July 22, 2014

Consumer Financial Protection Bureau Head Accused of Lying at House Committee Hearing

The first and second rules of Congressional Fight Club is that you don’t talk about Congressional Fight Club. The third rule is that if a new bureau head spends her time in front of a committee hearing being evasive and, allegedly, lying … she has to fight.

Or something like that.

What happened during today’s hearing was that Representative Patrick T. McHenry (R-NC), chairman of the House Oversight Committee, accused Consumer Financial Protection Bureau head Elizabeth Warren of misleading lawmakers in earlier testimony about her role in talks between government authorities and mortgage-servicing companies. McHenry also called Warren out for, according to him, reneging on her agreement to appear before the committee this week.

After an hour in which Ms. Warren repeatedly parried efforts by Mr. McHenry and other Republicans to nail her down with “yes or no” answers to questions concerning her testimony in March and about the bureau’s powers and responsibilities, Mr. McHenry moved to temporarily recess the hearing to allow members to travel to the House floor for a vote on an unrelated matter.

Ms. Warren objected, saying that she had juggled her schedule as the committee repeatedly changed the time of the hearing in recent days and had agreed to be present for only an hour.

A vigorous back-and-forth ensued.

“Congressman, you are causing problems,” Ms. Warren said. “We had an agreement.”

“You’re making this up,” Mr. McHenry replied. “This is not the case.”

The argument, an unraveling of the decorum that usually characterizes discussions among even the most fervent opponents during Congressional hearings, demonstrated the level of frustration that some Republicans apparently feel over the consumer agency, which was established as part of the Dodd-Frank Act that followed the financial and mortgage crisis.

The hearing Tuesday was intended to address the oversight that Congress should require for the agency.

Instead? Nothing got accomplished.

So … it looks like, nearly one year later, everyone is still totally thrilled with Dodd-Frank and that its implementation will continue to go swimmingly for all involved parties.

Reform is so easy.

Risk Management Magazine and Risk Management Monitor. Copyright 2014 Risk and Insurance Management Society, Inc. All rights reserved.

About the Author

Senior Editor

Jared Wade is the senior editor of Risk Management magazine and the Risk Management Monitor blog.


Boost: AJAX core statistics

Legal Disclaimer

You are responsible for reading, understanding and agreeing to the National Law Review's (NLR’s) and the National Law Forum LLC's  Terms of Use and Privacy Policy before using the National Law Review website. The National Law Review is a free to use, no-log in database of legal and business articles. The content and links on are intended for general information purposes only. Any legal analysis, legislative updates or other content and links should not be construed as legal or professional advice or a substitute for such advice. No attorney-client or confidential relationship is formed by the transmission of information between you and the National Law Review website or any of the law firms, attorneys or other professionals or organizations who include content on the National Law Review website. If you require legal or professional advice, kindly contact an attorney or other suitable professional advisor.  

Some states have laws and ethical rules regarding solicitation and advertisement practices by attorneys and/or other professionals. The National Law Review is not a law firm nor is  intended to be  a referral service for attorneys and/or other professionals. The NLR does not wish, nor does it intend, to solicit the business of anyone or to refer anyone to an attorney or other professional.  NLR does not answer legal questions nor will we refer you to an attorney or other professional if you request such information from us. 

Under certain state laws the following statements may be required on this website and we have included them in order to be in full compliance with these rules. The choice of a lawyer or other professional is an important decision and should not be based solely upon advertisements. Attorney Advertising Notice: Prior results do not guarantee a similar outcome. Statement in compliance with Texas Rules of Professional Conduct. Unless otherwise noted, attorneys are not certified by the Texas Board of Legal Specialization, nor can NLR attest to the accuracy of any notation of Legal Specialization or other Professional Credentials.

The National Law Review - National Law Forum LLC 4700 Gilbert Ave. Suite 47 #230 Western Springs, IL 60558  Telephone  (708) 357-3317 If you would ike to contact us via email please click here.