Senate GOP sided with Wells Fargo and Equifax instead of constituents

Senate GOP sided with Wells Fargo and Equifax instead of constituents
© Greg Nash

On the Senate floor late Tuesday night, an important vote hinged on a simple question: Do we protect hard-working Americans from predatory financial companies, or do we allow these companies to continue victimizing? Answering that question, 50 Senate Republicans sided with the likes of Wells Fargo and Equifax rather than their own constituents.  

The vote was so close that Vice President Mike PenceMichael (Mike) Richard PenceMelania Trump, Karen Pence say they're ready to serve four more years in White House The Turkish rupture could cause a fissure in NATO Buttigieg responds to Pence: 'My problem is when' VP's 'religious beliefs are used as an excuse to harm' MORE had to come down to the Capitol and cast the deciding vote clearing the way for Republicans to follow through on their promises to big banks and Wall Street lobbyists and finally repeal the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau’s (CFPB) rule on forced arbitration — a rule so broadly popular that it had support from every corner of the political universe: from the American Legion, the Tea Party and a former Fox News host, to Bernie SandersBernard (Bernie) SandersOvernight Health Care: DOJ charges doctors over illegal opioid prescriptions | Cummings accuses GOP of obstructing drug pricing probe | Sanders courts Republican voters with 'Medicare for All' | Dems probe funding of anti-abortion group Ex-Obama campaign manager: Sanders can't beat Trump Booker calls for sweeping voting rights reforms MORE, consumer advocates and the NAACP.

ADVERTISEMENT

That enormous coalition of support made perfect sense because the rule would have protected consumers who are taken advantage of by big banks and other financial interests from being forced into secret arbitration tribunals, where industry usually pick the judges and most consumers end up losing even more money. Instead, they would be able to seek justice by having their day in court.

 

Repeal was so deeply unpopular that for most of the late-night debate, only a single Republican senator had the nerve to rise and defend the push to repeal — the effort’s sponsor Sen. Mike CrapoMichael (Mike) Dean CrapoSenate needs to stand up to Trump's Nixonian view of the Fed Senate bill seeks to bring freedom back to banking Cain's nomination faces uphill climb MORE (R-Idaho). An endless stream of Democrats stood in opposition to Crapo’s proposal before even a single additional Republican would speak out in favor, and that senator would be the only additional voice of support.

On Tuesday night, the Republican caucus became the coward’s caucus with 48 senators refusing to explain their vote from the Senate floor perhaps out of fear that CSPAN cameras would preserve their words for use by opponents for years to come.

Their silence, though, was just as damaging.

For the tens of millions of American consumers who often don't know they are being forced into an arbitration clause when they sign up for a credit card, checking account, prepaid card or many other financial products, this rule could have made a world of difference.

We even have concrete examples of how bad actors like Wells Fargo and Equifax clearly harmed consumers and were trying to use forced arbitration to escape justice before the public outcry became too intense. It shouldn’t have to come to that for consumers to have their constitutional rights protected.

So folks might be wondering: Who is ultimately to blame? A special interest just isn’t very special if they don’t have lawmakers willing to do their bidding.

For weeks leading up to the vote several Republicans senators expressed concerns and identified themselves as undecided: Sens. Susan CollinsSusan Margaret CollinsOvernight Energy: Collins receives more donations from Texas oil, gas industry than from Maine residents | Interior chief left meetings off schedule | Omar controversy jeopardizes Ocasio-Cortez trip to coal mine Embattled senators fill coffers ahead of 2020 Collins receives more donations from Texas fossil fuel industry than from Maine residents MORE of Maine, John KennedyJohn Neely KennedyMORE of Louisiana, and Lisa MurkowskiLisa Ann MurkowskiCain says he won't back down, wants to be nominated to Fed License to discriminate: Religious exemption laws are trampling rights in rural America On The Money — Presented by Job Creators Network — Cain expected to withdraw from Fed consideration, report says | Dem bill directs IRS to create free online filing service | Trump considered Ivanka for World Bank MORE of Alaska come to mind. Heck, Sen. Lindsey GrahamLindsey Olin GrahamWhy Ken Cuccinelli should be Trump's choice for DHS Ten post-Mueller questions that could turn the tables on Russia collusion investigators GOP senators double down on demand for Clinton email probe documents MORE of South Carolina announced his opposition to repeal long before the vote. 

In the end, only Kennedy would join Graham in opposition. In other words, only two Republicans were willing to stand with consumers.

Collins and Murkowski provided the final blow, pushing the number of senators supporting repeal to the 50-vote mark so that Pence could come in and break the tie finalizing this dirty deed.

Just days before the vote, Collins claimed that she was still undecided but leaning towards repeal because the rule might hurt small banks and local credit unions. The claim was erroneous. The National Consumer Law Center couldn’t even find a Maine credit union or small bank that uses forced arbitration. That’s hardly surprising. Nationally more than nine out of 10 credit unions don’t use these onerous clauses.

If it wasn’t made up concerns about small banks and credit unions, what could possibly have convinced Collins to vote against consumers in her state? Perhaps it was the $3.5 million she received from the financial industry in campaign contributions or the thousands she took from Wells Fargo and Equifax.

Similarly Murkowski had professed her undecided status for weeks leading up to the vote. But when it was finally time for her to stand up for Alaska consumers, she turned her back and cast the final, deciding vote to repeal these important protections. Again, we are left wondering — why? Could it have been the $2 million she received from her friends in the financial Industry or the thousands she accepted from Wells Fargo and Equifax?

The truth is, Collins and Murkowski have yet to explain their betrayal to constituents. They didn’t give speeches explaining their decision on the Senate floor the night of the debate — no, they just quietly voted and left the floor. Days later they still haven’t posted statements to social media or their official websites.

Regardless of whatever excuses they may someday build up the courage to deploy in their defense, Collins, Murkowski and their fellow Republicans have once again put consumers in the back seat and given the keys to Wall Street special interests drunk with power.

This won’t be the last fight over consumer protections in Congress this year or in the years ahead. But every time lawmakers try to reverse the progress made by the CFPB to finally level the playing field for everyday Americans, opposition to their corruption continues to grow and someday soon their records will catch up with them.

Karl Frisch is executive director of Allied Progress, a consumer watchdog organization that opposed repealing the CFPB’s arbitration rule.