This was a vote on an amendment by Rep. Rush Holt (D-NJ) that would have increased funding for the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau (CFPB--which regulates banks, credit unions, and other financial institutions—and guards against abusive practices by financial institutions against consumers) by $63 million. This amendment was offered to a continuing resolution funding the federal government through September 2011, and cutting $61 billion in federal funding for many government programs.

Holt urged support for his amendment: “If we've learned any lesson from the financial crisis of the last several years, it should be this: by protecting consumers, we can protect the rest of the financial system. This amendment … [provides] the appropriate amount of money that the CFPB estimates that it will need to get the work done for the sake of American consumers. This amendment would ensure that the recently created Consumer Financial Protection Bureau…will have the independence and will have the resources that it needs to begin its critical work of protecting consumers and, by extension, protecting the entire financial system of this country.”

Rep. Jo Ann Emerson (R-MO) argued that the CFPB would receive adequate funding from the underlying continuing resolution: “I am not disagreeing that there is a strong need for consumer protection. I'm a mom. I believe in that very strongly. But just as commerce shouldn't run wild, neither should consumer protection. So the [funding] limitation in the bill, I believe, represents an adequate level…. It represents the level of resources that are currently expended by [federal] regulatory agencies on consumer protection activities…”

The House rejected this amendment by a vote of 163-265. Voting “yea” were 161 Democrats—including a majority of progressives--and 2 Republicans. 235 Republicans and 30 Democrats voted “nay.” As a result, the House rejected an amendment that would have increased funding for the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau by $63 million.