Connect with us

News

Trump’s recruitment of watchdog chiefs impeded by talk of regulatory cuts

Published

on

Trump’s recruitment of watchdog chiefs impeded by talk of regulatory cuts

Unlock the White House Watch newsletter for free

Republican enthusiasm for culling and combining the many US banking regulators is complicating efforts by the incoming administration of Donald Trump to find heads for those watchdogs.

The problem is particularly acute for the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau, which focuses on the way lenders treat customers. The CFPB has been a target of hostility from Republicans since its creation after the 2008 financial crisis. A number of experienced candidates have demurred when contacted about the position, people familiar with the search said.

“Republicans think the CFPB is unconstitutional, and even if you do make progress in protecting middle-class and low income Americans, the Democrats will never give you credit because you’re wearing the wrong colour jersey,” said a former senior financial regulator who is not interested in the job.

Advertisement

Recruiting issues are becoming more serious because of growing ferment around consolidating banking regulatory and supervisory responsibilities that are currently spread among the US Federal Reserve, the Office of the Comptroller of the Currency and the Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation.

Some potential candidates have been interviewed by Elon Musk and Vivek Ramaswamy, the bosses of Trump’s newly created advisory committee, the Department of Government Efficiency (Doge), and have been asked about streamlining regulation, people close to the process said.

Musk has called for eliminating the CFPB and Ramaswamy asserted last week on social media that it was “one of the easiest agencies to shut down”. The Wall Street Journal reported that some regulatory candidates have been asked whether it would be possible to eliminate the FDIC, which has protected bank depositors since the Great Depression.

The Trump transition team’s questions, combined with enthusiasm from the Republicans due to run key committees on Capitol Hill for lightening the regulatory load, could herald the first serious effort to reshape the guardrails for the banking industry since the 2010 Dodd-Frank law.

“I think the Trump team might be serious about this,” said Bill Isaac, a former FDIC chair, adding that he has talked to leading Capitol Hill players about his proposal to merge the OCC and the supervisory functions of the Fed and FDIC into a new regulator. “The system is broken.”

Advertisement

Tim Scott, the Republican in line to chair the Senate Banking Committee, has concerns with the current structure of the US’s bank regulatory system, his spokesman said, but did not specify whether he supported consolidating banking regulators. Scott “looks forward to working with the incoming Trump administration to find solutions to streamline regulation, reduce red tape, and increase efficiency while ensuring the continued stability of our financial system.”

But experienced Washington hands point out that multiple prior attempts to consolidate the patchwork of banking regulators into a single super-watchdog have failed. In 2010, Republicans provided crucial votes to help kill the idea.

“Most regulatory scholars support some form of consolidation among bank regulators in the US, but every attempt at doing this has failed. After every financial crisis, there is more regulation and more regulators than there were before,” said Aaron Klein, a senior fellow at Brookings and former Treasury official under Barack Obama.

During Trump’s first term, the acting head of the CFPB Mick Mulvaney at one point refused to request any funding for the watchdog, but it eventually resumed normal operations.

“Congress is needed for any consequential structural changes and it is incredibly difficult to envision a scenario where this issue makes it on the agenda, let alone gets the Democratic support necessary for enactment,” said Isaac Boltansky, managing director at BTIG.

Advertisement

Investor groups and former regulators have expressed alarm at the prospect of weakening the FDIC, noting that it is well known and popular with consumers, in part because most banks tout its deposit insurance as part of their advertising.

“FDIC has a perfect record of protecting insured deposits for over 90 years. Strong consumer confidence in the brand, providing stability during crises,” tweeted Sheila Bair, a former FDIC chair.

Patrick Woodall, managing director for policy at Americans for Financial Reform, said: “The FDIC stamp of approval has safeguarded depositors — and confidence in the banking industry — for nearly a century, while the CFPB has a strong track record of standing up for the little guy. Billionaire ideas about consumer protection and financial stability will do nothing for everyday people.”

Even Isaac said he opposes eliminating the FDIC as an independent agency, because of its emergency bank takeover responsibilities.

“I don’t think that makes any sense,” he said. The idea is to have the FDIC be an independent, bipartisan agency and the Treasury is anything but.”

Advertisement

The Trump transition team did not reply to a request for comment.

News

Supreme Court is death knell for Virginia’s Democratic-friendly congressional maps

Published

on

Supreme Court is death knell for Virginia’s Democratic-friendly congressional maps

The U.S. Supreme Court

Andrew Harnik/Getty Images


hide caption

toggle caption

Advertisement

Andrew Harnik/Getty Images

The U.S. Supreme Court refused Friday to allow Virginia to use a new congressional map that favored Democrats in all but one of the state’s U.S. House seats. The map was a key part of Democrats’ effort to counter the Republican redistricting wave set off by President Trump.

The new map was drawn by Democrats and approved by Virginia voters in an April referendum. But on May 8, the Supreme Court of Virginia in a 4-to-3 vote declared the referendum, and by extension the new map, null and void because lawmakers failed to follow the proper procedures to get the issue on the ballot, violating the state constitution.

Virginia Democrats and the state’s attorney general then appealed to the U.S. Supreme Court, seeking to put into effect the map approved by the voters, which yields four more likely Democratic congressional seats. In their emergency application, they argued the Virginia Supreme Court was “deeply mistaken” in its decision on “critical issues of federal law with profound practical importance to the Nation.” Further, they asserted the decision “overrode the will of the people” by ordering Virginia to “conduct its election with the congressional districts that the people rejected.”

Advertisement

Republican legislators countered that it would be improper for the U.S. Supreme Court to wade into a purely state law controversy — especially since the Democrats had not raised any federal claims in the lower court.

Ultimately, the U.S. Supreme Court sided with Republicans without explanation leaving in place the state court ruling that voided the Democratic-friendly maps.

The court’s decision not to intervene was its latest in emergency requests for intervention on redistricting issues. In December, the high court OK’d Texas using a gerrymandered map that could help the GOP win five more seats in the U.S. House. In February, the court allowed California to use a voter-approved, Democratic-friendly map, adopted to offset Texas’s map. Then in March, the U.S. Supreme Court blocked the redrawing of a New York map expected to flip a Republican congressional district Democratic.

And perhaps most importantly, in April, the high court ruled that a Louisiana congressional map was a racial gerrymander and must be redrawn. That decision immediately set off a flurry of redistricting efforts, particularly in the South, where Republican legislators immediately began redrawing congressional maps to eliminate long established majority Black and Hispanic districts.

Advertisement
Continue Reading

News

Explosion at Lumber Mill in Searsmont, Maine, Draws Large Emergency Response

Published

on

Explosion at Lumber Mill in Searsmont, Maine, Draws Large Emergency Response

An explosion and fire drew a large emergency response on Friday to a lumber mill in the Midcoast region of Maine, officials said.

The State Police and fire marshal’s investigators responded to Robbins Lumber in Searsmont, about 72 miles northeast of Portland, said Shannon Moss, a spokeswoman for the Maine Department of Public Safety.

Mike Larrivee, the director of the Waldo County Regional Communications Center, said the number of victims was unknown, cautioning that “the information we’re getting from the scene is very vague.”

“We’ve sent every resource in the county to that area, plus surrounding counties,” he said.

Footage from the scene shared by WABI-TV showed flames burning through the roof of a large structure as heavy, dark smoke billowed skyward.

Advertisement

The Associated Press reported that at least five people were injured, and that county officials were considering the incident a “mass casualty event.”

Catherine Robbins-Halsted, an owner and vice president at Robbins Lumber, told reporters at the scene that all of the company’s employees had been accounted for.

Gov. Janet T. Mills of Maine said on social media that she had been briefed on the situation and urged people to avoid the area.

“I ask Maine people to join me in keeping all those affected in their thoughts,” she said.

Representative Jared Golden, Democrat of Maine, said on social media that he was aware of the fire and explosion.

Advertisement

“As my team and I seek out more information, I am praying for the safety and well-being of first responders and everyone else on-site,” he said.

This is a developing story. Check back for updates.

Continue Reading

News

Woman killed in Atlanta Beltline stabbing identified

Published

on

Woman killed in Atlanta Beltline stabbing identified

Crime scene tape surrounds a bicycle in front of St. Lukes Episcopal Church in Atlanta on May 14, 2026. (SKYFOX 5)

The woman stabbed to death on the Beltline has been identified as 23-year-old Alyssa Paige, according to the Fulton County Medical Examiner.

The backstory:

Advertisement

Paige was killed by a 21-year-old man Thursday afternoon while she was on the Beltline. Officials confirmed to FOX 5 that the stabbing happened near the 1700 block of Flagler Avenue NE.

Atlanta Police Chief Darin Schierbaum said the department was alerted around 12:10 p.m. that a woman had been stabbed just north of the Montgomery Ferry Drive overpass. She was rushed to Grady Memorial Hospital where she later died. Another person was also stabbed during the incident, but their condition remains unknown.

According to officers, the man responsible attacked a U.S. Postal worker prior to the stabbing before getting away on a bike. He then used that bike to flee the scene of the stabbing as well.

Advertisement

The suspect was arrested near St. Luke’s Episcopal Church on Peachtree Street in Midtown around 5:25 p.m. 

What we don’t know:

Advertisement

While officials haven’t released an official motive, they noted the man may have been suffering a mental health crisis.

The Source: Information in this article came from the Fulton County Medical Examiner’s Office and previous FOX 5 reporting. 

AtlantaCrime and Public SafetyNewsInstastories
Advertisement
Continue Reading
Advertisement

Trending