Senator Warren raises fair and tough questions that deserve answers.

As discussed in a separate regarding the CFPB, the need for Senator Warren to ask these questions (and the possibility that she may have a tough time getting them answered) is very much a case of being hoist by one's own petard. It is Senator Warren who is credited with structuring the agency as a one-ruler kingdom, largely immune from either Presidential or Congressional influence, and without the check of a two-…

The desire of the regulated to have the regulator better explain its rules is by no means unique to the MSRB. SIFMA could certainly have made a similar request to FINRA. Notably, new CFPB head Mulvaney has also emphasized the need for the CFPB to do a better job of providing guidance as to its requirements.

While Mr. Mulvaney's statement will undoubtedly attract some negative reaction, he is describing the right approach to managing the CFPB. The notion that government regulators should "push the envelope" in seeking to expand the scope of their legal mandate is offensive. It is the job of Congress or the legislators to write laws that are both good and clear, and the job of the regulators to write rules that are good and clear. Once those good and clear laws and rules are established,…

In his consideration of the divergence of interests among shareholders of a company, Chair Clayton raises important questions. Here are a few more: What does it mean to say that a company is "American" if a large percentage of the shareholders are not, or if the company's controlling shareholders are not? Conversely, is a company "American" if its operations or profits are made outside the United States? Much of the recent debate as to the role of corporations has been about their social…