Patrick McHenryChairman

As the House marked "Financial Independence Week,” lawmakers passed eight bipartisan regulatory relief bills to promote a healthier economy, preserve consumer choice, and help more Americans achieve the dream of financial independence.

“The American dream for so many low and moderate income Americans is that one day they can achieve financial independence,” said Chairman Jeb Hensarling (R-TX).  “But, regrettably, over the last six years, middle income paychecks have remained flat or have actually been slightly lower; we know that middle income bank accounts are a lot lower.  Part of the problem, frankly, has been the Dodd-Frank Act.  After its passage the big banks have gotten bigger, the small banks have gotten fewer, the taxpayer has become poorer.” 

Six of the eight bills were passed on the suspension calendar: 

H.R. 601, the Eliminate Privacy Notice Confusion Act, sponsored by Rep. Blaine Luetkemeyer (R-MO): 

H.R. 1259, the Helping Expand Lending Practices in Rural Communities Act, sponsored by Rep. Andy Barr (R-KY); 

H.R. 1265, the Bureau Advisory Commission Transparency Act, sponsored by Rep. Sean Duffy (R-WI);

H.R. 1367, sponsored by  Rep. Amata Radewagen (R-American Samoa); and

H.R. 1480, the SAFE Act Confidentiality and Privilege Enhancement Act, sponsored by Rep. Robert Dold (R-IL).

H.R. 685, the Mortgage Choice Act, sponsored by Rep. Bill Huizenga (R-MI), was approved 286-140.  The bill provides clarity to the calculation of points and fees in mortgage transactions, allowing more loans to be classified as Qualified Mortgages and increasing affordable options for borrowers.

"Hardworking families should not be denied access to a qualified mortgage because of technicalities that are largely out of their control," said Rep. Huizenga, Chairman of the Monetary Policy and Trade Subcommittee.

The other bill, H.R. 650, the Preserving Access to Manufactured Housing Act, will ensure consumers – especially low and moderate-income consumers – can continue to have access to affordable manufactured housing.  This bipartisan legislation continues existing consumer protections, including protections that prohibit steering consumers to predatory loans.

The bill’s sponsor, Rep. Stephen Fincher (R-TN), said the bipartisan bill will protects "financing options for the millions of Americans who rely on manufactured housing. New regulations that fail to recognize the uniqueness of the manufactured housing industry are taking options off the table for low-income families.”

H.R. 650 passed the House 263-162.

Earlier in the week, the Justice Department charged a former Ex-Im loan officer with bribery, alleging 19 occasions when the former employee accepted cash and other things of value in return for “being influence in the performance of his official act,” the Wall Street Journal, The Hill and other media outlets reported.

Committee leaders called the news “alarming.”

“While this is disturbing enough, the fact that we learned of this only at the end of nearly three hours of testimony, is further evidence of the Bank’s continued and brazen efforts to avoid transparency and accountability. With the Bank’s charter expiring this summer, this adds to the already long list of significant concerns we have over its future viability,” said Chairmen Hensarling, Jason Chaffetz, Huizenga and Jim Jordan.

Earlier in the hearing, Subcommittee Chairman Huizenga noted that "since its creation, Ex-Im's taxpayer subsidy has grown exponentially to a whopping $140 billion cap. As the national debt continues to climb over $18 trillion, many fear that these taxpayer-backed loan guarantees put taxpayers dollars at significant risk and raise concern that the Ex-Im is looming towards yet another bailout that the American people simply cannot afford. It has been claimed that while the Export-Import Bank is a self-sustaining agency that receives a net appropriation of $0 from Congress, because these bank loans are backed by the full faith and credit of the U.S. government, I believe and many others believe that American taxpayers are at risk if these banks' projects fail. It's important to note that the bank has already received a congressional bailout previously,” Chairman Huizenga said, noting that “from 1992 to 1996, Ex-Im received $9.92 billion in direct appropriations from Congress and the American taxpayers."

Ex-Im is “beyond repair,” said Health Care, Benefits and Administrative Rules Subcommittee Chairman Jordan (R-OH).  “The reality is that 99.9% of small businesses across America get no assistance from the Ex-Im Bank. The bank is a beneficiary to some of the largest companies in America. I don't fault large companies. They're great, we're glad they're here, we're glad they do the great things in the economy, but they don't need middle-class taxpayers' help to succeed."

The Committee marked up and passed 11 bipartisan regulatory relief bills this week.  The bills are designed to help strengthen the economy, preserve consumer choice and allow more Americans an opportunity to achieve financial independence.

As the Committee began debate on the bills, Chairman Jeb Hensarling (R-TX) said “it is difficult, perhaps even impossible, to be more bipartisan or less controversial than these 11 bills that we consider today -- which means because they are bipartisan, they are modest. Although they are modest, they are not insignificant to our fellow citizens back home or to the community banks and credits unions that our fellow citizens depend on," he said.

Financial Institutions and Consumer Credit Subcommittee Chairman Randy Neugebauer (R-TX) said, “Today, the Financial Services Committee has begun to move the pendulum closer to the direction of reasonable regulation by taking the first step to address much-needed regulatory relief for our Main Street financial ​institutions and the consumers they serve.”

This week the Committee also approved a resolution to create the bipartisan Task Force to Investigate Terrorism Financing.  The resolution passed unanimously by voice vote. Serving as the Chairman and Co-Chairman of the Task Force are Rep. Michael Fitzpatrick (R-PA) and Rep. Robert Pittenger (R-NC).  Rep. Stephen Lynch (R-CT) will serve as the Ranking Member on the Task Force.

“As the United States pushes back against the tide of terror and extremism that is the enemy of freedom and peace everywhere, it must do so with every tool available – including within the financial system,” said Rep. Fitzpatrick.

Rep. Pittenger said, “America remains the primary target of radical Islamist jihadists, who seek to destroy our way of life and the freedoms we cherish.  We must do all we can to mitigate that threat.”

Witnesses told the Committee on Wednesday that Washington’s growing regulatory burden doesn’t just affect a bank or credit union’s bottom line, it also restricts consumers’ choices and access to affordable credit.

This is especially true for Americans with low and moderate incomes.

"It’s not an exaggeration to say that every single week we hear from another financial institution that is having trouble meeting the needs of their customers,” said Chairman Jeb Hensarling (R-TX). I have one message here from a bank in Arkansas that says due to the Qualified Mortgage rule that they have had to cease funding mobile homes 'which have long been a source of homeownership for low to moderate income consumers in our markets.' Here is one from a credit union in California who says due to federal regulation that one of their members can no longer wire funds to a family member in Ukraine. Here is one from a bank in Massachusetts -- 'we have experienced a spike in loan declines to women,' for their investigation identified that women attempting to buy the family home to settle their divorce and stabilize their family were being declined at a high rate due to the Dodd-Frank Qualified Mortgage rules and the ability to pay rules."

In its coverage of the hearing, the Mobile Press-Register quoted witness Tyrone Fenderson.  "This job has been made much more difficult by the avalanche of new rules, guidance and seemingly ever-changing expectation of regulators,' Fenderson said. 'It is this regulatory burden and the fear of even more regulation that often pushes small banks to sell to banks many times their size.'"

Witness Peggy Bosma-LaMascus urged Congress to require “realistic and robust cost-benefit analyses of proposed regulations,” the American Banker reported, “so the result would be smarter regulation.”

“The CFPB undoubtedly remains the single most powerful and least accountable Federal agency in all of Washington,” said Chairman Jeb Hensarling (R-TX) in his opening remarks. “When it comes to the credit cards, auto loans and mortgages of hardworking taxpayers the CFPB has unbridled, discretionary power not only to make those less available and more expensive, but to absolutely take them away."

With its authority unchecked, the Bureau restricts, limits and infringes on the economic freedoms of the very consumers it is supposed to protect.

Financial Institutions and Consumer Credit Subcommittee Chairman Randy Neugebauer (R-TX), said, “I remain concerned that many Bureau actions demonstrate a regulatory paternalism that assumes the American consumer doesn’t know how to make choices for themselves. It is a dangerous scenario when government bureaucrats start making financial choices for people. 

“In my district there is a single mother with three kids who use prepaid cards to budget finances and overdraft protection for the occasional cash shortage scenario. This single mother is barely in the financial mainstream,” continued Chairman Neugebauer.  “As the Bureau moves forward with rulemaking in these areas, it must truly understand the qualitative and quantitative costs and benefits of each rule.”

Committee Republicans also continued to seek answers about why the Bureau is spending more than $215 million in renovation costs for a building it rents.

When Rep. Ann Wagner (R-MO) asked CFPB Director Richard Cordray who authorized the renovations, he outrageously replied: “Why does that matter to you?”

"Because it's $215 million of taxpayers' money!" declared Rep. Wagner.

Watch this exchange between Rep. Wagner and Director Cordray here.

Republicans at this week’s hearing with Federal Reserve Chair Janet Yellen raised questions about how much influence the executive branch holds over the central bank and argued in favor of accountability reforms to both protect the Fed’s independence in its conduct of monetary policy and to help give the economy greater certainty.

In its coverage of the hearing, the Associated Press reported that Republicans on the committee “challenged the central bank’s lack of accountability”

Members “seized on Ms. Yellen’s official calendar records and an October speech on inequality, just before the midterm elections, as evidence she was leaning towards the Obama administration and Democrats,” reported the Wall Street Journal in its coverage of the hearing.

While Chair Yellen and Democrats argued reforms would open the Fed to political influence, “Republicans at the hearing countered that Ms. Yellen’s calendars show the executive branch has far more access, and potentially more influence, than Congress,” the Journal reported.    

“Opponents argue any reforms threaten the Fed’s monetary policy independence, but the greatest threat to that independence comes from the executive branch, not the legislative branch,” said Chairman Jeb Hensarling (R-TX).  “While the Federal Reserve Chair testifies publicly before this committee twice a year, she meets weekly with the Treasury Secretary in private.  And for decades there has been a revolving door between Treasury officials and Fed officials which continues even today…Fed reforms are needed and I for one believe Fed reforms are coming.”

“The Federal Reserve has proven time and time again that its government knows best approach doesn't hold the cure for what ails the economy," said Monetary Policy and Trade Subcommittee Chairman Bill Huizenga (R-MI). "It's time we restore certainty as well as fiscal responsibility, and we must lift the veil of secrecy to ensure that the Fed is accountable to the people's representatives, the same people that created the Federal Reserve in the first place."

Capital Markets and Government-Sponsored Enterprises Subcommittee Chair Scott Garrett (R-NJ) said, "In theory, having a technocrat like the Fed to simply implement monetary changes based on basic facts, it sounds appealing. But in practice, that is not anywhere close to what happens at the Fed." 

The Housing and Insurance Subcommittee held a hearing Thursday on the Federal Housing Administration (FHA), the second in a series that began earlier this month with the full committee’s hearing with HUD Secretary Julian Castro.

“House Republicans have argued that the FHA was wrong to make a cut to its annual mortgage insurance premium before its reserve fund reached a statutory minimum – and witnesses agreed,” reported the American Banker in its coverage of the hearing.  Witnesses told the subcommittee that the FHA’s premium reduction “is undercutting the private sector and expanding the government’s role in the housing market.”

“If independence is an issue, than we really ought to examine the independence of the Fed
from the executive branch of government.  That’s where the real threat is,
not from the legislative branch”

CLICK HERE TO WATCH

You can watch the entire interview by clicking on the image, and below are excerpts that may be of particular interest.

On his reaction to Chair Yellen’s testimony:

“Well, I was disappointed because what we have seen now is that middle income families are still struggling in the slowest, weakest recovery in the postwar era, and yet it seems that we will continue on extraordinary measures that were employed back in 2008 and here we are in 2015.  And yet they are not more transparent, they are not more accountable, and the real issue is, economists I know believe that we are best served when the Federal Reserve will communicate to the public what their monetary policy will be, and yet we didn't hear it in this particular testimony.”

On the Federal Reserve’s independence:

“[M]any of us believe that if independence is an issue, than we really ought to examine the independence of the Fed from the executive branch of government.  That’s where the real threat is, not from the legislative branch that merely has asked the Fed -- you make up monetary policy, you can waive it, you can change it, but you ought to have an obligation to communicate it to the rest of us, and when you don't, you hinder economic growth, you hinder a healthy economy, you hinder middle income America that now has smaller paychecks and a smaller bank account.”

On making the Fed more transparent and accountable:

“The House Financial Services Committee moved a bill that, again, would simply ask the Fed to reveal its policy -- it's really about transparency and accountability -- just as long as they reported it to the rest of us and to ensure that the Fed, as you know, just doesn't have to do with monetary policy, it has to do with being a prudential banking regulator.  And yet they are exempt from any of the provisions like cost-benefit analysis that other prudential regulators are required to do.  We moved that bill in the last Congress.  I intend to move a similar bill in this Congress.”

The committee held a hearing on Wednesday to examine the fiscal health of the Federal Housing Administration (FHA) and heard testimony from Housing and Urban Development Secretary Julian Castro.

"We all recall the famous admonition from Spanish philosopher Santayana who said, 'Those who do not remember the past are condemned to repeat it.' History has taught us that the root cause of the financial crisis was not deregulation but dumb regulation and helping put people into homes they could not afford to keep. Now the FHA, with exceedingly low down payments and a recently announced approximately 40 percent cut in its premiums, appears to be doing that. All at a time where the FHA continues to violate federal law by keeping a woefully insufficient capital reserve and right after receiving its first ever taxpayer bailout,” remarked Chairman Jeb Hensarling (R-TX).

In its coverage of the hearing, the Wall Street Journal noted that since 2009 the FHA has been in violation of the law which requires the agency to have a capital buffer equal to at least two percent of the loans it guarantees.  While Secretary Castro told the committee the premium cuts would push back the FHA’s return to the two percent threshold by only “a few months,” the Journal reported that Moody’s Analytics Chief Economist Mark Zandi and others have said “the fund might not return to the two percent level until 2018, two years later than an estimate made by the FHA’s independent actuary in November.”

After questioning from Rep. Sean Duffy (R-WI), “Castro acknowledged that the 50-basis-point reduction in fees would slow full restoration of the fund," noted the American Banker. "Duffy said it was proof of Republican arguments."

Coming to your inbox on Sunday afternoon in this week’s Video Message:  Rep. Andy Barr (R-KY) will discuss why hardworking taxpayers should be concerned the FHA is putting them and homebuyers at risk.

In the short term, the capital costs for Gina Rinehart’s Roy Hill mine are almost certain to blow out — and a lower iron ore price will make matters worse.

If the current iron ore price decline continues into 2017 and beyond, then Gina Rinehart’s massive $10 billion Roy Hill mine project is set for very large losses when it starts production next year.

And if the reports of safety problems in the construction phase are right, then the capital costs will blow out beyond $10bn, especially if unions start playing hard ball, as they often do when there is a safety cause.

The Oversight and Investigations Subcommittee heard testimony at its hearing on Wednesday that senior officials at the Department of Housing and Urban Development broke federal law and faced minor consequences for various ethical and legal violations.

In its coverage of the hearing testimony, the Washington Post reported the alleged violations include financial fraud, sexual harassment, nepotism and conflicts of interest.

"I want to make clear to committee members that these are different allegations against different employees in different departments and divisions responsible for very different tasks, but they seem to display the same cavalier attitude that shows these employees do not believe in following the rules and they do not care about getting caught. And when they do get caught, they do not care that they are obstructing an investigation or Congress," said Subcommittee Chairman Sean Duffy (R-WI). "It’s an attitude I think Americans are learning is prevalent throughout this Administration. And it’s an attitude I think we’re quickly getting tired of."

The Washington Times noted in its coverage of the hearing that, among various violations, HUD officials violated federal law by using taxpayer money to lobby Congress for increased HUD funding.

A witness from the Government Accountability Office told the Subcommittee that her agency concluded HUD officials violated federal law by engaging in “indirect or grassroots lobbying” when they urged individuals at organizations that receive HUD funding to contact members of Congress regarding HUD’s pending appropriations bill. 

A report issued last year from HUD’s Inspector General into this same matter also revealed that HUD officials attempted to cover up their illegal lobbying activity by obstructing the investigation.