Après Cohn, le Deluge?

Trump’s top economic adviser departs, and the administration’s grown-ups worry.

Mr. Trump’s washing-machine and solar-panel salvo was to be followed by a focus on China’s unfair trade practices, namely intellectual-property theft. The president would announce narrowly targeted trade actions against that country, while holding aluminum and steel tariffs in reserve. All this would be choreographed around renegotiation of the North American and Korea-U.S. free trade agreements.

.. Mr. Ross took advantage of the situation last week to get the president’s ear, and back we were to the days of Mr. Trump spinning out on the advice of the last person in the room.

.. few know that he spent this past weekend talking the president down from an even more Planet Mars idea from Team Ross —to set tariffs closer to 50%.

.. Mr. Ross (a former steel executive) and the nativist Peter Navarro have driven out their biggest free-market opponent, increasing their ability to wreak harm on the economy.

The voices of those who actually understand economic policy are greatly diminished, as evidenced this week by the administration’s endless loop of fact-free and near fantastical claims about the effects of the tariffs.

His shabby treatment has more than a few of the grown-ups now actively considering their own exit plans. It’s one thing to do battle daily; it’s another to watch months of work get flushed on a whim, and get publicly branded a “globalist” to boot. Mr. Cohn’s top deputy, Jeremy Katz, departed just as soon as the tax deal passed, and watch for other Cohn staffers—many of them important free-market voices—to follow.

.. Imagine a Trump presidency without Mr. Kelly, H.R. McMaster, Jim Mattis, Don McGahn, Mick Mulvaney, Kevin Hassett. Consider, too, that no one as good is likely to replace them—now having seen how the White House works.

And don’t forget congressional Republicans, whom Mr. Trump has potentially set up for a midterm rout.

Many are furious that he has forced them to call him out, splitting the party. But they are also legitimately fearful the tariffs will spark trade war and destroy tens or hundreds of thousands of jobs, neutralizing the benefits of the hard-won tax reform.

The economy is the best thing Republicans have going for them in November, and the Trump-Ross-Navarro trio just embraced the only policy that could kill it.

Just how bad it is will depend hugely on Mr. Cohn’s successor.

.. Besides, who in his right mind would even want the job?

Sorry, Mr. President. You can’t make Mulvaney ‘acting’ head of the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau.

The law says that the agency’s deputy director takes over when the director resigns. Nothing administration lawyers have said changes that.

 .. If Trump manages to put Mulvaney in the director’s chair before a court can rule, it’ll mean that the president has usurped the prerogatives of Congress on the way to installing his own loyalist to kneecap an agency created to protect main street from the excesses of giant banks and credit card companies. It would be an executive-branch power grab; one that gives foul new meaning to the notion of what it means to “occupy” Wall Street.

Mick Mulvaney Is the True Pope

Once again, naked progressive overreach sets Donald Trump up for a win.

Republicans, of course, have distrusted the CFPB since its inception. Partly the objection is practical, because its creation embodies the classic Beltway approach: rather than fix a broken regulatory system, throw another powerful agency atop the heap.

.. In this case, however, the objections are also constitutional. Philip Hamburger, a Columbia University law professor and author of “Is Administrative Law Unlawful?,” notes that the lack of democratic accountability almost CFPB.

.. “This agency is so independent that it does not need congressional funding, and it now has declared itself self-appointing—even in opposition to the president’s appointee,” he says. “The CFPB is thus a reminder of how the administrative state can go to dangerous extremes.”

.. Behind the metaphor of “the swamp,” after all, is the idea, not without justification, that today’s Washington is far removed from government of, by and for the people. In this context the CFPB is a good proxy for the beau ideal of modern American progressivism: appointed bureaucrats, unaccountable to the elected representatives of the people, who wield their regulatory authority as a weapon

Two Camps Assert They Each Have Control Over CFPB

White House budget chief and an Obama-era official both claim rights to lead the regulator

Some experts say there is little incentive for Mr. Trump to quickly nominate a permanent director. Rather, by allowing Mr. Mulvaney a year or longer to serve as a caretaker at the CFPB, the president could ensure several years of Republican control of the agency because directors serve five-year terms once they are confirmed.

 ..  To allow the CFPB to work quickly, lawmakers designed the bureau to be independent, stating that its single director could only be dismissed by the president for “inefficiency, neglect of duty or malfeasance in office” and insulating its budget from congressional oversight.
..  Republican lawmakers and the financial industry have long said the agency’s rules and supervisory and enforcement activities have increased compliance costs and reduced credit availability for vulnerable consumers the bureau was created to protect. 

.. The pushback has been particularly strong from industries that had previously been regulated lightly, such as so-called payday and auto lending.

.. Republicans have proposed curbs to the CFPB’s power, giving Congress control of its budget and narrowing the scope of its regulatory powers that would leave it primarily an enforcement agency.

.. Mr Mulvaney, a former Republican House member from South Carolina, once called the CFPB a “sad, sick joke” and has called for an overhaul of the agency, including curtailing its budget. Other possible actions include delaying the enactment of a recently issued rule on high-interest small consumer loans known as payday lending, amending a 2013 mortgage rule that tightened underwriting standards and reassessing pending lawsuits against companies such as student-loan servicer Navient Corp.