[Congressional Record Volume 157, Number 187 (Wednesday, December 7, 2011)]
[Senate]
[Pages S8392-S8393]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]




                         THE CORDRAY NOMINATION

  Mr. CARPER. Mr. President, I am delighted to stand before you on this 
Delaware Day, 2011. This is the anniversary of the day when, on 
December 7, 1787, Delaware became the first State to ratify the 
Constitution. For 1 week, Delaware was the entire United States of 
America. We opened up things in Pennsylvania and New Jersey, eventually 
New Mexico. For the most part, it has turned out well, especially the 
New Mexico part. We are happy to be here to celebrate this day with all 
our colleagues.
  Later today, Senator Coons and I will return to regale our colleagues 
with more about what we started all those years ago and how it has 
turned out.
  I wish to fast forward, if I could, though, to 2008. As the Presiding 
Officer will recall, during the aftermath of the 2008 financial crisis 
on Wall Street, one question which Congress repeatedly asked itself 
was: What can we do to prevent future harm from reaching Main Street? 
What can we do to prevent future harm from reaching Main Street?
  This theme continued as we considered and ultimately passed in 2010 
comprehensive financial regulatory reform regulation, which fortunately 
the majority of us, including myself, supported, the legislation now 
known as the Dodd-Frank law.
  While none of us were able to agree on each of the elements of the 
Dodd-Frank law, and while some of my colleagues did not support it in 
the end, most us could agree we needed to do more to help protect 
American families and businesses from bad actors.
  As a result, the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau was created. 
For the first time in history, one agency would be charged with 
overseeing consumer protection for Main Street Americans within the 
financial industry.
  In July of this year, 5 months ago, Richard Cordray was nominated to 
be Director of the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau. Richard 
Cordray served for many years as the president pro tem of the Delaware 
State Senate before retiring roughly 10 years ago--a man now probably 
in his mid-70s. I was shocked to hear he had been nominated to head 
this new agency. It turns out it is another Richard Cordray. This 
Richard Cordray had been the attorney general of Ohio for a number of 
years. He was well regarded. He helped protect consumers, investors, 
retirees, and business owners to ensure that Americans on Main Street 
got a fair deal. At the time of his nomination, he was leading the 
Consumer Financial Protection Bureau's enforcement efforts. Mr. 
Cordray, former AG, is someone who has been intimately involved in 
getting the new bureau stood up and running and who brings key 
expertise to the table.
  When we first passed the law, I suggested to the President, to 
Secretary Geithner, and others--I said I think there are three models 
they could choose from to pick someone to nominate to head this new 
bureau. No. 1, they could pick an academician; No. 2, they could pick 
somebody who has been a regulator or, in this case, attorney, an 
Attorney General; and the third, I said they might want to try to find 
somebody in the private sector who has run a significant financial 
service company but had a great, impeccable record, that of a ``white 
hat'' for consumer protection, for looking out for consumers, somebody 
who believes one can do well and do good at the same time. I thought 
those were the models. The administration looked at people in all three 
categories, including the latter one and ultimately decided, within the 
Consumer Financial Protection Bureau, they had Mr. Cordray. He had a 
good track record, and he was the person the President wanted to 
nominate. I think he has made a very good choice.
  I talked to a number of my colleagues who sat in on hearings where he 
testified on his nomination and for the most part got good reviews from 
Republicans and Democrats here.
  As my colleagues and I debate this nomination and ask ourselves is he 
qualified to do the job, I think the answer is yes. My colleagues on 
the Senate Banking Committee agreed, and 37 attorneys general from 
across the country, both Republican and Democratic, agreed.
  However, today's debate has not been about whether Mr. Cordray is 
qualified to do this job; instead, the debate has focused on the 
structure of the new Consumer Financial Protection Bureau. In May of 
this year, 44 of my colleagues from the other side of the aisle sent a 
letter to the President saying they would block any nominee until 
structural changes are made in the new agency. This is before the 
President ever nominated Mr. Cordray. My colleagues want to see changes 
made such as replacing the Director with a board structure and 
subjecting the Bureau to the appropriations process. My colleagues, 44 
colleagues in any event, pointed out that these structural changes 
would model the Bureau after already-existing agencies, while some of 
my other colleagues have also made the point that there are already 
existing agencies not subject to the appropriations process, such as 
the FDIC and the Federal Reserve.
  What we have is a disagreement, one where colleagues on both sides of 
the aisle have what I believe are legitimate points. The Consumer 
Bureau was created in Dodd-Frank through a series of compromises. 
Rarely is any compromise perfect. The Presiding Officer and I have been 
involved in enough compromises over the years to know if, in the end, 
neither side is fully satisfied with the compromise, maybe we struck a 
pretty good balance, and I think that is the case here.
  But the point of the Bureau is to put the consumer first, and I will 
be the first to admit that there is no such thing as a perfect law. I 
assume my colleagues who are here and back in their offices and at 
committee hearings would agree with that. If there are aspects to Dodd-
Frank that can be tweaked and approved, we ought to do that. But at the 
end of the day, we must put financial protection of consumers above our 
disagreements and our personal preferences.
  The longer we continue to constrain the Bureau by denying it a leader 
and only discussing the structural changes that some Members would like 
to see made, the greater the disservice to consumers across 
America. The Bureau's authority was created so that it would not just 
be limited to banks since those institutions are already regulated, as

[[Page S8393]]

are credit unions and bank-holding companies. The Bureau's authority is 
supposed to extend to nonbanks as well, nonbanks which provide a form 
of financial service, such as payday lenders and debt collectors.

  Prior to Dodd-Frank, nonbank entities were subject to little, if any, 
Federal supervision. Yet their reach and use across our country is 
widespread. As a result, many unscrupulous actors were able to exploit 
loopholes and harm American consumers. That is not to say all payday 
lenders or all debt collectors are unscrupulous actors. They are not. 
They are not all out there to exploit the loopholes. But too many of 
them do, and they do so without the kind of supervision they should 
receive.
  However, without a Director in place, the Consumer Financial 
Protection Bureau does not have the authority to supervise these very 
entities. This drastically undermines the very spirit in which the 
Bureau was created. It is not just the consumers who are harmed but our 
small community institutions as well. These community institutions want 
to see a level playing field where they can compete and where everyone 
plays by the rules. Consumers and businesses need certainty, and they 
need predictability. I hear that almost every day, especially from 
businesses. Without certainty, without predictability in a whole wide 
range of areas, we will continue to see our economic recovery hindered.
  I think I have shared with the Presiding Officer a story that is 
germane today to this discussion, and it goes back to 7 or 8 years ago 
when I was working on clean air legislation to try to reduce the 
emission of sulfur dioxide, nitrogen dioxide, mercury, carbon dioxide, 
issues that we debate from time to time in the Committee on Environment 
and Public Works where we serve.
  I remember one day we had seven or eight utility CEOs in from across 
the country to discuss the merits of different legislative proposals. 
Finally, one crusty old CEO of a utility down south said to me: Look, 
here is what you should do. You should figure out what the rules are 
going to be, use some common sense, give us a reasonable amount of time 
to comply with them, and get out of the way. That is what he said. I 
thought those were words of great wisdom, and not just for clean air 
legislation but also today.
  We cannot afford to drag this disagreement out in perpetuity. We must 
empower this Bureau to look out for Main Street as was envisioned with 
the creation of the Bureau. We may have to look at the idea of a 
commission-based structure, and I would love to sit down with my 
colleagues from the other side of the aisle and discuss that option if 
the former General Cordray's nomination continues to be blocked later 
this week.
  Right now we have the ability to move forward and to stand by our 
words and by the spirit of the law. We need to look out for every 
American with a mortgage, credit card, and those looking to send their 
kids to college. I hope my colleagues will join me in supporting Mr. 
Cordray's nomination. It is the right thing to do, and it is our 
opportunity to show the American consumers that we are putting them 
first, ahead of partisan politics, by governing as we were meant to do 
in the first place.
  I see Senator Webb of Virginia has joined us on the Senate floor. I 
will close, before turning it over to him, on a little brighter note. 
It is a gloomy day in our Nation's Capital. It has been raining, 
sometimes pretty hard. When I was walking up here from the train 
station it was.
  I want to go back and talk about the issue of uncertainty and lack of 
predictability. I think the greatest impediment to getting our modest 
economic recovery going and turning it into a robust economic recovery 
is to address so much of the uncertainty and lack of predictability. It 
revolves around a bunch of issues. Can we demonstrate to those who 
question our ability to find the middle to reach across the aisle? Can 
we demonstrate the ability to govern? Are we able to demonstrate 
through an approach much like the Bowles-Simpson Deficit Commission 
plan the ability to get us back on the right track in terms of reducing 
our debt?
  What is going to happen with the health care law? Is it going to be 
deemed constitutional or unconstitutional? What about the Tax Code? 
What is going to happen in a year from now, and what will happen to all 
of these tax provisions that expire at the end of this month? There is 
a lack of certainty and a lack of predictability, and we need to deal 
with that.
  I want to mention two or three promising signs before I close. We 
have new job numbers for the month of November. The unemployment rate 
dropped down to 8.6 percent. Before we stand and celebrate that, there 
are still a lot of people we know who don't have a job and are looking 
for a job. A lot of people stopped looking for a job, and that is one 
of the reasons that number has dropped.
  Here is the good news: There were about 120,000 private sector jobs 
created last month. About 100,000 jobs were created the month before 
and roughly 200,000 jobs the month before that. So that is roughly 
140,000 jobs per month. We are actually starting to see growth 
occurring not just over a couple of months, but now for well over a 
year there has been private sector job creation. It is not the numbers 
that we like, but it is in the right direction.
  The other thing we are seeing is a regrowth and rebirth of 
revitalization occurring in the manufacturing sector of our economy. 
Some of you may know that we have something called a manufacturing 
index. If it sits at 50, it means the manufacturing sector is not 
growing, and it is not shrinking. I think it has been over 50 for about 
25 consecutive months.
  We are seeing a resurgence of manufacturing in this country, which 
encourages me to believe that what the President is trying to do, to 
double exports over a 5-year period of time, is not just a pipe dream. 
It is something that might just happen. It is aided by the three free-
trade agreements that we passed in the last month or two.
  On those happier notes, I want to say thank you, Mr. President, for 
allowing me to talk about some leadership that is needed and the 
willingness to compromise if we cannot get Mr. Cordray confirmed this 
week.
  I yield the floor.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator from Virginia.

                          ____________________