Mediaboss Marketing

WASHINGTON Republicans lawmakers on Tuesday started trying to kill a brand-new U.S. rule prohibiting banks and credit card companies from requiring customers who open new accounts to sign an agreement that they will not join a group lawsuit in the event of a dispute.

The Consumer Financial Protection Bureau on Monday finalized the new rule banning "mandatory arbitration clauses" requiring consumers to forego class-action suits and instead settle disputes in negotiations overseen by arbitrators frequently hired by companies.

The rule immediately ran into fierce opposition by Wall Street and Republicans who control both Congress and the White House. They have long criticized the consumer agency, which is run by a Democrat, Richard Cordray.

Senator Tom Cotton, a member of the Banking Committee, has already announced he is drafting a resolution to kill the rule. His fellow Republican Senator Pat Toomey, chair of the subcommittee on financial institutions and consumer protection, said he is considering a similar step.

Republican lawmakers plan to eliminate the rule, using a law that allows Congress to undo new regulations with simple majority votes in both chambers and a signature from the president.

Analysts and consumer advocates have said the agency's rule may survive the Congressional challenge. Still, the U.S. Chamber of Commerce is contemplating a legal challenge and Trump administration officials are also looking at ways to kill the rule.

Isaac Boltansky, a policy analyst for the investment firm Compass Point Research & Trading, said the rule has a slightly better than 50 percent chance of surviving in Congress.

Joe Valenti, who tracks the issue for the liberal-leaning Center for American Progress, said the House of Representatives was unified against the rule, which opponents have argued benefits class-action lawyers, not consumers.

"It comes down to the Senate," said Valenti, noting that the rule would survive if only three Republicans in that chamber switched sides.

That is possible, said Ed Mierzwinksi, the consumer program director for the U.S. Public Interest Research Groups. He noted that Senate Republicans have struggled to gather enough votes for majorities and the calendar is swollen with pressing legislation and confirmation hearings.

In addition, Mierzwinksi said, senators may be leery of appearing to side with Wall Street against consumers. He noted that Wells Fargo & Co used clauses in its account-opening agreements to block customers from suing over its phantom account scandal.

Supporters of the rule say mandatory arbitration denies citizens their day in court and is rigged in favor of big firms. They say litigants banding together in a class-action lawsuit have a better chance of getting companies to answer publicly for illegal activities and that fears of such a suit can discourage law breaking.

The consumer protection agency wrote the rule after conducting a lengthy, multi-year study of the issue. Opponents of the rule say the study is flawed and that arbitration is cheaper and faster than class-action lawsuits and produces better awards for consumers.

OTHER CHALLENGES

The Chamber is exploring a prompt legal challenge to the rule, said Matt Webb, senior vice president for its legal reform institute.

Another possible challenge could come from the acting comptroller of the currency, Keith Noreika. He is laying groundwork to invoke an untested provision of the 2010 Dodd-Frank financial reform law that allows the council of the country's top financial regulators to nullify a consumer agency rule if they decide it threatens the safety and soundness of the banking system.

Rohit Chopra, senior fellow at the Consumer Federation of America and former CFPB assistant director, said a lawsuit will probably fail because the law says the agency can restrict arbitration as long as it hews to its study.

He said the Dodd-Frank provision that the comptroller's office is looking at was meant to keep risks to the financial system at bay.

"To suggest that this rule would cause a financial crisis is ridiculous on its face," he said.

(Reporting by Pete Schroeder; Editing by Jeffrey Benkoe and David Gregorio)

WASHINGTON President Donald Trump is increasingly unlikely to nominate Federal Reserve Chair Janet Yellen next year for a second term, and National Economic Council Director Gary Cohn is the leading candidate to succeed her, Politico reported on Tuesday, citing four people close to the process.

A day ahead of Federal Reserve Chair Janet Yellen's testimony to Congress on the state of the U.S. economy, two of her colleagues cited low wage growth and muted inflation as reasons for caution on further interest rate increases.

View post:
Republicans strike back at new US ban on forced arbitration - Reuters

By

July 11, 2017, 4:01 PM EDT

House Republicans rejected Donald Trumps steep budgets cuts for the Environmental Protection Agency as members of the presidents party instead offered a trim in spending for the environmental regulator.

Get the latest on global politics in your inbox, every day.

Get our newsletter daily.

The White House had proposed a record 31 percent cut to the agencys roughly $8 billion budget, telling lawmakers it wanted to cut 3,200 jobs and shrink or eliminate a wide swath of programs, including those aimed cutting lead poisoning and improving the health of the Great Lakes. Instead, congressional appropriators released a bill Tuesday that would slice the agencys budget by 6.5 percent to $7.5 billion.

While the overall fate of spending bills in Congress is unclear, GOP Senators have also indicated they wont go along with Trumps plan. The House bill is scheduled to be considered by a panel of the Appropriations Committee Wednesday, the first formal step of many before it could make it to the presidents desk for signature.

"Trumps proposed budget was a fantasy. It is hard to imagine that many sane lawmakers could support it," said Frank ODonnell, president of Clean Air Watch. "Trump is so weakened politically that he has no political capital to use on this issue."

The $31.4 billion bill also includes more modest reductions in spending for the Interior Department, which runs the national parks, protects endangered species and plays a primary role in permitting oil, gas and coal development on federal lands and waters.

House Republicans are drafting a set of spending bills that largely rejects Trumps overall call for $54 billion in domestic agency cuts, while they propose giving nearly $20 billion more to the military than Trump requested. Lawmakers of both parties had already warned EPA Administrator Scott Pruitt that the administrations plans for the agency werent going to stick.

Read More: Trump Spurs Bipartisanship as Lawmakers Vow to Stop His EPA Cuts

"These are all proposals we are unlikely to retain," Representative Ken Calvert, the Republican chairman of the House Appropriations subcommittee in charge of the agencys budget, told Pruitt at an earlier budget hearing.

The bill would still provide funds to help the administration offer buyouts to EPA employees and reflects the administrations goal to rein in outdated, unnecessary and potentially harmful regulations at the EPA, the committee said in a statement.

Separately, an appropriations bill funding the Energy Department acquiesces to Trumps call the kill off the agencys experimental research arm known as ARPA-E, and takes steps to eliminate the agencys loan guarantee program. The bill, slated for a key committee vote Wednesday, also slashes funding for renewable energy and energy efficiency by almost $1 billion, though thats still nearly $500 million more than what Trump proposed.

Read the original here:
House Republicans Reject Trump's Bid to Slash EPA's Funding - Bloomberg

HARTFORD >> House Republicans on Tuesday unveiled a new budget proposal amid growing calls for the General Assembly to end the current stalemate and pass a two-year state spending plan.

The GOP budget unlike a competing proposal from majority Democrats contains no tax increases. It also maintains school aid, caps future borrowing and abandons Gov. Dannel P. Malloys plan to extract $400 million in teacher pension payments from municipalities.

We need to vote on a budget that addresses all the issues that have led to perpetual deficits over the last seven years, said House Minority Leader Themis Klarides, R-Derby.

The massive tax increases that Democrats have rammed through without a single Republican vote have failed to solve our problems, Klarides said.

Advertisement

House Speaker Joe Aresimowicz, D-Berlin, said the Republican proposal contains some good ideas and predicted House members on Tuesday will begin work on a new budget and hope to pass a spending plan by the end of the year.

Some of these [GOP] proposals are interesting and we will look at them, Aresimowicz said. But some are problematic.

The latest GOP budget comes as Malloy continues to operate the state under a limited executive order that will soon cause massive across the board spending cuts, including significant reductions in municipal aid, school funding, transportation projects and social services.

Joe DeLong, executive director for the Connecticut Conference of Municipalities, said the time for budget proposals is over.

Its deja vu all over again, Delong said, quoting Yankee great Yogi Berra. We have seen enough dueling budget proposals. We think there are a lot of good ideas but its time to get the job done.

The Republican budget released Tuesday marks the most comprehensive spending plan by the GOP House caucus.

The House GOP plan seeks to limit state borrowing to $1.3 billion per year, a major drop from the $2.2 billion the state borrowed in 2015. It also calls for eliminating hospital property taxes and altering health insurance and pension plans through statutory changes, which means passing new laws or amending existing ones.

Republicans would also eliminate the cap on motor vehicle tax rates, reduce the state workforce, offer communities some mandate relief, preserve municipal aid and generate $768 million in savings over the next two fiscal years by freezing wages.

The GOP said its budget would eliminate a $5.1 billion budget deficit over the next two years.

Klarides said the employee savings can be achieved without opening existing union contracts or retirement plans.

The changes we would make are all through state statute changes, Klarides said. They do not have to be negotiated.

Aresimowicz questioned that assessment. Some court cases say you cant change benefits once people retire, he noted.

House Democrats recently offered a budget that relies on revenue increases, namely a higher sales tax and a 10 percent surcharge on food and beverage. Malloy, a Democrat, has rejected new tax increases.

The difficulty in passing a budget is rooted in math Republicans and Democrats are tied in the state Senate and Democrats hold a slim 79-72 vote majority in the House.

Lt. Gov. Nancy Wyman, a Democrat, can break a tie vote in the Senate, giving Democrats ultimate control of the chamber if they hold on to all members of their caucus.

That narrow balance of power was not lost on Klarides, who pointed out in past years, when Democrats had comfortable majorities in both chambers, party leaders could allow members to vote against a budget and still pass the spending plan they wanted.

We would have a budget now if Democrats had enough votes, Klarides said. So that tells you people are out there who are not happy.

DeLong also noted the political difference this year. The is the first time in years the Connecticut General Assembly has had to work with someone else to get this done, he said.

Aresimowicz said a budget led by Democrats will soon emerge.

We have made good progress understanding other peoples proposals, Aresimowicz said. I am confident we will have a budget agreement by the end of the month.

Read more:
Connecticut House Republicans release new state budget plan - New Haven Register

Senate leaders are rewriting their health care plan in an effort to vote on it next week, Republican Whip John Cornyn (R-Tex.) said Monday, even as some GOP senators expressed deep pessimism about the prospect of reaching a final agreement.

The push for a revised bill comes as Senate Democrats are working to enlist the help of Republican governors to scuttle the current health-care proposal. Some rank-and-file Republicans have suggested their party should negotiate with the minority.

Cornyn said that he expects GOP leaders to unveil a new version of the legislation this week, and then well vote on it next week.

At their normal weekly policy lunch Tuesday, Republican senators are expected to hear how their concerns have been addressed, and leaders can measure whether their tweaks are likely to move the needle at all, according to a GOP aide familiar with the talks.

A spokesman for Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell (R-Ky.) declined to say when he will release the new version of the bill.

(Jenny Starrs/The Washington Post)

While the prospect of a compromise between the two parties on overhauling the Affordable Care Act may prove daunting given the ideological divide between Republicans and Democrats on health care, the ongoing conversations among a handful of senators suggests some lawmakers are seeking a new path forward should the current bill collapse.

Sen. Thomas R. Carper (D-Del.) said in an interview that he called a couple dozen Republican and Democratic senators and governors over the recess to say this is a good time for us to hit the pause button in the Senate, and step back and have some good heart-to-heart conversations about how to revise the 2010 law known as Obamacare.

Carper, who said he had been encouraged by what he had heard from his colleagues, said the fact that the National Governors Association was holding its summer meeting in Providence, R.I., later this week could give governors a chance to weigh in on the current debate.

The governors can play a critical role in helping us get to where we need to be, Carper said.

However, even as Carper and some of his Democratic colleagues have reached out to Republicans, the White House is pushing back forcefully against the idea of such collaborations. In an interview with radio host Rush Limbaugh on Monday, Vice President Pence questioned those in his party who suggest we ought to reach out and do a bipartisan bill. That description could include McConnell himself, who has said he would have to reach out to Democrats to shore up the insurance markets if Republicans fail to pass their own bill.

Pence continued: The president has made it very clear: We believe that if they cant pass this carefully crafted repeal and replace bill [where] we do those two things simultaneously, we ought to just repeal only and have enough time built into that legislation to craft replacement legislation in a way thats orderly and allows states to adjust to different changes to Medicaid in a maybe three-year or four-year window.

Pences endorsement of an outright repeal of the ACA, along with an amendment Sen. Ted Cruz (R-Tex.) has crafted that would allow insurers to sell minimalist health plans on the ACA insurance market, could further fracture an already divided GOP.

Read more at PowerPost

Go here to read the rest:
Senate Republicans plan to introduce a new health bill this week, vote next week - Washington Post

HuffPost

In dramatic shift, most Republicans now say colleges have negative impact Inside Higher Ed Republicans have soured on higher education, with more than half now saying that colleges have a negative impact on the United States. An annual survey by the Pew Research Center on Americans' views of national institutions, released this week, found a ... The Majority Of Republicans Think Colleges Are Bad For The US, Poll ShowsHuffPost Sharp Partisan Divisions in Views of National InstitutionsPew Research Center for the People and the Press Majority of Republicans Say Colleges Are Bad for America (Yes, Really)Newsweek Nieman Journalism Lab at Harvard -Atlanta Journal Constitution -The Hill all 44 news articles »

Read more:
In dramatic shift, most Republicans now say colleges have negative impact - Inside Higher Ed