Posted by Johnny A. Guerrero.
This article was published by the New York Times on 26 November 2017 and was written by Stacy Cowley. The article illuminates the tension between a high-ranking government civil service official, Ms. Leandra English, and the President of the United States, Mr. Donald Trump. To further understand this dilemma, one has to first comprehend what is “the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau” and what do they do. For starters, the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau, “was created six years ago to oversee a wide variety of financial products, including mortgages, credit cards, bank accounts and student loans” (Cowley). With this in mind, one can say that the bureau was a regulator created in the aftermath of the global financial crisis that hit the New York Stock Market Exchange harshly. The “Regulatory Agency,” also referred to as (CFPB) was created by the Obama Administration to protect consumers from the tyrants of Wall Street. Thus, the agency is charged with overseeing financial products and services, as noted.
The tension raised because Ms. English, the deputy director of the bureau, was not willing to step down from her post because she believed that the President could not fire or replace her. So, she “filed a lawsuit late Sunday night on 26 November 2017 to block Mr. Trump’s choice of someone else from taking control of the agency on Monday morning, 27 November 2017” (Cowley). Ms. English was defending her cause because Congress gave the agency infrequent independency and autonomy to protect it from political interference. Thus, the bureau’s director “is one of the few federal officials the President cannot fire at will” (Cowley). However, the President nominates the agency’s director, who is subject to the approval and confirmation of the United States Senate. Ms. English was not nominated by former President Obama; she was appointed director by the agency itself because the director, Mr. Richard Cordray, brusquely stepped down on Friday 24 November 2017.
To add more fire to the already burning wood, Ms. English, a seasoned agency veteran who rose progressively through the agency’s ranks, was being replace by Mick Mulvaney, Mr. Trump’s budget director. Paradoxically, Trump wanted someone who saw the bureau as “sad, sick, a joke” (Cowley), and who openly supported legislation to eliminate it, as the agency’s new director. Ethically this is not right. Why appoint someone who speaks harshly about the agency to be its head? Mulvaney, a white-collar professional, many believed would undo what the bureau had achieved since its conception, which was to protect consumers from the abusive debt collectors and politics of Wall Street Financiers. This notion becomes eloquent with Senator Dick Durbin’s, a Democrat from Illinois, metaphor: “Wall Street hates it (the Agency) like the devil hates holy water” (Battle for Control of Consumer Agency Heads to Court, New York Times Article).
However, even though one may think that the President’s choice is ludicrous, he as the Head of the United States Government has the authority to appoint whoever he wants as the head of any Federal Government Agency. Ms. English did not have the grounds to veto the President’s decision; after all the actual director, Mr. Cordray, was the one who resigned. Therefore, it is the President’s duty to appoint a new head leader for the agency. The law regarding Presidential Nominees is clear, “not grey.” One must hope that Mr. Mulvaney does a good job protecting the American People from the Wall Street Tyrants, as he swore to do.
Johnny is in the dual B.A/M.B.A program at the College of Arts and Sciences (political science, minor in history) and the Stillman School of Business (management and finance), Seton Hall University, Classes of 2018 and 2019.
Source: