive bills passed. What you will get is a quick impeachment and back to business as usual. Without a violent revolution, which is not in the cards, change is going to happen incrementally. You are mainly voting for ANY third party candidate to make yourself feel better; you know they are going to lose but for the next four years you can self-righteously pat yourself on the back in these comment threads and say, "Well, I didn't vote for him." That's useless and doesn't improve anything.
I have kids and grandkids -- I won't risk their futures on your third party delusion and your desire to make yourself feel better while the nation goes to hell.
There were 0 filibusters, and 60 phoned-in (threatened) filibusters. That's the problem with you and your posts: you lie.
Republicans say they are against abortion but here they are, killing the yet to be born.
In NJ, Corzine was most definitely the lesser evil, much less evil than the filthy loud mouthed, Christie. Christie is doing so much damage to NJ that it will take years to recover from his right wing policies. A lot of New Jerseyites now have buyers remorse with Christie. In Wisconsin, the GOP governor is the evil. A Democratic governor would have made a huge difference for the better. Without a doubt, too many Democrats are moving or have moved to the right and have been bought off by corporate interests. I absolutely abhor Obama's educational policies and where's the support for the Employee Free choice Act? But the GOP has moved so far right wing, it has become so corporate, so toxic that it has left the D party in the dust.
I would love to support a workers' party that endorses universal health care and a stronger social safety net but that's just a dream.
Damn the GOP
Damn Obama
Consumer Financial Protection Bureau
headed by Elizabeth Warren is just what the 98% need.
Always remember when discussing such things that the "two" parties are actually just one beast. It has two backs. One has an "R" on it, the other a "D." If you pull the two backs apart a bit and look down the center, you will see a small, but very powerful, bunch of wealthy individuals and corporations pulling the strings of both sides.
They do not care which "party" wins as they own them both and both do their bidding. The cosmetic differences are there to make the people think they have a choice, that their vote means something.
My daughter, who is an Obamabot, has an excuse for every cave in the administration achieves. She asks me, "Dad, if the Republicans approve of Obama's actions, why are they always attacking him?"
I've told her that, if the Repubs were to praise Obama for doing the job he was hired to do by the Oligarchy, then the charade would be over and the people would realize that it is just a sham.
Now that Obama and the Supremes have put the Oligarchy firmly in charge, with no checks and balances left, they may just decide to end the charade and we will find ourselves in the PNAC fascist's dream, which, believe me, will be a nightmare for the rest of us.
minitrue
Pretty good analysis. Is there any hope for a return to democracy by a non-violent means? I don't think the oligarchs will give in without a fight.
Obama is not the Democrats, and the Democrats are not Obama. If people can't understand the difference we're going to end up with more Governors like Walker, Kasich and Kristie, and more states taking away union rights, banning abortion and turning education, medicare, parks and libraries into for-profit schemes that ordinary people cannot afford.
Every person who preaches a blanket, "no difference" sermon is taking us another step down that road. Judge people, not parties.
No one says "no difference", they say marginal difference. One party takes you over the cliff at 100 mph, the other at only 85mph, in the end, the destination is the same
Same thing. Same rhetoric. Same result.
Judge people, not parties. There are significant differences between individuals.
Cool! Let's judge people. Let's start with Nancy Pelosi. Is she your idea of a good progressive Democrat?
Elizabeth Warren is my idea of a good progressive Democrat. As to Pelosi, she is a compromised and co-opted Democrat, to put it politely. She'd be different, and a hell of a lot better, if we had a genuine progressive Democratic president.
@ minitrue, May 6 2011 - 1:20pm: It's not what anyone says -- talk is cheap. But, to reiterate my question, why are the corporatists spending such huge sums of money to defeat Democrats if both parties are the same? Why waste hundreds of millions of dollars if, as you say, it's all just really one party with 'two backs'?
The PNAC fascist nightmare is now being enacted in Ohio, Indiana, Wisconsin and Michigan and it's not because of Democrats -- it's wholly a GOP operation.
To read what many "progressives" say about even Progressive Democrats here, one would think CD has been taken over by Koch suckers, GOP shills, useful idiots and traitors of the people.