To donate by check, phone, or other method, see our More Ways to Give page.
President Obama has been looking a little more focused and functional
of late, talking about the need to invest in infrastructure projects to
create jobs and rejecting Republican calls for the extension of George
W. Bush's tax cuts for the rich.
President Obama has been looking a little more focused and functional
of late, talking about the need to invest in infrastructure projects to
create jobs and rejecting Republican calls for the extension of George
W. Bush's tax cuts for the rich.
But in case anyone thought Obama was starting to "get" that America
wants a president who will stand up to the economic royalists and do the
right thing, White House insiders indicated Wednesday night that he has
decided against appointing Harvard law professor Elizabeth Warren to head the new Consumer Financial Protection Bureau.
Instead, Obama is expected to appoint the hero of reformers to an
advisory post where she will report to Treasury Secretary Timothy
Geithner. Congress placed the bureau's powers within the Treasury
Department until such time as a permanent director is appointed and
confirmed by the Senate to a five-year term. But Geithner has never been
seen as an advocate for the agency. And, despite the complimentary public statements regarding Warren by the Treasury Secretary, it has been broadly suggested that he has been a behind-the-scenes opponent of her appointment.
White House aides say that Warren will also report to Obama--as a
presidential assistant--and that she will play a significant role in
helping to create the consumer agency that is supposed to make real the
promises made in the vague financial regulatory overhaul legislation
passed earlier this year. Perhaps that will be the case. And it is can
certainly be hoped that Warren is on track for the actual appointment
that Oregon Senator Jeff Merkley and others are urging him to make.
"While this is good news for American families, it is my hope that
President Obama will nominate Warren to a permanent position to head up
the CFPB. She is more than deserving of the job and the Senate should
have the opportunity to confirm one of the nation's strongest consumer
advocates," says Merkley.
"The CFPB has been tasked by Congress with
reining in the abuses by payday loan firms, credit card companies and
predatory mortgage lenders that have stripped families of their
hard-earned wealth and were a key cause of the recent financial crisis
and recession. Clearly, the new bureau has a big job to do, and
Elizabeth Warren is the right person to do it. She will put the
interests of ordinary Americans first and ensure that our nation's
financial products are safe for working families and small businesses."
Unfortunately, the right person will not be doing it for awhile. As such, Obama is avoiding a fight that he should be waging.
By failing to formally install Warren in the position that
economists and activists say she is uniquely prepared to fill, Obama is
missing one of the most important opportunities of his presidency.
Warren should not be reporting to Geithner, whose subservience to
Wall Street has done severe damage to the administration's ability not
just to the correct the course of the economy but to crystallize
financial issues that continue to play an essential role in our
politics.
Indeed, if Obama were serious about tipping the balance away from
Wall Street and toward Main Street, he would replace Geithner with
Warren.
That's too much to ask of this administration.
But it should not be too much to ask that Warren be given the job she conceived and campaigned to create.
The president could have appointed Warren to head the
Consumer Financial Protection Bureau and dared the Senate to reject a
woman who has become the face of the fight to hold big banks, credit
card companies and speculators to account. If Republicans threatened to
block her appointment, they would have clarified the question of which
party is working for Wall Street and which party is on the side of Main
Street.
Or, if he really feared a filibuster would have prevented Warren
from getting to the vital work of creating a muscular consumer
protection agency, Obama could have made a recess appointment
and put her in the position immediately. His critics would surely have
screamed about Obama moving too aggressively to, um, protect consumers
from being ripped off by Wall Street profiteers -- a complaint that the
president and his party would have been wise to invite.
Progressive campaigned for a recess appointment,
arguing that such a move could have helped to close the enthusiasm gap
that Democrats fear will make it hard to get base voters to the polls
this fall. The Progressive Change Campaign Committee
had even highlighted the differences between Warren and Geithner,
arguing in petition language that: "Elizabeth Warren has proven that she
is willing to stand up to Wall Street on behalf of consumers and is the
logical choice to lead the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau. Tim
Geithner is a longtime Wall Street insider, and if he's recommending
against Elizabeth Warren that's all the more reason to appoint her."
Instead, by making Warren an "assistant," Obama runs away from the
fight--and gives up another chance to clarify the economic battle lines
not just of the fall campaign but of his presidency.
Common Dreams is powered by optimists who believe in the power of informed and engaged citizens to ignite and enact change to make the world a better place. We're hundreds of thousands strong, but every single supporter makes the difference. Your contribution supports this bold media model—free, independent, and dedicated to reporting the facts every day. Stand with us in the fight for economic equality, social justice, human rights, and a more sustainable future. As a people-powered nonprofit news outlet, we cover the issues the corporate media never will. Join with us today! |
President Obama has been looking a little more focused and functional
of late, talking about the need to invest in infrastructure projects to
create jobs and rejecting Republican calls for the extension of George
W. Bush's tax cuts for the rich.
But in case anyone thought Obama was starting to "get" that America
wants a president who will stand up to the economic royalists and do the
right thing, White House insiders indicated Wednesday night that he has
decided against appointing Harvard law professor Elizabeth Warren to head the new Consumer Financial Protection Bureau.
Instead, Obama is expected to appoint the hero of reformers to an
advisory post where she will report to Treasury Secretary Timothy
Geithner. Congress placed the bureau's powers within the Treasury
Department until such time as a permanent director is appointed and
confirmed by the Senate to a five-year term. But Geithner has never been
seen as an advocate for the agency. And, despite the complimentary public statements regarding Warren by the Treasury Secretary, it has been broadly suggested that he has been a behind-the-scenes opponent of her appointment.
White House aides say that Warren will also report to Obama--as a
presidential assistant--and that she will play a significant role in
helping to create the consumer agency that is supposed to make real the
promises made in the vague financial regulatory overhaul legislation
passed earlier this year. Perhaps that will be the case. And it is can
certainly be hoped that Warren is on track for the actual appointment
that Oregon Senator Jeff Merkley and others are urging him to make.
"While this is good news for American families, it is my hope that
President Obama will nominate Warren to a permanent position to head up
the CFPB. She is more than deserving of the job and the Senate should
have the opportunity to confirm one of the nation's strongest consumer
advocates," says Merkley.
"The CFPB has been tasked by Congress with
reining in the abuses by payday loan firms, credit card companies and
predatory mortgage lenders that have stripped families of their
hard-earned wealth and were a key cause of the recent financial crisis
and recession. Clearly, the new bureau has a big job to do, and
Elizabeth Warren is the right person to do it. She will put the
interests of ordinary Americans first and ensure that our nation's
financial products are safe for working families and small businesses."
Unfortunately, the right person will not be doing it for awhile. As such, Obama is avoiding a fight that he should be waging.
By failing to formally install Warren in the position that
economists and activists say she is uniquely prepared to fill, Obama is
missing one of the most important opportunities of his presidency.
Warren should not be reporting to Geithner, whose subservience to
Wall Street has done severe damage to the administration's ability not
just to the correct the course of the economy but to crystallize
financial issues that continue to play an essential role in our
politics.
Indeed, if Obama were serious about tipping the balance away from
Wall Street and toward Main Street, he would replace Geithner with
Warren.
That's too much to ask of this administration.
But it should not be too much to ask that Warren be given the job she conceived and campaigned to create.
The president could have appointed Warren to head the
Consumer Financial Protection Bureau and dared the Senate to reject a
woman who has become the face of the fight to hold big banks, credit
card companies and speculators to account. If Republicans threatened to
block her appointment, they would have clarified the question of which
party is working for Wall Street and which party is on the side of Main
Street.
Or, if he really feared a filibuster would have prevented Warren
from getting to the vital work of creating a muscular consumer
protection agency, Obama could have made a recess appointment
and put her in the position immediately. His critics would surely have
screamed about Obama moving too aggressively to, um, protect consumers
from being ripped off by Wall Street profiteers -- a complaint that the
president and his party would have been wise to invite.
Progressive campaigned for a recess appointment,
arguing that such a move could have helped to close the enthusiasm gap
that Democrats fear will make it hard to get base voters to the polls
this fall. The Progressive Change Campaign Committee
had even highlighted the differences between Warren and Geithner,
arguing in petition language that: "Elizabeth Warren has proven that she
is willing to stand up to Wall Street on behalf of consumers and is the
logical choice to lead the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau. Tim
Geithner is a longtime Wall Street insider, and if he's recommending
against Elizabeth Warren that's all the more reason to appoint her."
Instead, by making Warren an "assistant," Obama runs away from the
fight--and gives up another chance to clarify the economic battle lines
not just of the fall campaign but of his presidency.
President Obama has been looking a little more focused and functional
of late, talking about the need to invest in infrastructure projects to
create jobs and rejecting Republican calls for the extension of George
W. Bush's tax cuts for the rich.
But in case anyone thought Obama was starting to "get" that America
wants a president who will stand up to the economic royalists and do the
right thing, White House insiders indicated Wednesday night that he has
decided against appointing Harvard law professor Elizabeth Warren to head the new Consumer Financial Protection Bureau.
Instead, Obama is expected to appoint the hero of reformers to an
advisory post where she will report to Treasury Secretary Timothy
Geithner. Congress placed the bureau's powers within the Treasury
Department until such time as a permanent director is appointed and
confirmed by the Senate to a five-year term. But Geithner has never been
seen as an advocate for the agency. And, despite the complimentary public statements regarding Warren by the Treasury Secretary, it has been broadly suggested that he has been a behind-the-scenes opponent of her appointment.
White House aides say that Warren will also report to Obama--as a
presidential assistant--and that she will play a significant role in
helping to create the consumer agency that is supposed to make real the
promises made in the vague financial regulatory overhaul legislation
passed earlier this year. Perhaps that will be the case. And it is can
certainly be hoped that Warren is on track for the actual appointment
that Oregon Senator Jeff Merkley and others are urging him to make.
"While this is good news for American families, it is my hope that
President Obama will nominate Warren to a permanent position to head up
the CFPB. She is more than deserving of the job and the Senate should
have the opportunity to confirm one of the nation's strongest consumer
advocates," says Merkley.
"The CFPB has been tasked by Congress with
reining in the abuses by payday loan firms, credit card companies and
predatory mortgage lenders that have stripped families of their
hard-earned wealth and were a key cause of the recent financial crisis
and recession. Clearly, the new bureau has a big job to do, and
Elizabeth Warren is the right person to do it. She will put the
interests of ordinary Americans first and ensure that our nation's
financial products are safe for working families and small businesses."
Unfortunately, the right person will not be doing it for awhile. As such, Obama is avoiding a fight that he should be waging.
By failing to formally install Warren in the position that
economists and activists say she is uniquely prepared to fill, Obama is
missing one of the most important opportunities of his presidency.
Warren should not be reporting to Geithner, whose subservience to
Wall Street has done severe damage to the administration's ability not
just to the correct the course of the economy but to crystallize
financial issues that continue to play an essential role in our
politics.
Indeed, if Obama were serious about tipping the balance away from
Wall Street and toward Main Street, he would replace Geithner with
Warren.
That's too much to ask of this administration.
But it should not be too much to ask that Warren be given the job she conceived and campaigned to create.
The president could have appointed Warren to head the
Consumer Financial Protection Bureau and dared the Senate to reject a
woman who has become the face of the fight to hold big banks, credit
card companies and speculators to account. If Republicans threatened to
block her appointment, they would have clarified the question of which
party is working for Wall Street and which party is on the side of Main
Street.
Or, if he really feared a filibuster would have prevented Warren
from getting to the vital work of creating a muscular consumer
protection agency, Obama could have made a recess appointment
and put her in the position immediately. His critics would surely have
screamed about Obama moving too aggressively to, um, protect consumers
from being ripped off by Wall Street profiteers -- a complaint that the
president and his party would have been wise to invite.
Progressive campaigned for a recess appointment,
arguing that such a move could have helped to close the enthusiasm gap
that Democrats fear will make it hard to get base voters to the polls
this fall. The Progressive Change Campaign Committee
had even highlighted the differences between Warren and Geithner,
arguing in petition language that: "Elizabeth Warren has proven that she
is willing to stand up to Wall Street on behalf of consumers and is the
logical choice to lead the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau. Tim
Geithner is a longtime Wall Street insider, and if he's recommending
against Elizabeth Warren that's all the more reason to appoint her."
Instead, by making Warren an "assistant," Obama runs away from the
fight--and gives up another chance to clarify the economic battle lines
not just of the fall campaign but of his presidency.