i want to thank you for that. >> in preparing for testimony today, a number of members of this committee can speak to this person from the own expense of service so i think it's quite important. >> thank you very much. >> senator vitter. >> thank you, mr. chairman and thank you, mr. cordray. like a lot of members and a lot of citizens, i am really concerned about the vast amounts of data that cfpb collects on all citizens related to financial transactions. .. allow any citizen to see what personally identifiable information that cfp be has collected at least once a year. would you support that? wwor

the mortgage market issues where you wall discuss time to time whether allies have gone too far, whether they've gone far enough. how can we answer questions at that data on the marketplace. that is different from a wind data on what senator vitter does. >> personally identifiable data. >> we have personally identifiable data and consumer response where consumers can this data so we can work on their complaint and family constituents to your office -- >> -- collect personal viable data appeared to >> we. >> you don't collect any of that? >> for example we do not have

address, social security number, account number. we are interested in the pattern of what goes on in the market. >> too collected before you scrub it? >> we ask the data to be scarred for comes to us. depends on which data. we will have a full briefing on this. >> somebody involved in the process? >> typically described before it gets to the agency. private companies have all the data. they care very much like you and i do and they're always marketing on that. that is where the focus should be. we don't have the data. we don't care about that. it is a big difference in a big distinction often misunderstood and misstated by people. so that is what i would say to

them. >> so what about these databases the collection of 100,000 to 500,000 deposited in accounts that contain transaction level data. does you will never collect that? >> with that particular collections from industry to work on particular reports. we're typically not interested in transaction level data for the individual transactions. >> what i've reference to include transaction level data. >> again, a number of different collections of her times. if you would like people to come to your office and speak specifically about anything in particular, happy to do it. i don't think i find it problematic. if you do see something problematic i want to know about it because it is a problem in your not a problem of i-9.

>> i've seen personally transaction related data collected. >> u.s.a. map? how if you >> i've read three specific databases to collect did they contain that. >> give us a chance to brief you. number two, all sorts of data that involved the information can before it gets to you. in any case however large or small would you support citizens being able to see what data is collected by or because of regulations. >> this sounds good in the abstract but the data we collect we wouldn't tell you which citizen is what because you and i don't want us to know that. >> it would only apply to what i am describing.

would you support citizens having access to understand certain what is being collected? i'd be happy to talk further about it. consumer response information gave us the data family tier can reach her at services. if it's an enforcement supervisor reaction, we need to know who should get the relief and work with institutions to accomplish that. i don't care and don't want to know who in individual lives that we typically do not know it and couldn't tell an individual anything about data as we don't know who's data it is not the way you should want and that is the way i wanted. >> thank you mr. chairman. senator menendez. >> with the fifth anniversary of the wall street reform act this month there's been a lot of discussion about what the law did well, where there might be room for improvement and what

challenges still remain on the financial landscape. as we look back it is without question establishing the consumer financial protection bureau has been one of the cornerstone achievements of the law. families have an independent cop on the beat on their site to stop predatory and deceptive practices. the cfp be provides consumers and policymakers better information and research about financial products. i thought hard for the cfpb's creation as well as many protections charged such a strong mortgage servicing roles and protections to end abusive and deceptive credit card practices. i also thought for stability and corporate governance improvements and while the law is not perfect and some important challenges remain, and overall there's a lot that is not right.

director corday the cfpb has been at the forefront of many of these games is a testament to the work to you senator warren the cfpb staff have put in to continue development. i want to commend you for being a force for good. two areas i would like to get my questions. one is about servicers privations of the dual track provisions and some of the credit card reforms i thought for a 2000 credit card. i'm in the bureau has made these the priority more autonomy and housing market continues to recover from crisis, still many parts of the country struggled with mortgage data for closure including my home state of new jersey which has the highest rate in the country of hallman

for closure. despite the cfpb's they continue to face obstacles to obtain modifications that can help. for example, in some mortgage services market applications that complete homeowners are not eligible for dual tracking protection which prohibit a service moving forward with there for closure while the homeowners pursuing loss mitigation. while homeowners scrambled to pull together document after document, the accumulate these inverted and make them even more likely to default. some services request documents on a piecemeal basis repeatedly request the same document, making prompt and effective authentication of pipe dream for distressed homeowners. do you have concerns servicers are struck in the loss mitigation process to favor for closure and if so what more can be done to collect and protect

sooners. >> i have concerns and for me they go back to when i was a sitting county treasurer at the local level in ohio out of difficulties problems were creating for homeowners who didn't deserve to have that key on top of financial distress. when we created our rules which went into effect in january 2014, we looked closely at those issues which we know the pain points for consumers that we hear about frequently. and work to address them. we had further work in enforcement actions. several enforcement actions where this has been part of the problem and part of the answering orders we had to impose and supervisory work with institutions we highlighted in our supervisory highlights last edition so while industry can know this is a focus for us any

problem persisting for years and when they need to cleanup and it's a complex problem and different states have different situations they are in with homeowners that differ dramatically for the nonjudicial foreclosure states. this has been pretty much a constant. >> i'd like to follow what. but the 2009 credit card act we are pleased to see an independent valuation four years later show almost $21 billion per year. in 2013 releasing its own report framing similar successes but also identified market practices that are concerns for consumers. can you give us an update? i go back to the state level where we saw complaints people are making about credit card since 2005 training 2006 before

the current act in crisis. is better today than 10 years ago. three reasons for that. the card act made an enormous difference in correcting problems in late fees, universal default and problems cleaned up. credit card companies have done a better job. that promotion score index which they've used in handling credit card calls for customers have put financial incentives behind the way people handle calls said a more consistent with what the customers looking for rather than getting them off the phone. i would ask them to think about using that promotion score index principles across their customer service and financial products. that would be a good thing if they know how to do it they should do it.

consumers themselves have been more responsible thinking about how to approach their credit card debt whether to maintain revolving debt, what the interest rate tire. i think when you're a consumer having a better. managing your day to have a better experience with your company in the marketplace. there's still issues we are concerned about good deferred interest is an issue of some concern. the credit card ads have been a point of particular focus and much of that has been cleaned up. i would say the credit card industry is a hopeful sign for me that the financial and the two shins when they come under pressure from congress and others and also when they understand the importance of doing it themselves have the ability to clean up their act

and i would urge them to consider what they've done and how they can do it elsewhere. >> thank you mr. chairman. good morning. as i'm sure you are aware south carolina has become giants in the sector transportation. i'm proud of my state's progress with his debut mercedes, continental bridgestone, we certainly have seen a lot of jobs created by manufacturers that depend on selling cars. i'm particularly concerned by the cfpb's boldness imposing a one size fits all cookie-cutter regulation on lenders and dealers as senator shelby has stated, cfpb has jurisdiction over dealers that it seems the bureau's regulating heavily relationship between lenders and dealers. my concern however is not as

concerned about dealers or lenders. i'm concerned about consumers in south carolina or charleston who will now pay a higher price for vehicles because of the government's involvement trying to make things better. limiting the ability to compete for customer business will mean the customer ultimately pays a higher interest rate. the expand the involvement to pay higher interest rates and how does that provide greater consumer protection? >> a couple things senator. first of all, understand my background as i come from a strong automotive state. talk to senator portman and senator brown. gm, ford chrysler honda has

been significant presence in that state. when i was general we had to do with issues of chrysler and general motors bankruptcy. all of them have a good result being we understand the importance of employment in the area. pensions and health care for people who work in that field in importance to our economy. i'm the director of the consumer financial protection bureau. the last thing i want is auto lending mortgage lending and the like. you will be to the detriment of my agents the end the american public. we have had the hottest market in the last several years to meet other had before in the history of this country. that is at the same time the consumer bureau was gathering his things and coming into existence. and please because as consumers

with access to transportation in your area at the mind you don't have the ability to get through a car or truck and you're in a lot of trouble in your life. having said that, we believe strongly people should not be subject to high prices are more onerous terms based on ethnic racial or gender background and the justice department feels strongly as well and are a partner in the work. bulletin you describe was a pretty straightforward of the change in the last several years ago which simply stated if you are a lender and you haven't automotive lending program your subject to the undeniable proposition and you need to think carefully about where your program is. >> direct to her corday come i hate to interrupt you.

there is legislation working through the house in a word of cbc members on the specific topics. i would suggest the members are very concerned about discrimination and perhaps your approach to the lending market is inconsistent with the outcome that you sincerely desire to achieve. my other question is on our conversation before we started the panel as they relate to feel a vespa. senator donnelly and myself is submitted a letter in may asking for a grace period or sometimes the actors in the business trying to transition would have more time to have less liability exposure. i would love to hear your response we talked about

earlier. >> we heard a tremendous amount on both sides of capitol hill about what we call a note before you owe mortgage rule, which is something congress required us to do. as a reminder or defend the law law. it is a good game. it takes a regime that has grown up or quit it didn't make sense for the consumer had to get two different forms at the application stage from two agencies and two different forms at the closing stage. very confusing. how do they differ, what i take from my beard were supposed to reduce that to one farm in each state which we've done in this role and everybody recognizes that the period that requirement was in the last five years ago

when it was passed. we looked carefully over time, did a lot of consumer testing. we finalize the rule of november november 2013. we gave a 21 month implementation data in response to what we heard from industry. nonetheless as they get towards the end, some people aren't ready. we heard from you and others in the spring and assist an example of the oversight you talked about. when we get congressional oversight ticket series. i don't regard myself as well enough concerns people race to me. if you raise a concern to the people i'm trying to service well. we did in the end due to an error but we did backup implementation that was important to a number of people and is now under consideration to put that in october. a lot of people don't like it because when we did our first

round of mortgage rules under requirement of time friends in congress in this january in many systems changes they do is inconvenient. the other thing we said in response to the question was they worked with the other agencies to get an agreement which we have got there early examination will be diagnostic and correct. we don't think people will be trying to exploit consumers on like this. for the first. which may last many of the other agencies and ourselves and see terrorism going out with me are and how they should be corrected. we will not be punitive towards people. they said that it was silly and i will say it on the record today. what we said about the mortgage rules two years ago and how it has been a no one has said

otherwise and was taken that to heart as well. happy to talk further about it or we've been trying to get a fair amount of leeway but the same time moving forward with an important change that is good for consumers to understand that action better. >> thank you. >> senator tester. >> thank you, mr. chairman. thank you for being here today, richard. i appreciate what you are doing and i want to say of senator scott did we appreciate the extension that you did respond to a letter that i had many on this committee assigned with senator donnelly. i want to talk about negative americans. it's different because of the issues of sovereignty and the issues of consultation. we've talked about before montana tribes that have been

unhappy with the consultation process. to be fair i've heard from an oklahoma bank debt.you are doing good things. the question comes up is the consultation process is there a policy on what you do with how you do it that applies to every driver across the country and if that is true, could you give me an idea what it is. >> entries on to the back and forth you and i had on the subject and others from the area of the country in particular but other parts of a track or two as well. we did put together a policy on consultation and formalize that shared it and got input from the leading travel accounts will. we have since been been requested to put together and

though you don't be more specific about the aspects of how it works if we did develop a draft that we shot back to the tribes as a whole. i don't want to get into individual tribes because my understanding is there's 500 across the country but we are trying to do with them as a group. they are concerned about the small dollars and income potential regulations they are. we have had two distinct consultations on that subject at their request at this point and had a considerable amount of input from them. i want to emphasize to try to be as an agency accessible at all times to see us and tell us what they are concerned about. i always feel that improves our work. we have been trying to be very

full seminar pressure this. you have emphasize that to me again and again. happy to your further from you. >> will try to help where we can help. appreciate that. early this year they agree or propose changes to support mortgage lending in rural america and where there's things we can work on we are appreciative of what the bureau did they make positive changes one of which was expanding the definition of rural states and now almost the entire state of indiana is considered rural which is correct. outside montana are you still hearing from folks who think they are in rural areas -- >> either way, i still remember meeting in your office and depressed economy i found a understood something world from pryce of ohio which are quite rural. he said i don't think you know

what rural maids in montana and you gave me a little schooling on that and that led in part to her thinking on how to expand the definition. the federal reserve proposed before we came into being as an agency and definition would've covered 2.2% of the american population which was plausible but somewhat narrow. we let them decided it was too narrow. we came out with a different definition that was more like 9.9% of the population. about quintupled it. even after that people show the maps of ohio county by county and senator brown and i could do this in our sleep. a whole bunch of counties were rural in my mind but were not covered under a definition so we felt the need to go back in and do it again. one of the things i appreciate is that want to get it right in if we didn't get it right we will not pretend we didn't say we can't change it. we will try to fix it.

we have a definition of world that is much broader and includes almost the entire day. whether it is too broad or not i don't know but it feels appropriate. disagreements in the agency over it but we are working to finalize rules on that which we should do by the end of summer and for the most part they been fairly well but the adult that once we hear from people as they see how they work we will think more about it. >> one last point. i was very concerned about the information you collect paint and because the data breach at opm maybe it is reachable to. i was very encouraged when you're not collect and the account numbers. we have to be careful as policymakers at kosovo to release any personally identifiable data. you would have to go back and

put names and address, social security to the data that would take time to time and make me very concerned about what's going on here. >> i really would not like that. >> thank you very much. thank you, mr. chairman. >> direct here i want to raise the issue as several people have raised on a bipartisan mobile. i understand from your vector general the total cost of the building which used to be used by the office of supervision is $260 million all in. this is a facility which you got it and they're putting in a two-story waterfall on glass staircases. if you look at the number of employees in your bureau, it is a 1459. that would lead to a per employee cost of $148046 per

employee. i would say since it was okay with the thrift supervision, how can any $216 million in upgrades of what they are to have. >> several thing. how does the waterfall help you do your job? >> that one in particular i don't begin to see how it helps us to her job and we want to wind up at the waterfall although when he too big shopping mall can find a waterfall somewhere and that is a very overstated by people. in any event the office of thrift supervision which had this building before it went defunct had already recognized had done an audit and recognize the building was indeed need. >> bandanna wrapped a little bit of father juan the line of

senator tester bias made as attorney general you would certainly pick up the issue of the collection you are doing as someone who is a free service in the community for over 20 years, happy taking specific actions. i would ask you again, have you taken the specific action to take members of congress out of data collection and members of the supreme court out of your data collection? do you see the issue of separation of powers? >> you not to question i haven't had a chance to there appeared a bit to go back to the building first if i may. the opposite of supervision recognized systems for reaching into their useful life. >> have you made sure you have not collected credit card data of the supreme court justices? >> we have not collected credit

card data and any member of congress or any supreme court justice. the purpose for me to do so. i don't consider that issue any more import than the privacy of individual consumers. >> -- you have not collected supreme court justice information. >> why on earth would i do that? >> separation of power. >> by what i collect supreme court justice? >> this is a scandal, bit like the nsa scandal that you have in fact done too much and it gives you too much power. >> i can't follow the question here. >> a first year law student at pick this up. it gives you ability to use the power and intimidate the quarter. >> intimidate the quarter. i don't really follow that at all. we are not doing anything you or have publicized the normative want to do that to what it makes sense to do that. >> senator tester also picked up

the issue. the only purpose of collecting data is to access it and the problem is >> not so. >> the chinese intelligence service have it before you do now that we have seen on the order of 10 or 200 million people compromised by opm. the problem is we don't trust you to keep it secure. >> i can see you don't trust me. you have a set of hypotheticals that have nothing to do with me. maybe have our staff regime were to give you comfort on that score. do you want me to go back to the building or whenever going to answer that question? >> i would ask why is $140,000 per employee necessary to your mission? >> those numbers are off.

>> they are the numbers of your inspector general. >> they talk about, but construction costs has remained consistently constant. or budget. they're fairly consistent with what the otf opined this necessary six or seven years ago before the cfpb. that that is my view but am happy to talk further about it. >> i would gently suggest you should make sure you don't collect intel on members of the supreme court. >> i tell you what i'll be glad to take a look at that. i can imagine we are doing that. >> that would reassure us all. sure chinese don't have it before we do. >> lula to give you reassurance on that point. >> thank you, mr. chairman.

scented soap in the stores for years ago, the trend i've have had a consumer complaint hotline where consumers can call in, go online, watch complaint about a financial product or service. that is the consumers have been doing it they come in and complain about sketchy fees on a checking account, errors on a credit report harassment by a debt collector. the agency says those complaints onto the company who then have time to respond to a consumer and the cfpb and resolve the issue. dh is the price 650,000 complaints through the hotline. could you give us a sense, just a ballpark figure about how many complaints were resolved to consumer satisfaction and how much consumers have recovered financially through this

process. >> ousted the arctic in the complaints continues to increase in terms of volume and that is a function of still a lot of lack of ability. people don't know what the cfpb is and they will know more over time and i hope they see we are providing value to them. that is what we aim to do. we like 700 some credit card complaints in our first month and we are now up to 25,000 complaints per month across the entire range of financial services. what happens then is we get the consumer a chance to tell us whether there is satisfied with the resolution of the complaint or what they continue to be concerned about and we then prioritize issues for further investigation or enforcement action or supervisory committee. the institutions know that and it pushes them to be more thoughtful about how they try to resolve complaints in the first and 10th. i don't know the exact numbers but in maybe 20% continue to feel they have a dispute once we

worked through our process and how further steps we can take. in terms of how much resolution there's been for consumers, many millions of dollars. it's hard to know for sure. they don't always tell us how the matter was resolved although many come back to our tell your story line. often with real gratitude they did get a resolution i couldn't get a resolution for months and. after speaking to us that got one promptly and not really thrilled us when we hear that. the other thing is a lot of on monetary release people get from complaints. getting something on the credit report can build very large and it's hard to quantify. >> i take it does have certain ramifications. >> maybe they could get a mortgage. that may be worth thousands of dollars. debt collection issues are a constant source of irritation

for consumers. the ronstadt or not the right person and they can get people to stop calling their home. 12 calls a day or calls on the work place and it's not the right person to whatever it is, us being able to stop that looms large for people. another point you have made to me is that they sometimes -- it is always easier to quantify the amount of really forgive back to people for things that happen to them before today and we can't easily quantified the benefit to them the things that will not happen tomorrow because of changes made today. those go on in the future and accumulate excessively over time. we don't have any with putting a price tag on that but it's very significant. >> you created the website 25,000 people a month -- and rising. or phone. it looks like roughly 80% of some kind of resolution here.

the agency also recently went live with this consumer complaint database. here you have a collection of thousands of narratives from real consumers about problems they have with financial products or with companies and it is all sortable online. it is possible to go online and see a byproduct, a day consumer lives. this morning i went to the database or much for complaints from massachusetts about mortgages. it is a powerful way to see what issues are popping up in the communities that all of us represent. i know it's only been online a few weeks but i wonder if you could describe how you think this will help improve markets for financial products. >> the database has been online longer of those broken into generic categories which were less insightful for people than hearing and the consumers on

worse with the the problem was that they saw it. i think that's incredibly important. we describe the narrative does the heart and soul of the complaint. for me to make a complaint and how to be categorized as debt collection, wrong amount, a number of complaints about all the more you know about it is not nearly as insightful as hearing what happened to me the calls i got home, the effect on my life. it is just tangible. it is real. the difference between statistics and stories into me if there is significant. the database is causing institutions to compete on customer service which is a good thing and the good ones are computing well and others have to improve and not the kind of pressure that is a positive pressure. i will mention there are many members of congress and this committee now referring complaints when they come to their office and we encourage you to do it.

we are experts and then you can see it keep track of how they go. we want every american who has a problem to come to us. we will always strive. >> i appreciate it and i see this as a prime example of how government can take small steps that have a positive impact on the market. a bit more accountability for companies that mistreat or cheat their customers. on the other hand, public acknowledgment for the companies who treat their customers well and resolve complaints quickly. i just want to slip in one little follow-up to the point senator brown made earlier about forced arbitration clauses. senator brown highlighted the report to see fpb recently released contains damning findings about how forced arbitration clauses mentally

cope the process against consumers and keep them from effectively fighting back when they've been cheated. it is clear the biggest banks and some of their republican friends in the house of representatives see the writing on the wall. they pushed legislation that would force the cfpb to redo the report before you issue any new rules. this is a stall tactic plain and simple. it took three years and 720 changes to complete. the carefully documents a wide range of problems. it is thorough and extensive. i want to ask you briefly because the chairman is indulging on them over time. can we get on record the steps the agency took to ensure the study was complete and accurate including soliciting and considering comments from a financial service industry. >> first of all, we did a request for an her mission at the us had to ask people if we probably solicited people's

thoughts and heard a lot from industry and different kinds of markets and also from consumer groups and others that were aired towards the side of being comprehensive about what they told us we should do and try to do as much as we possibly could. in many areas this is breaking brand-new ground. it wasn't necessarily data accumulated on that. we did go to the american arbitration association and were able to get significant data about the process which shed light on that the people have not had before. we looked at a number of different ways of trying to get judicial resolution of similar matters. we were helped in part because there's class-action involving certain institutions at one point has stop doing their arbitration agreements. you can see what the before and after wise. data can save consumers money to have been forced arbitration

process and we were able to map to able to map to discern that. we look at enforcement actions as a means of affecting the market place and people talk about our consumer claim process is a new element here. it is a comprehensive report. i don't think we could think of a single thing we could have done that we didn't do. we are always happy to hear more and we've had tremendous input insensitive given roundtables opportunities to digest the report and talk to us about it and that's an ongoing process. as they now embark on a rulemaking process that will be small business review panels. they will be notice and comment process on that. everybody will have their say. we will digest it as best we can and do what we are supposed to do is congress told us to do to act in the public interest consistent with the results of the report to determine what to do about this. >> thank you, mr. chairman. i really appreciate it. it's an important issue. >> thank you, mr. chairman.

director corday, earlier several members of the panel had a great question information concerning collection of data. probably the reason why it is an item of further interest is because of opm and loss of the data fare. employees have come in and been very concerned about the loss of personal data. when they talk about the collection process a few years and utilize in the market analysis the question comes into are the organizations required to submit data to you are they submitting from then through perhaps a third party or are they providing database been scrubbed by the organization itself. are you aware of how that works in terms of how you scrub the data or how it gives scrubbed? >> i'm generally aware of it and

with people who are carefully focused on that. it depends on the data collection. some of it is negotiating with industry. they have all this data by the way. they know everything you're doing and i'm doing and use it to market to us. it can be positive. it can be negative. there are repositories of data that are much but troubles some than anything we have. we can get the data on the sampling basis and specifically for certain fields and not other fields comes to us in map form. the credit card databases vetted through experience, a credit report company is that describes the data before it comes to us and remove certain fields. we try hard to make sure employees do not have access to personal identifiable information. let me say the opm breaches affect my employees as well as

your employees and we are sensitive to that end is something we are dealing with to make sure employees know what their rights are what is available to them then i'm sure you were too. what we would contribute to that -- >> a church to light the fact when we collect data that we have an additional obligation to protect the data. what i was curious about was whether you've received the data and scrubbed it or if it was delivered by a third party who would then have the responsibility. it sounds like what you've indicated in the case of the larger data amount it has been scrubbed by a third party before it gets to you. >> a credit reporting agency that has access to the data anyway. i'd be happy to have folks present to you on each individual thing. i want you to have comfort on this. we are trying to be careful about it. i see the stories about the nsa. i'm an american citizen and i have the same can turn you do about that.

i think it is distinct from a pickup about here but i'm happy to have folks come spend some time. if you remain concerned -- >> that's a good way to the vet and we will request that. let me move on to rural appraisals. i'm not sure how deep into this you've gotten personally, but rural appraisals have been tough to get. i'm not sure how they are in rural south dakota to get an appraisal has been very difficult. number one nhi decided up so they could identify rural locations and i'm asking is there another way we can get a third or fourth look at it because we've got communities that are clearly rural in nature. they are not identified that way. this very process to where we can get the challenge set up to get them placed in the appropriate category? >> when we open our doors we had

a number of mortgage rules were required to do by law and one has to do is appraisals on the other was an interagency vote with the federal reserve on appraisals. has always been somewhat concerned as whether they got that way. one of the big issues in unfamiliar in rural areas there's fewer comparables. it is more difficult. appraisers might have to come from a greater distance. just barriers to being able to make world transactions. we've been working to alleviate that but i would encourage you to press on that. you are pressing with me here so i'll be taking it back. if there's more really give him not because it's a peculiar circumstance of the few and far between areas and we want people to get mortgages as they can in the dense areas. >> two different things. the appraisals themselves and comps with regard to rural areas which in many cases don't exist.

i think you see legislation proposed right now that would create the ability for some banks were holding those mortgages because they can't qualify the secondary market. we want to make sure those are still considered an appropriate asset for those banks. if i could just one more question. i know when you work through the consolidated statements and the polis to perhaps simplify some of the period last year as i was moving on south dakota, i just got a copy of the most recent release or the qualifications statement. he says the new disclosure statement has proposed 164 pages. that was the pdf. the only reason i bring this up is if that is actually the case and if his back. in his definition in this

explanation. look we've got to have disclosures people will actually read. >> that is not correct. what is talking about is the regulation, the rule that implemented forms is lengthy. i wish it were but it is. the forms themselves are not 164 pages. that would be ridiculous. they are shorter than before. they wanted it to be one page at the closing state. >> we might find something. it is the key information. we are looking to do electronic closings and push the industry in the direction they want to go anyway so a lot of the paper

gets taken off and you can focus on the key formed there. they've tested with consumers said they found them to be much easier and more accessible and understandable. that is the key thing weather is two pages or three pages it might matter in some sense in the abstract. these are not lengthy forms. they are meant to be key summarized forms and that is what we're doing. i would be glad to hear more from you. i heard a lot from senator john senator is chair of the committee about south dakota and hear from senator tester and others that the population is more spread out. we've been working to get more latitude to its community banks and credit unions to portfolio mortgages in their own portfolio and have them be given all the protections that the rule. i think we get a good place imac, but we will hear more as we go. >> my time is that.

>> community banks are increasing their market share in the mortgage market which imply that that's a good thing. >> thank you sir. thank you, mr. chairman. >> thank you, mr. chairman. director corday, great to see you again. i have three areas i want to caps-on and i will try to be brief. one is when we started to see all the huge concerns about opm and they move aggressively. one of the areas when we started seeing this on the private vector side in terms of credit card and debit card hacking with an area i wasn't familiar with the differential consumer protections between credit cards and debit cards. i think particularly about the young people using debit cards rather than credit cards.

they have different business models, but how do we laymen on this to make it legislation that would harmonize protections for consumers. we speak to that how we better informed as a parent of daughter sees debit cards and credit cards that would equalize protections. >> it's interesting because the regulation grows up through historical circumstances that don't make logical sense. credit card protections were developed at a different time and for different purposes and by the way another example is prepaid cards. they have no consumer protection. most people are unaware of that is why we work to get the rule finalized to cover the gap. what you say is credit cards and debit cards started out as being seen as distinct. they were about credit and the

way they get away from store cards. they were seen as having to do with atms and other things. that kind of merge together as payment mechanisms and people often now they pull out one card with the other and not think that carefully about bed although some people are quite careful. i believe the fraud protection is $50 limit of exposure and a debit card is $500. it may have made more sense and debit cards for me about the atm and taken a fair amount of cash. it is something i would invite congress to think about and it may have guidance for us on that. whether they could fix it ourselves >> there's some interest in privatization and we have to know that is very different

protections. let me move to another subject. one of the areas i've spent some time on his looking at this dramatic growth and the sharing economy for the on demand economy amongst millennialist. one of the good sides and bad sides is the freedom that comes with is for sound folks it is quite lucrative to cobble together different revenue sources. a whole host of questions around the lack of safety net of worker's compensation bill of the areas not necessarily for your purview of the something we will work through maybe not with a top-down solution but a private often enough doubt. one model that would have fallen in your area as more and more and much of the work for us fall somewhere but as we think about

cuba had we've heard some concern and the emerging 10 the emerging 1090 nines or contingent workforce that traditional banking system doesn't record their income in inappropriate ways of their ability to qualify undermine. my understanding is that appendix q. is this faction within key lan that includes guidance for verifying and documenting our were in town. it's an area taken a look at and i understand not a lot of policymakers. in far and away the fastest growing sector we had to get ahead of it a little. >> anytime anyone asked the question i know they are commendably in the wee.

>> i didn't know about appendix q. >> in any event the point you raise is a good one and found him that i i have become increasingly aware of and concerned about. there's different aspects of this. i would say several aspects. we are moving to an economy where you have full salary in the old model. just as we move away from defined pension systems this is happening. interestingly the health care law is pro-liberty in the sense that it doesn't cause people to be stuck in a job to get health care. they consider being an independent contract your and still not get health care. it does create more complications for people qualifying for a mortgage because it's harder to document income. it may be more fluctuating. you start adding up who is in her mid-employees who are

temporary employees, seasonal employees. it is a huge portion of the operation. if not an easy thing from a standpoint about than retirement accumulation pension plans and 401(k) contributions tend to be limited and companies that have multiple workforces to the full-time full salary people. even the ability to put away savings for retirement or get matched by an employer and will think hard about what we do without. treasury is developing to my ra ra account in a panic sample in this area. illinois did something legislatively into something we need to think about because otherwise people will be falling behind and income disparity but also very much falling behind in

the help environment. >> thank you or senator corker. >> thank you, mr. chairman. mr. corday, thank you for being here. in our office we talked about key lan. we are all working on this issue way back when in the bad old days when so much was happening. we are all concerned about a 5% risk sharing. number. that is where everybody's focus was trying to figure out a way to get that right. one of the themes and legislation is there is this focus too this focus to only do it at community banks and smaller institutions. if you look at a qualified mortgage on portfolio that means the institutions keeping 100% of the risk.

i wonder why we try to differentiate between smaller institutions holding qualified mortgages and larger institutions being unable to do so. i know we've talked about it and i have one other question. >> we don't have much time to talk about it and i'd be happy to talk about it more with you. we are trying to find ways to encourage community banks and credit unions to do mortgage lending because if you look at the data through the crisis, they have lower default than anyone else. they are the most responsible lenders we have had more than being the better it is for consumers and our economy. that is why we focus portfolio provisions to benefit them. i'm concerned about it at upper levels because the logic of it

may not obtain larger levels. experientially unaware of the number of his dictation that blew up that didn't get it right. washington mutual, countrywide america west. some of these companies that threaten the economy because they made such a mess of things and portfolio lending isn't always a cure-all in terms of i'm bearing the risk so i'm responsible so it feels to me credit unions have been highly responsible about it and as we say i am pleased to see you at community banks share of funding seems to be on the increase. that is good for america i think. >> it just seems to me and i agree with much of what you just said. but it seems to me if on the portfolio lending component there is something different than stopping at a $2 billion or whatever and people just going

whole hog into it, there ought to be something that is different than the stark line and we have to explore that together. i manufactured housing, i live in the state where we have a lot of people with difficulty affording housing. senator brown listen to stay with there's a lot of people that difficulty affording housing. the fact is for some of the lower intensity since we represent them in manufactured housing is an outlet. i know we sponsored legislation in 2012 that was more expansive than what was in the shelbyville this time. yet we have these rules in place that make it difficult. you and i talk about the fact i'm a $20000 loan the cost

associated with doing that up front end up dumping up against the regulations we have and i wonder if you might address that and address the fact that is a problem. i wondered if of that collectively generate a solution for that. >> the problem i'm concerned about and it's not limited to manufactured housing. as you go to lauren at the start drug and the size of loans, the smaller the loan, there's a certain amount of cost to be incurred in order to make the loan. enzyme that is 200 300 $400,000, the costs are spread over a big base. 25 or $50,000 a lot of houses in a state in manufactured homes of that kind. the cost start to get larger. it does provide for that and

says 100000 common re-% cap can rise to four and 925 and lower levels to be a hard dollar amount. ..

summer the leading manufactured housing manufacturers are quite profitable so i don't know what to make of some of the concerns people are raising to me. but i will say this issue of cost on this mortal i think is a universal issue and problem and one that maybe we should be thinking further about whether the threshold are exactly right. >> thank you for the time. i would just close by saying i appreciate you looking at that david and i understand in a growing economy you're likely to see more people doing these types of things. we've seen some data that shows number of these people are unable to be served and they are ending up paying more for rental housing than they could be paying for actually purchasing again and lower cost home of either type whether it's conventional or manufactured.

>> certified can't. >> thank you, mr. chairman. at the risk of going down this rabbit hole one more time i just want to kind of begin with where we are with data collection. i have listened and i think in some ways i feel like we are ships passing through the night and not really hearing. you do not require the transfer of personally identifying information, other than to do consumer services based on a complaint. is that what i'm hearing? >> that's generally correct although enforcement supervision matters where we are getting money back for consumers, we ultimately will need to have information to get the money back to consumers. >> these wouldn't be individual complaints? this would be a broad, sweeping investigation where you can would require individual information?

>> so, for example, where we a credit card data matters. we have to get money back to consumers. either we can work through the institution or may have -- >> i think my point is in terms of your data collection the only way he would have personally identifying data would be if it were necessary to serve the consumer either in a broad complaint or an individual complaint? >> i believe that's exactly correct and there's no purpose in having it otherwise. it just gets in my way in terms of doing our work. >> do institutions send you a bulk amount of data that actually has that information with it requiring you to scrub it, or do you get information that's been scrubbed and resources could never than personally identified information has been remote? >> so on that one up like to do is have our staff come and brief your staff on all of our -- >> i think there's enough interest that maybe just report back to the committee would be very helpful. >> we can do that.

that is typically our aim and i believe it's true in all circumstances but i'm hesitant to say all without making -- >> i want to make one final point on this which is interesting to me is that where we are deeply concerned about what you have we should be equally deeply concerned about the cybersecurity of the information where it resides which is what the companies that you ask this every day. so they're going to have come any breach of the data is much more damaging that access to your data that is being used for market analysis. >> target and home depot, social security numbers, very problematic. >> another thing that would be helpful and with a great response from the agency on what's rural and what isn't, we think you probably have made the right decisions in north dakota but i'm curious as to the percentage of landmass in this country that you determine its impact rural. if you could get that that would be great. also would reiterate senator

tester's concern about consultation and would be interested in follow-up on consultation with tribes as well. that's part of the overall theme and a government-to-government relationship. we need all agencies to appreciate what what that means spin kind of yuppie promising to come visit you so -- >> i was going to mention that. and i do have to say that where we can disagree i think your personal integrity is unimpeachable. i think you are doing a very difficult job and i want to thank you for your service. someone with your credentials having at the clerk of the supreme court at one point, with a great academic background is someone who is an extraordinarily valuable and i am course are in partial to pass a cheese so we are all good. i want to reiterate some of the points you've been hearing about where we are at with the people are trying to protect i think will draw to get at is how do

you balance protecting the consumer finance access to necessary credit where the it is small dollar linda, manufactured housing, just access to rural communities or native american communities for the market. i think there's a balance and i know i told you frequent my story. i was probably one of the first people who can't beat that by trying to shut down payday lenders and predatory lending. i learned something in the process, which sometimes people need diversity and sometimes do have a flat tire and they can't fix it. these are folks living on the margin. i understand the need to protect people by also understand they need to have some form of small dollar short-term lending. what do you think those products, and this'll be my last question from, what do you think those products should look like and had to achieve that balance and how do you as the director,

i think address the concerns that we have, which is let's get people access to credit commitment helps build a credit, helped build america, but let's also protect them. that's a tough balance with this population. >> it really is. we first saw this issue with our mortgage roles where in the dodd-frank act they pass certain things we were required to do on mortgages at a time when the mortgage market was overheated and quite irresponsible and the underwriting had deteriorated. at the time we came to write the rules things had crashed the mortgage market was no frigid, credulously tight. it was a hugely different situation. as we wrote those rules we became very keen aware face-to-face with this problem of how do you balance protections with access to credit which we do not want to choke off. that's something we try to balance. i think we did pretty well but it's something we are constantly monitoring and trying to think about. same thing in these small dollar rules. we know people have a demand for

small dollar credit. they'vethey have had it for over 100 years and they get that demand served in various ways and some products are more responsible and some are less responsible but people have a demand. we can't choke off the supply to them but at the same time we're concerned about this issue of the debt trap people ending up thinking they're getting in and out but many of them end up rolling over and getting stuck in their high cost of a long period of time. that's the issue we're trying to address. whether the industry business model relies on them to subsidize the single demand loans i'm not entirely clear on that. they say they don't but maybe they do. it's something we're going to figure out. but i have the same objective in mind you described. devoted have access to money and that everybody has an uncle or a sister or mother in law that they can go to for three or $500 to if you don't want to do what they may not be able to do a third time. so we get there. at the same time we don't want people to end up in products

that harm them for the. i don't know i am the right person to do all the right products or. what we're trying to identify this short run products we want to try to rein in that it will still get access to credit. that's the right answer. how to get there is a complex difficult issue and i'm hopeful and we are working hard to try to understand enough to get it right. >> thank you, mr. chairman. >> thank you senator. said heitkamp raised a real important issue and we talked about this before, mr. cordray is we don't want to drive the small marginal consumer underground where there is no regulation. because that's what we've had before and i believe that goes right to the thrust of our question. how do we do this without over regulating this and how do we have access to do some type of credit? will it be legal or illegal?

now we can have senator cardin coming up, we can have that i believe debate that you refer to. senator cotton. >> okay. thank you, mr. chairman. thank you, director. i want to return to topic senator corker touched upon, affordable housing. since this indicates to me not be a single count in this country that really has enough of rental housing, this is particularly a cute and kind of rural state that a rep as a normal county where i live. are not a lot of new single-family homes being built. is not a large stock of multi-governmental units which is why many families find manufactured housing to be the most affordable options they have as senator corker described described. as you described there's a basic

math problem. it takes a certain amount of time and resources to process any loan whether the loan is 40,000 or 400,000 or 4 million ma and over a bigger loan that cost is spread out across a database and, therefore, the percentage cost don't appear as high for over a small bone like for manufactured housing is a much smaller base spread out so it appears to be much higher even thouga preferencpreferenc e of the consumer and jeff financial institutions were willing to make those loans. you have regulatory flexible under the dodd-frank act under section 1431 to address this to raise those percentage rates yet you haven't used that. can you explain why and maybe if you're looking ahead to using it comes to grant some relief to families and lenders? >> we did consider this and pretty careful with a lot of input at the time we adopted our mortgage roles our big set of mortgage roles in 2013. this issue was raised and the 3%

was not seen as appropriate for loans under $100,000, and it went to for at certain levels five at lower levels and a dollar figure out the lowest levels. that was an effort to try to address the issue that you're raising this is a very legitimate issue. whether we've got those numbers right, whether we should reconsider them and think further about than just a we reconsidered further by the rural and underserved issue is a fair point and it's what i will take back from this hearing. i do remain concerned the credit at the smaller, at the lower dollar end of the spectrum is tight. it is tight, it is time for people often have lower credit scores and more difficult to access the credit. i don't want to try to pretend to redo underwriting that is being done by these institutions on that. but whether those numbers are

set at the right level, rather 100,000 is the right level i think some fairly clear on. i think we should be looking at samore you should be looking at them or. we should have a fruitful discourse on whether the navy changes there. >> thank you for that. you referenced in your answers adjusting some encouraging data as i have as well. i believe that -- >> manufacturing. >> yes also for refinancing and for secondary sales, manufactured housing doesn't have the same lifetime that single-family housing does but oftentimes families the manufactured housing at a time in their lives when they're going through a lot of change at their newly married, have no children, going to economic change hopefully getting higher wages, moving up the economic ladder and ready to move into different kind of home when there's another family who would be willing to buy their

manufactured home. director, i want to turn to another question now. last year brought an enforcement action against a mortgage lender phh. human in front of the commission of law judge and the judge ruled for you. you overturned that judgment and imposed a fine of $109 million. could you explain your thinking both why you pursued an administrative law judge as opposed to an article iii courts? and what evidence and thinking with into your decision to overturn and impose your own find 17 times the initial judgment? >> the use of administrative law just as opposed to a court is under the statute is a discretionary decision. we just administrative law judges fairly sparingly except for consent orders. we've been in court and we are in court in many matters. it does one difference is the

al of -- alj returned faster and more streamlined whether that's good or bad things often is in the eyes of the beholder. that happened to be the approach that was used in this particular matter. as for the decision, that decision is published and the reasons for it are set out on the faced things like maybe a 36 page decision so it is lengthy. the particular point you're getting at had to do with whether under the law, and this is not an obvious point and the ministry of law judge saw it one way, i saw it another way under the law whether if you violate the rest the statute is the right relief only contracts the violated the statute after a certain date? or is it payments made after certain date on contracts the violated the statute?

not enough to split but it does point out when she decided one way or the other makes a huge difference in this that intensity not overly. that is the sole reason for it. i thought the law pretty clearly was one way. others may see it differently, but we tried to come to the right result as we understood the law. >> thank you for that explanation. you are right the implication of the question intention of driving at is not necessary about that decision to put about the structure of the decision-making. not only within your own bureau but with the agency as a whole. your bureau has features that exacerbate the problem. your budget is not subject to annual appropriation, that you are a single director as opposed to a five member commission this is not a reflection on your a future director. these are concerns i have about the nature of this bureau. madison said that the demolition of all powers, legislative and executive and judiciary in the same hands may be very -- the definition of tyranny.

in a single case or any other case our future director's judgments i'm going to continue to these concerns. >> having said that i in i am here in front of you here and consistently, and happy to be speaking to any kind i regard that much is oversight as very meaningful and very vigorous. that decision is subject to appeal. it is being appealed to the core. i hope to you see the case the same i didn't think i do things like it if they disagree they will tell us and will comply and abide by the ruling so we're subject to review every respect as well. >> we're glad to have judicial review by the original factfinders with life tenure and protections are different from factfinders at agencies and bureaus, not just yours. >> trigger off a state court judges are not subject of a. >> issuing rules to provide standards of conduct under which the force of law can impose penalties, not elected or differ from people up here making doesn't have to answer that we serve back home for the wisdom

of those rules. not a specific commentary on this particular case or any particular thing you've done but i'm reservations about the structure of this bureau. >> senator merkley. >> thank you very much, mr. chairman. and thank you, director cordray, for your testimony. but i want to thank in particular for your leadership of the finally having a watchdog fighting for consumers and fairness in financial transactions. in your testimony you note that your enforcement activities resulted in more than $10.1 billion in relief for 70 million consumers. is my understanding this is specific funds that come from addressing predatory practices that has been returned to 17 million families across america and? >> yeah, it takes different forms. forms. some of it is direct restitution, some is uncompensated victims that get compensated over civil penalty funds.

some of it is same mortgage relief, some of it is a debt that they otherwise would require to pay and subject to further costs and proceedings that is forgiven and wiped from the books. but yes it's meaningful relief for american consumers. the other point that senator warren has made me which is worth making come every time the same things don't happen going forward and you can expect the same money is being saved each year in the future but it is very hard to quantify that. >> it is hard to quantify, but every time a consumer gets a fair mortgage loan whether -- rather than a predatory one, a great deal of help has been created in terms of a wealth building enterprise versus a wealth of stripping one come and go agency is critical to the. i wanted to turn to the subject of payday loans. you were engaged specifically in laying out out a policy framework, not yet a draft

regulation, and taking feedback on it. in oregon, we proceeded to establish a pretty rigorous framework reestablishing a usury cap on the full range of loans, consumer loans title loans payday loans because we've seen a migration from one area to another where states have tried to tackle the 500% interest rate in payday loans. but we see aggressive outreach by payday loan companies to solicit people online entities outside the framework of state law. and in that regard about once a week i get a text message like this one that came the other day, dylan -- i don't know who dylan is but whoever dylan is, do you need some extra dollars? that credit is okay. approved in four minutes. click here. i'm absolutely convinced this is not a payday lender operating

under the state law probably offshore as most online or. and the challenge is that with the ability to reach out to folks through text messages in this case, i also received phone calls for delegate this bill is out anywhere and once his phone messages, well please contact me. so folks have been respond to this and said okay great this is convenient, i don't have to go down to the brick and mortar payday loan star by the way we still of those in oregon even though they operate at 36% interest rate they are still providing credit as they have in every state that is cracked up on a 5% interest rate. citizens self axis when they need at a fair rate but they're getting ensnared i these online solicitations. the reason this works is because these companies are able to use electronic fund transfers or remotely generated checks to essentially once they have a number of the account of the

individual they simply reach in and grab the money even to their love is in violation of the law. how are they going to stop this? >> first of all you may need a better step build on your phone although maybe pick up some good intel this way. second the online lending is a particularly acute problem for any enforcement regime i saw it as attorney general in ohio. i hear about it from our colleagues at the justice department who battle with it and help us win are trying to do with something that international in scope like a scam we do with earlier this year, some of the folks were based in kansas city but they were incorporated in -- i don't even know what it is someplace in the pacific maybe. maybe it's in the caribbean, i don't know. caribbean, all right. in any event, the enforcement of that is quite difficult but important. i also, one might of the online

lending we do nothing more efficient because you would not have to the brick and mortar but the default rates are so high they are paying lead generators $400 to acquire customers. what does it take about a customer they are acquired if they think it is worth paying three to $400 to get the phish on the line for them the lending to do them particularly in small they are loan sharks is going to be astronomic interest rates, five and 40% 720%, even more. and that's a major concern. in terms of a small dog lending rules that we're working on now that's a big piece of it. the account access where they can just take the money directly from your account and creates all kinds of risk. i was in the with the kansas city outfit. we shut down earlier last year. these are things we are wrestling with because the

account access, particularly creates vulnerability for consumers and can cause them to be trapped in these loans and they may or may not appreciate what's happening when it's in the fine print. it's something we're trying to think very carefully about what we are aware of and very sensitive and concerned about the same problem that they think you just described as we are trying to work through these issues. >> well thank you for your efforts to wrestle with this issue. it matters a lot to a family. whether or not they acquire a payday loan in oregon under a 36% interest rate cap of whether they respond to the text message or the phone call and end up with a 500% interest loan from a group that is operating with no accountability and reaches in and just takes money without authorization or there has to be a solution to this. i've suggested several in my stopping abuse and fraud electronic lending act the safe

act in 2013. continue to look for a way for fair lending to happen to help families to succeed and to stop his predatory practices. i know that's the business you're in and you're doing an excellent job and thank you for the work that you do. >> thank you, senator merkley. director cordray, thank you for adhering again before the banking committee come and we appreciate your testimony and your frankness -- appearing again. the hearing is adjourned. [inaudible conversations]

[inaudible conversations] >> one month after an investigation found security failures at dozens of the nation's busiest airports, white house homeland security subcommittee will hold a hearing on the readiness of the federal air marshal service which is part of the transportation security administration. that hearing is at 10 eastern on c-span3. it is a day to affect your janet yellen. she testifies about the economy and interest rates before the senate banking committee at 2:30 p.m. eastern on c-span3. >> the u.s. senate about the gavel into start their seventh day of work on the update of the no child left behind education law. several amendment votes possibly as many as 20 will take place around 10:45 a.m. eastern. we may also see some work on the

highway funding bill. now live to the senate floor on c-span2. the president pro tempore: the senate will come to order. the chaplain, dr. barry black, will lead the senate in prayer. the chaplain: let us pray. righteious god, lead us not into temptation but deliver us from evil. set our lawmakers on safe paths protecting them from dangers seen and unseen.

preserve them and their loved ones, doing for them more than they can ask or imagine. provide our senators with counsel even in the night seasons, that they may prevail against the evil forces that seek to destroy our nation and world. as they trust your loving kindness, may their hearts rejoice in your salvation. lord, deal bountifully with them and the members of their staffs. we pray in your marvelous name. amen.

the president pro tempore: please join me in reciting the pledge of allegiance to the flag. i pledge allegiance to the flag of the united states of america and to the republic for which it stands, one nation under god indivisible, with liberty and justice for all. mr. mcconnell: mr. president? the presiding officer: the majority leader. mr. mcconnell: the pundits told us it would never happen. republicans and democrats will never agree on a way to replace no child left behind, they said. but a new senate that's back to work is proving them wrong. we're poised to pass bipartisan legislation that would replace an education law that no longer

works with significant education reforms that will work. it's a bipartisan bill that would take decision-making power away from distant federal bureaucrats and empower parents teachers states, and school boards instead. it's a bipartisan bill that would end the practice of states being coerced into adopting measures like common core. it's a bipartisan bill that would substitute one-size-fits-all washington mandates for greater state and local flexibility. and because the needs of a student in kentucky aren't likely to be the same as the needs of a student in montana or california, this is a bill that would clear the way for enabler standards and programs to be designed with the needs of local students in mind.

in short the every child achieves act is aimed at helping students succeed instead of helping washington grow. i urge colleagues to join me in passing it soon. that would be a big achievement for our kids and it would be another reminder of what's possible in a senate that's back to work for the american people. after all what did our constituents see in this debate? they saw senators they sent to washington regardless of party having their voices heard. they saw senators working across the aisle. they saw senators of both parties offering amendment after amendment and then voting to adopt many of them. on this bill alone the new senate's already taken roll call votes on 17 amendments. we expect to take up to six more today. just to put that in sper tech alternative, the -- in perspective, the new senate will have taken more roll call votes

on this single bill alone than the old senate took all of last year on all bills combined. that's something we should all want to celebrate because it means the voices of the american people are being heard again here in the senate. so i want to thank senior senators from tennessee and washington for all of their hard work on this bill. their continued dedication helped lead us to the point we are today. i also want to acknowledge the efforts of the house of representatives on this issue. the republican-led house passed legislation to address this issue in the past few years but the old senate did not act. this year a senate under new management is poised to finally do its job. we look forward to going to conference with the house on this issue but first we must pass the bill before us. so let's keep the productive momentum going. let's pass this bill.

let's place no child left behind once and for all. after all we've seen how states like kentucky have been able to achieve more success by obtaining just a limited amount of flexibility from the current law by conditional waivers. just imagine what kentucky and other states can achieve when fully empowered to do what's right for their students. mr. president, i ask unanimous consent that not withstanding the provisions of rule 22 the vote on the motion to invoke cloture on the motion to proceed to h.r. 22 occur at 2:15 on tuesday, july 21. the presiding officer: is there objection? without objection. mr. mcconnell: let me just say to all senators, we're making progress on the highway bill, and we're setting the vote for next tuesday to allow the bipartisan supporters of a longer-term bill a couple of days to complete the draft substitute. chairman inhofe, senator boxer

and a bipartisan group of senators are working out the final language. i want to thank them for their efforts, and i hope we'll find a way to go forward on a multiyear paid-for highway bill.

the presiding officer: the democratic leader. mr. reid: mr. president i commend senators murray and alexander for their good work on

this education bill, but i want the record to be spread with this. the bill is passing this congress because we've had a constructive minority during this congress. senator harkin, who is chair of that committee indicated -- and i've said this on the record last week -- that on two separate occasions they reported a bill out of the education committee but it was filibustered. he never got it to the floor. so it's, i understand why my friend the republican leader, is beating his chest about how great the senate works -- and it does work if you have a cooperative minority. and that's what we have done. we have worked very hard to try to get this done. and as a result of our work together we've been able to get it done. but please save everyone the lack of history that my friend

keeps bringing up. boy, the senate's working so well. it was very cynical what my friends did in stopping everything the -- the last four years stopped everything. hundreds of times stopped bills from moving to the floor. so for my friend to come to the floor and say oh, man things are working so great now. isn't it great the senate's working? as cynical as it was the republicans had a plan, and that was to oppose everything. we had a democratic president we had a democratic senate. and if they opposed everything, it would work out great for them. and it did. it wasn't good for the country but they're now in the majority. how long they stay there remains to be seen. if you look at the poll numbers about how my friend is doing the republican leader, it's not very well. the lowest numbers since they've started doing polling on leaders, democratic or republican leaders. so we'll continue to cooperate when we can. the highway bill is coming up. i hope we can work together to

get something done on that. it's something that's long overdue. we have tried to get that done in the past but we've had republican objections on everything we've tried. we've had 33 short-term extensions on the highway bill. 33. we used to do them as a matter of routine every five years but that isn't the way it is anymore. so we're going to cooperate as much as we can on the highway bill and everything else. prior to leaving the floor mr. president, i want to talk about another subject that is extremely important. and that's this: one of the sad things that's happened the last few months is republicans have brought to a standstill -- and that's even an understatement saying that, the export-import bank. it's now gone. legislation was not passed, and so something that we usually and always have done in the past, routinely reauthorized this

bill. not this time. the republicans have stopped it. it's gone. the export-import bank is gone. our ability to sell to other countries our products has been seriously overwhelmed. it's so sad and it really is sad. other countries have these export-import banks. there's some mind-set from my republican friends that we can't do anything the government's involved in. mr. president, if we're going to be competitive in the world, we have to have a program like the export-import bank. it's been around for a long time. it's been very successful. if we don't do this, for example, the airplanes we build in the state of washington will actually come to a screeching halt. they can sell to america but not to other countries. now, am i making all this up? no. in fact, other countries have

these banks. is it one or two countries? no. scores of countries. scores of countries. i'll take a minute or two and read the names of the countries that have working export-import banks to help their businesses and workers compete globally. argentina australia austria bangladesh, bar bay dose, belgium, brazil, canada, china hong kong, colombia croatia czech republic, denmark ecuador finland france, germany, greece, hungary india indonesia, italy japan jordan, luxembourg malaysia, netherlands, new zealand norway pore -- poland, slovakia slovenia, south

africa, south korea spain sweden switzerland thailand, turkey united kingdom uzbekistan. yef one of these countries -- every one of these countries have a working export bank. why do they have one? they want to be competitive. whatever they sell to a foreign country, whether a bag of wheat or some product they manufacture, they want to be able to help their local businesses sell to foreign countries. but not the united states. and we are really hurting. and i can't imagine -- i can't imagine how the republicans supposedly the business-oriented operation we thought over the years, was interested in helping business they just turned a blank eye. they're not interested in helping business anymore. why? because these working export-import banks are government operations.

now, does it cost the federal government of the united states money? of course not. we've gotten $7 billion back in rewards that goes to our treasury. we make money on the deal. so i would say to my friend who believes in how the senate's working well, i wish somebody would take a -- say to my republican friends you know, all business organizations support the export-import bank. the chamber of commerce is not an organization that's out beating the drums for democrats but they are running ads all over america today saying republicans, do something about this. huge companies like boeing, which is hundreds of thousands of jobs in boeing are dependent on being able to export those big airplanes they make. as a result of the republicans'

nonaction not reauthorizing this important piece of legislation, there was before this collapse at the bank took place 165,000 americans working in jobs related to the export-import bank. now, i don't know how many there are today but i guarantee there are not 165,000. each day that goes by, others lose their jobs. little companies. from the state of nevada, little companies are calling me saying we have to have this. we're going to go out of business. the bad feeling my republicans have for anything dealing with government that they do stuff like this is hard to explain to anybody why they would do something like this. every one of these countries have programs. i have read their names into the record. i think it's just a shame what is happening with this wonderful institution that was so good for

creating jobs in america. mr. president, i see no one on the floor. would you announce the business of the day? the presiding officer: under the previous order the leadership time is reserved. the senate will resume consideration of senate bill 1177 which the clerk will report. the clerk: calendar number 63, s. 1177, a bill to reauthorize the elementary and secondary education act of 1965 to ensure that every child achieves. mr. reid: the time is not equally divided. i ask that it be equally divided. i'm sorry mr. president. i got some bad advice from my staff member. i note the absence of a quorum. the presiding officer: the clerk will call the roll. quorum call:

quorum call: a senator: mr. president? the presiding officer: the senator from new hampshire. ms. ayotte: are we in a quorum call? the presiding officer: we are. ms. ayotte: i would ask that the quorum call be lifted. the presiding officer: without objection. ms. ayotte: mr. president i come to the floor this morning to speak about the bill that we have pending on the floor a law that is long past due for reexamination and