inane suggestion that the statutory requirement for the Director to appear before relevant Congressional Committees to discuss its semi-annual reports could be interpreted as requiring the Director merely to attend a hearing and not answer questions, despite the well-established interpretation of similar statutory requirement for the Chair of the Federal Reserve Board of Governors to appear before the House Financial Services Committee and the Senate Banking, Housing, and Urban Affairs Committee on a semi-annual basis about the monetary policy report, as required by the Humphrey-Hawkins Full Employment Act. In the face of such blatant, and disrespectful, attempts to warp the authorizing and oversight role of the first branch of the Federal government—the United States Congress—by the Trump Administration, Congress must, in this instance, now refine the Consumer Bureau’s authority to ensure that the vital role that the Consumer Bureau should be playing within the country’s financial regulatory regime is not effectively destroyed by the agency’s current leadership. (5) While the legislation is a direct response to address many of the misguided decisions that have been orchestrated by the new political leadership at the Consumer Bureau that have been exposed to the public, as of the date of the bill’s introduction, and sharply criticized by numerous Federal and state officials, including law enforcement, as well as organizations representing servicemembers, senior citizens, and other vulnerable consumer populations, this legislation should not be viewed as an exhaustive list to fix all the damaging actions that may have otherwise occurred at this agency since the departure of former Director Cordray in November 2017, particularly since detailed information revealing the full scope, nature, and extent of the current flawed operation of the agency, and the adverse impact resulting from these actions, may not yet be publicly available. Rather, this legislation should be interpreted as an attempt to highlight, and