At issue here is accountability. Warren’s new agency was created without debate by having it tucked into the mammoth finance reform bill. The House now wants to get to the bottom of the agency’s aims and purpose, hence the hearing. But Warren, basically saying she has better things to do than answer questions from Congress, and claiming the existence of an agreement to get her out of the hearing in an hour, bolts. The Democrats, predictably, come to her defense — even though it’s evident that the committee held the hearing on Tuesday to accommodate Warren’s schedule in the first place. What meeting was more important than answering questions about her agency? Warren doesn’t say.
Philip Klein wrote the fracas up shortly after it occurred Tuesday.
Elizabeth Warren, President Obama’s controversial choice to head the new consumer financial regulatory agency, skipped out of a House Oversight hearing before answering questions from two members of the committee, claiming that she had reached an agreement allowing her to leave at that time. But Rep. Patrick McHenry, R-NC, chair of the subcommittee holding the hearing, said no such agreement existed.
“You’re making this up, Ms. Warren,” McHenry fired back when Warren claimed she only agreed to come under the condition she could leave at 2:15 p.m.
Rep. Elijah Cummings, D-MD, came to Warren’s defense, saying, “You just accused the lady of lying.”
The hearing before the TARP, Financial Services and Bailouts of Public and Private Programs subcommittee was expected to be contentious. The organized Left and a growing number of House and Senate Democrats are urging Obama to make a recess appointment of the Harvard Law School professor to the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau, a bureaucracy created by last year’s financial regulatory law. The new CFPB would be given wide-ranging powers to regulate consumer financial products, much as the Federal Reserve Board regulates the banking system.
Obama has already circumvented Congress by making Warren an adviser at the Treasury Department, where she has been serving as the de facto head of CFPB. Republicans have threatened dire consequences if Obama goes through with the plan to recess appoint her.
So this is what we are up against (big mystery, I know). Can you say “contempt of Congress?” He should have issued an immediate subpoena.
Agreed; subpoena time! Can you imagine the hullabaloo if a Republican had done that? Accused her of lying? Yes, because that is what she did.
Why is the Right so threatened by an agency that would protect consumers (ie your average American who isn’t obsessed with money)?
And we are so sure that this agency will “protect consumers because…? Because they say so? The serial attempts to evade scrutiny by Congress (recess appointment of Warren followed by this latest “Whoa! Lookah the time…” drama) do not inspire confidence that they mean what they say.
jO:
I am not familiar with ALL the provisions of the Finanacial Reform Bill, nor with the specific provisions that created ANOTHER new beauracracy, the “Consumer Financial Protection Bureau.” But I personally think the entire scene is ridiculous; Chairman McHenry should have told her to “Sit down and answer our questions, or we’ll hold you in contempt.”
IMHO, the biggest problem with these fedearal beauracracies is that they believe that they are NOT accountable.
Our God-King – and his emissaries are generous enough to deign to sit before a lowly branch of government for an entire hour to hear their petty grievance, and this scumbag accuses Her Majesty of lying!? How brazen can a congressman get? That woman was positively regal, queenly even, standing up to power and the man. Obama meant it when he said he’d fundamentally change America. Time to show the minor branches which adorn His mighty tree who is in charge of this kingdom.
They could have answered the questions with all the time they have wasted. Maddening to watch!!!!!!
I just love how you don’t mention that the two Republican representatives who had yet to ask questions weren’t at the hearing. That’s right, she was expected to wait for them to show up, then ask their questions. They were not even in the room when this discussion was going on (but notice how important all of you think the hearing was; it was so important to them that they didn’t even bother to show up to the rest of it). Nice how you don’t mention that (or more likely, like them, you don’t actually care).
@Judy, no they couldn’t have answered the answers, because even by the end of this stupidity on the part of an elected representative, they still had not entered the room. Maybe they need an organ player for interludes in congressional hearings.
By the way, I also like that no one here has any idea if there was a staff agreement as to the end time of the hearing, and whether it was as precise and fixed as Warren suggested. None of you has any idea because you’re not there. You’re here, just finding what you already believe in, twisting it to your own opinion, and piling on.
Think a little, will you? The republic would be better for it.
Republican Representative from North Carolina Patrick McHenry was dismissive and rude to the point of hostility. He deliberately tried to place Elizabeth Warren in an embarrassing position and make her look like a fool. But there is a big difference in being made to look like a fool and actually being a fool. And Elizabeth Warren is no fool.
Correction, the biggest fool in the room was, wait for it…
Rep. Elijah Cummings, D-MD. The “D” and “MD” says it all.
This woman wants a nice federal paycheck and can’t stick around for the interview?, next person in line please.