Home > Personal Finance > Consumer Protection Fight Erupts Into Allegations of Lying

Comments 0 Comments

Congressional Republicans also have pushed to replace the board’s single director with a five-member board, and to replace the board’s funding from the Treasury Department–which comes largely from fees charged to financial institutions–with a budget approved by Congress. A group of 44 Republican senators sent a letter to President Obama saying they would block any nominee until they won significant structural changes to the board.

Republicans already succeeded in checking the consumer protection agency by inserting language into Dodd-Frank that submits the new bureau to oversight by a new Financial Stability Oversight Board, comprised of the leaders of all the other federal banking regulatory agencies.

“(T)he Bureau is the only bank regulator whose rules can be overruled by a council made up of other federal agencies,” Warren testified.

But McHenry was not mollified. He questioned Warren at length about her involvement in negotiations between the nation’s largest mortgage servicers and a coalition of state attorneys general, who are investigating the companies for alleged fraud that may have resulted in consumers being illegally evicted from their homes.

[Article: Bank Regulator–We Passed Too Many Bank Regulations!]

After the hearing, when asked by a CNBC reporter whether he thought Warren lied to Congress about the extent of her involvement in the negotiations, McHenry said, “Sure.”

For her part, Warren may not have done herself any favors by refusing to cooperate with McHenry regarding a scheduling conflict. McHenry proposed pausing the hearing for ten minutes so that his subcommittee members could vote on the House floor. Warren responded angrily.

“Congressman, you are causing problems,” Ms. Warren said. “We had an agreement.”

Members of Congress expect a fair degree of deference from the people appearing before them, says Jean Noonan, former associate director of the FTC and now an attorney who focuses on consumer financial issues and a Credit.com columnist. Warren may have crossed that line.

Warren’s objection to waiting ten minutes for the committee to return “comes across as testy and maybe a bit regal, which is pretty fatal before congressional committees,” Noonan says. “I’m sure there was a feeling by Warren of being bullied and pushed too far, but that’s never good to have it come out in public.”

Then again, McHenry crossed a line by calling Warren a liar and using his subcommittee’s oversight power to try and discredit the consumer board, says Plunkett of the Consumer Federation of America.

“I’d call this thug oversight,” Plunkett says. “Thug oversight is characterized by attempts to make accusations, to slander, to taint, to not give a witness much time to respond, and then to try and taint their responses as not just wrong but somehow lacking in veracity.”

None of this bodes well for efforts by moderates to find some way out of this impasse. Representative Barney Frank (D-MA), a 30-year veteran of Congress, called the Republicans’ treatment of Warren “the worst abuse of the confirmation process I’ve ever seen” in an interview with The Hill newspaper. Rep. Al Franken sent a letter to President Obama, asking the administration to go over Republicans’ heads and make a recess appointment of Warren to lead the agency.

“I think what all of this shows is an unwillingness on either side to compromise,” Noonan says. “Between Warren and the Republicans, they both seem more willing to escalate the rhetoric than to tamp it down.”

Pages: 1 2

Comments on articles and responses to those comments are not provided or commissioned by a bank advertiser. Responses have not been reviewed, approved or otherwise endorsed by a bank advertiser. It is not a bank advertiser's responsibility to ensure all posts and/or questions are answered.

Please note that our comments are moderated, so it may take a little time before you see them on the page. Thanks for your patience.

Certain credit cards and other financial products mentioned in this and other sponsored content on Credit.com are Partners with Credit.com. Credit.com receives compensation if our users apply for and ultimately sign up for any financial products or cards offered.

Hello, Reader!

Thanks for checking out Credit.com. We hope you find the site and the journalism we produce useful. We wanted to take some time to tell you a bit about ourselves.

Our People

The Credit.com editorial team is staffed by a team of editors and reporters, each with many years of financial reporting experience. We’ve worked for places like the New York Times, American Banker, Frontline, TheStreet.com, Business Insider, ABC News, NBC News, CNBC and many others. We also employ a few freelancers and more than 50 contributors (these are typically subject matter experts from the worlds of finance, academia, politics, business and elsewhere).

Our Reporting

We take great pains to ensure that the articles, video and graphics you see on Credit.com are thoroughly reported and fact-checked. Each story is read by two separate editors, and we adhere to the highest editorial standards. We’re not perfect, however, and if you see something that you think is wrong, please email us at editorial team [at] credit [dot] com,

The Credit.com editorial team is committed to providing our readers and viewers with sound, well-reported and understandable information designed to inform and empower. We won’t tell you what to do. We will, however, do our best to explain the consequences of various actions, thereby arming you with the information you need to make decisions that are in your best interests. We also write about things relating to money and finance we think are interesting and want to share.

In addition to appearing on Credit.com, our articles are syndicated to dozens of other news sites. We have more than 100 partners, including MSN, ABC News, CBS News, Yahoo, Marketwatch, Scripps, Money Magazine and many others. This network operates similarly to the Associated Press or Reuters, except we focus almost exclusively on issues relating to personal finance. These are not advertorial or paid placements, rather we provide these articles to our partners in most cases for free. These relationships create more awareness of Credit.com in general and they result in more traffic to us as well.

Our Business Model

Credit.com’s journalism is largely supported by an e-commerce business model. Rather than rely on revenue from display ad impressions, Credit.com maintains a financial marketplace separate from its editorial pages. When someone navigates to those pages, and applies for a credit card, for example, Credit.com will get paid what is essentially a finder’s fee if that person ends up getting the card. That doesn’t mean, however, that our editorial decisions are informed by the products available in our marketplace. The editorial team chooses what to write about and how to write about it independently of the decisions and priorities of the business side of the company. In fact, we maintain a strict and important firewall between the editorial and business departments. Our mission as journalists is to serve the reader, not the advertiser. In that sense, we are no different from any other news organization that is supported by ad revenue.

Visitors to Credit.com are also able to register for a free Credit.com account, which gives them access to a tool called The Credit Report Card. This tool provides users with two free credit scores and a breakdown of the information in their Experian credit report, updated twice monthly. Again, this tool is entirely free, and we mention that frequently in our articles, because we think that it’s a good thing for users to have access to data like this. Separate from its educational value, there is also a business angle to the Credit Report Card. Registered users can be matched with products and services for which they are most likely to qualify. In other words, if you register and you find that your credit is less than stellar, Credit.com won’t recommend a high-end platinum credit card that requires an excellent credit score You’d likely get rejected, and that’s no good for you or Credit.com. You’d be no closer to getting a product you need, there’d be a wasted inquiry on your credit report, and Credit.com wouldn’t get paid. These are essentially what are commonly referred to as "targeted ads" in the world of the Internet. Despite all of this, however, even if you never apply for any product, the Credit Report Card will remain free, and none of this will impact how the editorial team reports on credit and credit scores.

Your Stories

Lastly, much of what we do is informed by our own experiences as well as the experiences of our readers. We want to tell your stories if you’re interested in sharing them. Please email us at story ideas [at] credit [dot] com with ideas or visit us on Facebook or Twitter.

Thanks for stopping by.

- The Credit.com Editorial Team