Shelley Capito

Mrs. CAPITO

Mrs. CAPITO. I yield back the balance of my time.

Mrs. CAPITO. I yield back the balance of my time.

Mrs. CAPITO. I oppose the amendment because I am in support of the bill, Mr. Duffy's bill, which puts a workable and a more reasonable standard that could actually look at consumer rules and regulations that, as he has said, and I think very eloquently, takes in consideration Main Street, the community bankers and the credit unions. I would like to remind the gentlewoman from Texas, as we were reminded by the gentleman from Massachusetts, that car loans are exempted from this, so we don't have to worry about car loans in terms of their being part of the rule and regulation. That is part of the Dodd-Frank bill. Anyway, I think that a simple majority makes a lot of sense. I yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from Wisconsin (Mr. Duffy).

Mrs. CAPITO. I yield back the balance of my time.

Mrs. CAPITO. Mr. Chairman, I rise to claim the time in opposition to the amendment.

Mrs. CAPITO. Mr. Chairman, I think I understand the gentleman from North Carolina's amendment. But I would like to just start, in the 5 minutes that I have, to remind everybody who is on the council that is going to be able to allow sleazy financial products to go forward to save the safety and soundness of an institution. That's what the gentleman said. So we've got the Secretary of the Treasury. We've got the Chairman of the Federal Reserve, the Director of the CFPB, who is the person who is making the regulations, Chairman of the FDIC, Comptroller of the Currency, Chairman of the NCUA, Chairman of the SEC, Chairman of the CFTC, Director of the FHFA, and an insurance representative. That's 10 people, professional regulators that are working in certain areas of the financial markets overseeing our financial stability. It's not Tom, Dick, and Harry off the street trying to figure out if a certain provision, sleazy provision should be allowed to go forward. And I think, in order to convince these folks, or to put your argument forward as to why the rule or regulation would harm the safety and soundness of an institution, I would imagine that these professionals would require much due diligence and proper background work, probably touching on some of the things the gentleman's already talked about, who would be influenced and an analysis of the practice that is the subject matter of the regulation or provision. I think that the standard is high in any scenario. Certainly, it's impossible in the existing bill. But in Mr. Duffy's bill, which brings the standard down more in line with protecting community banks and credit unions and other institutions on Main Street and the consumers that so rely on them, that, I think, really this amendment just further complicates, places in jeopardy, I think, makes it more cumbersome, more impossible to meet a standard where the FSOC would be able to oversee a certain rule and regulation. So I would oppose the gentleman's amendment. I reserve the balance of my time.

Mrs. CAPITO. I yield 3 minutes to the gentleman from Wisconsin (Mr. Duffy).

Mrs. CAPITO. Mr. Chairman, I rise to claim the time in opposition.

Mrs. CAPITO. Mr. Chairman, I rise to claim the time in opposition to the amendment.

Mrs. CAPITO. I yield to the gentleman from Oregon.

Mrs. CAPITO. I thank the gentleman for the clarification. I didn't address that in my statement, and you're absolutely right. But I would just continue to oppose the gentleman's amendment. I yield back the balance of my time.

Mrs. CAPITO. I claim time in opposition to the amendment.

Mrs. CAPITO. Mr. Chairman, I would like to yield 6 minutes to the chairman of the full committee, the gentleman from Alabama (Mr. Bachus), and I thank him for his leadership on this bill and many others.

Mrs. CAPITO. I would like to congratulate the gentleman on an amendment that provides for sunshine and transparency. When we did the markup, we actually had another amendment along the same lines. I would support the gentleman's amendment. I yield back the balance of my time.

Mrs. CAPITO. I would just like to tell the gentleman I support his amendment. I think it lends itself, again, to transparency and full accountability. I thank him for bringing it forward. Good work from the gentleman from Oklahoma.

Mrs. CAPITO. I demand a recorded vote.

Mrs. CAPITO. Mr. Chairman, I claim time in opposition, but I am not opposed to the gentlelady's amendment.

Mrs. CAPITO. I would like to thank the gentlewoman for her amendment. I would like to also highlight, in the Dodd-Frank bill, and I'm sure she is well aware of some of the provisions that are already being made through the CFPB for multilingual outreach and understanding. During a conference call with a large number of bipartisan congressional staff, the senior officials at the CFPB indicated that the Bureau would have the capacity to translate into 180 languages. That is a very broad reach, I think. And there are other foreign language disclosures outreach by the Secretary of the Treasury to help persons facing language barriers and other aspects around the same issue that the gentlelady is speaking about. I am delighted that she wants to amend the Commission because, as we know, and I have spoken more than a few times on this in just the last several hours, about my ardent support for the Commission. There is one Commissioner who is charged with overseeing some special segments of our population, and certainly ones who have language barriers would be included in this. I yield back the balance of my time.

Mrs. CAPITO. I am opposed to the amendment offered by the gentlelady, my ranking member. We work really well together, I think, on the subcommittee. We obviously have differences, and this is one. The portion of the bill that she's talking about is actually the portion that I created. It was really a creation of a couple of months ago. Probably in April, I began to think to myself: The President hasn't made an appointment to the marque bureau to protect consumers, and he's had almost an entire year to do this. The handwriting was going to be on the wall in terms of trying to get a Senate confirmation. Certainly, you're not going to get one in 4 days, which is what he tried when he nominated somebody on Monday, finally. So the thought for me is that we have enormous powers vested in one individual. The bill was written to have them. The minority leader was down here saying the oversight that is provided by Senate confirmation is the Congress's stamp of approval of the direction this individual wants to take this bureau. Yet, we have a situation where we have a President who's waited an entire, let's see, 361 days before making an appointment, and we're in a position where we're going to have an acting or recess appointment with a very powerful position without any input or oversight in the nominating process that moves forward and is vested in the United States Senate. I just think that's a problem. I think that the President had had due time to accomplish this, and we're going to say to the Treasury Secretary, We're going to give it to you. Quite frankly, I think the Treasury Secretary is pretty busy right now dealing with debt limit issues and trying to solve other problems that we have in front of us financially. Our economy, we have 9.2 percent unemployment. We've got to get the wheels turning here, and I'm sure that's where the Secretary is putting his energy, appropriately so. I just think that this is an agency that's starting with one hand tied behind their back because of the fault of the chief executive who has not appointed a person that could seek and get Senate confirmation, and I think that without that person, with the oversight of a Senate confirmation, taking the reins of this very powerful bureau that's just been created, we would be getting off on the wrong foot. I would oppose the gentlelady's amendment. I yield back the balance of my time.

Mrs. CAPITO. Mr. Chairman, I rise to claim the time in opposition.

Mrs. CAPITO. Mr. Chairman, I demand a recorded vote.

Mrs. CAPITO. I yield the gentleman 30 additional seconds.

Mrs. CAPITO. I yield back the balance of my time.

Mrs. CAPITO. Mr. Chairman, I would like to remind the other side that we're not changing, taking any powers away from the CFPB. We're not reforming any of the reach of the CFPB. We are simply looking at the accountability structure of who is going to be governing the CFPB. The gentlewoman from New York was very helpful in committee when we amended the commission to have one commissioner particularly looking at specialty issues concerning veterans and elderly and children, and I thank her for her input on that. I yield 1\1/2\ minutes to the gentleman from New York (Mr. Grimm), a great member of our committee.

Mrs. CAPITO

Mrs. CAPITO. Mr. Speaker, I ask unanimous consent that in the engrossment of H.R. 1315, the Clerk be authorized to correct section numbers, punctuation, and cross-references and to make such other technical and conforming changes as may be necessary to accurately reflect the actions of the House.