Wells Fargo: The NCUA’s Best Friend?

When it comes to congressional oversight, the NCUA should be thankful for Wells Fargo.

And Bank of America.

Because as long as Wells Fargo paints a huge target on itself, the House and Senate committees, with oversight of the NCUA, are likely to leave the agency largely alone.

And as long as Bank of America and other big banks post huge profits, few people in our nation’s capital are going to look at credit unions, no matter how large they are.

Granted, Senate Majority Leader Charles Schumer (D-N.Y.) has called the NCUA to task for its oversight – or lack of it, according to the senator – of credit unions that made a large number of taxi loans.

But other than that, we can’t expect much.

In April, the House Financial Services Committee hauled the chiefs of the nation’s largest banks before the committee so that Democrats could yell at them.

“It will always be profitable for banks to swindle consumers, investors and small businesses if no one is going to hold them accountable,” Financial Services Chairwoman Maxine Waters (D-Calif.) told the bankers. “And so, as policymakers, we must evaluate what it will take to rein in chronic lawbreaking by the biggest banks.

Then, last month, the House Financial Services Committee and the Senate Banking Committee held what were supposed to be oversight hearings for the financial regulators.

New NCUA Chairman Rodney Hood sat patiently waiting for questions, which were few.

When the regulators faced the Banking Committee, Hood was finally asked a question, prompting ranking Democrat Sherrod Brown of Ohio to quip, “Glad you finally got to say something here, Mr. Hood.”

Members concentrated on the big guys.

Just take a look at what you’ll find listed at the Twitter hashtag #DemsDemandAnswers.

On April 10, freshman Rep. Rashida Tlaib (R-Mich.) tweeted, “SOON: I’ll be questioning seven megabank CEOs 10 years after the financial crisis and many more years of consumer abuses.”

On May 16, the committee held a hearing featuring Hood and the heads of the other prudential regulators.

Here’s what the Financial Services Committee tweeted: “Megabanks have made record profits while closing branches in low-income areas & racking up billions in fines. #WallStreet isn’t serving Main Street, they are profiting from it AND regulators have failed to rein in megabanks that break the law.”

So, see, on the bright side, there is an advantage to the huge profits being reaped by the so-called megabanks.

Five Minutes?

Every now and then, congressional hearings do get interesting. Or at least they start to get interesting.

And then, the “five-minute rule” takes over.

Each committee member is given five minutes to ask questions and have the questions answered.

Members of Congress can’t clear their throats in just five minutes.

So, a member will take three minutes to make a statement, ask a question and then request a “yes or no answer.”

By that time, the member’s time will have expired, so they will promise to submit additional questions “for the record.”

And the questions and answers disappear.

Members of Congress may send follow-up questions to witnesses, and witnesses may submit answers to those questions.

But the exchanges aren’t readily available.

For instance, the Senate Banking Committee doesn’t release the questions and answers. Committee staff leave it up to the individual senators to release questions they might have submitted and the accompanying answers.

There are 25 senators on the Banking Committee.

And the agencies? They too say it’s up to the senators to release the questions and answers.

The questions and answers may not become available for months – until the Government Publishing Office prepares a record of the hearing.

By that time, who will even care?

Thousands of Hot Water Tanks Are Failing

There seems to be a flurry of people taking out payday loans to replace their faulty hot water heaters.

And a bunch of people have been going to their local payday loan outfit because they now take care of their parents AND their children.

How do we know that?

All you have to do is read the comments on the CFPB’s latest proposed changes to its payday lending rule.

Allowing the public to comment on what policymakers are trying to do is crucial to our democracy.

But as usual, technology has created havoc.

When the CFPB issued the original final payday lending rule, which was strict on lenders, more than one million people submitted comments.

The new proposed rule, as you may recall, would rescind the payday loan rule requirement that borrowers demonstrate an ability-to-repay before they qualify for a loan.

More than 50,000 people have commented on the rule, according to regulations.gov, where the comments are posted.

Now, the picture become sketchy.

Interest groups on both sides of the issue contend that the other side sent in comments from people who were coerced or had no idea what they were signing when they commented.

Let’s start with the rule’s opponents.

“Allied Progress,” a group that thinks the proposed rule changes stink, also says some of the comments smell fishy.

At least 214 people filed a response with the agency saying they needed a new hot water tank.

At least 201 comments cited their expenses stemming from taking care of their children and parents, using the same wording.

Then, there’s the other side.

The Community Financial Services Association of America said groups like Allied Progress are hypocrites because they offered portals through which opponents of the repeal could send their comments.

Allied Progress’ website urged visitors to commit to sending a formal comment, and the group sent email blasts to people urging them to comment, according to the CFSA.

Both sides say the comments were tainted and many posted should be ignored.

Ah, democracy!

David Baumann is a correspondent-at-large for CU Times. He can be reached at dbaumann@cutimes.com.