It was illuminating to note Mr. Caforio acknowledging some of the points he left out of his column in a recent letter to the editor. To readers, it underscored the fact that he’s not a neutral arbiter on this issue.
In his response he stated: “To me, this shouldn’t be a partisan issue. …” And yet that’s exactly what he’s made it in the original column, and now in his letter to the editor.
District 25 voters won’t be persuaded by simplistic populist talking points in the 2018 congressional election. Instead, it’s about ideas and a philosophy of governance.
Rather than attacking his political opponent and advocating for his professional self-interest, Mr. Caforio should perform a real non-partisan public service by advising why he advocates for an unelected and unaccountable regulatory agency as being in the best interests of District 25 citizens.
As an attorney and officer of the court, shouldn’t he also address the U.S. Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit’s decision on the unconstitutional structure of the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau?
The court stated that too much power was invested in the director of the CFPB and that it must restructure to provide the executive branch oversight to restore constitutional separation of powers.
These are facts Mr. Caforio doesn’t provide in his response.