Senate Parliamentarian rejects Senate’s 0 percent proposal on CFPB funding, will review new 6.5 percent plan

Orrick, Herrington & Sutcliffe LLP
Contact

Orrick, Herrington & Sutcliffe LLP

On June 19, the U.S. Senate Committee on the Budget issued an update on the Senate Parliamentarian’s ruling that the provision in HR 1, the “One Big Beautiful Bill Act,” to eliminate all funding the CFPB may request would violate the Senate’s Byrd Rule. According to the Parliamentarian, if Republicans wished to pass such a provision, they would have to do so under the typical bill procedure, which is subject to a filibuster and 60-vote threshold.

As previously covered by InfoBytes, the Senate Banking, Housing, and Urban Affairs Committee released its proposed amendment to HR 1 to include a reduction — from 12 percent to 0 percent — in the amount of funds the CFPB can annually request from the Fed’s inflation-adjusted profits. However, the proposed amendment would not affect the CFPB’s ability to request funds directly from Congress.

Sens. Jeff Merkley (D-OR) and Elizabeth Warren (D-MA) praised the Senate Parliamentarian’s decision to reject the proposal, while Sen. Tim Scott (R-SC) issued the following statement on the ongoing reconciliation discussions with the Parliamentarian: “As it stands now, the Banking Committee’s reconciliation provisions will delay the implementation of Section 1071 of Dodd-Frank, which reduces CFPB spending and protects the privacy and data of small business owners . . . My colleagues and I remain committed to cutting wasteful spending at the CFPB and will continue working with the Senate parliamentarian on the Committee’s provisions.”

The Committee recently released a new proposal to set the CFPB’s funding cap at 6.5 percent, but this amendment will be reviewed by the Senate Parliamentarian before it can be inserted into the reconciliation bill.

[View source.]

DISCLAIMER: Because of the generality of this update, the information provided herein may not be applicable in all situations and should not be acted upon without specific legal advice based on particular situations. Attorney Advertising.

© Orrick, Herrington & Sutcliffe LLP

Written by:

Orrick, Herrington & Sutcliffe LLP
Contact
more
less

PUBLISH YOUR CONTENT ON JD SUPRA NOW

  • Increased visibility
  • Actionable analytics
  • Ongoing guidance

Orrick, Herrington & Sutcliffe LLP on:

Reporters on Deadline

"My best business intelligence, in one easy email…"

Your first step to building a free, personalized, morning email brief covering pertinent authors and topics on JD Supra:
*By using the service, you signify your acceptance of JD Supra's Privacy Policy.
Custom Email Digest
- hide
- hide