>> one thing that kraninger said, she's the multi-director, and mulvaney came in with a different vision and she has a different vision she is trying to implement and move the bureau to a middle ground. not where it was with mulvaney, but she has reversed some things that mulvaney did, and branding the bureau consumer financial protection bureau now and revised some of the boards that mulvaney eliminated or drastically changed the membership of and insisted on a middle ground approach for the bureaus rules and regulations. back to the bill, the consumers first act, 17th amendment. and under the rules, what is one that she launched for? >> one is a momentum of understanding, between the cfpb to get data from the education department as it pursues cases involving student loans and oversight of federal student loan servicers. this came in when betsy devos came into the education department and something that kraninger says wasn't okay. she says she needs something to be able to pursue the cases and oversight of loan servicers. one thing i'm keeping an eye on. another is an amendment from re

the bureau, mick mulvaney, and now the complaints about the republican-appointed director, kathy kraninger. we're here today because democrats regret that during dodd-frank, that they didn't go far enough in mandating outcomes by this bureau, because they didn't consider a republican could actually be a leader of that bureau and they may not like the action of that unaccountable director. they have buyer's remorse. and unfortunately they've decided to advance legislation that does nothing to create a more responsible cfpb over the long term. instead of taking this opportunity to work together to bring transparency and accountability to the cfpb, the majority's moving a bill that does little more than advance their political agenda and micromanage the bureau. h.r. 1500 codifies and recreates offices inside the cfpb, some of which are given more authority and some of which, like the office of cost-benefit analysis, are given less. h.r. 1500 also directs that bureau staff -- it actually directs what bureau staff can refer to the bureau as in public. now, let me explain. if you call it the con

nevertheless, the consumer bureau under its current director, kathy kraninger, is ignoring its own legal counsel and refuses to supervise banks for m.l.a. compliance. during our march 7 hearing on consumer bureau, veteran jennifer davis from the national military family association stated this, she said, we have become alarmed by he cfpb's decision to no longer supervise lenders for compliance with the m.l.a., current leadership has expressed the opinion that the agency does not explicitly have he authority to do supervisory examinations, to ensure m.l.a. compliance. we disagree. and as mrs. davis noted, dodd-frank grants the consumer bureau executive and administrative authority and implementation of consumer nancial laws, the rules, guidance, orders, policy, examination and enforcement actions and she has been joined by 38 military and veteran service organizations, a bipartisan coalition of 33 states' attorney generals, as well as retired army colonel paul cantwell and former head of the office of service member fairs in disagreeing the consumer bureau's decision. i reserve the balanc

the consumer bureau under director mulvaney and now director kraninger's failed leadership, the agency has returned zero, zero relief to harmed consumers. my amendment would require the director to report on the various enforcement actions taken against these debt collectors. because we cannot afford to go back to the days in which consumers were left to fend for themselves in fanl industry that was stacked against them -- in a financial industry that was stacked against them. information is power. the more information we have, the more power we have to protect consumers from harassment. recently the consumer bureau released a proposed debt collection rule filled with carve-outs and loopholes that would allow debt collecters to more aggressively target and harass consumers through emails and text messages. my amendment would prohibit the director from issuing further rules that would essentially open the flood gates and allow collectors to bombard consumers. i urge my colleagues to stand with consumers and to support my amendment. thank you, and i reserve the balance of my time. the ch

chairman powell and cfpb director kraninger has made it clear that wells fargo has not cleaned up its act. but one thing has change. ceo tim sloan was finally kicked out. so wells needs a new ceo. now, in a law that was passed in the wake of the savings and loan crisis in the 1980s congress gave the occ the authority to examine the, quote, competence, character ob experience or integrity, end quote of candidates for senior positions in a quote, troubled bank. close quote. like wells fargo. in other words, the occ can effectively veet oceo candidates who don't pass muster. controller otting, i recently wrote you a letter asking why the occ waived its right to a trouble bank review in recent settlements with wells fargo. and you responded yesterday that the agency was committed to conducting a review of the candidate's for wells fargo ceo. will this review be exactly the review that congress gave you the authority to conduct? i just want to be clear. >> no, i understand. fifl, wells is currently not a troubled bank by the definition. >> i want to know if you're conducting the review acc