iPhone app iPad app Android phone app Android tablet app More

Randy Neugebauer On Elizabeth Warren's Consumer Agency: 'I Don't Like Them'


First Posted: 03/15/11 01:55 PM ET Updated: 05/25/11 07:40 PM ET

WASHINGTON -- Congressional Republicans have insisted that their proposals to force the new Consumer Financial Protection Bureau to fight for legislative appropriations every year are grounded in good-governing principles.

But in an interview with The Huffington Post, a top House Republican acknowledged frankly what many political observers have believed for months: that his aim is less to make the nascent agency justify its funding than to defund it to the point where it cannot function.

Under the financial regulation bill signed into law by President Barack Obama last year, the CFPB's budget is tied to that of the Federal Reserve, with the intention of insulating the bureau from annual congressional budget battles and the attendant mountains of lobbying cash. But Rep. Randy Neugebauer (R-Texas)-- who chairs the House Financial Services Subcommittee on Investigations and Oversight and has helped lead previous pushes to cut funding for the CFPB -- said one of the three top priorities for his Republican colleagues this year is to change that status, making the bureau dependent on prevailing sentiments in the legislature.

Only one major federal financial regulator has ever had its budget linked to the Congressional appropriations process -- the Office of Federal Housing Enterprise Oversight, which oversaw Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac during the housing bubble and was unable to rein in the mortgage giants' risk-taking in the face of massive lobbying. When asked how the CFPB could perform its duties under such a funding model, Neugebauer said he didn't expect the agency to be able to operate.

"I don't think they'll work at all," Neugebauer told HuffPost late last week. "I'm just trying to get the ground I can get. I don't like them."

Neugebauer's frankness stands in contrast to the delicate dance by some of his colleagues in discussing the new agency. In seeking to limit or shift CFPB funding, Republicans have tended to employ the language of fiscal responsibility and effective oversight.

Rep. Jo Ann Emerson (R-Mo.), who defended the House GOP's bid to slash the CFPB's funding in its budget proposal last month, argued that $80 million is about what another current bank regulator, the Office of the Comptroller of the Currency (OCC), spends on consumer protection. During debate over a separate plan to cut funding for the SEC, Emerson elaborated on her view, claiming the move was more about improving government efficiency and the pursuit of fiscal responsibility.

"I am not opposed to strong financial regulation," Emerson said last month. "But at a time when we're trying to do more with less, I think it's important for the agencies to do more with less too."

Other Republicans, including House Financial Services Committee Chairman Spencer Bachus (R-Ala.), have voiced opposition to the CFPB on the grounds that it embodies vast, unchecked regulatory powers.

The agency is assuming the existing powers of the OCC and the Federal Reserve, which have largely failed to enforce consumer protection rules for a variety of reasons. The OCC's previous head, John Dugan, was a former bank lobbyist who returned to the bank lobby after five years as a regulator. Both the OCC and the Fed had close relationships with the nation's largest banks, with the OCC even joining bank lobbyists in a lawsuit against state regulators.

Neugebauer reiterated the other principal GOP objections during the interview with HuffPost, calling the CFPB an agency with “a lot of powers but no review process.” But when pressed further, Neugebauer acknowledged that any CFPB rules that threaten bank stability could be vetoed by a council of other regulators, while maintaining his opposition.

“If they start saying, ‘Well, I think a $25 overdraft fee is exorbitant,’ there’s really not any appeal for that," he said. "I’m just not a big fan of CFPB.”

In a Thursday meeting with reporters, senior Treasury officials noted the push against the CFPB, arguing that Wall Street-friendly politicians were attempting to maim the agency to block serious regulation of consumer lending.

Altering its funding stream, however, may not be necessary to crimp the bureau's power. In February, the House GOP passed a short-term budget bill that instructed the Federal Reserve not to transfer more than $80 million for the entire fiscal year to cover the CFPB's operations -- roughly half of what it estimates it needs for that time period. The president has vowed to veto the measure, which did not pass through the Senate.

Bachus and Emerson did not return calls requesting comment.

FOLLOW HUFFPOST POLITICS
Subscribe to the HuffPost Hill newsletter!
WASHINGTON -- Congressional Republicans have insisted that their proposals to force the new Consumer Financial Protection Bureau to fight for legislative appropriations every year are grounded in good...
WASHINGTON -- Congressional Republicans have insisted that their proposals to force the new Consumer Financial Protection Bureau to fight for legislative appropriations every year are grounded in good...
 
 
  • Comments
  • 1,381
  • 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 »  (38 total)
11:09 PM on 05/11/2011
The fact that Republicans and Banks are scared to death of this Women convinces me that she is right to head that agency. I have seen Elizabeth Warren interviewed before and she is very Impressive and Smart.
This user has chosen to opt out of the Badges program
photo
11:43 AM on 03/25/2011
GOP, subversive economic terroists, should be investigated by Home Land Security and prosecuted to the full extent of the law
This user has chosen to opt out of the Badges program
photo
JaxReader
Hear reason, or she'll make you feel her.
04:19 PM on 03/16/2011
GOP = the Corporate Voice.

Please continue to tell me about how great economic policies of deregulating corporations and making the Rich, Richer has been for all of us!
Bladernr1001
Vote Libertarian
10:39 AM on 03/16/2011
Here is a very informative piece on why government regualtion is not nearly the panacea you liberals belive it to be:

http://www.thefreemanonline.org/headline/fifteen-things-to-hate/
This user has chosen to opt out of the Badges program
photo
whirlybird
Time's a-wastin'!
11:02 AM on 03/16/2011
subpar
Bladernr1001
Vote Libertarian
11:54 AM on 03/16/2011
Closed mind.
thevamprn
Truth Smells Better Than BS
11:07 AM on 03/16/2011
Interesting piece.
This user has chosen to opt out of the Badges program
Robin Brenizer
Loves politics and people.
09:59 AM on 03/16/2011
yes by all means, let's cut back funding for the one agency that may actually protect consumers. Since that worked out so well for you in the past. I love Austin having lived there for 13 years. But Texas your representation is an embarrassment to yourselves and the country. Neugebauer is rooting for Mr. Potter and his is not a wonderful life.
photo
Mac1000
My macro-bio ate my micro-bio.
08:52 AM on 03/16/2011
Warren must be doing something right if the Republicans don't like it!
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
jbvbwysu
I actually read the article before I comment on it
10:17 AM on 03/16/2011
They're terrified of her.

I really hope to see her in the Senate or the White House someday. No joke.
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
Nomccain
08:50 AM on 03/16/2011
Surprise? No surprise here! Republicans don't want any interference with their rich friends making money any way they can (See Wall Street) and resent any attempt at regulation or oversight. Their banner should read: "uncontrolled greed and corruption, American Capitalism."
Bladernr1001
Vote Libertarian
10:41 AM on 03/16/2011
Market forces themselves control greed....that is unless the government erects regulaitons and implicit backing (read: bailouts) that set up a moral hazard.
05:49 PM on 03/16/2011
Where have you spent the last 3 years? Not in the US, it's clear, and maybe not on the same planet as the rest of us. "Market forces themselves control greed"? Hahahahahahaha! Our economy has been driven into disaster because the markets ran the Bush efforts to deregulate and then took advantage of every no-longer-regulated system to make billions for themselves while screwing the rest of us. Heads they win, tails we lose. We had more regulation and slightly higher taxes in the Clinton years and a strong enough economy that he left office with a surplus - one the Republicans couldn't WAIT to spend. You have some amazing capacity to ignore history and evidence, my friend.
nbb
332-206
08:50 AM on 03/16/2011
Certainly no interest among the hard right in looking after the interests of the little guy, is there. The GOP apparently doesn't even wish to APPEAR (read dissemble) as if they care about the individual.
Bladernr1001
Vote Libertarian
10:45 AM on 03/16/2011
What do you say when the regualtions are so restrictive that businesses stop doing any business at all with the "little guy"....or anyone else for that matter?

This is a exactly what was percieved to have happened in the mortgage business in earlier decades....thus prompting activist groups to demand that banks make loans more available to the "little guy"....or more precisely "disadvantaged minorities".
This user has chosen to opt out of the Badges program
photo
whirlybird
Time's a-wastin'!
11:04 AM on 03/16/2011
They've stopped doing business with the little folk because they don't need to anymore. They're sitting quite prettily without us. Ask yourself how that happened, would you?
08:18 AM on 03/16/2011
Aren't most republicans in Congress business people? Aren't they pro-business and anti-laborer?
08:12 AM on 03/16/2011
I'm reading the FCIC report for the second it tells me E. Warren is exactly what we need. But the banksters still own our Congress.
This user has chosen to opt out of the Badges program
photo
whirlybird
Time's a-wastin'!
11:04 AM on 03/16/2011
It's gonna be a long battle.
photo
HUFFPOST PUNDIT
omega777
Yellow cake is the Bomb
08:11 AM on 03/16/2011
Elizabeth Warren for President
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Elizabeth_Warren
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
jbvbwysu
I actually read the article before I comment on it
10:18 AM on 03/16/2011
Eh, let's get her elected Senator for Massachusetts first. She would mop the floor with Scott Brown.
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
ladybug7
10 miles left of Palm Beach!
07:43 PM on 03/16/2011
I'd like to see that debate.
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
alumcreek
sorry to see humanity repeating errors ad nauseam
08:08 AM on 03/16/2011
Why should the GOP fund her agency? That agency will catch many of their large scale donors in felonious activities and make them unhappy and as a consequence they will threaten the GOP with no more bribes till the matter is resolved and they are permitted to get away with cheating the public.
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
cooky3
07:17 AM on 03/16/2011
Spoken like a true, new-age Republican. It's not: "I disagree with them." Instead it is: "I don't like them."
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
jerryjerry5959
LIFE--Good and bad days. Just have more good ones
06:54 AM on 03/16/2011
Elizabeth Warren for President of anything. That woman is so right on, bright, and most of all, practical. No wonder the GOP hates her.
07:53 AM on 03/16/2011
I've always respected Ms. Warren. She stands up to the banks and works to protect the middle class. If they boot her, it will be time to leave for Canada.....or sell our souls and go work for the banks....or the Republicans.
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
saltpeter
Ayn Rand is the L. Ron Hubbard of fiscal ideology
06:51 AM on 03/16/2011
Of course a Republican doesn't like anything to do with consumer protections. Republicans despise the entire concept as well as the concepts of worker protections, child protections, environmental protections, protecting civilians from terrorism, protecting other nations from wantonly inflicting damage on their country and their people, protecting Americans from tsunamis, hurricanes, and other natural disasters, or any other protection of citizens of our own nation or any other nation we engage with from forces both human or natural that the government could minimize or maximize the issues related with depending on their willingness to provide protection.

In other words, Republicans don't believe in protecting PEOPLE, they believe in protecting PROFIT.
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
Matt Christensen
What the hell is a "Level 2 Superuser?"
08:12 AM on 03/16/2011
Someone posted the following last weekend, and I think it sums it up perfectly;

"There are two kinds of Republicans, Millionaires & Suckers!"
photo
Ed C Atlanta
Justice for all,,It's an Entitlement
08:40 AM on 03/16/2011
Damn good one Matt. F/F,I feel the same way and have been stating this for awhile.
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
saltpeter
Ayn Rand is the L. Ron Hubbard of fiscal ideology
09:09 AM on 03/16/2011
So true. And the suckers haven't learned by now what the true GOP agenda is, then they're never going to figure it out. No wonder the suckers despise public education, whatever education was imposed on them was wasted.