tv Washington Journal Jessica Silver- Greenberg Discusses Consumer Lawsuits... CSPAN July 15, 2017 8:30am-9:01am EDT
couple of clips about things being said about america in russian state media, i think people would change their minds quite quickly about what russian intentions are towards the united states. host: crystal on the independent line in pennsylvania. just a few seconds left. what is your question for alina polyakova? guest: caller: good morning. i just have a question. what you think the relationship is between trump and russia? i personally believe the dossier was correct and accurate. why do you think trump supports russia's so much -- russia so much? host: let's give her a chance to respond. guest: the dossier -- i should point out a lot of the information has not been verified. we do have to be careful how much of that we take as real and
how much not. i think the question of why president trump seems to want a better relationship with russia is one most of us cannot answer. at the end of the day having better relations with russia is something that all of us should want, but at the same time the united states cannot sacrifice our values and principles in the pursuit of that relationship. i think what the administration has been finding out, like many administrations previously, is that it is fraud and difficult and the russians are not reliable partners so we have to find other ways for the things to get done without relying on shem as an ally in our attempt and desire to keep america safe. host: alina polyakova of the atlantic council, think you for joining us today. you can find more at atlanticcouncil.org. you can find her on twitter.
thanks again. rule allows new consumers to join class-action lawsuits against banks and credit card companies. we will talk about what that means for consumers with new york times and is a reporter jessica silver-greenberg. later on, christian science monitor's simon motley discusses his piece on how the rust belt is trying to adjust to a more high-tech future. george w. bushts and bill clinton had a discussion of leadership thursday night at the george w. bush presidential library in dallas. you can watch the entire event at c-span.org and on tv tomorrow night on c-span at 9:40 p.m. >> when both of you became president, their father had been president and you had not had a other them as president but do it in around government. what was the biggest surprise? you have learned the secrets, the nuclear codes, all the crises we might be getting into, what was the biggest surprise you found and when did it you
you are president and the most powerful man of the world? the first day, the week, the first month? saidclinton: kerry truman he spent so much time trying to talk to people in doing things they should be doing without asking in the first place. was surprised me, maybe because best -- his his's gigs on me was i was the governor of a small state, you are so far removed from the american people that it is hard for them to see you as a three-dimensional person. i had to learn -- even when he was governor of texas, as big as texas is, you had a much more personal relationship with people. lloch loveed -- bob bu
george bush and health to be a better governor. we were used to being people in dealing with people. it surprised me how easily i could be turned into a two-dimensional cartoon instead of a three-dimensional human being. you have to discipline yourself about what to talk about, how to talk about it. you have to remember there are all these leaders between you and people that did not used to be there. that surprised me. i thought it was a good communicator and i just fell on my face four or five times before i figured out how to do it. >> you were 46 years old. if you have been president and 56 or 66, would it have been different or would you have had less energy? think i would've been better in some ways if i had been older, but i think i would have been not as good in
some ways. sometimes you are too dumb to know you can't do it. you show up and keep trying to do it and something happens. >> your father was president, so obviously you are in the white house and solid he did write in my conduct on. did you take any lessons from that? george w. bush: i learned a lot from watching him. i was not interested in separation from him and he was not interested either. we had a great father and son relationship. i learned a lot from watching him. my most startling moment came right after the inaugural parade. i decided i was going to go to the oval office this evening felt like -- to see what it felt like. andy carr had called upstairs and asked dad to come in. i was in the oval office at the desk just taking it all in and
hear walks in my dad. i said, welcome mr. president. he said, thank you, mr. president. [laughter] >>'s like when your mother walked in? bill clinton: she started laughing out loud. >>. washington journal continues host: joining us from new york city is new york times reporter jessica silver-greenberg. she is here to discuss a new consumer financial protection bureau role that would allow consumers to join class-action lawsuit against banks and credit card companies. thank you so much for joining us today. guest: thank you for having me. host: explain to us exactly what this new rule on mandatory arbitration does and why it's happening now. guest: in its most basic form, the rule says financial companies, banks and credit card companies and other kinds of lender's, can't force their
customers as a condition of signing up for a product to agree to go not to court but to mandatory arbitration. that is on its face the kind of most basic thing it does. that theeally means is consumer financial protection bureau is shifting power from wall street financial firms to consumers. -- why it's happening now is that the more complicated questioned, but the consumer financial protection bureau has been studying this rule almost since it deception -- its inception since 2010. this is been on track to put up this rule which was really a centerpiece of the agency's work. host: you write and the new york times that this rule would pry open the courtroom doors for millions of americans by prohibiting financial forms from forcing them and arbitration and
dispute over there bank and credit card accounts. it would deal a serious blow to the banks and other financial freeing consumers to band together in class action lawsuits that could cost the institutions billions of dollars. talk about what the potential impact might be on banks. guest: what it will do is it will open up the floodgates to enable, like you said, groups of consumers to come together, to pool resources and contest questionable business practices. illegal practice like -- practices like lending. ofcould mean a restoration thatinds of class actions
financial firms were so intent on quashing when they set out to use arbitration to kill these kinds of lawsuits about almost a decade ago. two decades ago. host: let's talk about the broader fight over the cfpb itself. a lot of republicans and business groups have been critical of the organization and its chairman, richard cordray. let's look at an april 5 house financial services hearings about the cfpb and remarks from apollo group -- republican congressman jeff and killing. [video] >> denying due process, richard cordray should be dismissed by our president. not only must you go, for the current cfp be must go as well. american consumers in competitive markets and a cop to protect them from fraud and deception.
they don't need washington elites trampling on freedom of choice and peaking on their financial product for them. they don't just act as a cop on the beat, they act as legislature, prosecutor, judge and jury all rolled into one. cfpb represents the summit of unelected, on accountable agency governments. it represents a dagger aimed at financial principles, checks and balances, due process and justice for all. clearly you can be a gimmick cracked -- ba democrat and believe in the cfpb, by the canopy a democrat -- you cannot be a democrat, lowercase 'd 'and believe in this institution. it represents nothing less that one of the key battles to defend and protect the constitution. host: can you put this in the context of the broader fight over the cfpb?
guest: yeah, i can. it is interesting because representative handling brings up the idea that the cfpb is preventing competition, preventing choice among consumers. it is interesting because it is a signature rule they have proposed, this ban on arbitration clauses actually restores a lot of competition to the market. what is interesting is arbitration has successfully derailed challenges by consumers to anti-competitive business practices. and fees,e wage theft anti-competitive fees that are charged. in terms of restoring competitive practices or talking monopolies,k on this rule really -- he gets
consumers a lot more power to exercise that freedom of choice. that is one thing. the other thing is it is a pretty bold move by the cfpb to put up this rule now, especially because they are under fire. reassertions is a of the agency's independence from congress and from the prevailing political forces in washington right now. host: we are talking with jessica silver-greenberg of the new york times about a new rule cfpb from the that would allow class-action lawsuits against credit card companies instead of mandatory arbitration as was previously the practice. democrats can call (202) 748-8000. republicans, (202) 748-8001. independents, (202) 748-8002. robert on the democratic line from arkansas. caller: i am glad to see this
come to light. you should not have to wave a constitutional right to take part in the economy. a few years ago, to get a contract on your phone, you agreed if you terminated, you would pay them so much money. on the other hand they could change the terms, the fees, the conditions without any notice. you agreed no matter whether it -- fraud, breach of contract any other theory of liability, you agreed you would waive your right to a trial by jury and go arbitration. whenever there is a contract change each party should be a will to look at their own decisions. we entered his contract for two
years, for example. you had a look at your conditions the same as they do. when they find the need to change the contract, you should also be able to look at your contract. i think this is an excellent time to look out and you should never be forced to participate in the economy to waive your right to a trial by jury. thank you. host:. go ahead, jessica guest: robert, thank you for calling. one of the things you point out which is interesting, it shows the impact of this rule. can you imagine -- effectively what arbitration rce peopled was fo in exchange for opening the bank account or rent a car was waiting constitutional right. can you imagine if getting a car or bank product you had to wake her second amendment right? we would see a lot of outrage.
i think many people have signed away their right, way that right without even fundamentally realizing it. aig from trenton, new jersey on the democratic line. caller: hello. i have a sad story to tell you. my ex-fasth, we were getting a divorce -- ex-s pouce, bank of america issued her nine credit cards. she had run up the cards on gambling in atlantic city, hotels, cruises, and just basically wasting money. there is no recourse you can go back to the credit card company and tell them this is just nonsense on your part. one card would've been more than enough.
certainly by the time the issu cards, they just came across with the credit card knowing nothing could happen to them. you can't sue them. as soon as you sign the back of the credit card, there is a ontle -- a couple of words the back to you agree to binding arbitration. there is no legal recourse. host: would this will provide relief for people like craig? guest: it would. in the new credit cards. if you took out a new credit card or a new loan, you would be protected under this new rule if it goes into effect. the new york -- times did an investigation of arbitration and just how many people have gone to arbitration over a financial dispute in a period from 2010 to 2014.
in that time what we saw was particularly for financial disputes like the kind you are describing, very few people, once they were forced in arbitration went forward with it. for the financial firms, arbitration bans have been very powerful, very effective in derailing consumer complaints or challenges the business practices like the ones you are describing. host: a couple of accounts show the different sides of arbitration, results through arbitration and results through class actions. neither one gives great results. usa today, which calls it a ripoff clause, the mandatory arbitration clause, points out consumers have narrow odds of winning in arbitration. the odds are stacked against consumers. they lack the institutional
knowledge of banks. that is partly why there are so few. only about 400 consumers file arbitration per year against financial companies. on the flipside, there is a piece in the washington post ruling class action is a win for all even if it does not seem like it. it points out it is bittersweet. but rule change is a win, not necessarily for a greek individuals who dream of a big settlement in court to punish wrongdoing. lawyers can walk away with millions. cell phone is a huge payday -- seldom is it a huge payday. summer cover as low as -- some recover as low as three cents. guest: a lot of people focus on
the amount of money that is returned to consumers in class actions. legalents of the rule, scholars who have studied class actions and their role in a functioning democracy, talk about their purpose being not to deliver huge payouts to large groups of consumers, but deliver small amounts of money to -- across a large group of individuals who have been harmed. more fundamentally the idea is not the financial payout from abilitytions, but their to fundamentally uproot unfair and illegal business practices. to force companies to change. host: one case would be the wells fargo, which recently paid $142 million in an account settlement. they will pay that settlement to customers whose credit card
score was hurt by employees much-maligned practices of creating fake accounts at the branches -- at bank branches. the impact is felt on the bank, right? guest: exactly. there is another class action people point to. for a long time some car finance companies, some car dealerships were trudging minority drivers minorityere charging drivers more than white counterparts even with the same credit score. a class action was brought against the number of the dealerships. been successfully changed the practice of minority drivers are no longer, at least in these cases, no longer there paying a premium for their race. host: comments on the independent mind from vermont. -- thomas on the independent
line from vermont. caller: i would like to bring the puerto rico. it is a very bad situation. and go back to 2008. $700 billion. we bailed out the banks. people like richard wolf, the economist who said we should have given the money to the homeowners. it would've been better for the economy. i thank you very much for your program. bye. host: go ahead, jessica. guest: thank you for the call. justnk one of the things, to look at the consumer financial protection bureau in the broader context, it was created as part of the 2010 dodd frank act which was put in place in response to some of the abuses and harm we saw from the mortgage crisis. originationat its
with designed to protect consumers, protect homeowners from what the caller was describing. host: linda from salem, west virginia on the republican line. you are on with jessica silver-greenberg. there?inda, are you we will move on to one knee to -- juanita from cincinnati. caller: i just want to say to the host, you are so pretty. you look beautiful this morning. cordray, heo mr. was the attorney general in ohio. a.g.s a wonderful all of our credit was fine. then they turned around and sent us a $100 cash card that we can
use because they thought we were short of money. we sent that card to mr. cordray and columbus because citibank claimed up-and-down they were not affiliated with the bank. i am so absolutely ecstatic. we won the class-action suit. be $245 forto income for the money that citibank tried to charge us. i want to thank you. bye. host: go ahead, jessica. cordray is a polarizing figure. as the director of the agency he has weathered a lot of abuse. to the caller's point, a lot of consumers who lived in
ohio and you have been beneficiaries of the rules put forth by the consumer financial protection bureau are very grateful. host: talking about the different views about richard cordray cfpb andy in general -- andy cfpb -- and the cfpb in their brazen finalization of the arbitration , a prime example of an agency gone rogue." enterling has ruled that could lead to contempt charges. tell us about that fight. has long beenb since its inception been a thorn in the side of banks and wall street companies, but it will
target -- it has been a target from ire from the republican party. that is what you are seeing with representative interlink -- henterling. he sent a letter a week before the rule, the final rule was put out where he said he threatened to hold cordray and contempt for not applyint complying with for discussions around the arbitration rule. host: jackson -- caller: good morning. it is almost laughable. for him to say this is an attack against the constitution, it is quite the contrary. i am so glad they are doing this cfpb. to give you an example, my bank -- i've always an online
banking. when the bank was bought out by a larger bank i had to sign this agreement. the agreement was there would be no trial by jury. that is taking away from the constitution. kneeling think and tested with the arbitration -- the only thing -- they are standing up for the little man. host: go ahead, jessica. guest: thank you for calling. i think that is an interesting point you make. i think proponents of this ban on arbitration would agree and say the rule does restore a right that many people did not realize they were giving up. they do not understand when they were signing or clicking the box they agreed to mandatory arbitration. until they have a dispute that requires them to go to
arbitration. they don't really understand the impact of being shut out of the court. host: we're talking with jessica silver-greenberg of the new york times and formerly of the wall street journal in business week about a new mandatory arbitration rule that allows bring class-action suits and set of mandatory arbitration. donna from florida on the republican line. caller: hi. host: you are on with jessica silver-greenberg. caller: i have had a problem with wells fargo in my town. my husband passed away march 17 of 2016. we always had joint accounts, savings, and checking. when he passed away i was not aware that the savings account was only in his name.
the bank had different times i had been in there. they could have informed me of this and did not. my social security check was going into that account, and i had -- it was $100 a month i had put into the savings to help pay for my property tax yearly. that amount in there at the time, to me it was a lost. to other people -- it was a lot, and other people i'm sure it was not. that ie was an issue received a call from somebody saying they were from the bank and they started telling me about the account. this souspicious about i alerted the bank about it. the following day i went to my local bank and i talked to them about what had happened
previously, the day before, and they said that is true. your account -- you cannot use it. host: we are running a little short on time. whatt to ask jessica, should customers who are having issues like this with their banks, what would you suggest they do? for the contact the cfpb? guest: the first route is to contact the bank. is a tremendous resource for people like donna. there is a complaint database, a repository of issues that consumers are having. that can be another route. depending on the conduct, you can always contact your state attorney general as well. host: call from indianapolis on the independent line.
just a few seconds left with jessica silver-greenberg. go ahead. caller: two quick questions. couldn't we have somebody better pick the arbitrators then give the trial or is a huge benefit? thet the real problem with cfp be that they are totally independent without congress controlling their budget? i will take my answers off the airb. thanks. ye -- off the air. thanks. bye. guest: it's not really what happens in arbitration. very few people end up going to arbitration. the rule is about allowing consumers another option to pool as a group, as opposed to an individual. an individual with limited resources, it is hard to take on a big corporation with a dee