Ketanji Brown Jackson is such a badass. She's going be chief justice one day. It'll break so many Republicans brains. She's so sharp on her knowledge of the law.
I'm fine with CFPB getting whacked. I like the CFPB just fine, but I know Warren was trying to pull some stunts to protect its fiefdom that were probably overstepping. Student loan forgiveness might get whacked too, but whether it stays or goes it's not the end of the line for the issue of college costs and student debt relief. More will be demanded of politicians.
Just an excuse unless one is steeped in conservative ideology. The S Ct decisions are mostly based on their politics. Aways like Gerald Tribe the famous law prof when asked to predict how the Repub S Ct would rule. Look to the most recent GOP presidential platform.."Original Intent" etc. lol
You realize if CFPB gets struck down, so do other entities funded this way. Deposit Insurance on bank accounts becomes illegal. The government bureau that charters banks becomes unconstitutional. Technically even the Federal Reserve itself becomes unconstitutional since it isn't funded via appropriations either. Basically any entity funded by the Department of Treasury or the Fed gets destroyed. Not to mention that 10 years worth of regulations gets struck down overnight which would be a complete mess to deal with. CFPB's funding wasn't strange or different. Congress has funded entities via Treasury or the Fed (rather than direct appropriations) since the 1800s. This is just chaos created by courts with no basis other than crackpot legal theory.
Didn't realize. But I suppose the ramifications would depend on the logic SCOTUS uses to strike it down, if indeed they do.
Youre fine with the CFPB getting cut? Are you seriously crazy?!?!? Do you have any idea that would have for consumer protection. Jesus christ corporate America has completely fed the public lies. Do u have any idea how important the CFPB is for minorities and disadvantaged folks? This is crazy
Yeah and mind to tell me why it was founded in the first place???? It's not like some huge financial disaster occurred where folks where getting effed over right that forced gov to create it huh. Lets have unlimited junk fees and more banking fees!!! I'm sure our buddy at chase will never screw us over! I'm sure wells fargo would never open fake bank accounts either right ? Big banks are our best friends. They'll never do bad
Republicans love big banks. They bailed them out under W and now want to get rid of the agency created because of their egregious practices that led to the Great Recession. Privatize the profit socialize the risk.
That's one way to look at it, I suppose. In the real world, only 3 Democrats in the House and 9 in the Senate (10 if you count Sanders) voted against the bailout. 14 Republican Senators (to 35 in support) and 145 Republican Congressmen (to 47 in support) voted against TARP. It was signed into law by Bush, who is a Republican, so that's something I guess. The Senate support was bipartisan, and the House support was almost entirely Democrats. I'm afraid it was not the GOP that bailed out the banks, it was the federal government.
while W's bailout was ineffective, Obama's was---resusitating the US financial industry---leading to >71 consecutive months of positive job growth the difference was Obama's competence, and W's lack of it
What does that have to do with which party bailed out the banks? Whatever your view on the effectiveness of TARP, it was largely supported by the Democrats in the House and both parties in the Senate.
When CFPB was created it was actually given specific laws to enforce (beyond the original mandate in the Dodd-Frank bill). For example, rules and regulations around credit reporting are now managed by CFPB. For example, CFPB issued a number of rules around accurate reporting of collections, clarifications on what types of debt can be reported, and enforcement powers by various entities (mainly confirming that state AG offices can regulate and enforce laws within their domains). Most of us probably haven't noticed, but credit agencies have both become more accurate in their reporting of debt and respond much more quickly to disputes. Additionally, there are new covid era reporting rules that were passed by Congress (to protect consumers from credit hits when they had renegotiated debt with lenders). CFPB issued all the rulemaking to ensure that lenders and credit bureaus were in compliance. And that's just rulemaking on credit reporting. There are other rules on things like fair lending practices, data privacy rulemaking, etc.. There are a littany of rules that would disappear overnight if the CFPB gets struck down. That creates chaos not only for consumers, but businesses now need to figure out what the current rules are (with no regulatory body to even provide guidance on what the current rules are). Plus there are statutes that explicitly called for CFPB to be the rulemaking and regulatory agency. Consequently, you'll have a series of laws with no regulatory agency to enforce them and with our current Congress, there would be no fix for this. Effectively a series of laws would become unenforceable and all of these laws are consumer rights centric so the impact is quite large.
clearly, you have no idea what ur talking about as it relates to TARP. TARP was ALL about bailing out banks. the US financial industry was bankrupt in W's last year in office, TARP was signed into law to bail out bankrupt banks (US Gov to purchased troubled assets from financial institutions). when W left office, many financial institutions were still insolvent. once he took office, Obama work w Congress to extend TARP, specifically targeting the smaller banks. whatever your political persuasion, the financial industry was bankrupt during the W admin, he was unsuccessful in bailing it out Obama's first task was to bail out the mess W left behind; he was successful in bailing out the financial industry. 44 was able to extend the TARP to where even the small troubled banks got bailed out. once the financial industry was resustitated, the US economy was stabilized, paving the way to 71 consecutive months of steady job growth during the Obama era what a difference competence makes in bailing out the US financial industry
So you agree that it was the Democrats that bailed out the banks, with some Republican support. Which is exactly what I said.
So we are considering cancelling student loans because of covid? I thought covid was why we froze repayments.
Both things can be true. I don't really care what justification that they use - they need to do something about all of it
Not advocating for it's abolition, just saying it wouldn't be the end of the world. Chaos, sure. Worse consumer protection, sure. But that doesn't justify an unconstitutional construct, if indeed that's what this is. Other agencies might pick up some of their remit, congress might pass more laws where regulation is very needful, and sure under-regulated companies might take advantage and exploit consumers where the gaps remain.
Are you broken or something? @Phillyrocket said Republicans bailed out the banks under President Bush, clearly referring to TARP. I said TARP was passed by Democrats with some Republican support in the Senate. Anything about the effectiveness of TARP is irrelevant to the issue. Anything about what Obama did is also irrelevant to the issue. The whole conversation was about whether or not Republicans were bailing out the banks when President Bush was in office. I think you believe I was trying to give the Republicans some kind of undue credit. You are, unsurprisingly, wrong.
