Visit us on Facebook icon-twitter.png icon-linkedin.png icon-google.png  icon-youtube.png icon-flickr.png     About Us     Contact Us      

George Will

George Will writes for Newsweek. Reach him at

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-srv/opinions/biographies/george-f-will.html 

George_Will.jpg

Unchecked power gets called out
A
nother small step was taken recently on the steep and winding ascent back to constitutional norms. The U.S. Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit, the nation’s second most important court, did its judicial duty by reprimanding Congress for abandoning constitutional propriety.

The court declared unconstitutional the unprecedented independence that Congress conferred on the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau.

This legal skirmish about one aspect of this one tentacle of the administrative state may seem recondite and trivial. It concerns, however, two momentous matters. One is the integrity of the federal government’s Madisonian architecture. The other is something that not even the prescient James Madison could have anticipated: Congress’ modern eagerness to diminish itself.

The CFPB is empowered to “regulate the offering and provision of consumer financial products or services.” Being able to define financial products, it can regulate almost everything touching finance, from mortgages to financial advisers to retirement plans. Acting like a freewheeling little legislature, it concocts laws as it improvises standards. It is authorized to “declare,” with scant congressional guidance, certain business practices “abusive,” “unfair,” “deceptive” or involving “discrimination.” It does so by whatever criteria it pleases and imposes penalties it deems appropriate.

Until the court’s recent decision, the CFPB, unlike any federal institution created since 1789, was uniquely sovereign: Its director was appointed by the president for a five-year term — longer than the president’s — and the director could be removed by the president only “for cause.” That is, only for “inefficiency, neglect of duty or malfeasance,” not for reasons of policy.

The court held, however, that as created by Congress in the 2010 slapdash Dodd-Frank legislation, the CFPB’s single director “enjoys more unilateral authority than any other officer in any of the three branches of the U.S. government, other than the president.”

Another important challenge to the CFPB’s operations, currently in a federal district court, concerns Congress’ voluntary abandonment of its power of the purse: Dodd-Frank, which was passed with the support of only three House Republicans and three Republican senators, says the CFPB’s funding shall be “determined by the director” and shall come not from congressional appropriations but from the Federal Reserve. Small wonder it spends lavishly on itself.

Sen. Elizabeth Warren, D-Mass., insists the CFPB is “highly accountable” to Congress. The CFPB disagrees, having proclaimed that its funding from outside the appropriations process gives it “full independence” from Congress.

When a member of the House Financial Services Committee asked CFPB Director Richard Cordray about his agency spending $215 million refurbishing a building with an assessed valuation of $150 million, he, oozing disdain, dismissed the question: “Why does that matter to you?”

The CFPB’s progressive authoritarianism reflects, in the language of the Hudson Institute’s Christopher DeMuth, “regulatory insouciance” made possible by “legislative abnegation.” Both will continue until conservatism reappears. 

—George Will is a columnist with the Washington Post Writers Group. Reach him at .