July 20, 2013

Letters to the editor: Sen. Collins says stance on Cordray didn't shift

Recently, following a 3½-hour debate in the historic Old Senate Chamber, members of the U.S. Senate reached a bipartisan agreement that averts drastic changes to our longstanding rules and traditions, yet addresses the gridlock that frustrates so many Americans.

Richard Cordray
click image to enlarge

The nomination of Richard Cordray, above, to serve as permanent director of the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau was confirmed earlier this week. Republican Maine Sen. Susan Collins said that her vote to confirm Cordray did not reflect a change in position on her part.

2012 File Photo/The Associated Press

Following this agreement, and with my support, the Senate voted to confirm Richard Cordray as the director of the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau.

Contrary to your recent editorial "Our View: Collins, Senate make right move on rules" (July 18), I did not change my position. Rather, I secured a written commitment from Mr. Cordray to brief the Appropriations Committee annually on his agency's finances and expenditures, which responded to my major concern.

This is critical because, as the law now stands, Congress has absolutely no oversight of the CFPB's budget, which can be as high as a half-billion dollars, and is set by the director himself. This is contrary to Congress' constitutional obligation. Had the administration been willing earlier to address my concern, which is shared by many of my colleagues, Mr. Cordray's nomination may well have been considered long ago.

While I consider Mr. Cordray's commitment sufficient to move forward, more must be done.

That is why I am also supporting efforts to create a Senate-confirmed inspector general for the CFPB to help ensure proper oversight of the agency's expenditures and of an effort to collect massive data on credit card transactions that raises privacy concerns.

U.S. Sen. Susan Collins


Readers offer perspectives on median panhandling ban 

What great news that the ban on all the different sorts of activities taking place on Portland medians will prevent any safety incidents.

What sort of activities? Panhandling and, well, who knows what else?

What safety incidents? You know, anything could happen even if it never did yet.

And now, hopefully, the homeless panhandlers will bring their signs to the sidewalks, like in the Old Port when the next supercruiser docks to offload tourists. Or near the arts, entertainment and athletic venues in the city.

Maybe they'll exercise their right to free assembly and be seen banded together everywhere -- except the medians, of course. Or will the city of Portland ban congregations of two or more citizens for safety reasons?

William Hobbs


The City Council's support in banning panhandling on Portland's streets was a fine example of leadership and focus, though I feel the reason given to support the ban being a safety issue was a lot of malarkey.

Yes, one can see that there are some safety issues with panhandlers standing on the medians.

But the real reason that should have been aired is that it's just plain unsightly, making the city look like it's a dumping ground for the city's lost souls.

To have them be the meet and greet committee at city gateways doesn't leave a very good impression. Unless, of course, that's the best the city has to offer.

John Golden


Road race fees boost costs for competitive runners 

When I was little I loved playing baseball, but it took a few weeks' worth of allowance to pay for cleats, a bat and a glove. Whenever I complained, my dad always told me that running was the cheapest sport: He always said it just costs a pair of shoes.

And that is true. Running is still probably the cheapest sport to train for. However, it is quickly becoming more expensive to compete, due to the rising costs of road racing.

(Continued on page 2)

Were you interviewed for this story? If so, please fill out our accuracy form

Send question/comment to the editors

Further Discussion

Here at PressHerald.com we value our readers and are committed to growing our community by encouraging you to add to the discussion. To ensure conscientious dialogue we have implemented a strict no-bullying policy. To participate, you must follow our Terms of Use.

Questions about the article? Add them below and we’ll try to answer them or do a follow-up post as soon as we can. Technical problems? Email them to us with an exact description of the problem. Make sure to include:
  • Type of computer or mobile device your are using
  • Exact operating system and browser you are viewing the site on (TIP: You can easily determine your operating system here.)