Elizabeth Warren Named "Advisor"

Pragmatism trumped valor, and quite possibly political acumen, when President Obama named Elizabeth Warren an "advisor" to the President and the Treasury Secretary, rather than Director of the newly formed Consumer Protection Bureau. While I understand the President's reluctance to take on a tough Senate confirmation fight, I cannot help but wish he had chosen that route. A Senate hearing would have been illuminating and I do not believe it would have been a bad thing for the underdog Democrats heading into a challenging election season.

Warren, who is detested by financial industry insiders, has garnered wide support among consumer advocates for her stand against the big guys in her position as Director of the Congressional TARP Oversight Commission.

The same New York Times article that reported her appointment [click on this post's title for the link] reported: "The favorite among administration officials [for the position of Bureau Director] is Michael S. Barr, an assistant secretary of Treasury for financial institutions who is an authority on financial regulation and on services for low and moderate-income households." [We have seen how well Treasury has served THAT constituency.] Additionally, the article said, "Privately, Mr. Geithner [Wall Street's darling] promoted Mr. Barr for the consumer post."

The article further mentioned Mr. Geithner's apparent pleasure at the appointment.

Just when I thought the Obama Administration might be developing some spine.

Our President might do well to heed the words of country singer Aaron Tippin: "You've got to stand for something, or you'll fall for anything."

Elizabeth Warren for Consumer Protection

I heard a pundit insist Elizabeth Warren should not head up the new Consumer Protection Agency because she does not have a background in the financial industry. This is a problem why? As head of the Congressional Oversight Committee for the TARP, she certainly has not demonstrated any lack of understanding about the industry. Of course the industry has found her persistence in seeking accounting for its use of those funds somewhat off-putting.

I also heard the complaint she is too widely supported by consumer advocates. This is a bad thing? I have not noticed a shortage of policy makers from the financial industry in the Obama Administration.

Bloomberg.com http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2010-09-15/obama-said-to-consider-installing-elizabeth-warren-at-treasury.html reports that rather than appoint Warren head of the new agency, which would require a difficult approval process in the U. S. Senate, the Administration is considering naming her a counselor of Treasury Secretary (and financial industry insider) Timothy Geithner. She would be Geithner's subordinate. Geithner's opposition to Warren has been widely reported. As head of the new agency, she have far more independence. Theoretically Warren would still be responsible for getting the new agency off the ground. The banking industry is far more supportive of this approach. I do NOT find this reassuring. Sounds like a plan to neutralize one of the most dedicated (and outspoken) financial reformers in the country.

The director of the Consumer Protection Agency should be a consumer activist. Otherwise, what is its purpose? I am convinced Warren would look out for my interests, not the industry's and for this nomination the Administration should pull out all the stops.