The House Financial Services Committee has always been a sweet spot for crooked politicians. Both parties have encouraged corruption by putting criminal types on the committee. Every Republican and most of the Democrats takes bribes from the financial services industry. Patrick McHenry, one of the most corrupt members of Congress in living memory, is the perfect chairman. And on Wednesday night he and his cronies ushered through the committee a package of bill targeting American consumers on behalf for the committee’s campaign contributors. The goal was to weaken the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau with these 6 bills by these 5 notorious crooks, who have taken over $9 million in legalistic bribes from the organizations their legislation is meant to benefit:
● Blaine Luetkemeyer (R-MO) introduced the Consumer Financial Protection Commission Act and the Bureau of Consumer Financial Protection-Inspector General Reform Act, two pieces of legislation supported by the Consumer Bankers Association and the U.S. Chamber of Commerce, which have given Luetkemeyer $67,500 in combined campaign contributions. Over his congressional career, Luetkemeyer has received over $3.3 million from commercial banks, securities & investment companies, and finance & credit companies.
● Andy Barr (R-KY) has introduced the Taking Account of Bureaucrats’ Spending (TABS) Act in several consecutive congresses, while consumer advocates have opposed the TABS Act for undermining the CFPB’s enforcement capabilities and giving a “‘free pass to Wall Street.’” Over his congressional career, Barr has received over $3.5 million from commercial banks, securities & investment companies, and finance & credit companies.
● Tom Emmer (R-MN) recently reintroduced the CFPB Dual Mandate and Economic Analysis Act, which would “amend the mission of the CFPB to direct its attention to competition and consumer choice,” much to the support of the Chamber of Commerce–– which has given Rep. Emmer $3,500 in contributions–– while consumer advocates criticized the CFPB Dual Mandate act for “requir[ing] the CFPB to engage [in] a series of burdensome and delay-inducing requirements.” Over his congressional career, Emmer has received over $1.6 million from commercial banks, securities & investment companies, and finance & credit companies.
● Alex Mooney (R-WV) introduced the Transparency in CFPB Cost-Benefit Analysis Act, which was supported by the Consumer Bankers Association, while consumer advocates criticized the act for also “requir[ing] the CFPB to engage [in] a series of burdensome and delay-inducing requirements before issuing a rule or taking a pro-consumer action.” Over his congressional career, Mooney has received over $680,000 from commercial banks, securities & investment companies, and finance & credit companies.
● Scott Fitzgerald (R-WI) reintroduced the Making CFPB Accountable To Small Business Act, which was criticized by consumer groups for implementing burdensome requirements before CFPB regulatory actions, while the Independent Consumer Bankers Of America–– which has given Fitzgerald $4,500 in contributions–– praised the bill. Over his congressional career, FItzgerald has received over $50,000 from commercial banks, securities & investment companies, and finance & credit companies.
According to Accountible.us, the package of bills is meant to “leave millions of Americans vulnerable to financial industry abuse and predatory behavior. It was the latest assault in a long-running campaign by conservatives in Congress to defund, defang and destroy the agency that has been so successful at protecting consumers to the chagrin of the right-wing’s major donors in the financial industry. Bills moved today include Congressman Andy Barr (R-KY)’s TABS Act which leaves CFPB funding beholden to the political whims of Congress and undermines the CFPB’s enforcement capabilities— all at the expense of consumers.
Liz Zelnick, Director of Accountable.US’ Economic Security & Corporate Power: "Since its inception, the CFPB’s independence has drawn the ire of conservatives in Congress because they’d prefer the agency have zero funding to protect consumers from their major industry donors like predatory lenders and greedy Wall Street banks. The CFPB has been so effective at recouping billions of ill-gotten dollars on behalf of wronged consumers precisely because it has always been free from political influence. The multitude of lawsuits and legislation aimed at the CFPB are all about weakening the agency and leaving consumers more vulnerable to abuse from bad actors in the financial industry that fuel right-wing political coffers."
Congress has been making noise about the failure of the Surpremes to live up to the "even the appearance of impropriety" standard, and yet Congressmen who are on committees to regulate an industry still take campaign contributions from the industries they regulate. How did we let this happen? Nobody should be permitted to donate to a campaign for an election in which they are not entitled to vote. No Congress person should be permitted to take a seat on a committee which regulates an industry they have taken contributions from. These seem to me like very simple, common sense rules we could easily implement, although in light of the Supreme Court precedent equating donations with speech, a constitutional amendment would …
CFPB is one of ONLY two (maybe) positives that accidentally came out of the obamanation admin. the nazis have been trying to defund it and now repeal it ever since.
on balance, considering the xxFTAs, the refusal to prosecute treason and torture and the refusal to do "eric holder" about finance fraud that caused the 2008 crash (and loss of 11 million homes AND jobs!), his admin was a massive negative... but cfpb is one net gain.
once the nazi reich begins, wall street will have even the modest regs left lifted.
your mention of the hfsc omits the name of barney frank, who chaired it after 2008 when glass-steagall should have been reinstated (it was repealed by GLBA that…