On July 16, the Republican-controlled U.S. House approved its fiscal year 2015 Financial Services and General Government Appropriations bill, H.R. 5016, on a vote of 228-195. The $21.3 billion package would provide annual funding for the Treasury Department, the Judiciary, the Small Business Administration and several other agencies.
The Senate is not expected to take up HR 5016, and the administration signaled that President Obama would veto the bill if it were to reach his desk. However, the measure served as a focal point for the continuing debate over the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau (CFPB) and other agencies charged with implementing provisions of the Dodd-Frank Act.
The bill, as approved by the House, includes language that would change the bureau’s funding mechanism. The CFPB is currently funded by the Federal Reserve, and Republicans have long argued that the agency should be brought under the congressional appropriations process to increase accountability. The bill would change the CFPB’s funding source beginning in fiscal year 2016.
Rep. Gwen Moore, D-Wis., opposed the portions of the bill related to CFPB funding, and she offered an amendment she said would affirm the bureau’s current, independent funding source.
“I know that Republicans plead that this provision is about oversight or transparency, but when you scratch the surface, you will realize that the claim is just not credible,” Moore said. “It is just yet another attempt to undermine the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau, and, ultimately, it seeks to defund the CFPB and make it a paper tiger.”
Moore’s amendment was defeated, with some Democrats joining Republicans who voted no. Rep. Jose Serrano, D-N.Y., said the financial crisis demonstrated that Congress needs to oversee regulatory agencies.
“It sounds great for many [members of Congress] to have an agency be on its own and do the right thing. But past history shows us that when we did that, when we did not supervise, and when we did not have oversight, it did just the opposite,” Serrano said.
HR 5016 includes several other provisions related to Dodd-Frank and the agencies charged with carrying out its mandates. For instance, the Office of Financial Research — established by Dodd-Frank to improve the quality of financial data available to policymakers — would become subject to the annual appropriations process beginning in FY 2016.
The measure would limit the Securities and Exchange Commission’s (SEC) ability to tap a reserve fund established under Dodd-Frank. Further, the SEC’s FY 2015 budget would be set at $1.4 billion, $50 million more than the agency’s 2014 appropriation but $300 million less than the White House requested.
The administration strongly objected to the proposed SEC funding level.
“At this funding level, the SEC would be unable to add critical positions in market oversight, compliance and enforcement to carry out its financial oversight responsibilities under [Dodd-Frank] and other authorities,” the White House budget office said in a July 14 policy statement. “The SEC is fee-funded, and its funding level has no impact on the deficit.”
The measure would also require the budget office to report on the costs of Dodd-Frank. The White House said such a report would be “burdensome and duplicative.”
View HR 5016