[Congressional Record Volume 157, Number 114 (Wednesday, July 27, 2011)]
[House]
[Pages H5585-H5586]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
RATING THE CONSUMER FINANCIAL PROTECTION BUREAU
The SPEAKER pro tempore. The Chair recognizes the gentleman from
Massachusetts (Mr. Frank) for 5 minutes.
Mr. FRANK of Massachusetts. Mr. Speaker, Members often come to the
floor to talk about inspector general reports about agencies. And they
are almost always critical of reports--reports that document
shortcomings.
I'm very proud today to come to the floor to present excerpts from a
joint report from the inspectors general of the Federal Reserve and the
Treasury, in which they give a perfect set of marks to the new Consumer
Financial Protection Bureau. Those two agencies looked into this
agency. This is an agency that is being set up, under fire,
unfortunately, in a somewhat unusual situation. And what the inspectors
general reported is that they've done everything right; that ``they
identified and documented mission-critical activities and legislative
mandates''; that the CFPB has developed and is implementing appropriate
plans.
{time} 1020
They found that they are implementing appropriate plans that support
ongoing operations as well as the transfer of employees and functions.
They created several agency-wide documents that identified and tracked
priorities. ``We found that the agency has completed elements of its
implementation plans and is making progress on others.''
It is a joint report from two inspectors general that says they've
done everything right; so I want to put that forward.
I want to put it forward, in part, because the individual most
singularly responsible for its great success, as she was for the idea
and the creation of this agency, is Elizabeth Warren. Elizabeth Warren
is one of the most able and dedicated individuals that I've ever
encountered, who has dedicated herself to public service.
I regret very much that uninformed political opposition denied her
the appointment to be the head of the agency, because she was not only
the creator of this idea and a great partner for those of us on the
Financial Services Committee--I see my colleague from Wisconsin (Ms.
Moore) who was an important part of this on the floor as we set this up
in the face of significant opposition from vested interests and from
ideologues--but in having had the idea, she then presided as the
appointee of the Secretary of the Treasury and of the President to set
this agency up in an extraordinary way. It is now, on the date when it
takes off, ready to function. So she was not simply the creator of the
idea and a great advocate, but she has shown herself to be a great
administrator; and I regret the fact that she is not getting the
appointment.
Although I have great confidence in the appointment of Mr. Cordray,
whom the President appointed--he was an outstanding Attorney General,
and he will be an outstanding Director--I want to reflect for just a
minute on why we had such unwarranted opposition to a woman of great
sense and of moderation, a woman who understands the market and was
ready to help it function.
Part of it, I have to say, was gender bias. Along with Sheila Bair,
recently departed as head of the FDIC, Ms. Warren encountered from some
people--maybe unconsciously on their part--the notion that a very
strong-willed woman with strong opinions might have a place but not in
the financial sector; and I regret the loss of both of them. Yet there
was also on the part of my most conservative Republican colleagues a
recognition that she was a threat. I disagree with the position not to
appoint her, but I give credit to President Obama and Secretary
Geithner because they helped us get this agency created, and they did
put her in the position and gave her their full backing to get it this
far.
We would have ideologues here who would have people believe that
government is always a bad thing, that less government is always
better. We've seen it in this notion that we should cap government at X
percent or Y percent--but I don't regard more firefighting as a bad
thing; I don't think research into Alzheimer's and cancer is something
we need to limit; I am not opposed to fixing bridges and highways. So
this notion that government is always bad is mindless. There is a
particular problem--and the private sector is a place that will create
wealth, and I want us to do what we can to create the right conditions
for the private sector, but there will be times when we need the
government to protect people from the private sector. That was the
rationale of the Consumer Bureau.
The Consumer Bureau was set up--and it's a very popular entity--to
protect individual citizens from abuses in the private sector. It's
working well. It was well-designed, I must say. It was well set up, as
the inspectors general have said. So I believe my most right-wing
colleagues are terrified. It is their false notion that the government
is always the source of the problem and the private sector is always
the source of the good. Sometimes the government does create problems,
and much of the time the private sector does create wealth, but there
are times when the public sector has to protect people from the private
sector. The Consumer Bureau was set up for that.
Now, the chairman of the Committee on Financial Services, Mr. Bachus,
said the other day, We don't worry about the Federal Deposit Insurance
Corporation of the Federal Reserve. What we worry about is an agency
that exists solely to protect consumers. He is also the one who said
that he thought the bank regulators were there to protect the banks,
but we want to have a regulator there to protect the consumers.
So I salute Elizabeth Warren. I regret that she will not be able to
continue the excellent work she has done, but it will live on as a
tribute to both the idea she had, the political work she did with us to
get it created, and the extraordinarily good administrative work she
did in setting it up. I believe Mr. Cordray and the others will do a
very good job and that we will soon have proof that the public sector
can, in some cases, protect citizens from private sector abuses.
Results of the Joint Review
CFPB Identified and Documented Mission-Critical Activities and
Legislative Mandates
Based on CFPB planning documents and interviews of agency
officials, we found that CFPB identified and documented
implementation activities critical to standing up the
agency's functions and necessary to address certain Dodd-
Frank Act requirements. In addition to activities necessary
to establish the primary mission areas identified by the
Dodd-Frank Act, such as supervision and enforcement, CFPB
designed its organizational structure to account for other
mandated functional units as well, including offices for
financial education, fair lending, and service member
affairs, among others. Moreover, CFPB identified the
activities necessary to complete the transfer of employees
and data from the transferring agencies in a timely manner.
CFPB identified in its plans the need to establish a pay and
classification system, information security processes, and
financial management capabilities--areas required by the
Dodd-Frank Act.
In addition, CFPB prepared documentation addressing
critical activities vital to establishing a new agency. For
example, CFPB's plans identified core business activities--
such as securing office space, establishing procurement
capabilities, building payroll and benefits functions, and
designing an information technology infrastructure, among
others.
[[Page H5586]]
CFPB Developed and Is Implementing Appropriate Plans
We found that CFPB developed and is implementing
appropriate plans that support ongoing operations as well as
the transfer of employees and functions that will occur on
July 21, 2011. CFPB planned for mission-critical standup
activities and certain Dodd-Frank Act requirements. In July
2010, Treasury officials created a document that, according
to a CFPB official, served as a roadmap for implementation.
Overall, CFPB's approach was to create detailed planning
documents at the division level to provide input for the
agency-wide strategic plan. Most CFPB divisions maintained a
draft strategic plan, organizational chart, and
``dashboards'' that tracked implementation progress and
potential risks. The division-level strategic plans generally
included division-level missions, goals, deliverables, and
coordination activities. We also noted that these plans
included multiple phases that span beyond the designated
transfer date.
CFPB also created several agency-wide documents that
identified and tracked priorities and milestones for
implementation. For example, one priority for CFPB was the
transfer of employees from other agencies. To implement this
priority, CFPB maintained a detailed recruitment schedule,
developed coordination agreements with other agencies, and
allocated resources from the various divisions to timely
complete the employee transfer process.
In reviewing the agency's planning documents and discussing
the standup status with CFPB officials, we found that the
agency has completed elements of its implementation plans and
is making progress on others, including its overall strategic
plan. Nevertheless, CFPB's operational success will depend,
in part, on its ability to effectively execute its plans.
____________________