Dodd: Put CFPA Inside Federal Reserve

[laughingliberal]

Sen. Chris Dodd (D-Conn.) reached out to fellow members of his Banking Committee on Monday to float the latest proposal for a compromise Consumer Financial Protection Agency that would be housed within the Federal Reserve, committee aides said Monday, confirming reports in the Washington Post and Politico.

Dodd and the White House have been signaling for some time that they were less concerned with whether the agency was independent than with its structure and funding stream. Without independent funding, it would be at the whim of lawmakers who might want to block its mission.

The new proposal from Dodd, who is retiring at the end of this year, would grant the agency independent funding and a presidentially-appointed director, another priority for consumer advocates. But it would not give the agency, according to the Post, authority to enforce those rules. The Federal Reserve has had consumer protection laws on its books for years, but consciously elected not to enforce them before the financial crisis.

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2010/03/01/dodd-put-cfpa-inside-fed_n_481766.html


Please explain how an agency without the authority to enforce rules helps? And the Fed has had consumer protection laws it chose not to enforce for years? A sham in the making, obviously. I've grown old waiting for Washington to start standing up for the average citizen.

[Moochy]

1. If Dodd thinks its a good idea

it usually means it is something tricksy, and wrong.

[laughingliberal]

2. Yeah, makes you wonder what his future career plans are. nt

[FLAprogressive]

3. The last thing we need to do is give the Fed any more power. I don't trust Dodd. nt

[ProfessorGAC]

4. Might Be Smarter To Do The Opposite

Then, whims of politicians couldn't defund CFPA, because it would have a direct effect on the whole economy. So, you still get Dodd's benefit, and you protect the population from the whims of the Fed.
GAC

[waiting for hope]

5. Isn't Dodd not seeking reelection?

Slash and burn on his way out.

K&R

[laughingliberal]

7. Or positioning himself for a nice job offer? nt

[waiting for hope]

8. Aren't they all? I wonder, in about 6 months to

a year, what these yahoos will be doing .. especially Bayh .. I can see Dodd in a banking lobby type job, all to easy.

[Nikki Stone1]

6. The Federal Reserve is no more "federal" than Federal Express.

Private cartel.

[laughingliberal]

12. Yep

Pretty obvious they don't work for us.

[Sebastian Doyle]

9. Giving a criminal private banking system the power to regulate criminal private banks

is like giving the Catholic church the power to regulate pedophiles.

Timmy the Elf was pushing this shit a while back. We all know why he would think it was a good idea, because he's from that criminal crowd. Guess this means Dodd is trying to line up his next gig? :puke:

[laughingliberal]

11. It just gets better and better, doesn't it?

As if this is needed: :sarcasm:

[wordpix]

10. Nader Smacks Dodd with this letter

http://www.registercitizen.com/articles/2010/03/02/news/doc4b8d6a46bd613196668069.txt

WEB FIRST: Nader to Dodd: Stand up to special banking interests

snip
As I said in that letter,

Making this kind of deal with the Republicans and more conservative members of your own party will signal to consumers across the land that you, as chair of the Committee on Banking, Housing and Urban Affairs, have lost touch with Main-Street interests. It will show that the leaders of the Democratic Party care more about the high-rolling gamblers on Wall Street and the fat-cat bankers than the consumers, workers, taxpayers, and small investors who have been left with the costs of the financial meltdown caused by executives' greed, speculation and crimes.

When you announced that you were not seeking re-election, many in the consumer movement thought that you would be free to push for meaningful financial re-regulation because you wouldn't have to worry about re-election fundraising. Instead it looks like you are mistakenly thinking that a financial re-regulation bill, no matter how lacking, is better than no bill, and that you need to deliver such a bill for President Obama.

In fact, abandoning consumers on real financial re-regulation is likely to be more costly to President Obama and the Democratic Party than standing up to the banking and financial interests that have so damaged our economy.

The Consumer Financial Protection Agency should be independent with strong leadership, not part of some other existing bank-indentured financial regulatory agency. Consumers need an independent agency that will serve their interests without being captured by the financial wheelers and dealers who put gouging for short-term profit before the legitimate interests of consumers. more

[snot]

13. Couldn't agree more. We're simply mocked.