89 House Democrats just fired off a letter to President Obama, prior to meeting with him in the White House, asking that he appoint Elizabeth Warren as the Director of the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau. The list of names comes mostly from the Progressive Caucus but includes members of the House leadership like Budget Committee ranking member Chris Van Hollen, Education and the Workforce Committee ranking member George Miller and House Democratic Caucus Chair John Larson. Reps. Carolyn Maloney, Brad Miller and Keith Ellison, all members of the Financial Services Committee, put together the letter. They specifically stated that Warren should be appointed by “recess appointment if necessary.” This is from the release:
“Those who are blocking Elizabeth Warren from even being nominated are members of ‘The Financial Crisis Never Happened Caucus’,” Rep. Maloney said. “In her role as Assistant to the President since September creating the CFPB, Mrs. Warren has shown her unique skills in traveling across the country and meeting with everyone to be affected by the new body: from bank executives to those with troubled mortgages. She’s demonstrated that a regulator must reach out, listen to all sides and decide issues in the public interest. It’s time for the President to appoint her to the Director’s job—regardless of her misguided Senate opponents.”
“Just last month, the CFPB proposed simple one-page disclosure forms for mortgages that make clear the terms and conditions in plain English. It’s beyond me how things like this so terrify the CFPB’s antagonists,” Maloney said.
House Democrats should CC Harry Reid on this. The motion to adjourn is not debatable and cannot be filibustered. Without an adjournment, and with continued pro forma sessions like we’re seeing in the Senate this week, there cannot be a recess appointment. Reid probably saw no point in forcing the issue when there was no imminent recess appointment; but the next recess for the Senate will be the only one between now and July 21, when CFPB moves into the Federal Reserve, and when they lose the power to regulate non-bank financial institutions without a Director.
Senate Republicans have vowed to filibuster ANY nominee to that Director position unless they get to gut the agency. They and their bretheren in the House have given their Constitutional duties over to the bank lobby. So a recess appointment is really the only avenue left. Reid needs to open up that avenue through a regular adjournment, and the House needs to sign off on it. That needs to be a focus of these efforts as much as the President. Same goes for the Progressive Change Campaign Committee and other outside groups, who have gotten a quarter of a million signatures from Americans demanding an appointment for Warren. Tell it to Harry Reid, too.
Incidentally, Darrell Issa wants to schedule another hearing with Warren, I assume to provide her with more publicity and power, given how the last hearing went.
The text of the letter and the signers are on the flip.
June 2, 2011
Dear Mr. President,
We appreciate your leadership last year in supporting the strong financial reforms in the Dodd-Frank bill that responded to the financial meltdown on Wall Street that led to the worst recession since the Depression.
A key element of that effort was the creation of the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau with the goals of making prices clear, risks clear, making financial markets work for families and particularly protecting service members and their families from abusive financial practices. Since you appointed Professor Warren to “stand up” the bureau, she has laid the foundation as a strong advocate for consumers—something that seems to strike fear among those who are opposed to reform.
Regretfully, Republicans in the Senate have now made it clear that they oppose reform. They have vowed that they will not allow consideration of any nominee to head the CFPB until the bureau is weakened. They would rather hold your appointment hostage and obstruct the process than make sure consumers have a strong advocate on their side.
Since Republican Senators have said that no one is acceptable unless the law is weakened, we would urge you to nominate Professor Warren as the CFPB’s first Director anyway. If Republicans in the Senate indeed refuse to consider her, we request that you use your constitutional authority to make her a recess appointment. We can think of no better person to be the first Director of this incredibly important consumer financial protection regulator.
Sincerely,
Maloney, Carolyn
Frank, Barney
Miller, Brad
Ellison, Keith
Bass, Karen
Blumenauer, Earl
Capps, Lois
Capuano, Michael
Carson, Andre
Chu, Judy
Cicilline, David
Cohen, Steve
Conyers, John
Cummings, Elijah
Davis, Danny
Davis, Susan
DeFazio, Peter
DeLauro, Rosa
Deutch, Ted
Doggett, Lloyd
Doyle, Michael
Edwards, Donna
Engel, Eliot
Eshoo, Anna
Farr, Sam
Fattah, Chaka
Filner, Bob
Frank, Barney
Fudge, Marcia
Garamendi, John
Grijalva, Raul
Gutierrez, Luis
Hanabusa, Colleen
Hinchey, Maurice
Hirono, Mazie
Holt, Rush
Honda, Michael
Jackson, Jesse
Jackson Lee, Sheila
Johnson, Eddie
Johnson, Hank
Kaptur, Marcy
Kildee, Dale
Kucinich, Dennis
Langevin, Jim
Larson, John
Lee, Barbara
Lofgren, Zoe
Lowey, Nita
Luján, Ben Ray
Lynch, Steve
Matsui, Doris
McCollum, Betty
McDermott, Jim
McGovern, James
Miller, George
Moran, James
Murphy, Christopher
Nadler, Jerrold
Napolitano, Grace
Norton, Eleanor
Olver, John
Pascrell, Bill
Pingree, Chellie
Price, David
Rangel, Charles
Richardson, Laura
Roybal-Allard, Lucille
Ryan, Tim
Sarbanes, John
Schakowsky, Janice
Schiff, Adam
Sherman, Brad
Slaughter, Louise
Speier, Jackie
Stark, Pete
Thompson, Mike
Tierney, John
Tonko, Paul
Towns, Edolphus
Tsongas, Niki
Van Hollen, Chris
Waters, Maxine
Waxman, Henry
Welch, Peter
Wilson, Frederica
Woolsey, Lynn
Wu, David
Yarmuth, John




24 Comments

Support this site!
Subscribe to the newsletter
Advertise on Firedoglake
Send
us your tips
Make us your homepage
About FDL News Desk
This is another chapter in that impressive dossier: “Do not underestimate Elizabeth Warren.”
Why do you think the House would sign off on an adjournment resolution? They know very well that they are essentially voting for Elizabeth Warren’s confirmation if they do that. The nonsense about Reid voluntarily not holding an adjournment vote was just a show. It was very clear that Boehner refused to send over a concurrent resolution to adjourn, and the same refusal will continue throughout Obama’s presidency,
The only way Elizabeth Warren (or anyone else) is going to be appointed to the CFPB is if Obama breaks with recent custom and appoints someone during a 3 day pro-forma recess (something not prohibited by the Constitution).
More kabuki. Letters are always sooo successful. (Not to mention much less dangerous than other things like, you know, actions — votes against WH policy measures, retaliatory parlimentary tricks to hamstring the administration’s agenda, etc.)
Every once in a while I become totally jaded and just want to go live in the woods …. and then I see my Congresswoman sign on to something that matters to me, and I get ready, again, to march. If these folks “called a meeting” and asked us to show up to support their efforts, I’d be there. Would you?
Not gonna happen. Looks good, but no.
You don’t have to be a Progressive yo recognize Warren’s passion & qualification for getting this off the ground in a positive way. SHAME on the House Democrats for not UNANIMOUSLY signing on to this! AND, shame on Obama for not caring a hoot about how important this is. Obama is DISGRACEFUL!!!!!!!!
Yes, but look at what that link to the Nation article (linked in the post) points out:
According to Eliot Spitzer, the FIRE sector spent over $62,000,000 last year alone in lobbying. That was JUST the lobbying — that $3 trillion figure she’s up against may even be low.
But I’ve been following the news feeds, and this has really become interesting.
I now think of Elizabeth Warren as kind of an ‘Arab Spring’ of finance. If you look at the groups publicly putting up statements in support of her nomination this week, you have the nation’s Credit Unions, Consumer Affairs, and smaller local banks coalescing in her favor in a way that wasn’t happening even a week ago.
The banksters are like American Mubaraks: clueless and deep in denial.
While the Wall Streeters and financiers are deep in denial and their GOP toadies are holding more hearings, other interested, affected interests are putting up public support that was not evident even a week ago.
I’ve been a great fan of Elizabeth Warren. Wanted her nominated for that at the beginning.
But I’ve got to be honest, it worries me when banksters come out in support of her being nominated too. Because IMO if the banksters aren’t crying LOUDLY, then the new regs aren’t being done right.
That said, I still hope for her to be appointed. And hope to hear bankster’s wails in the near future. Guess I’m just not so sure anymore. Please Ms. Warren, if you get this job, do what you know to be right and make a cynical old fat guy’s day.
BeachPopulist
Spot on comment. Great to read those who can think for themselves.
Thanks.
Nope… because it wont change a thing. Petitions, writing and calling and emailing your rep… accomplishes nothing.
Whatever is going to happen has already been decided in back room deals made between the Obama administration and the Wall Street Titan-Criminals.
The American people have nothing to say about it… and yet “progressives” still keep supporting and voting for corrupt Democrats over and over and over and then wonder why nothing changes.
The Democrats and Republicans are corrupt to the core.
And another thing… your congressman signing this “letter” means nothing… it’s all just a big show… to hoodwink easily mislead party loyalists.
Sad but true.
And it will just keep happening. And they will keep supporting them.
Mislead? Maybe.
Willfully ignorant. You betcha.
Never happen!
No way will Warren get it.
It’s not personal. It’s just business.
Warren will cost these people billions. She may even force America back into the realm of justice somewhat.
They will spend millions to make sure she never get it.
All of you cynics who are deep into your cynicism (of whom I found many in the comments):
You’re POV is not without evidence. But it won’t do you any good. If Warren is indeed blocked from nomination, either by the Senate or by the President, your window to proclaim your own wisdom may give you a brief moment of satisfaction, which will quickly fade, and you will once again become a sour puss. And you will fester in a pool of your own cynical making. I know, because I’ve been there.
I used to be a world class cynic, and I got to be right a lot. But it didn’t make me happy.
I now prefer to hope. I find it a much more nourishing food for the soul.
So I hope for Warren’s appointment. I think she will get nominated, and I think some kinda deal will be worked out that will slow down what she wants to do. The question will be, how much?
Cheers,
Bob in AZ
You do not need the GOP House to recess to get a recess appointment.
In the Constitution it says:
“The President shall have Power to fill up all Vacancies that may happen during the Recess of the Senate, by granting Commissions which shall expire at the End of their next Session.”
Reid calls the shots – the only reason he could have for not calling a recess of the Senate is a request by the White House – Obama does not want to recess appoint Warren.
Obama will obey the rich and corporate – as he always has, and Reid will obey Obama.
I “hope” you are correct – and that Obama will nominate her.
But so far predicting what Obama will do has been easy as long as you assume he is a con-job from the rich and corporate powers that be that only pretended to be a Democrat so as to beat Hillary. So I “believe” that Obama will claim the Senate never went into recess so his hands were tied as to Warren (and about 60 judgeships)- and Kos and the rest will sell that nonsense to the rest of the party, and Obama will be re-elected, because “he is better than the alternative”.
And, THAT’S why certain people now support her – they KNOW it will NEVER happen. It’s a free opportunity to look like they care & will fight to do the right thing! Kabuki dance is right, BeachPopulist! “Clarence Thomas” Obama is SHAMEFUL, ABSOLUTELY SHAMEFUL!
Don’t you just love the latest headline – Obama draws line in the sand, he will NOT extend Bush’s tax cuts AGAIN! I guess that’s a great reminder, no matter how many campaign promises he’s broken, he can always make more.
You’re right. THAT’s why the Repubs ran that tea party whacko against Reid – the knew they wouldn’t win the Senate & they couldn’t do better than having their good friend Reid there to help them. So, they ran the one person in Nevada against him who couldn’t beat him. It’s a sorry game – elected Dems & elected Repubs on one side doing the bidding of Corporations & uber-rich inheritees, and 129,000,000 voters on the other side who are left without a voice on the other. The odds aren’t in our favor, that’s for sure.
The only shot Warren had was a recess appointment, but Harry Reid assisted the R’s in a parliamentary trick to stop it. Not that Obama would have made the appointment regardless. Elizabeth Warren has zero chance of being heading the CFPB, 89 House votes doesn’t do anything.
we offer cheap ed hardy up to 35%-65% off, ed hardy ed hardy is a kind of street style clothing online store, they are all the newest and cheap ed hardy.
http://www.edhardychothing.com/
cheap ed hardy
ed hardy clothes
ed hardy sale
ed hardy sales
ed hardy on sale
ed hardy on sales
ed hardy discount
ed hardy discounts
we offer cheap nike jordan shoes up to 30%-60% off, nike jordan shoes is a kind of street style shoes online store, they are all the newest and cheap nike jordan shoes.
nike air max 2011
nike shox torch cheap nike shox torch
air jordan 2010 cheap air jordan 2010
jordan retro shoes air jordan shoes 2010
Pls visit us http://www.nikejordanlink.com/
Obama doesn’t want to appoint Warren. He actually likes Boehner’s public intransigence since Obama can’t publicly express his own.
Obama is a fraud.
Obama is a liar.
DE-ELECT THIS HORRIBLE PRESIDENT in 2012.
He also won’t increase the payroll tax back to 6.2%. Tax increase in an election year, right.
Fire Tech Pups SPAM Alert (as there is no “flag as inappropriate”)– @ 21 above