Get your news from a source that’s not owned and controlled by oligarchs. Sign up for the free Mother Jones Daily.

So Obama isn’t going to officially nominate Elizabeth Warren to head up the new Consumer Financial Protection Bureau. Josh Marshall comments on what Obama is going to do:

ABC’s Jake Tapper has a curious scoop, reporting that President Obama will name Elizabeth Warren not to run the new consumer financial protection bureau but instead will give her the previously unheralded “special position reporting to both him and to the Treasury Department and tasked with heading the effort to get the new federal agency standing.” Get that?….I tend to agree with Matt Yglesias on this: “With Warren, Obama showing real innovation in developing odd, satisfying to nobody compromises.”

Matt seems to have changed his mind here, and I think his second take is the right one. It’s pretty obvious to anyone with a pulse that Republicans will filibuster Warren, thus sucking up Senate floor time that no one can afford with only a few weeks left before Congress goes into recess. At the same time, the CFBP needs to get off the ground, and appointing an unofficial interim head is a way of doing it. Warren is clearly the best choice for this.

I have no inside scoop on whether Obama or Tim Geithner “really” like Warren, but honestly, I’ve seen no serious evidence that either one of them is standing in her way. Geithner supposedly doesn’t like the grillings Warren has given him in the past, but come on. He’s a big boy, and in any case what better way of getting Warren out of his hair than giving her a job that will keep her too busy to bother him much? If George Bush had done something like this we’d all be gnashing our teeth about how he and Karl Rove were so committed to their base that they were once again cleverly bending the rules to evade Democratic opposition and why can’t wussy Democrats ever act like that too? Well, now one is. So bravo. Given the realities of Republican subjugation to whatever the Chamber of Commerce wants, this is a good solution. Then next year maybe Obama will just give Warren a recess appointment and that will keep her in place for a couple of years. What’s good for the goose is good for the gander, no?

From the desk of Mother Jones CEO, Monika Bauerlein...

Newsrooms can be funded in many ways. One of the most controversial (and volatile) ways is by a for-profit corporation or a billionaire owner. We see it across the headlines on a weekly basis: the claw backs in public media, the gutting of The Washington Post, the bending over backwards to appeal to Trump and his allies.

But not here.

When Mother Jones first started publishing 50 years ago, our founders made a critical decision: to be a reader-supported nonprofit. They knew that no corporate owner would be interested in a muckraking newsroom; they also knew that no muckraking newsroom would be interested in following the agenda of a corporate owner.

And so, we’ve been reader-funded for half a century. We rely on contributions from our readers—readers like you—whether it’s $50, or $15 a month, or whatever fits your budget. People give what they can, and every donation makes a difference for our newsroom, which has grown tremendously—in size and reach and renown—since its inception in 1976.

You may be wondering: What does it take to publish an investigation? And what does my donation actually fund? The answers are one and the same: It takes people, resources, and time. And that’s what your donation funds directly.

Every donation Mother Jones receives from readers fortifies our newsroom, whether we’re covering underreported scandals out of Washington, DC, or the most important news of the day. And right now, each donation will be doubled because of our $50,000 match. So when you make a donation—$5, $50, any amount—it’ll go twice as far.

Your support keeps us going. If you’re able, donate today.

Thanks for reading.

—Monika

From the desk of Mother Jones CEO, Monika Bauerlein...

Newsrooms can be funded in many ways. One of the most controversial (and volatile) ways is by a for-profit corporation or a billionaire owner. We see it across the headlines on a weekly basis: the claw backs in public media, the gutting of The Washington Post, the bending over backwards to appeal to Trump and his allies.

But not here.

When Mother Jones first started publishing 50 years ago, our founders made a critical decision: to be a reader-supported nonprofit. They knew that no corporate owner would be interested in a muckraking newsroom; they also knew that no muckraking newsroom would be interested in following the agenda of a corporate owner.

And so, we’ve been reader-funded for half a century. We rely on contributions from our readers—readers like you—whether it’s $50, or $15 a month, or whatever fits your budget. People give what they can, and every donation makes a difference for our newsroom, which has grown tremendously—in size and reach and renown—since its inception in 1976.

You may be wondering: What does it take to publish an investigation? And what does my donation actually fund? The answers are one and the same: It takes people, resources, and time. And that’s what your donation funds directly.

Every donation Mother Jones receives from readers fortifies our newsroom, whether we’re covering underreported scandals out of Washington, DC, or the most important news of the day. And right now, each donation will be doubled because of our $50,000 match. So when you make a donation—$5, $50, any amount—it’ll go twice as far.

Your support keeps us going. If you’re able, donate today.

Thanks for reading.

—Monika

We Recommend

Latest

Sign up for our free newsletter

Subscribe to the Mother Jones Daily to have our top stories delivered directly to your inbox.

Get our award-winning magazine

Save big on a full year of investigations, ideas, and insights.

Subscribe

INDEPENDENT. BECAUSE OF YOU.

Mother Jones has no billionaires calling the shots—just readers like you making fearless reporting possible

Donate