Russell Vought Requests $145 Million for CFPB Despite Seeking Its Elimination
Russell Vought, the acting director of the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau (CFPB), has submitted a funding request to Congress for the 2026 fiscal year, asking for approximately $145 million to keep the agency operational. This request presents a stark contradiction to his publicly stated goal of dismantling the agency. Vought, a staunch conservative and former White House budget chief under President Trump, has long been a vocal critic of the CFPB, arguing that it wields too much power and operates without sufficient oversight. His nomination to lead the agency was viewed by many as a strategic move to curb its influence or shutter it entirely. However, the mechanics of actually closing a federal agency are complex, requiring congressional approval, which is unlikely to be granted easily. In the interim, Vought is legally required to submit a budget request to the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) to fund the agency’s continued operations. The $145 million figure is notably lower than the agency's previous budget allocations, reflecting Vought’s intent to scale back its activities. This budget request includes funds for salaries, benefits, and operational expenses. It does not, however, include money for the Civil Penalty Fund, a detail that has drawn criticism from consumer advocates who say it could hinder the agency’s ability to compensate victims of financial wrongdoing. Vought’s strategy appears to be one of "death by a thousand cuts"—starving the agency of resources and authority until it can no longer function effectively. This approach is part of a broader conservative effort to reshape the federal bureaucracy and limit the reach of regulatory agencies. The CFPB was established in the wake of the 2008 financial crisis with the mission of protecting consumers from predatory lending and unfair financial practices. Since its inception, it has returned billions of dollars to consumers through enforcement actions and settlements. Republicans and the financial industry have frequently criticized the bureau for what they describe as regulatory overreach and an aggressive enforcement style. Vought’s budget request is the first step in a long negotiation process. The Trump administration has previously proposed drastic cuts to the CFPB’s budget, but Congress has largely maintained its funding. It remains to be seen whether Congress will approve Vought’s requested amount or if they will adjust it. In addition to the funding request, Vought is also reportedly taking steps to reorganize the agency internally, potentially reassigning staff and consolidating divisions to reduce efficiency. This internal restructuring is seen by critics as another tactic to weaken the agency from within. Legal challenges to Vought’s leadership and his efforts to dismantle the bureau are expected. Consumer advocacy groups and Democratic lawmakers have vowed to fight any attempts to weaken the CFPB. They argue that the agency is a vital watchdog for consumers and that its elimination would leave the public vulnerable to financial abuse. The battle over the CFPB’s future is part of a larger ideological struggle over the role of government regulation in the economy. While Vought’s budget request is a procedural necessity, it underscores the ongoing conflict between the administration’s agenda and the agency’s statutory mission. As the budget process moves forward, the future of the CFPB remains uncertain, caught between a hostile leadership and a Congress that holds the power of the purse. The outcome will have significant implications for consumer protection in the United States and the balance of power between regulatory agencies and the industries they oversee. The situation highlights the complexities involved in shutting down a federal agency created by statute and the limitations even a determined director faces in unwinding it. Vought must keep the agency alive on paper to eventually close it legally, creating a paradoxical situation where he is requesting funds for an agency he seeks to destroy. This paradox is at the heart of the current political drama surrounding the CFPB, illustrating the tension between political goals and bureaucratic realities. The agency's staff and operations remain in a state of limbo, unsure of their future funding or the long-term viability of their positions. The debate over the CFPB budget is expected to be contentious, with Democrats defending the agency’s record and Republicans echoing Vought’s concerns about its scope and authority. Ultimately, the decision on funding will rest with Congress, which must navigate the competing interests of consumer protection, financial industry concerns, and fiscal responsibility.
