iPhone app iPad app Android phone app Android tablet app More

GOP Budget Plan Would Cut CFPB Funding Nearly In Half [UPDATED]

Elizabeth Warren

First Posted: 02/16/11 03:40 PM ET Updated: 05/25/11 07:30 PM ET

With reporting by Ryan Grim and Elise Foley

WASHINGTON -- A new federal budget proposal from House Republicans would dramatically restrict the budget of the new Consumer Financial Protection Bureau during its first year of operation.

[UPDATE: An amendment introduced by Rep. Rush Holt (D-N.J.) to restore $63 million in funding to the CFPB failed on Thursday in a 163-265 vote.]

No House Republicans voted for the Wall Street reform bill that created the CFPB, which is currently being set up by consumer watchdog Elizabeth Warren. Several House Republicans have suggested cutting the agency's budget, however, as a method of restricting its capacity to regulate.

The language included in the House GOP's budget proposal for 2011 would restrict the CFPB's annual budget to $80 million-- a major cut from the $143 million the agency expects to spend as it hires staff and implements new systems to get off the ground.

Warren warned Congress against creating a weak agency last summer, as lawmakers sought to placate Wall Street lobbyists. She insisted that the new CFPB must be given the authority and resources to prevent bank abuses. "My first choice is a strong consumer agency," Warren said in an interview with the Huffington Post last year. "My second choice is no agency at all and plenty of blood and teeth left on the floor."

The Republican attack on the CFPB's funding would only apply to this year, but would make launching the new agency very difficult, and send a very aggressive signal about Congress' intent to follow through on the bill it passed in July. Regulations cannot be enforced if regulators do not have the budget to hire staff.

Rep. Barney Frank (D-Mass.), the top Democrat on the House Financial Services Committee, told HuffPost that Democrats would be offering an amendment to strip the CFPB language from the GOP budget plan. The amendment will likely come up for a vote on Thursday.

"When you're talking about $143 million or $80 million you're talking about several multiples of a bank bonus," Frank said. "It just shows the disproportion between what the banks have and what they have."

Last year's Wall Street reform legislation tied the CFPB's budget to the Federal Reserve's operations, requiring 12 percent of all funding for the central bank to be diverted to the CFPB. The new House GOP budget proposal, known as a continuing resolution, or CR, would block the Fed from disbursing more than $80 million during fiscal year 2011, which ends in October. Some estimates suggest that the CFPB could receive as much as $550 million a year under the existing funding structure-- less than half of the Securities and Exchange Commission's current budget. That funding will be needed as the new agency staffs up-- the CFPB is tasked with regulating a broad array of consumer lending, from payday lending to credit cards to mortgages, many of which have been prone to abuses in recent years.

"Remember, the consumer bureau doesn't just deal with credit cards, it's a major way to go after all these unregulated financial industries, payday lenders, check cashers, etcetera," Frank told HuffPost.

Connecting the CFPB's budget to the Fed was a move that consumer advocates hoped would protect the new agency from this type of appropriations gamesmanship. If any new budget law can direct the Fed how to spend its resources, Wall Street-friendly Republicans are likely to continue trying to restrict the CFPB's budget.

Other bank regulators are funded by special taxes they levy against the banks they regulate, known as "assessments," which are not subject to the Congressional appropriations process. In a speech yesterday before the Consumer's Union, Warren warned that, "Politicizing the funding of bank supervision would be a dangerous precedent, and it would deprive the CFPB of the predictable funding it will need to examine large and powerful banks consistently."

FOLLOW HUFFPOST BUSINESS
Subscribe to the HuffPost Money newsletter!
With reporting by Ryan Grim and Elise Foley WASHINGTON -- A new federal budget proposal from House Republicans would dramatically restrict the budget of the new Consumer Financial Protection Bureau d...
With reporting by Ryan Grim and Elise Foley WASHINGTON -- A new federal budget proposal from House Republicans would dramatically restrict the budget of the new Consumer Financial Protection Bureau d...
 
 
  • Comments
  • 419
  • Pending Comments
  • 0
  • View FAQ
Comments are closed for this entry
View All
Favorites
Highlights
Recency  | 
Popularity
Page: 1 2 3 4 5  Next ›  Last »  (14 total)
03:58 PM on 02/18/2011
Consumer protection should be apolitical, but just like every major issue, it's now mired in a partisan quagmire. Instead of holding the too big to fail banks accountable for causing a global crisis by violating existing rules, the CFPB is insisting on writing a bunch of new rules that have fomented political division.
11:23 AM on 02/18/2011
It continues to be fair game on financially struggling families and people who are not financially savvy. Now I understand why a good 17% of working adults do not have a bank account: there is no trust in the system anymore. We really need to put the trust back in the system in order for people to do business and invest and spend again. It would benefit everyone if the playing field is a little more leveled toward the consumer and investor. Structured finance has become ridiculously complicated and rating agencies have become just hot air that people probably feel safer putting their money in their mattress. Money needs to be fluid in order for the economy to grow and for jobs to be available. This will not happen if consumers have no rights and protections in place. Shame on republicans for not thinking about the bigger picture here.
09:48 AM on 02/18/2011
It's such a shame that millions of Americans are duped into thinking today's GOP is fighting "for them" when the exact opposite is the case.
This user has chosen to opt out of the Badges program
09:10 PM on 02/17/2011
   As the financial institution gains more supremacy over our economic system the entire system will gradually come under the ownership of China and other lenders.  The banks will be the brokers of the transfer of ownership.  America was the best hope of the traditional people wanting to become modern.  with the loss of the American democracy, ordinary people throughout the world are on their own.
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
tomstedham
Troubled old white guy....
03:58 PM on 02/17/2011
No cuts to the $3.8 BILLION to Israel; the $1.8 BILLION to Egypt, but we can cut this???

Sigh...
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
BARRY08
12:47 PM on 02/17/2011
Shame on them ! shame on them !
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
BARRY08
12:46 PM on 02/17/2011
This is the same as GOP saying they do not want transparency but to allow all banks etc to keep on ripping people off ! They do not care for the rest of the country , they only care to protect those who abuse us !
photo
WOODSTOCKER51
HAVE A NICE DAY!
11:07 AM on 02/17/2011
RYAN CANT DO ENOUGH FOR THOSE DOING "GODS WORK.....AND STEALING YOUR LIFE SAVINGS!
10:19 AM on 02/17/2011
Hiding behind the mask of fiscal responsibility is the GOP-Baggers intent is to remove any impediment to their greed and hunger for power.If their tax giveaway to the rich was intended to create jobs,I ask where are those Jobs?By slashing budgets aren't You slashing Jobs? Jobs Today ,Deficits Tomorrow!
photo
elbzee
Fear is the mind-killer
09:27 AM on 02/17/2011
Does anyone know HOW to contact Ms Warren or any segment of the new bureau? I have GOT to share the horror stories of GEMoney/CreditCare's predatory activity. (It's my new cause!)
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
BARRY08
12:47 PM on 02/17/2011
write to the White House if you cannot find another source !!! they are pretty good at responding ! they will make sure she receives it
photo
elbzee
Fear is the mind-killer
01:32 PM on 02/17/2011
Thank you! I'll do it! I simply cannot believe credit companies are continuing their shenanigans! Caused an automatic payment plan to default resulting in a 60.51% penalty plus 29.99% APR. Criminal simply doesn't say it.
STAY AWAY FROM ANY GE MONEY/CREDITCARE plans!!!!
photo
mikey09
Living off the grid.
09:18 AM on 02/17/2011
Sounds like some good paying jobs if you need 80 billion in one year to hire staff.
 
Sorry but 80 BILLION sounds like sufficient funds....we are after all cuting 1.2 billion from heating low income peoples homes.....
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
Judann
At a loss for words
11:02 AM on 02/17/2011
Are you talking about the consumer agency's budget? That was budgeted at 80 MILLION, not billion, not only to hire staff but also to implement new systems to get the agency, which does not physically exist, off the ground. If we turned FOREIGN aid to DOMESTIC aid, we could well afford helping low income people heat their homes as well as provide numerous other needed social services.
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
ttowse
08:22 AM on 02/17/2011
No surprise here. Shame on Republicans and Democrats. These good ole boys under Clinton silenced Brooksley Bourne. Same schtick different face. Boo hiss.

Bring your own brick...it worked in Egypt.
07:58 AM on 02/17/2011
There are already 4-5 agencies that should have been overseeing Wall Street. The problem is not that we need another agency. The ones we have need to do their jobs. Madoff scheme was reported three times and no one did anything about it. They scratched the surface. Perhaps everyone that has responsibility for reviews like this need to have some serious classes for investigation and reporting. Our government failed us in this mess. WHERE were all the regulators when this started, where are the fines and prosecutions of those involved???
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
Judann
At a loss for words
11:13 AM on 02/17/2011
The problem is that these agencies are not set up to advocate for consumers but to monitor the compliance (lol) to regulations. This agency goes well beyond Wall St. and includes credit card corporations and other financial institutions which allegedly serve average Americans.

As for Wall Street, why do we need 4-5 agencies? One efficient agency that really does its job would be sufficient. As for the fines and prosecutions, I, for one, would add jail time.
This user has chosen to opt out of the Badges program
photo
Trepasky
Sanity is neither free nor easy
07:57 AM on 02/17/2011
Any system needs to be monitored and managed. This is true of your car, your house (heating), and even your computer. The same need is true of businesses that produce energy, products, foods, and services.

Your computer may monitor itself but you probably have installed an anti-virus product or should have one installed. Sure it may cost a bit but the alternative is potentially unintended release of your information and the real possibility of loosing all your data.

We can apply the same principles to energy producing companies. They may self monitor but without a secondary monitoring service, unintended release of toxins might not be noticed. Allowing each state to regulate (monitor) businesses presents some problems, much the same as relying on the computer (operating system) to monitor for viruses (toxins). States do not have the resources and tools to sufficiently mange the monitoring. That coupled with potentially biased limits based upon each states knowledge and preferences will not adequately protect neighboring states from potential toxins.

The EPA by being Federal can afford the resources to be capable of such a task. By being Federal, will ensure consistent and adequate enforcement of the monitoring and management of those businesses that have the potential to damage the environment and the people who work and live near by.

Gutting the EPA must be a purposeful act intended to relieve businesses of any responsibility for their inadequate monitoring and management of their toxins. Why wold the people choose this?
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
NYC123
07:23 AM on 02/17/2011
If Consumer Protection Agency (CPA) gets weakened severally, Warner should quit to make a statement -- for a weak CPA agency is worthless!.
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
Judann
At a loss for words
11:15 AM on 02/17/2011
I have a feeling this lady will fight to make it work by making statements whenever and wherever she can whether or not she is the head of the agency or not.
photo
elbzee
Fear is the mind-killer
01:36 PM on 02/17/2011
"My first choice is a strong consumer agency," "My second choice is no agency at all and plenty of blood and teeth left on the floor." THIS is why I love this woman! She's it!!!
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
NYC123
05:26 PM on 02/17/2011
The FDA was gutted during Bush -- we all know the impact that has and continues!