[Congressional Record Volume 164, Number 162 (Monday, October 1, 2018)]
[Senate]
[Pages S6410-S6411]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
CONSUMER FINANCIAL PROTECTION BUREAU
Mr. BROWN. Mr. President, last week we learned from investigative
reporting that a senior political appointee--a political appointee at
the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau, Eric Blankenstein, has
written hateful, bigoted blog posts.
This is a man handpicked for the job--and paid very well from tax
dollars--by Mick Mulvaney, the head of the CFPB, the sort of part-time
head of the CFPB. He is tasked with enforcing laws to protect
consumers, laws protecting Americans from discrimination and lending.
The Consumer Protection Bureau is supposed to be on the frontlines,
fighting for families getting ripped off by shady payday lenders and
big banks.
The person with Blankenstein's job should be fighting and preventing
the very real financial discrimination that everybody in this body
knows happens all too often today in Ohio and Oklahoma and across this
country.
Instead, now, because of news reports, we know the person tasked with
this job has written that most hate crimes ``are hoaxes.'' These blog
posts are filled with disgusting, bigoted language that I will not
repeat on the Senate floor because we have a better decorum than that
and this language is so offensive.
But this is the man Mick Mulvaney wants going after big banks that
discriminate. How is it that the Director of Management and Budget
failed to look into the background of such a senior, well-paid
political appointee? Placing Blankenstein in charge of fair lending was
a moral mistake, a managerial failure, and he should be fired
immediately. It has been a week now since reporters found those hateful
writings. The fact that he is still in the job is a disgrace. The
President should act; the CFPB head should act.
We have seen no contrition from Blankenstein--no contrition from him,
no apology for the hateful posts, no acknowledgement that these are
totally inappropriate and immoral views for someone whose job it is at
the agency to root out discrimination.
How can you expect to lead a staff dedicated to that mission after
these revelations, after this attitude, after expressing these kinds of
views? There should be no place in the Consumer Protection Bureau for
people who don't believe discrimination is real or don't believe
discrimination is a serious problem.
Too many Americans are turned down for loans or charged higher rates
based on the color of their skin. We know that. That is proven. That is
documented.
A report this year from the Center for Investigative Reporting
analyzed tens of millions of mortgage records. They found that across
the country, people of color are far more likely to be turned down for
a loan, even when you take into account factors like their income and
the size of the loan. Someone who is African American or Latino with
the same income, the same size of loan, the same financial
information--the person of color is more likely to be turned down than
the person who looks like me.
In the runup to the 2008 crisis, faulty mortgages were often
targeted--we know this--to people of color. Even African-American and
Hispanic borrowers with higher incomes than other borrowers found
themselves in subprime products, and then they had to pay for it later.
These practices of discrimination stripped--stripped--a generation's
worth of equity from communities that had fought hard for equal access
to home ownership.
Borrowers with these higher cost loans were foreclosed on at almost
triple the rate of borrowers with standard 30-year fixed rates--almost
triple the rate.
It is important, when you talk about statistics and you think about
these foreclosures, to think about the family that is foreclosed on, to
think about the conversations at the kitchen table, to think about the
discussion with sons or daughters who are teenagers about what is going
to happen to them in school, changes in the school that they are going
to go to, the different neighborhood, the different sets of friends.
All of these are about foreclosures. All of these are about evictions,
and that is just in the housing market.
We know discrimination is a serious problem in all sorts of lending
markets. It is why we created the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau,
to look after bank customers, to root out discrimination.
But under Mick Mulvaney, the agency has been doing the opposite.
Rather than policing shady corporations trying to get away with ripping
off and discriminating against consumers, Mulvaney gutted the office of
the CFPB that was supposed to stop discrimination in lending. He
disbanded the team that protected student loan borrowers. He canceled
an investigation into the payday lending industry that preys on
consumers and traps them in a downward spiral of debt. He exhorted a
group of bank lobbyists saying: You have to lobby harder. You have to
go to people; you have to give campaign money so that they will listen
to you.
He has hired a bunch of political cronies, people like Eric
Blankenstein, and has given them enormous salaries to run the Consumer
Financial Protection Bureau into the ground, and we now know
specifically of one. The abuses look pretty common, but we know of
one--again, Eric Blankenstein--who has a history of spewing disgusting,
bigoted views. He is still collecting a $260,000 paycheck from
taxpayers. That is unacceptable.
[[Page S6411]]
It is past time that Eric Blankenstein--I don't think I have ever gone
to the floor and personally called out somebody and their salary and
asked that they be fired, but when he has these kinds of positions and
this kind of background and has spewed this kind of hatred, and we are
paying him $260,000 of taxpayer money, that is morally outrageous.
Mick Mulvaney, do your job. President Trump, do your job. He should
not be employed there.
I suggest the absence of a quorum.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. The clerk will call the roll.
The senior assistant legislative clerk proceeded to call the roll.
Mr. McCONNELL. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the order
for the quorum call be rescinded.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is so ordered.
____________________