Financial Reform Watch : Financial Services News & Information : Blank Rome Government Relations Lobbying Firm : Government Relations, Corporate Governance : Financial Reform Watch Law Blog

President Obama announced this afternoon that he will install Former Ohio Attorney General Richard as director of the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau by “recess appointment.” The recess appointment comes despite the fact that the Senate is not officially in recess. The appointment will almost certainly be challenged in court.

Speaking in Shaker Heights, Ohio, the president said “Today I’m appointing Richard as America’s consumer watchdog. That means he’ll be in charge of one thing: looking out for the best interests of American consumers. His job will be to protect families like yours from the abuses of the financial industry.” The president went on to criticize Senate Republicans for blocking Cordray’s confirmation. “The only reason Republicans in the Senate have blocked Richard is because they don’t agree with the law setting up the consumer watchdog. They want to weaken it. Well that makes no sense at all.”

Now that the bureau has a director, it will assume its full authority under Dodd-Frank, which includes oversight authority over non-bank financial institutions. In the five-and-a-half months since the bureau opened its doors, mortgage servicers, debt collectors, and payday lenders have been outside of its purview. Now, these and other non-banks will likely be subject to regulatory and enforcement actions by the CFPB.

• Email This
• Print
• Comments
• Trackbacks
• Share Link

As the July 21, 2011 Dodd-Frank implementation date rapidly approaches, it is becoming increasingly likely that the Bureau of Consumer Financial Protection will not have a Senate-confirmed director by the time its new authority begins. While some have tried to downplay the significance of the CFPB assuming authority without a director, it could seriously hinder the bureau’s ability to do so much as open its doors, let alone effectively regulate.

According to Title X of Dodd-Frank, the director is appointed by the President with the advice and consent of the Senate. Once confirmed, the director serves as the sole head of the CFPB. Dodd-Frank enumerates the director’s responsibilities clearly: appointing and directing all bureau employees; establishing all offices within the bureau; reporting to Congress; submitting budget requests to the Federal Reserve; requiring reports of covered firms; and prescribing rules and issuing orders and guidance, among others.

Additionally, there are a number of responsibilities assigned to “The Bureau,” though Dodd-Frank does not establish who has authority over The Bureau, if not the director. Assuming a case can be made for some other leadership structure, however, The Bureau is tasked with exclusively enforcing federal consumer financial law. The Bureau also may take action against those participating in unlawful acts, engage in joint investigations, conduct hearings and adjudication proceedings, and commence civil action against those who violate federal consumer financial law.

While this would suggest that The Bureau would have some capabilities absent a director, it may not be quite that easy. First, Dodd-Frank at times fails to clearly delineate where the exclusive authority of the director begins and ends as opposed to The Bureau as a whole. While this could arguably help The Bureau perform its duties without a director, there’s a second, stickier problem. The director has the sole authority to staff The Bureau, as well as to request and budget funding from the Federal Reserve. Consequently, even if The Bureau could find the statutory authority to perform some regulatory functions, it would be hard-pressed to do so without funding or personnel.

If a director is not confirmed by July 21, Dodd-Frank permits two courses of action. First, the Secretary of the Treasury may submit a request to Congress to delay the implementation date. The law requires that implementation cannot be delayed for more than 18 months, meaning that the Administration would only gain 6 months to get a nominee confirmed. Alternatively, Dodd-Frank states that the Secretary of the Treasury is authorized to perform the functions of The Bureau until the director is confirmed by the Senate, though it is unclear whether this authority expires on July 21.

Secretary Geithner has not yet announced plans to take either of these steps, but with only a month to go and Republicans in the House and the Senate vowing that they will go to any means necessary to block the confirmation of presumptive nominee Elizabeth Warren, delaying the implementation may be the Secretary’s only option.
 

• Email This
• Print
• Comments
• Trackbacks
• Share Link

With near-perfect unity, Senate Republicans joined their House counterparts this week in calling for significant structural reforms to the new Consumer Financial Protection Bureau (CFPB). And unlike the House, the Senate can take hostages.

On Monday, 44 Republican Senators sent a letter to President Obama threatening to block any CFPB director nominee—regardless of party affiliation—unless their concerns regarding the new agency’s structure and lack of appropriate accountability mechanisms are addressed by Congress. Senators Scott Brown (MA) and Lisa Murkowski (AK) were the only Republicans not to sign the letter.

Specifically, the GOP letter calls for the adoption of reforms in three main areas, including:

• Leadership Structure - Alter the CFPB’s leadership structure from that of a single director to a board of directors, similar to the Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation (FDIC), Federal Reserve Board, or Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC). GOP senators expressed concern that Dodd-Frank “failed to provide any real checks on the CFPB director’s powers” by providing limited tools for Congress or the administration to remove a director for poor performance and granting the director with “unfettered authority” over the CFPB’s annual budget.

• Email This
• Print
• Comments
• Trackbacks
• Share Link

This afternoon the Senate passed the Dodd Frank Wall Street Reform and Consumer Protection Act by a vote of 60 to 39.  As expected, all but three Republicans -- Senators Scott Brown (MA), Olympia Snowe (ME) and Susan Collins (ME) -- voted against the bill, and Sen. Russ Feingold (D-WI) was the only Democrat to vote against it. The president is expected to sign the legislation next week.

• Email This
• Print
• Comments (2)
• Trackbacks
• Share Link

With the clock ticking on a self-imposed deadline for the completion of House and Senate conference negotiations, House Financial Services Chairman Barney Frank (D-MA) did his best impersonation of (soccer star) Landon Donovan early Friday morning, clearing a conference report that will bring Congress one step closer to passing the most sweeping financial regulatory reform legislation in nearly a century. 

Capping off two weeks of publicly-televised conference committee negotiations that included a nearly 24-hour marathon session on the final day, House conferees voted 20-11 and Senators voted 7-5 to approve the measure on party lines; and provided President Obama with a critical victory prior to this weekend’s G-20 Summit in Toronto.

Below are the key issues that were resolved in conference committee on Thursday:

Derivatives
A broad array of industries, both inside and outside the financial sector, anxiously awaited the conferees’ response to controversial Senate language authored by Sen. Blanche Lincoln (D-AR) that would require banks to spin-off or “wall off” their swaps operations. After many weeks of behind-the-scenes negotiations -- including a contentious session yesterday in which House Democrats threatened to pull their support for the overall bill if the Lincoln language was included -- conferees ultimately agreed to a watered-down version that allows banks to continue trading with certain derivatives that are deemed less risky. Under the proposal offered by House Agriculture Committee Chairman Collin C. Peterson (D-MN), derivatives tied to interest rate swaps, foreign exchange swaps, gold and silver, and investment-grade credit default swaps will be exempted from the prohibition, while derivative trading related to agriculture, commodities, energy, equities, metals, and below-investment-grade credit default swaps must be walled off from a bank’s federally insured deposits.

Volcker Rule
Aside from the derivatives title, the debate surrounding the “Volcker Rule” -- or the proposed ban on proprietary trading for banks and bank holding companies -- proved to be the most contentious item on the conferees’ agenda in the final week. In the end, negotiators agreed to strengthen the Volcker Rule provisions by incorporating language offered by Senators Carl Levin (D-MI) and Jeff Merkley (D-OR) that would strip the ability of regulators to halt the Volcker Rule‘s implementation. However, in deference to the wishes of Sen. Scott Brown (R-MA)—who was one of only four Republicans to vote for the financial reform bill in the Senate— the final language would allow banks to engage in proprietary trading activities with up to three percent of their tangible common equity.

Banking Capital Standards
Another major agreement involved language authored by Sen. Susan Collins (R-ME) that would limit the ability of banks to use commonly held securities known as “trust-preferred” to meet capital requirements. Although House Democrats sought a 10-year phase-in for financial institutions with assets between $15 billion and $100 billion, negotiators agreed to a five-year phase-in period for $15-$100 billion institutions and a full exemption for those with less than $15 billion.

Corporate Governance
Conferees decided to retain a Senate provision that requires publicly-trade companies to grant certain shareholders -- those owning five percent of the outstanding shares for at least two years -- to nominate and elect members of the board of directors through a proxy vote.

Levy on Banks and Hedge Funds
In order to defray the legislation’s projected $22 billion cost -- as estimated by the Congressional Budget Office -- conferees approved last-minute language that would allow the Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation (FDIC) to levy fees on financial institutions with assets of $50 billion or more and hedge funds with managed assets of over $10 billion.

The House and Senate are expected to vote on the final conference report next week -- which is not subject to further amendment -- before sending it on to the White House for President Obama's signature and enactment into law .
 

• Email This
• Print
• Comments
• Trackbacks
• Share Link

Beginning at noon tomorrow, House and Senate conferees for the financial reform legislation will return to the negotiating table for round two – this time with their attention fixed on the contentious Title 10, which props up a new regulator for consumer financial protection.

In preparation for tomorrow’s proceedings, House Financial Services Chairman Barney Frank (D-MA) unveiled this afternoon the House’s proposals for amending the Senate language in regards to not only consumer financial protection, but also mortgage reform and predatory lending, and risk retention.

In a critical concession, Frank’s proposal would retain the Senate version’s placement of the newly-created Consumer Financial Protection Bureau (CFPB) inside the Federal Reserve, a move that is likely to provoke disapproval amongst Frank’s Democratic colleagues who favor the creation of a stand-alone agency. Even Frank, himself, panned the idea of housing a new consumer regulator inside the Fed when it was first proposed in the Senate in March. But once again, Frank’s concession largely reflects the political dynamics in the Senate, where the creation of a stand-alone agency would likely unravel a fragile coalition of 60 votes required for passage.

Striking another controversial note, Frank defied long-standing White House objections by reviving language included in the House-passed version and offered as amendment in the Senate by Sen. Sam Brownback (R-KS) – but which did not receive a vote -- that would exempt auto dealers from the CFPB’s regulatory oversight. It remains uncertain whether the White House will continue to lobby against the provision during negotiations this week.

• Email This
• Print
• Comments
• Trackbacks
• Share Link

When House and Senate conferees return to the negotiating table next Tuesday, they will begin consideration of arguably the thorniest issue of financial reform: the newly created consumer financial protection regulator. In addition, conferees are expected to continue debating the details of FDIC resolution authority over failing financial services institutions, along with a controversial Senate derivatives title that forces banks to spin-off their swap desks.

This afternoon, House Financial Services Chairman Barney Frank (D-MA) and Senate Banking Committee Chairman Christopher Dodd (D-CT) released the following schedule for Tuesday:
 

Tuesday, June 22
• Pending offers and Counter-offers from Week One
• Consumer Financial Protection-CFPA/CFPB-title 10 of base text
• Predatory lending-title 14 of base text
• Risk retention-subtitle D of title 9 of base text
• Interchange-section 1076 of base text
• Access issues-titles 10, 12, and 14 of base text
 

• Email This
• Print
• Comments (1)
• Trackbacks
• Share Link

After wrapping up another eventful voting week that involved the consideration of nearly 15 amendments to the Restoring American Financial Stability Act of 2010 (S.3217), the Senate – and perhaps the Congress – now appears headed towards the finish line on financial regulatory reform.

Despite the numerous votes, Senate Banking Committee Chairman Christopher Dodd’s (D-CT) overhaul legislation escaped relatively unscathed from problematic amendments that could have disrupted future conference negotiations with the House, as a flurry of proposals – including those related to credit rating agencies, Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac, community banks, oversight of the Federal Reserve’s monetary policy, underwriting standards, the newly-created consumer financial protection bureau (CFPB) and interchange fees – all were brought up for consideration (see below for additional details on amendments). When the chamber returns to action next week, Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid (D-NV) is expected to set up a vote that will occur on Wednesday to invoke cloture – or limit further debate to 30 hours – which if approved, would likely lead to the bill’s final passage later in the week. Some sources around Capitol Hill are even predicting that after the Senate completes its work, House Financial Services Chairman Barney Frank (D-MA) and fellow Democrats will push for House passage of the Senate bill, precluding the need for a formal conference and ultimately shortening the timeline for the President’s signature.

But predictions aside, Dodd must still contend with the burgeoning frustration of his Democratic colleagues in the Senate, who expressed dismay this week that only 31 amendments out of the over 300 introduced have been formally debated on the floor thus far. In addition, particular contention still lingers with respect to the legislation’s provisions regulating derivatives transactions, specifically the scope of the bill’s "commercial end-user" exemption and its prohibition on commercial banks and bank holding companies from directly engaging in derivatives transactions. The Senate rejected, 39-59, a Republican derivatives proposal offered by Senators Saxby Chambliss (GA), Richard Shelby (AL), Judd Gregg (NH) that sought to limit the types of swaps transactions that would face clearing requirements by exempting “bona-fide hedging swap transactions.”
 

• Email This
• Print
• Comments
• Trackbacks
• Share Link

Following a nearly three-day logjam, the Senate is now voting , and voting often, as leaders on both sides continue to queue up a broad array of amendments dealing with nearly every component of the Restoring American Financial Stability Act of 2010 (S. 3217).

Yesterday, the Senate jumpstarted the amendment process by passing overwhelmingly two proposals aimed at ending “Too Big To Fail” through modifications to the bill’s resolution authority language. The first amendment, offered by Senator Barbara Boxer (D-CA), attaches language specifying that “no taxpayer funds shall be used to prevent the liquidation of any financial company”; and the second amendment, offered by Senators Christopher Dodd (D-CT) and Richard Shelby (R-AL), removes the controversial $50 billion fund that would have been used to finance the resolution of failing financial institutions and would limit the payments received by creditors during liquidation. The Boxer amendment passed by a vote of 96-1 and the Dodd-Shelby amendment was approved 93-5.

Although both parties were able to resolve the “Too Big Too Fail” dilemma relatively peacefully through closed door negotiations, the gulf between Democrats and Republicans over a contentious proposal to create a new consumer financial protection bureau (CFPB) may prove to be more difficult. At some point today, the Senate is expected to consider an alternative GOP proposal offered by Shelby and Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell that would, as opposed to the current Dodd proposal that places the CFPB within the Federal Reserve, put the new bureau inside the FDIC and grant its board with significant oversight authority over the bureau's rulemaking decisions. The Shelby-McConnell proposal would also limit the bureau’s authority to that of rulemaking, as banking regulators would retain their enforcement and supervisory authority. But nonetheless, the GOP alternative’s prospects of passage are dismal by most accounts.

• Email This
• Print
• Comments
• Trackbacks
• Share Link

In the eyes of Senate Democratic Leadership, the writing is on the wall. A recent poll shows that nearly two-thirds of Americans support reforms to the financial industry and a majority of those voters trust President Obama over Republicans in getting the job done. And now, following a series of tactical maneuvers this week that forced Senate Republicans into voting not once, twice, but three times against moving forward with the debate on financial regulatory reform, Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid’s (D-NV) next play appears simple: ride the populist wave against Wall Street all the way to November.

Beginning next week, the Senate will begin formally debating and considering amendments to the Restoring American Financial Stability Act of 2010 (S.3217)—a process likely to consume at least two weeks of floor time. Reid’s announced timeline of Memorial Day for completion of S.3217, coupled with President Obama’s new goal of September for the signing of a final bill, provide a clear indication that Democrats are looking to financial reform as a signature issue in the 2010 elections.

• Email This
• Print
• Comments
• Trackbacks
• Share Link

Following financial regulatory reform's path in the Senate may require a scorecard. This coming Monday, Senate Banking Committee Chairman Chris Dodd (D-CT) plans to file his committee's report on the legislation it adopted before the spring recess. Sen. Majority Leader Harry Reid (D-NV) announced that the Senate will begin floor debate on the bill starting next week. Meanwhile, Senate Agriculture Committee Chairman Blanche Lincoln (D-AR) today unveiled her much anticipated derivatives bill, which her committee will markup next week. Reportedly, the current Lincoln bill does not reflect the negotiations she has been having with her Republican counterparts, and the legislation is likely to change significantly during next week's markup. Of course, the Agriculture Committee markup could end up like the Banking Committee markup with no amendments and a party line vote. It is too early to predict, but President Obama's threat today -- that he would "veto legislation that does not bring the derivatives market under control" -- signals that the White House is not looking to compromise.

Earlier today, it looked like Democrats would have been able to entice at least one Republican to help them break a possible filibuster next week. By this afternoon though, all 41 Republican Senators sent a unified letter to Reid opposing the Banking Committee bill and asking for support for the bipartisan negotiations several Senators have continued conducting.

• Email This
• Print
• Comments (1)
• Trackbacks
• Share Link

This afternoon at 5 p.m. the Senate Banking Committee will meet and likely adopt along party lines Chairman Chris Dodd's "Manager's Amendment" to his financial regulatory reform draft unveiled earlier this month. Instead of dedicating a week or more to consideration of the 473 amendments filed by committee members -- 98 of which were filed by Sen. Bob Corker (R-TN) -- Dodd decided to incorporate a fraction of the amendments into one roughly 100-page package and then move the bill swiftly and successfully out of committee.

Corker said this morning that he was disappointed about the process, since he had hoped to work through many of the issues in a bipartisan fashion within the Banking Committee.  Assuming things go as predicted tonight, many compromises to the bill will be worked out behind the scenes prior to floor consideration, while still other issues will play out on the Senate floor.

Corker still believes the bill has a 90 percent chance of passing ultimately and thinks that there may be a "better opportunity with a different cast of characters -- the full Senate -- to do something policywise."
 

• Email This
• Print
• Comments
• Trackbacks
• Share Link

Taking a pivotal step towards the enactment of comprehensive financial regulatory reform, this afternoon Senate Banking Committee Chairman Christopher Dodd (D-CT) released the Restoring American Financial Stability Act of 2010, which includes broad revisions to legislation that Dodd introduced in November and represents the base bill for a full committee markup that is slated to begin next week.

The introduction of the Dodd bill comes amidst increasingly protracted negotiations between the chairman and his fellow banking committee members Richard Shelby (R-AL) and Bob Corker (R-TN), which were halted before both sides could hash out bipartisan compromises on several significant policy issues—including the authority of a proposed Consumer Financial Protection Bureau and a newly-created process for winding down large and interconnected financial institutions. But according to Dodd, the Senate’s dwindling timeline for action was the most immediate factor driving his decision; while others are viewing Dodd’s move as an effort to ramp up the political pressure on Senate Republicans by bringing the debate out in the open.

Below are the bill’s highlights:

• Email This
• Print
• Comments (2)
• Trackbacks
• Share Link

Senate Banking Committee Chairman Chris Dodd (D-CT) and Ranking Member Richard Shelby (R-AL) continue to work towards bipartisan agreement on at least some key elements of a financial reform measure. While the process has been a rocky one, both Senators appear to be working hard to find common ground. They appear to have found agreement on at least two things:

1. There will NOT be a stand-alone Consumer Financial Protection Agency.  Rather, consumer protections functions will be folded into another agency or agencies.

2. The president's proposal to limit the size of financial institutions (the "Volcker rule") has complicated the process and may have come too late in the game.

Our contacts on the Hill are telling us to expect committee action on a financial reform package by the end of the month. Regardless of the final outcome of the Dodd-Shelby discussions, the Chairman appears committed to moving ahead.

• Email This
• Print
• Comments (1)
• Trackbacks
• Share Link

Sen. Banking Committee Chairman Chris Dodd's (D-CT) announcement that he will not seek re-election has roiled the already choppy waters surrounding the financial reform legislation. The Financial Reform Watch team has been intrigued by the comments attibuted to congressional and industry sources indicating that his retirement may increase the opportunity for a bipartisan bill. We are not so sure.

While we would all like to think that respect for a departing colleague and the desire of Senators to help him cement his legacy would result in more cooperation, there is little evidence to suggest today's Senate operates on that principle. We need only look back as far as the consideration of health care reform to support our view. Early in 2009, many thought the illness of Sen. Ted Kennedy would spur Senators to help him achieve his goal of more than 30 years to achieve health care reform. After his death, there was even more talk of how Senators might be moved to seek accommodation in his memory. Clearly, those sentiments—if they ever existed—were overwhelmed by the deep partisan divide in the Senate.

Today, those who indicate that bipartisanship might emerge in the wake of Dodd's announcement seem to believe he will be more accommodating of GOP concerns over certain issues—particularly the creation of the Consumer Financial Protection Agency. Our contacts on the Hill suggest that creation of that agency is as close to non-negotiable for the Administration and Sen. Dodd, not to mention House leaders, as any issue in the package. If the price of GOP support for the bill is dropping that, we are doubtful we will see much bipartisanship.

So our assessment is that is is too early to say whether Dodd's retirement improves or diminishes chances for a bill to be enacted. Your FRW team will be monitoring the situation closely and will keep you apprised of developments.

• Email This
• Print
• Comments
• Trackbacks
• Share Link

This afternoon the House of Representatives took a significant step towards the enactment of comprehensive financial reform legislation, passing the Wall Street Reform and Consumer Protection Act of 2009 (H.R. 4173) by a vote of 223 to 202. Democrats would have preferred a larger margin of victory, but they can take some satisfaction from having now passed three of the Obama Administration's major priorities—climate change, health care, and financial reform.

Throughout the week, the Democratic leadership was forced to fend off several attempts by moderate Democrats to narrow the bill’s provisions, especially those relating to the Consumer Financial Protection Agency (CFPA). On Wednesday, word quickly spread around the Capitol that a federal preemption amendment backed by Rep. Melissa Bean and her allies in the New Democrat Coalition faced strong opposition from the White House and Treasury, who were seeking to bar it from consideration on the House floor. The Bean amendment would have broadened the CFPA’s ability to preempt state consumer protection laws. However, following direct negotiations between the New Dems and top Treasury officials, a modified version of Bean’s preemption amendment was ultimately wrapped into a manager’s amendment that passed on Thursday.

Another significant amendment, opposed by House leadership and the White House, was offered by Rep. Walt Minnick (D-ID). Minnick's amendment would have replaced the Consumer Financial Protection Agency (CFPA) with a Consumer Financial Protection Council (CFPC), comprised of 12 members, including, among others, the Secretary of Treasury, the Chairman of the Federal Reserve and the chairman of the CFTC and SEC. Although rejected by a vote of 208-223, Minnick was able to pick off 33 Democrats, potentially providing momentum for a CFPA alternative in the Senate where the Banking committee is still working on a bipartisan compromise.

The defeat of the "cramdown" amendment offered by Rep. John Conyers (D-MI) was a victory for the banking industry. Conyers' amendment would have enabled bankruptcy courts to modify mortgage repayment periods, reduce interest rates and fees, and lower the mortgage principal balance to the level of a home’s fair market value. Although the House passed similar language as part of the Helping Families Save Their Homes Act of 2009 (H.R. 1106) in March, the amendment was rejected today by a vote of 188-241.

Now that Financial Services Committee Chairman Barney Frank (D-MA) got his comprehensive reform package passed before the holidays, the pressure is on Senate Banking Committee Chairman Chris Dodd (D-CT) to produce results on his side of the Capitol.

• Email This
• Print
• Comments
• Trackbacks
• Share Link

…But first, the House Rules Committee will meet this afternoon and Wednesday to consider nearly 250 amendments that have been filed to the Wall Street Reform and Consumer Protection Act of 2009 (H.R. 4173), initiating a process that will set the parameters for a series of votes to occur during three days of floor consideration that could begin later this week.

Reflecting increasing pressure from Capitol Hill for the Obama administration to ramp up existing mortgage foreclosure prevention efforts, Rep. John Conyers (D-MI) and Zoe Lofgren (D-CA) have offered an amendment to H.R. 4173 that reincarnates a highly controversial provision—known as “cramdown”—which would allow bankruptcy judges to modify the terms of troubled mortgages.

Identical to the language passed by the House in March under the Helping Families Save Their Homes Act of 2009 (H.R. 1106), the Conyers-Lofgren amendment would authorize bankruptcy courts to modify mortgage repayment periods, interest rates and fees, and even the principal balance if a borrower provides evidence that efforts to complete a loan modification through the Obama administration’s “Making Homes Affordable” program have failed. Despite passage in the House, the cramdown legislation has twice been voted down in the Senate during separate votes in 2008 and 2009.

• Email This
• Print
• Comments
• Trackbacks
• Share Link

The House Financial Services Committee yesterday completed work on the last pieces of its financial reform package, approving the systemic risk bill (H.R. 3996) and the Federal Insurance Office Act (H.R. 2609). Next Tuesday, December 8th, the House Rules Committee will reassemble into one large package all of the bills the Financial Services Committee considered separately. That package will include the two bills approved yesterday as well as legislation covering the Consumer Financial Protection Agency (H.R. 3795), over the counter derivatives (H.R. 3126), executive compensation and corporate governance (H.R. 3269), and mortgage reform and lending standards (H.R. 1728).

Financial Services Chairman Barney Frank (D-MA) is angling to have the omnibus reform package on the House floor on December 9th with at least three days of debate before the final vote. FR Watch is hearing from others on the committee that the date may slip to the following week. Frank said he anticipates the Rules Committee will approve ten additional, substantive amendments for consideration by the full House.

As the House is putting its package back together, the Senate Banking Committee is peeling apart the (Chairman Chris) Dodd draft so that bipartisan pairs of Senators can delve more deeply into assigned issue areas. Chairman Dodd (D-CT) and Ranking Member Shelby (R-AL) are focusing on the Consumer Financial Protection Agency. Senators Reed (D-RI) and Gregg (R-NH) are examining derivatives and credit rating provisions. Senators Schumer (D-NY) and Crapo (R-ID) are taking on corporate governance, investor liability, and executive compensation. Senators Warner (D-VA) and Corker (R-TN) are covering issues related to systemic risk.

The Senate Banking Committee has not yet scheduled any (financial reform-related) hearings beyond today’s nomination hearing for Fed Chairman Ben Bernanke, but it is safe to assume that the committee will be fixated on financial reform for the rest of December and probably well into the new year.
 

• Email This
• Print
• Comments
• Trackbacks
• Share Link

Gaining strong momentum after its passage out of the House Financial Services Committee last week, a bill crafted by Chairman Barney Frank (D-MA) to create a new Consumer Financial Protection Agency (CFPA) ran into a significant and unforeseen roadblock on Thursday – fellow Democrat and equally powerful House Energy and Commerce Chairman Henry Waxman (CA). In what could have been a routine markup of H.R. 3126, the Consumer Financial Protection Agency Act of 2009, the House Energy and Commerce Committee -- whose jurisdiction includes consumer protection and Federal Trade Commission oversight -- made dramatic changes to Frank's bill. One of the most obvious can be gathered from the amended bill's title: the Consumer Financial Protection Commission Act of 2009.

Waxman and the committee's Ranking Member Joe Barton (R-TX) collaborated on the manager’s amendment that would dramatically shift the agency’s governance from a single director to a commission led by a five-person bipartisan panel. Modeled after independent agencies like the Federal Communications Commission and the Federal Trade Commission, the chairman and commissioners would be nominated by the president, confirmed by the Senate, and serve staggered five year terms

Frank expressed sharp disapproval of the Waxman approach, referring to the commission model as “a big mistake” that will “weaken the capacity of the agency to provide consumer protection.” Frank defended the House Financial Services version as a balanced approach that allows a CFPA director to take prompt action, while at the same time, receiving the necessary recommendations and oversight from a board comprised of bank regulators and consumer groups. The differences may need to be resolved on the House floor. Waxman indicated he would have further changes during the floor debate, specifically removing some of the industry exemptions that were carved out by the House Financial Services legislation, including those for merchants, retailers and auto dealers.

The House Rules Committee will be the next stop for the bills where Chairman Louise Slaughter (D-NY) will execute the will of the House Democratic leadership and likely resolve the differences. It would not be in the best interest of the White House or congressional Democrats to have two of its most powerful chairmen battle over consumer protection on the House floor. The schedule is not yet posted, but the Rules Committee reconciliation could occur as early as next week.

• Email This
• Print
• Comments
• Trackbacks
• Share Link

Heading into the House Financial Services Committee's markup of the CFPA bill last week, a handful of moderate, pro-business Democrats—including Reps. Melissa Bean (IL) and Jim Himes (CT)—banded together with the intention of significantly watering down bill language that scraps long-standing federal preemption laws related to consumer protection. However, merely a week later, and in the midst of suggestions from Democratic colleagues that a reinstitution of federal preemption laws would hamper the rulemaking ability of the states and ultimately poison the overarching bill, Bean and her allies were only able to muster a few drops as the committee approved legislation this morning by a vote of 39-29.

Instead, by voice vote, the committee agreed yesterday to an amendment to the Consumer Financial Protection Agency Act of 2009 (H.R. 3126) that allows the Office of the Comptroller of the Currency (OCC) or the Office of Thrift Supervision to intervene and preempt state laws on a limited basis, only in cases where state law discriminates against nationally chartered institutions or “significantly interferes with” national banks’ ability to engage in banking. Offered by Reps. Mel Watt (D-NC) and Dennis Moore (D-KS), the amendment still leaves in place bill language that severely limits the exemptions from state laws that nationally chartered thrifts, banks, and their operating subsidiaries have enjoyed since 2004. 

• Email This
• Print
• Comments
• Trackbacks
• Share Link

While Senate Banking Committee leaders Sens. Chris Dodd (D-CT) and Richard Shelby (R-AL) have been engaged in a public display of bipartisanship about shaping comprehensive financial services reform legislation, it appears difficulties are arising in finding common ground on key issues. What we hear on Capitol Hill is that development of a detailed legislative proposal is now taking place almost exclusively on the Democratic side. GOP involvement has been minimal in recent weeks as Sen. Dodd's team seeks to pull together a draft piece of legislation.

The earlier goal of releasing a bipartisan draft in October and having a committee markup soon thereafter is proving elusive. Committee staff continues to work on a comprehensive measure including the controversial Consumer Financial Protection Agency (CFPA) and—one way or another—we expect something to emerge from that process in the next few weeks. Key committee members believe the CFPA is the one thing on which the Administration will draw a line in the sand, so opponents of that agency should not expect any early "give" on that front from the Democratic side. The major issues on that topic will center on the scope of the agency's authority and the powers it will have.

The issue of systemic risk regulation is under active discussion at the committee and it appears unlikely the Fed will be given that role. One indicator of the Fed's unpopularity at the committee these days is that there appears to be some reticence to move quickly on re-confirmation hearings for Fed Chair Ben Bernanke. Committee leaders would like to avoid hearings that might color the committee's deliberations on financial reform legislation. So even though his term is up at the end of the year, we would not be surprised to see Bernanke's reconfirmation delayed until after the New Year. He can stay in office beyond the expiration of his term, so there is no burning need to get the process completed right on time.

• Email This
• Print
• Comments (1)
• Trackbacks
• Share Link

Following last week’s unveiling of his newly-modified draft bill to create a Consumer Financial Protection Agency (CFPA), House Financial Services Chairman Barney Frank (D-MA) announced Wednesday his intention mark up the bill the week of October 12. While the philosophical debate between House Democrats and Republicans over the CFPA’s creation may be coming to a close, the debate amongst Democrats over the CFPA’s contours may be just beginning.

Federal preemption of state banking regulations is one of the first issues to divide Democrats. During Wednesday's committee hearing, Democratic lawmakers expressed concerns over a provision in Frank’s draft that would scrap federal preemption laws related to consumer protection. The Frank bill would have the CFPA set a minimum federal threshold and enable the states to set stricter rules if they choose. The potential exposure of nationally chartered banks to different consumer financial protection laws in every state is a prospect some fear would be overly cumbersome.

• Email This
• Print
• Comments (2)
• Trackbacks
• Share Link

House Financial Services Chairman Barney Frank (D-MA) yesterday sent a memo to his Democratic colleagues on the committee outlining areas where he is willing to compromise on the Obama administration’s proposed Consumer Financial Protection Agency (CFPA) and inviting additional Member input. In recent weeks, the Independent Community Bankers Association, the U.S. Chamber of Commerce, and other industry organizations have vehemently opposed the CFPA on the grounds that the new agency’s authority would be too broad and it would separate regulators’ consumer protection functions from safety and soundness responsibilities.

Moderate and Blue Dog Democrats on the committee have been receptive to industry criticisms, especially those of community bankers, who have a strong presence in most members’ congressional districts. It is not surprising that Frank is beginning to compromise on one of the most controversial elements of the administration’s plan, given the Chairman’s determination to enact financial reform before the end of the year.

• Email This
• Print
• Comments (1)
• Trackbacks
• Share Link