Hot off the press from the Hill, Richard Cordray, head of the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau, which has been hindering lenders in America from serving consumers through draconian regulation, (and is the subject of multiple lawsuits for operating in an unconstitutional manner) has announced his resignation from the agency:
The director of the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau (CFPB) announced his resignation Wednesday, giving President Trump the chance to reshape an agency that has long been the target of Republican ire.
Richard Cordray expects “to step down from his position here before the end of the month,” he wrote in an email that was sent to CFPB staff.
and..
Cordray’s departure came as welcome news to his detractors, who called for sweeping changes at the bureau under the next director.
Hensarling said “we are long overdue for new leadership at the CFPB,” which he called “structurally unconstitutional and completely unaccountable to the American people.”
“The resignation of the Bureau’s director is an excellent opportunity to enact desperately needed reforms,” Hensarling said. “Properly designed and led, it can truly protect consumers by ensuring they have access to competitive markets that are vigorously policed for fraud.”
With the departure of the director, this would be a great opportunity for President Trump and Congress to rein in the rogue agency, and place it back within constitutional authority.
If its unconstitutional, then why would you want to appoint an other agency head?
There are multiple lawsuits being litigated on the subject. How the agency is organized and funded is what’s at issue, including the fact the director could not be removed.
https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/get-there/wp/2016/11/18/cfpb-challenges-court-ruling-that-found-its-structure-is-unconstitutional/?utm_term=.a6ca682a9536
It’s easier to fix something when someone is in charge.
Thanks for the cite, but if you read the article and agree with the Appeals Court decision on the CFPB, then it potentially empowers a President with the right to fire the head of the Office of Special Counsel – and in these times, is that something we really want?
It kind of ironic too, that people want to be able to fire someone who works for consumers, but then how does one fire a Federal Reserve Chairperson who works for the banks?
Wrapped in a constitutional complaint is the true rationale; to get this agency to work for business, not against it. Let the buyer beware.
I believe they call it “caveat emptor.” Yep, don’t promote morals and ethics because a guy has got to make a buck, but make sure you go to church on Sunday, however…..
#Incredible