first, it requires the cfpb to collect data. this is to ensure against discriminatory lending in the small business space. the data requirement imposes limited cost on lenders, but provides an important protection for small businesses, particularly those owned by women and people of color. more regimely though, there's authority over almost all service providers, large and small. the regulations could effect credit, but i want to emphasize it's premature to judge the impact on financial providers or the impact of the cfpb on small business credit costs and availability. instead, individual rules will need to be evaluated on their own marts when, and if they are proposed. the dodd-frank act imposes safeguards on rule making to ensure against unregulatory burdens. this rule makes and adjudication is subject to the act and supght to the regulatory flexibility act. the cfpb is one of three agencies required to have regulatory flexibility review panels under the enforcement and fairness act. they are required to consult with regulato

the term "significant" is subject to the cfpb's discretion to define. second, the bureau does not have to adopt recommendations that are advisory and just give explanation for adopting or rejecting them. it covers the rule making process, and i think you heard the first witness describe that regulation is not always the best way to go about doing things. they can use compliance assistance, supervision, enforcement actions to essentially dictate broader policy that are not subject to any sort of formal process where by input is taken. just to again put a fine point on it, i mean, actions speak louder than words. as mentioned here this afternoon, the bureau already does have rule makings essentially in progress, if not technically. one to merge these two mortgage forms, another to define the types of businesses that the bureau will supervise in the non-bank space, and in neither cases has the panel been put together. now, technically it's not required at any particular stage, but, you know, if we want it right from the gipping, we encourage the bureau to

subjecting auto dealers and realtors to cfpb regulation. there is not a very good principled argument for exempting them. >> thank you. mr. altmire anything? i want to thank you for taking time to coming down to capitol hill and testifying today. on this very important matter. with that the committee is adjourned. [inaudible conversations] [inaudible conversations] >> executive director of the organization iraq and afghanistan veterans of america told a senate committee wednesday veterans are concerned about losing their benefits if the nation does not raise the debt limit. the committee held a hearing to assess the long-term financial costs of caring for iraq and afghanistan war veterans. especially with those with traumatic brain injuries. hosted by the committee on veterans affairs, this is just over an hour and a half. >> good morning and welcome to today's hearing where we are going to examine the lifetime costs of supporting our newest generation of veterans. as we all know, when our nation goes to war, it's not just the cost of fight

to start changing the scope of regulation, i strongly urge subjecting auto dealers and realtors to cfpb regulation. there's not a good principled argument for exempting them. >> thank you. mr. altmire? >> no further questions. >> thank you for coming down to capitol hill and testifying today on this very important manner. with that, committee's adjourn. [inaudible conversations] [inaudible conversations] [inaudible conversations] >> the senate negligence committee took up the -- the organization charged with gathering and analyzing counterterrorism intelligence. before going the nsa, matthew olsen directed the task force overseeing the administration's detainees at the guantanamo bay. a vote is not expected until the senate returns from its august recess. this is an hour and 35 minutes. >> the hearing will come to order. the process will be as follows. i'll make remarks, the vice chairman makes remarks, and then we'll call on the distinguished senator from south dakota for remarks, and then we will proceed. i trust that is agreeable with everybody. the committee meets today to consider

the soon to be cfpb efforts and interagency guidelines are also being looked at to affect standards. all these efforts must be evaluated before any decisions made on any single uniform standard. just a quick note, i did visit a shop recently and wanted to see what they had implemented on the single point of contact. hundreds of people were being trained to handle the single point of contact rule, training lasted up for six weeks. once the training was complete, employees had several large black binders of which to navigate for all the different programs and processes they had to deliver the message on about what the options were for the borrower. the training objective for new hires is to bring consistency, empathy for the customers and accuracy regarding the descriptions of the options available to the borrowers as well as access to information that would be relevant to the borrower over the course of the eligibility review. the training tasks seem daunting and -- but it was indeed impressive. and some companies are dealing with licensing single point of contact on the original nati

does not have the senate approved later by the first anniversary last the consequence kicks in the cfpbbe take action against banks with more than $10 billion of assets but that which are end quote. are you saying traditional banks are hurt by efforts to block the appointment as you know mr. chairman a huge supporter of consumer and low moderate income issues and i think it odd anomaly if not confirming mr. cordray is that of consumer rules, but they there want be an imposition of those rules on the the shadow banking out a good thing. i think we have to get a balance moving forward here. >> in conclusion let each of you start one or two improvements would you make to hard to stay at just two. if i can go a little about today's hearing you have seven days afterward including dr. or gus be the first is the point that i think most of big to fail banks. that is something that should've the. >> i could be for that. >> higher capital requirements us basel iii goes anywhere near far, the point and made before is that they continue to be engaged in by fdic insured institutions large faction of

minted consumer financial protection bureau doesn't have a senate-approved leader by july 21, the cfpb will be free to examine and take action against banks with more than $10 million of assets but not against their nonbank competitors. that was your quote. are you saying traditional banks are hurt by efforts to block the appointment of the director? >> yes, they are, actually. i'm -- as you know, mr. chairman, i'm a huge supporter of consumer loan and moderate income issues. i think it's important to have a functioning agency and in that regard, the anomaly of not confirming mr. cordray, there will be an imposition on the banking sector of consumer rule, not a bad thing, but there won't be an imposition on those rules on the nonbank financial sector, the shadow banking system, not a good thing. i think we ought to get about moving forward here. >> in conclusion, i'll let each of you, what one or two improvements would you make to dodd-frank? >> it's hard to limit it to just two. >> and certainly you can commit in writing, you have seven days after this. >> i think most of us are conce