Whether I have been speaking to community banks, consumer advocates, or businesses, I have been clear that the purpose of the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau would be to ensure that everyone plays by the same rules. I said I would not support carve-outs. It was clear from the initial drafts of the Ensign amendment that this was intended to exempt certain lending by casinos from the jurisdiction of the bureau. The underlying bill already clearly exempts sellers of nonfinancial products who offer financing in support of those sales. It is my belief that the Ensign amendment could undermine that goal and I therefore oppose it.
Editor's note · Context
The speaker addresses opposition to an amendment related to the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau.
Share
More from John Ensign
I rise today to talk about this New START treaty. I have some very serious concerns about it. I appreciate the work that has been done by my colleagues. This is an incredibly serious issue. I do not question anybody's motives, but I do…
I rise today in support of the amendment offered by the Republican leader to repeal what I believe is an unconstitutional government takeover of our health care system. Make no mistake, we all want to improve access to affordable health…
Just to address the one point on the clarification in the resolution of ratification, it has been said that our resolution of ratification clarifies and we should not need this language in the definition. Here is the problem I have…