‘Is anyone in this Administration clean?’: Comments of the week

In response to an argument that banks can hide behind a "veil of secrecy" following a House vote to exempt more firms from the Home Mortgage Disclosure Act:

“I guess he's never experienced a compliance exam and had to explain the decisions we made on each loan file in question. I'm surprised more mortgage lenders aren't exiting the business given what it takes from a regulatory perspective to make a mortgage loan.”

Related: House votes to exempt more firms from HMDA rule

On Randal Quarles, the Federal Reserve vice chairman for supervision, indicating that the central bank intends to revise capital and liquidity rules for the nation’s largest banks:

“Good news long overdue for an institution that has become ossified over the years. Along with the moves discussed here, it would be great if Gov. Quarles could help the Fed overcome the bureaucratic inertia that has paralyzed their ability to make timely decisions on applications and regulatory questions timely, and also eliminate the "fly-specking" mentality that fails to distinguish truly important matters from the trivial and insignificant. Heavy lifts, to be sure, but well worth the effort.”

Related: Fed’s Quarles to seek more ‘tailoring’ of large-bank rules

On the many ways Consumer Financial Protection Bureau Acting Director Mick Mulvaney has been remaking the agency:

“Under Dir. R. Cordray, the CFPB overreached in enforcing its own interpretation of law, regulation and historical guidance. It now appears to be ‘pay back time’ with Mulvaney at the helm. This is also not a good thing for the industry. What FIs need and desire most is predictability, consistency, and an informed deliberative process where they can manage and grow their business. These wild pendulum swings hurt for FIs and the customers they serve. And so it goes. . . .”

Related: Is CFPB’s Mulvaney waging war on the agency he runs?

On JPMorgan Chase outlining plans to add 400 brick-and-mortar branches in new markets:

“Digital will not differentiate. Practically all banks, CU's, etc. will have very good digital platforms. Pricing is a similarly hard way to differentiate. Competitors can match. Physical presence in markets still matters to customers, and especially small businesses. Don't bet against JPM Chase here.”

Related: JPMorgan's branch expansion: Threat to rivals, or overreach?

On bankers and analysts appearing to be optimistic that fee income will bounce back:

"An over reliance on fees is no different than a cocaine addiction. A tool used by weak stale lenders. Banks need to get back into the risk reward business of lending and abandon the practice of milking income without adding value. If there was ever a place that needed more regulation..."

Related: Weak spot in banks' earnings: Fee income

On an argument against changing CFPB's funding as part of a budget deal:

"I could not disagree more with the authors assertion. NO ENTITY EVER should have an unchecked management structure or budget. Minimally the CFPB budget should have to be approved and controlled by the Federal Reserve. If however, folks want the agency to be a standalone entity, then it needs to be staffed and funded LIKE EVERY OTHER agency."

Related: Congress should not hold CFPB hostage in budget talks

In response to an argument that the Justice Department's actions on pot banking are a disservice to the industry:

Jeff Sessions isn't the problem here. The problem was created by Obama and Holder choosing to ignore federal law that conflicted with state laws, seeking neither a judicial nor legislative fix. This is the problem with arbitrary and capricious enforcement of laws and not fulfilling your oaths of office. It leads to something other than the republic we think we have. And bankers thinking that violating federal law is a "reasonable operational risk" shouldn't be bankers.

Related: Pot banking crackdown is a step backward

‘Is anyone [in] this Administration clean?’: Comments of the week