by Jeff Sovern
Mark W. Olson, former Federal Reserve Board governor, and former chairman of the American Bankers Association predicts here a compromise on appointment of a CFPB director. He writes:
Expect a compromise that will please very few. It is hard to believe that many members of Congress running for reelection will support the repeal of a regulatory entity designed to "protect consumers."
On the other hand, that sort of a concentration of authority is unlikely to stand over multiple changes in administrations. Look for the single "director" to be replaced at some point by a board, which would require its re-designation from an executive agency to a commission.
Meanwhile, Alan Charles Raul attacks the independence of the Bureau while Clyde Mitchell, formerly a partner at White and Case, and an adjunct professor at Fordham has a piece in the New York Law Journal (behind a paywall) agreeing with Republicans that the Bureau should be run by a commission instead of a director (he doesn't refer to the problems with the House bill providing for a commission) but arguing that the Bureau's funding should be left as is, contrary to Republican demands.
None of these writers explains why it is ok for the Office of the Comptroller of the Currency to have an independent director rather than a commission, not be subject to the congressional appropriation process, and (unlike the CFPB), not be subject to overruling by the Financial Stability Oversight Council.
Comments