Thread regarding Wells Fargo & Co. layoffs

The Warren-Biden Bank Heist

A coup at the FDIC breaks norms and signals more political control of finance.

Elizabeth Warren finally got her woman—that is, the Senator and her many acolytes in the Biden Administration have succeeded in ousting Jelena McWilliams as chair of the Federal Deposit Insurance Corp. The coup deserves attention because of its norm-breaking precedent and what it signals for bank mergers and supposedly independent regulatory agencies.

Ms. McWilliams resigned on Dec. 31, effective Feb. 4, to avoid more turmoil at the bank regulator. But as she wrote in these pages on Dec. 16, her resignation comes amid a concerted and unprecedented political effort to strip her of authority before her term as chair expires in June 2023.

***
The coup has been led by Rohit Chopra, the Warren protege who now runs the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau and is one of four current members of the FDIC board (one post is vacant). The FDIC’s longstanding practice and bylaws, based on its interpretation of the law, is that the chair sets the board’s agenda.

Enter the Warren-Biden progressives in a hurry. The Senate confirmed Mr. Chopra on Sept. 30 on a 50-48 vote, and as soon as Oct. 31 he presented Ms. McWilliams with a request for information (RFI) on bank mergers. When she said the draft RFI would have to be vetted by FDIC staff, Mr. Chopra publicly released his own RFI without authority from his post at the CFPB, which the FDIC was obliged to contradict.

Mr. Chopra then moved to neuter Ms. McWilliams by other means. He has asked the Office of Legal Counsel at the Justice Department for an opinion on whether Ms. McWilliams can set the agency’s agenda. In a Dec. 14 statement, Mr. Chopra also threatened to “take further steps to exercise independence from management” of the FDIC.

This distorts the meaning of agency “independence,” which is supposed to be from the executive branch. Mr. Chopra cites President Biden’s July 9 executive order referring to bank mergers, but the FDIC has long held that it is not subject to executive orders on policy. Mr. Chopra wants to make the FDIC a de facto part of the Biden Administration. Who knew the left endorsed the originalist constitutional theory of the “unitary executive”?

Our sources say the plan was for Mr. Chopra and his allies on the board—Mr. Gruenberg and acting Comptroller of the Currency Michael Hsu —to change the FDIC bylaws and strip Ms. McWilliams of her power. Ms. McWilliams made the honorable decision to spare the agency more internal fighting, but her resignation means Mr. Chopra will now essentially run the show. Mr. Gruenberg will become acting chair. He will follow where Mr. Chopra wants to go, as he showed by signing a jo--t statement with Mr. Chopra on his draft RFI on Dec. 9.

The real power behind all this is Sen. Warren, who has planted her aides and camp followers throughout the Biden Administration. She may have lost the 2020 Democratic primaries to Mr. Biden, but she has colonized the government’s financial regulatory offices.

Her former staffer, Bharat Ramamurti, is deputy director of the White House National Economic Council. His fingerprints were all over the failed nomination of Saule Omarova to be Comptroller of the Currency. Wally Adeyemo, who helped Ms. Warren establish the CFPB, is now deputy Treasury secretary. Lina Khan runs the Federal Trade Commission. Graham Steele, a former aide to Warren Senate ally Sherrod Brown, is assistant Treasury secretary for financial institutions. There are many others.

One result is that Treasury Secretary Janet Yellen seems to have little influence over financial regulation. Ms. Omarova wasn’t her choice for Comptroller. Ms. McWilliams sought her support for the FDIC’s traditional independence, but Ms. Yellen refused. Her main job these days seems to be telling the public not to worry about inflation.

***
What do these Warren cadres hope to accomplish? One clear goal is greater influence over the allocation of credit. Using regulation to squeeze financing for fossil fuels will be a priority. Bank mergers are a political target because regulatory approval can be exploited as a tolling station to coerce money for “local communities,” to use Mr. Chopra’s euphemism for progressive political groups.

Mr. Chopra also wants to reinterpret the law to make it easier to block bank mergers, notably those that have more than $100 billion in assets. This is a coordinated effort. His Dec. 9 RFI mentioned that figure. On Dec. 10 Maxine Waters sent a letter to federal officials urging a moratorium on bank mergers above $100 billion. On Dec. 17 the Justice Department’s Antitrust Division issued a press release praising Mr. Chopra and promising heightened antitrust review of bank mergers.

The irony is that regional banks are merging to gain economies of scale to compete with giant banks. The 2010 Dodd-Frank Act increased compliance costs, which the biggest banks find easier to afford. Blocking mergers of regional banks will enhance the market power of JP Morgan and Bank of America.

By undermining the independence of federal agencies, Democrats are also creating a precedent that the GOP will follow. The next Republican President will promptly fire the next FDIC chair, among other officials.

The FDIC coup should also focus the Senate’s attention on Mr. Biden’s pending nominees for the Federal Reserve, another supposedly independent bank regulator. Anyone who endorses the FDIC coup shouldn’t be confirmed.

Democrats claim that Trump Republicans broke political norms, and sometimes they did. But one reason is that they see how progressives trample norms when they have power. Watch the Warren left in action.

by
| 1725 views | | 13 replies (last ) | Reply
Post ID: @OP+1eEVZklB

13 replies (most recent on top)

@vex+1eEVZklB it doesn't need to be political. I, and many here, resent both the lizard warren and charlie. She hates the free enterprise system including its banks and does so as a self serving move, and he likes to bloat the top at all costs, namely, laying off worker bees and above, but not cronies and his groupies.

by
| | Reply
Post ID: @1jht+1eEVZklB

i am not of either party that is in the middle and i don’t know enough about all of this but i do know that the way Warren rippped our former CEO was hysterical. Now am i happy about the fact that WF was neutered in growing yes because Levels 1-3 get bigger and more are onboarded and yet we can’t throw enough money at risk mitigation to get us out of the ho-e we got into, absolutely not. But we are paying way too much for the Exec and OC to still see WF perform the way it does. Agile/Scrum good grief. The more things change the more they stay the same. More on top get rid of 200 people to pay for one of them and we are still in a JAM. When i see fewer leaders at the executive level i will believe WF is serious. Now it is nuts and doesn’t appear to be able to get out of its own way. Someone should be paid and given a year to turn this around and if they can’t then they go. Don’t Blame the regulators or politicians for the mess WF got itself into. And still we continue to get fined so we are still i guess thinking it is cheaper to pay the fines then to fix the business.

by
| | Reply
Post ID: @vex+1eEVZklB

Bank mergers are generally bad for customers and employees, I would have thought that both WF and Wachovia people would agree. Probably everyone would be happier if these two banks had never merged.

More competition and less ripping off of customers is better across the board.

McWilliams was very interested in deregulation, that never goes well and often results in catastrophes like bank runs and collapse of the mortgage/housing market.

by
| | Reply
Post ID: @lan+1eEVZklB

Does anyone ever get nervous she’s gonna reference this type of thread when interrogating Charlie next time he’s in front of congress and then successfully get our asset cap extended as a result?

by
| | Reply
Post ID: @voh+1eEVZklB

Mods need to ban themselves for taking down posts that violate no rules. Ridiculous.

by
| | Reply
Post ID: @frl+1eEVZklB

TL;DR

by
| | Reply
Post ID: @hgh+1eEVZklB

@wxn+
Why people support Warren, most of all this bank, is beyond me. They must be out of their minds no to be understand why she is bad for all of us.

by
| | Reply
Post ID: @ffl+1eEVZklB

She's not referred to as "The Lizard" for no reason. Creepy claws, then the jaws, throughout.

by
| | Reply
Post ID: @ajc+1eEVZklB

@rwq+1eEVZklB

OP put WSJ in the “your name” section.

You might not like it because it’s a conservative article, but this is highly relevant for a WF layoff site. I’ve said before: if Warren can accomplish her goals, every single one of us and our families will be living on the streets just for daring to be associated with Wells Fargo.

by
| | Reply
Post ID: @wxn+1eEVZklB

WSJ editorial board copy/past without citation.

Conservative, and uneducated.

by
| | Reply
Post ID: @rwq+1eEVZklB

The posts on this board get more valuable and more intelligent by the day. This is becoming my go-to source now for professionally relevant news as a WF employee.

Back to the post itself: Can someone please explain to me what Warren’s platform is? I get she wants to squash fossil fuel lending, great, but her platform is “stand up to the bully big guy and get all the people to cheer for me!!!!!!!!!111”.

But once all the people cheer her on and elect her, then what? She can’t actually do anything good or run anything good. If she controlled an economy or ran a simple gas station for that matter, she’d run it to the ground because you can’t succeed in running a business on negativity. All negativity (and my goodness is she talented at negativity) accomplishes is dragging down successful people.

Am I off here? I’ve never heard a positive word come out of the woman’s mouth.

by
| | Reply
Post ID: @xbg+1eEVZklB

The FDIC is just an insurance company. Think of them as a GEICO of banks.

by
| | Reply
Post ID: @lle+1eEVZklB

i didnt see anything about Warren-Biden layoffs?

by
| | Reply
Post ID: @mnf+1eEVZklB

Post a reply

: