April 25, 2025 • 28 mins
The federal policy landscape is transforming at breakneck speed, with sweeping changes across regulatory agencies that directly impact credit union mortgage operations. Leah Dempsey, Shareholder at Brownstein Hyatt Farber Schreck, joins ACUMA President Peter Benjamin to unpack these developments and provide crucial insights for mortgage professionals navigating this new terrain and what to watch for in the coming months:
- New leadership at FHFA with CEOs of Fannie and Freddie replaced, and John Roscoe appointed chief operating officer.
- GSE reform appears back on the agenda with Trump administration appointees who have experience in this area
- CFPB is awaiting confirmation of Jonathan McKernan, who may take an approach similar to Kraninger era with more explicit regulatory guidance
- DOGE initiative expanding to NCUA and potentially bypassing notice-and-comment rulemaking for specific regulatory changes
- White House is considering rescinding regulations that don't align with Loper-Bright's decision limiting agency authority.
- Senate Banking Committee planning markup sessions on housing legislation in coming months, showing bipartisan interest
- The impact of tariffs creates market volatility that affects mortgage rates and potentially complicates longer-term GSE reform plans.
- Credit union professionals benefit from clear rules of the road and fair regulation tailored to their unique structure.
Stay connected with ACUMA for continued updates as these rapid changes unfold. With new leadership at multiple agencies bringing fresh regulatory philosophies, credit union mortgage professionals must remain vigilant and engaged to navigate this dynamic policy environment successfully.
Sponsored by Loan Vision.
Mark as Played
Transcript
Episode Transcript
Available transcripts are automatically generated. Complete accuracy is not guaranteed.
Speaker 1 (00:00):
The views and opinions expressed in this
podcast do not necessarilyreflect the views or positions
of ACUMA, its board of directors, its management staff or its
members.
The podcast discussionpresented is conversational in
nature and for generalinformation only.
Speaker 2 (00:32):
Hello and welcome to Actors On Point Podcast, the
policy series where we focus onpolicy issues impacting the
credit union mortgage industry.
I'm your host, peter Benjamin.
Almost two weeks ago I sat downwith Leah Dempsey, shareholder
with Brownstein, and around thattime it was right before the
news broke about the changeshappening over at NCUA and,
(00:54):
unbeknownst to us, doge wascoming in and making some rapid
changes and, of course, theadministration came in and fired
the board members shortly afterthat.
And so you know, as you goabout listening to this
recording and, of course, thisepisode, just know that you know
Leah and I, you know, as wewere discussing, you know,
(01:14):
things happening over at NCUA.
This is right before the newsbroke about the changes
happening with the NCUA board.
So all important information.
You know we are still very muchinterested in how things will
unfold over at the NCUA and youknow we will continue to monitor
that and I imagine that in ournext issue, our next episode,
(01:36):
we'll give you a full update.
But let's go ahead and diveright in.
We hope you enjoyed the latestepisode of Actions on Point
podcast policy episode.
Anyways, enjoy it.
Before we get to our episode,just a quick word from our
sponsor.
Speaker 3 (01:50):
This episode is being brought to you by Loan Vision.
Is your credit union looking toturn your accounting department
into a profit driver?
Loan Vision can help.
Our platform delivers real timedata, loan level insights and
automations to streamlineworkflows and improve control
over financial performance.
Transform your cost centersinto revenue generators by
(02:11):
equipping your team with thetools needed to better serve
your members.
And don't miss our monthlywebinar series, where we share
key strategies and bestpractices to help credit unions
optimize their mortgageoperations.
Register today atwwwloanvisioncom under our
upcoming events page.
Speaker 2 (02:30):
Joining us today as our resident expert is Leah
Dempsey, shareholder withBrownstein.
Leah, how are you doing today?
I know we've been busy Well,one, we've been keeping you busy
but how are you doing?
Speaker 4 (02:43):
I'm doing well.
Yeah, it's a little bit of arainy, cold April day in DC, so
that's a little bit depressing,but it was great to see you guys
this week at the Acuma Summitand really fun to be with many
Acuma members that are, you know, I think, just coming up with a
lot of inspiring ideas and arejust fun to always talk to and
(03:05):
learn from.
So thank you guys for having meat that.
Speaker 2 (03:07):
Of course.
Of course, now, you said it.
We were at the summit and wetalked about a lot of things and
one of the biggest takeawaysfrom the summit was there's a
lot happening in DC, which isobviously why we are here talk
about policy issues.
Now, first question out of thegate, and I think that's a very
(03:30):
important question because Ithink we've really set the stage
and I'm sorry for thelong-winded intro to this first
question, but throughout theyear, here we are April, but
throughout the year, it's reallyhere we are April, but
throughout the year, you know,we've it's really been an ever
changing environment and I don'tand you can correct me if I'm
(03:51):
wrong, but this seems, I don'tknow, just thinking back to my
time when, when coming into themortgage industry, but this
seems like even only four months, it's already feels like it's
been a year right, at least asfar as what has been
accomplished by thisadministration.
So first question out the gateis you know, from a very high
(04:13):
level, can you just you know,can you just think about or can
you tell us?
You know our listeners, youknow, top of mind, what's
something that our listenersshould really be focused on when
it comes to policy issues thatthey should be watching that are
really going to be startingimpacting the credit union
(04:34):
mortgage lender.
Speaker 4 (04:37):
Sure, well, I mean, there's just a tremendous amount
of activity happening in theexecutive branch and at the
agencies right now that has thepossibility of impacting credit
union mortgage professionals.
The FHFA this week has hadanother extremely active week.
We continue to see a ton ofchanges there.
(05:00):
We saw the CEOs of Fannie andFreddie fired and replaced a
number of board members.
We also saw a new chiefoperating officer, john Roscoe,
named to help lead thosebusinesses as well.
He is a former chief of staffto Mark Calabria, who worked in
(05:24):
the prior FHFA Trumpadministration.
So you know, we kind ofcontinue to see a change of
policy at the agencies and atthe GSEs, which we will, I
believe, continue to see thingsrolling out that are impacting
the industry.
We've already seen a number ofannouncements that have made
(05:45):
changes to how the process isdone on a number of things, and
I'll get into some of that more.
Speaker 2 (05:52):
Can I ask a question on that real quick?
Speaker 4 (05:53):
Oh sure?
Speaker 2 (05:53):
Yeah, all right.
So I mean, I'm a visual person,so I have to kind of sort of
visualize this.
So you have, you know what I'massuming is going to be.
You know, the CEOs of bothFannie and Freddie, and they're
both going to report up to thechief operating officer and
who's essentially going to actas, in many ways, a tiebreaker
if there ever needs to be atiebreaker or the filter between
(06:17):
that CEO and Pulte.
Is that essentially how it'sgoing to work?
Speaker 4 (06:23):
I think so.
I mean, I don't know the innerworkings completely of
everything they plan to do, butit appears like he is going to
be taking on a day-to-day roleof leading them and that you
know Director Pulte is going tobe working closely with him.
So I would expect them to beworking closely together and us
(06:45):
to see, uh, their them kind ofcollaborating on a number of
items in the next few months.
Speaker 2 (06:52):
So, and this, I mean this is someone who is, you know
, a seasoned vet for all intentsand purposes in Washington,
right?
So you, you know, it seems likesomeone who is is good in this
position, right, you know, theyknow d they're, uh, is it okay
to call him a dc insider?
I mean, he, obviously he's beenin washington, he worked
(07:13):
underneath calabria, so it's aninteresting position.
Obviously he created thisposition, right?
Um, it's interesting to see howit plays out because it's a
newly created position.
It's interesting to see how itplays out because it's a newly
created position.
It's interesting to see if thenext administration carries
forward this position.
But from a person standpointand an appointee standpoint, you
(07:37):
know, it's, at least you havesomeone in there that
understands the inner workingsof that agency from the FHFA
standpoint, right, sointeresting, understands the
inner workings of that agencyfrom the FHFA standpoint right,
so interested to see how thisplays out.
Speaker 4 (07:49):
I would say I think my read is that this says a lot
about the Trump administration'swillingness to engage in GSC
reform.
We know that Director Pulte hasbeen eager to spin out Fannie
and Freddie.
We know that former directorCalabria was very eager to do
that and did a lot of work onthat, and I'm sure John Roscoe,
(08:12):
in working with him, has a lotof experience in that.
I personally just think thatthis shows just another move in
some of what's going on, thatthat is on the agenda.
It's something that the Trumpadministration wants to do.
It's going to take some time.
A lot of people have saidreally it's more of a 2026 item,
but I believe that this ismaybe part of that plan, as well
(08:35):
as some of the things that yououtlined too.
Speaker 2 (08:38):
I mean this, this that was actually my next
question Like, does putting himin play someone who is seasoned
in that sector, the housingsector and I think that's fair
to say that right?
Does that you know at one pointin time and you can correct me
if I'm wrong but at one point intime Pulte said, you know, gse
reform is kind of sort of put onthe back burner at this point
(09:00):
in time.
Does this in many way speed upthat process?
Because you now have someonewho understands it, has been in
the Calabria era of FHFA,understands the inner workings
and now can really handle thattransition.
Does it speed things up alittle bit?
It may Without this guy.
(09:22):
If it was someone else, it maydelay it.
I mean, who knows, right?
But it's an interesting.
It's again you know aninteresting strategy, cotton.
Let's see how this plays out.
You know that's basically allI'm thinking about.
So I interrupted you.
Let's continue forward.
What else should you know ourlisteners be focused on?
That's coming out with policy.
Speaker 4 (09:44):
Yeah.
So I mean, I would say at theagencies, other agencies as well
.
Hud is going through atremendous amount of change.
We're seeing cuts to not onlystaff but a number of their
programs that they had in thepast.
Cfpb continues to not be fullystaffed up Right now.
(10:05):
We're still waiting forJonathan McKernan's nomination
to be agreed to by the Senate,which we think is going to
happen the first week of May.
But during that time we'reseeing them start to roll back
certain regulations and dropcertain lawsuits from the Biden
(10:25):
administration.
Cfpb.
But still a lot of work to bedone in engaging with potential
new CFPB employees and figuringout what their longer-term
agenda might be with regulationssuch as some of the mortgage
rules that would be impactingECUMA members.
(10:45):
So a lot to follow there.
And then the FTC.
They fired the two Democratcommissioners and they, just as
of yesterday, confirmed anotherRepublican.
We're also hearing some rumorsthat the CFPB may be moving
certain items over back to theFTC for enforcement or for
(11:09):
regulation over there.
So a lot to keep up on and itfeels like it's changing pretty
much every day at this point.
Speaker 2 (11:18):
Okay.
So, going back to McKernan, andwe talked about this at the
summit and you said somethingvery interesting when I asked
you this question and so I'mgoing to reference you.
So at the summit I said youknow, mckernan is an interesting
(11:38):
pick for this position for CAPBdirector.
You know he is a true, you know, regulator, you know it's a
good pick.
But it's interesting because,for all intents and purposes, it
seems as though they are tryingto sunset the CFPB, which is
why it's so interesting.
You take an agency that, forall intents and purposes,
appears as though they aretrying to close down, or what
(12:01):
everyone thinks they're tryingto close down, and you put a
true regulator in there.
But then you said well, youhave a gut feeling that he's
gonna take the cpb back to.
You know the um, the why am Iblanking on her name?
Um, the kathy kraninger era, youknow, and thinking about it not
(12:21):
, and and I I've been thinkingabout it ever since you said
that the Kraninger era, that wasactually not trying to get
political whatsoever, thatwasn't a bad time for the
mortgage industry.
She was willing to work withthe mortgage industry on a lot
(12:41):
of the issues that we hadconcerns about ATRQM, lo, comp,
and I'm just naming a few.
And so if that's his approachand willing to work with the
mortgage industry, providingclarity on some of these things
that we have concerns about,that's kind of sort of a win in
(13:01):
my mind.
Granted, there's also the farextreme.
Hopefully it's not that farextreme, but if he's willing to
provide clarity, not bad right.
And again, you and I were in DC, you know, last couple of weeks
ago, and that's all we'vetalked about is, can we just get
some clarity, just give us theright direction, point us in the
right direction, and we'rehappy.
Am I reading the tea leavesright way?
(13:25):
Am I understanding this right?
Speaker 4 (13:27):
I think so.
I mean I think that JonathanMcKernan's been around DC for a
while.
He was on the Hill, he workedfor Pat Toomey, who I think was
a great lawmaker, and he wasactually at both Treasury and
FHFA.
So he has been in and for anumber of years and has been
through a number of differentpresidential administrations.
(13:48):
I think has been a very, youknow, has taken his job
seriously as a regulator andbeen a fair and effective
regulator in his past work.
I do think his background in themortgage industry from his work
at FHFA would be a tremendousbenefit to Acuma members and
(14:09):
some of the work that you'retalking about, where there are a
few regulations that are outthere that could probably be
improved upon.
I think them going totally awaycould create a whole host of
problems and industry has beenclear that they don't
(14:30):
necessarily ever want to go backto a timeframe when there's no
regulation and bad actors areable to make things worse and
then people are probably lesslikely to look to lenders for
mortgages and people are justafraid of the system and all
(14:51):
that's not a good thing.
So I think credit unionsbenefit when there's clear rules
of the road, fair and effectiveregulation that's tailored to
their size and scope and uniquestructure as member-owned
cooperatives.
So I'm hopeful that Jonathanwill be a good advocate for that
, and I feel like he will.
Speaker 2 (15:14):
I mean, you said it.
I mean credit unions thrivewhen it's an even playing field
and we have clear instructions.
And I think that's all we everwanted is an even playing field
with clear instructions, whereasothers want a leg up right.
And for those who want that legup you and I talked about this
(15:34):
before and you, zach, and I havetalked about this before For
those who want that leg up, whatdo they think is going to
happen when the administrationchanges winds right or changes
sides?
It's going to come back tenfoldand bite them in the butt.
Hopefully that doesn't makethis podcast explicit by me
saying butt, but anyways.
All right, so let's change gears, but sticking with the credit
(15:56):
union side.
But I'm also going to bring inDoge into this.
I think it's an interestingtopic.
Now I do want to know you know,basically, Doge's role in all
the agencies, but you justmentioned prior to the podcast
that Doge just went to the NCUA.
So walk us through that a bit,because I think this is
interesting.
Was this always on the gameplan or is this kind of sort of
(16:19):
a surprise?
Speaker 4 (16:20):
I mean I think they're going to pretty much
every agency.
It seems like they think thatthere are a number of areas of
fraud, waste and abuse in prettymuch every agency and that
there are improvements that canbe made.
So I'm not I'm not shocked thatthey are also going to.
The NCUA is a little bit lesspolitical than some of the other
(16:45):
agencies, just because of theway it's structured in having
the holdover board members.
That kind of survive even afteran election.
But one of the most interestingthings for me this week was the
announcement from the WhiteHouse that is apparently in
coordination with Doge, talkingabout really taking a look at
(17:07):
any regulation that's out there,and particularly if it doesn't
align with the Loper-Brightdecision, which, as a reminder
to listeners, is related toChevron and says that if an
agency doesn't have clearstatutory authority to engage in
rulemaking, they shouldn't bedoing that.
And basically the White House,sort of thrown into a big mix of
(17:32):
other press releases that theyput out, noted that they are
going to consider any regulationthat doesn't align with Chevron
and Loeppel and think aboutrescinding it without going
through the notice and commentperiod.
So for me, you know, as kind ofan administrative law nerd.
(17:52):
This is just a massiveannouncement to, not to say that
the administration is going tomake a number of regulatory
changes without going throughthe notice and comment period.
To me, that's like abolishingthe filibuster.
It's something that is aprotection for businesses to
(18:14):
raise how regulations impactthem and for stakeholders to be
able to provide their thoughtson what impact this would have.
And, frankly, on both sides ofthe aisle, it's not a good thing
if regulators in DC are makingdecisions in a vacuum without
(18:35):
consulting industry.
That was a huge criticism ofthe Biden administration, cfpb
for not engaging stakeholders inthe regulatory process, and I
think the same dangers apply ifthe Trump administration does it
.
It's people that are rulewriters in DC don't know the ins
(18:56):
and outs of every singlebusiness in the country and they
don't know what the Acumamembers, for example, know about
the inner workings of a creditunion, and without that feedback
, it's to me, I think, reallythe possibility for a number of
problems, even though industry,I'm sure, would be eager to have
less regulation in a number ofcircumstances.
Speaker 2 (19:21):
Very interesting, very interesting, okay.
So just for the sake of time.
Very interesting, veryinteresting, okay.
So just for the sake of time.
I think there's also been somemovement, no-transcript, kind of
shocked about that, and I knowwe I'm sure you're going to keep
us fully updated on that as itgoes forward.
(19:41):
Because we've talked aboutChevron quite a bit.
We posted a policy insights onit.
It was when Chevron was rolledback, we, the whole industry,
talked about it.
I remember seeing stuff fromAmerica's Credit Union, mba, you
name it.
Almost every association outthere talked about it in some
(20:06):
way, shape or form, because itwas massive.
It impacted not just us, itimpacted every type of agency
out there.
I'm sure you're going to keepus fully updated as that goes on
, just for the sake of time.
I know we have to keep thistrain moving, all right.
So let's go on to Congress inthe housing space.
What's going on with Congressin the housing space?
Speaker 4 (20:30):
So you know and you were up on the Hill with me two
weeks ago we met with committeestaff on Senate Banking
Committee on both sides of theaisle.
They both have indicated thatthey're thinking about doing a
Senate banking markup sometimein the next few weeks or months,
which you know.
That in itself is news becausein the past the Banking
Committee has gone fullCongresses without doing markups
(20:53):
.
So the fact that they'realready committed to doing one
in Senate banking is positivefor movement in a bipartisan way
.
So continuing to keep an eye onthat.
The Republicans talked aboutsome of Tim Scott's landmark
legislation that he's beenworking on.
(21:13):
He's been working on.
He's very focused onopportunity zones.
He also has a number of his ownbills that I think he would
like to see move.
Senator Warren, who is theranking member, is also
passionate about housing andreally, if there's any room for
(21:35):
consensus in a bipartisan way inthe country right now, I think
it's on housing People.
Still the interest rates remainfairly high and there's still a
number of challenges to peoplethat are looking to be
homeowners, and members ofCongress on both sides of the
(21:55):
aisle are getting a lot ofpressure on that.
So we will continue to work onthat and watch it, but it seems
like there is at least somemomentum going forward right now
in Congress.
Speaker 2 (22:04):
Okay, and I have to ask this right Because obviously
it's we were down there onLiberation Day.
That's what it was calledLiberation Day.
So we were down there onLiberation Day.
Are you hearing anything fromCongress in general on the
(22:25):
tariffs and their impact onhousing?
They are doing this housingmarkup.
They're obviously voicingconcerns on the impact on
affordable housing.
Are they saying anything?
Speaker 4 (22:34):
Congress is getting.
I can tell you they're gettinga lot of outreach from their
constituents about the tariffs.
It's been a roller coaster thisweek on the tariffs.
I'm sure everyone watching thenews is aware it started out
that the stock market wasgetting close to crashing and
then things looked better for aday and now things are kind of
evening out and there's really alot of mixed analysis of where
(22:56):
that's going to go.
But I will just tell you from apersonal perspective.
I am currently buying a home andmortgage rates when I, when I
locked in, were somewhat decentcompared to a few months ago.
They got really good for a fewdays, like around the tariffs,
and then, as of today, I justchecked again and they're back
up.
So it's kind of been just allover the place.
(23:19):
In terms of mortgage rates,which you know to my earlier
point, that's one of the biggestconcerns of homebuyers.
So I don't know that we aretotally sure yet what's?
This is kind of unchartedterritories.
What's happening right now inthe liberation day post-mortem,
(23:40):
but to the extent that itimpacts the housing market,
that's going to be, I think,important in a lot of things,
including GSE reform, which wetalked about earlier, if we
don't see things going well.
After all of these tariffs,it's going to be pretty hard to
(24:01):
spin out Fannie and Freddie in arocky economy.
So all of this over the summer,we'll see how things play out,
but we are certainly living inexciting and interesting times
where there are massive changeshappening basically on a weekly
basis.
Speaker 2 (24:21):
So that leads me to my next question.
Right, and I don't want to benegative, because we always do
our best to stay positive, andnor do I want to be political,
because we do our best to stayas middle of the road as we
possibly can.
Now, you know, and everythingthat we do, but we also know
(24:42):
that there's, you know,different branches of the
government, right that that runour government, right?
So what happens when you havetwo of the branches?
You have the administration andCongress not agreeing with each
other on this tariff stance,because you have, obviously, the
(25:04):
Trump administration and he isdead set on going down this
tariff path and, for all intentsand purposes, it doesn't look
as though he's going to pull upat any point in time or stop
this train.
And what happens when Congressfinally says enough's enough?
(25:26):
What happens?
What happens in six to 12months when this engine finally
breaks?
Speaker 4 (25:34):
Yeah, and I think one thing that was interesting at
the beginning of this week iswhen the stock market really was
not doing well, I was wonderingbecause Congress is about to go
on recess for two weeks so ifit had not sort of jumped back
up in the last few days, I thinkmembers of Congress over those
two weeks, it would have beeninteresting because I think they
(25:55):
would have gotten a huge earfuland who knows what actions they
would have taken when they cameback.
Things have kind of evened outa little bit over the past day
or two, but that's far from thecertainty that anyone needs on
these issues.
So I think everyone's going tohave to continue to follow it.
(26:15):
But I do think when, to theextent that consumers and
constituents, that their bottomline is impacted and their
pocketbooks are impacted, that'swhen members of Congress hear
the most from them.
So they at some point, if it'snot proving to be beneficial to
(26:38):
consumers, that's when I thinkmembers of Congress start to
potentially jump ship and thinkabout their own elections two or
six years from now where theyhave to defend some of these
items.
But I don't think we're quitethere yet.
I think things got a little bitbetter at the end of the week
and Republicans are feeling morepositive about the outlook.
(27:02):
Um, but I far from certain andwe're going to have to continue
to follow it and see how thingsgo.
Okay, okay.
Speaker 2 (27:10):
Well, we have to start wrapping up Um any final
thoughts before we actually do.
Speaker 4 (27:17):
Um, I think just I would encourage Acumen members
to stay tuned for all of ourupdates that we're doing and to
continue to attend the regionalsummits and annual meeting,
because not only are thingshappening quickly, there's also
a lot of new faces to hear from.
There's also a lot of new facesto hear from, there's new
directors at a lot of theagencies and a lot of people
(27:40):
with views that people should beaware of and want to just stay
closely involved in what'shappening.
So I would say great to talkwith everyone and look forward
to continuing these discussionsover the next couple of months.
Speaker 2 (27:58):
Awesome.
Well, thank you so much foreverything that you do for Acuma
, our community.
It's always good learning fromyou and I guess we'll see you
very soon.
So again, as always, thank you.
Speaker 4 (28:09):
Thank you.
Speaker 2 (28:10):
And to close out, thank you again to Loan Vision
for sponsoring today's episodeand to all of you.
We know your time is valuable.
Thank you for tuning into thelatest episode of Acuma's On
Point Podcast.
We hope you enjoyed it.
Until next time.
Be well, my friends.
Speaker 1 (28:26):
Thanks for listening.
We'll see you next time at theAcuma On Point Podcast.
If not already, be sure tosubscribe and give us a
five-star rating For more greatepisodes and information.
Be sure to visit us online atacumaorg and to get the latest
updates.
Head over to our LinkedIn page.
The views and opinions expressed in this
podcast do not necessarilyreflect the views or positions
of ACUMA, its board of directors, its management staff or its
members.
The podcast discussionpresented is conversational in
nature and for generalinformation only.
Speaker 2 (00:32):
Hello and welcome to Actors On Point Podcast, the
policy series where we focus onpolicy issues impacting the
credit union mortgage industry.
I'm your host, peter Benjamin.
Almost two weeks ago I sat downwith Leah Dempsey, shareholder
with Brownstein, and around thattime it was right before the
news broke about the changeshappening over at NCUA and,
(00:54):
unbeknownst to us, doge wascoming in and making some rapid
changes and, of course, theadministration came in and fired
the board members shortly afterthat.
And so you know, as you goabout listening to this
recording and, of course, thisepisode, just know that you know
Leah and I, you know, as wewere discussing, you know,
(01:14):
things happening over at NCUA.
This is right before the newsbroke about the changes
happening with the NCUA board.
So all important information.
You know we are still very muchinterested in how things will
unfold over at the NCUA and youknow we will continue to monitor
that and I imagine that in ournext issue, our next episode,
(01:36):
we'll give you a full update.
But let's go ahead and diveright in.
We hope you enjoyed the latestepisode of Actions on Point
podcast policy episode.
Anyways, enjoy it.
Before we get to our episode,just a quick word from our
sponsor.
Speaker 3 (01:50):
This episode is being brought to you by Loan Vision.
Is your credit union looking toturn your accounting department
into a profit driver?
Loan Vision can help.
Our platform delivers real timedata, loan level insights and
automations to streamlineworkflows and improve control
over financial performance.
Transform your cost centersinto revenue generators by
(02:11):
equipping your team with thetools needed to better serve
your members.
And don't miss our monthlywebinar series, where we share
key strategies and bestpractices to help credit unions
optimize their mortgageoperations.
Register today atwwwloanvisioncom under our
upcoming events page.
Speaker 2 (02:30):
Joining us today as our resident expert is Leah
Dempsey, shareholder withBrownstein.
Leah, how are you doing today?
I know we've been busy Well,one, we've been keeping you busy
but how are you doing?
Speaker 4 (02:43):
I'm doing well.
Yeah, it's a little bit of arainy, cold April day in DC, so
that's a little bit depressing,but it was great to see you guys
this week at the Acuma Summitand really fun to be with many
Acuma members that are, you know, I think, just coming up with a
lot of inspiring ideas and arejust fun to always talk to and
(03:05):
learn from.
So thank you guys for having meat that.
Speaker 2 (03:07):
Of course.
Of course, now, you said it.
We were at the summit and wetalked about a lot of things and
one of the biggest takeawaysfrom the summit was there's a
lot happening in DC, which isobviously why we are here talk
about policy issues.
Now, first question out of thegate, and I think that's a very
(03:30):
important question because Ithink we've really set the stage
and I'm sorry for thelong-winded intro to this first
question, but throughout theyear, here we are April, but
throughout the year, it's reallyhere we are April, but
throughout the year, you know,we've it's really been an ever
changing environment and I don'tand you can correct me if I'm
(03:51):
wrong, but this seems, I don'tknow, just thinking back to my
time when, when coming into themortgage industry, but this
seems like even only four months, it's already feels like it's
been a year right, at least asfar as what has been
accomplished by thisadministration.
So first question out the gateis you know, from a very high
(04:13):
level, can you just you know,can you just think about or can
you tell us?
You know our listeners, youknow, top of mind, what's
something that our listenersshould really be focused on when
it comes to policy issues thatthey should be watching that are
really going to be startingimpacting the credit union
(04:34):
mortgage lender.
Speaker 4 (04:37):
Sure, well, I mean, there's just a tremendous amount
of activity happening in theexecutive branch and at the
agencies right now that has thepossibility of impacting credit
union mortgage professionals.
The FHFA this week has hadanother extremely active week.
We continue to see a ton ofchanges there.
(05:00):
We saw the CEOs of Fannie andFreddie fired and replaced a
number of board members.
We also saw a new chiefoperating officer, john Roscoe,
named to help lead thosebusinesses as well.
He is a former chief of staffto Mark Calabria, who worked in
(05:24):
the prior FHFA Trumpadministration.
So you know, we kind ofcontinue to see a change of
policy at the agencies and atthe GSEs, which we will, I
believe, continue to see thingsrolling out that are impacting
the industry.
We've already seen a number ofannouncements that have made
(05:45):
changes to how the process isdone on a number of things, and
I'll get into some of that more.
Speaker 2 (05:52):
Can I ask a question on that real quick?
Speaker 4 (05:53):
Oh sure?
Speaker 2 (05:53):
Yeah, all right.
So I mean, I'm a visual person,so I have to kind of sort of
visualize this.
So you have, you know what I'massuming is going to be.
You know, the CEOs of bothFannie and Freddie, and they're
both going to report up to thechief operating officer and
who's essentially going to actas, in many ways, a tiebreaker
if there ever needs to be atiebreaker or the filter between
(06:17):
that CEO and Pulte.
Is that essentially how it'sgoing to work?
Speaker 4 (06:23):
I think so.
I mean, I don't know the innerworkings completely of
everything they plan to do, butit appears like he is going to
be taking on a day-to-day roleof leading them and that you
know Director Pulte is going tobe working closely with him.
So I would expect them to beworking closely together and us
(06:45):
to see, uh, their them kind ofcollaborating on a number of
items in the next few months.
Speaker 2 (06:52):
So, and this, I mean this is someone who is, you know
, a seasoned vet for all intentsand purposes in Washington,
right?
So you, you know, it seems likesomeone who is is good in this
position, right, you know, theyknow d they're, uh, is it okay
to call him a dc insider?
I mean, he, obviously he's beenin washington, he worked
(07:13):
underneath calabria, so it's aninteresting position.
Obviously he created thisposition, right?
Um, it's interesting to see howit plays out because it's a
newly created position.
It's interesting to see how itplays out because it's a newly
created position.
It's interesting to see if thenext administration carries
forward this position.
But from a person standpointand an appointee standpoint, you
(07:37):
know, it's, at least you havesomeone in there that
understands the inner workingsof that agency from the FHFA
standpoint, right, sointeresting, understands the
inner workings of that agencyfrom the FHFA standpoint right,
so interested to see how thisplays out.
Speaker 4 (07:49):
I would say I think my read is that this says a lot
about the Trump administration'swillingness to engage in GSC
reform.
We know that Director Pulte hasbeen eager to spin out Fannie
and Freddie.
We know that former directorCalabria was very eager to do
that and did a lot of work onthat, and I'm sure John Roscoe,
(08:12):
in working with him, has a lotof experience in that.
I personally just think thatthis shows just another move in
some of what's going on, thatthat is on the agenda.
It's something that the Trumpadministration wants to do.
It's going to take some time.
A lot of people have saidreally it's more of a 2026 item,
but I believe that this ismaybe part of that plan, as well
(08:35):
as some of the things that yououtlined too.
Speaker 2 (08:38):
I mean this, this that was actually my next
question Like, does putting himin play someone who is seasoned
in that sector, the housingsector and I think that's fair
to say that right?
Does that you know at one pointin time and you can correct me
if I'm wrong but at one point intime Pulte said, you know, gse
reform is kind of sort of put onthe back burner at this point
(09:00):
in time.
Does this in many way speed upthat process?
Because you now have someonewho understands it, has been in
the Calabria era of FHFA,understands the inner workings
and now can really handle thattransition.
Does it speed things up alittle bit?
It may Without this guy.
(09:22):
If it was someone else, it maydelay it.
I mean, who knows, right?
But it's an interesting.
It's again you know aninteresting strategy, cotton.
Let's see how this plays out.
You know that's basically allI'm thinking about.
So I interrupted you.
Let's continue forward.
What else should you know ourlisteners be focused on?
That's coming out with policy.
Speaker 4 (09:44):
Yeah.
So I mean, I would say at theagencies, other agencies as well
.
Hud is going through atremendous amount of change.
We're seeing cuts to not onlystaff but a number of their
programs that they had in thepast.
Cfpb continues to not be fullystaffed up Right now.
(10:05):
We're still waiting forJonathan McKernan's nomination
to be agreed to by the Senate,which we think is going to
happen the first week of May.
But during that time we'reseeing them start to roll back
certain regulations and dropcertain lawsuits from the Biden
(10:25):
administration.
Cfpb.
But still a lot of work to bedone in engaging with potential
new CFPB employees and figuringout what their longer-term
agenda might be with regulationssuch as some of the mortgage
rules that would be impactingECUMA members.
(10:45):
So a lot to follow there.
And then the FTC.
They fired the two Democratcommissioners and they, just as
of yesterday, confirmed anotherRepublican.
We're also hearing some rumorsthat the CFPB may be moving
certain items over back to theFTC for enforcement or for
(11:09):
regulation over there.
So a lot to keep up on and itfeels like it's changing pretty
much every day at this point.
Speaker 2 (11:18):
Okay.
So, going back to McKernan, andwe talked about this at the
summit and you said somethingvery interesting when I asked
you this question and so I'mgoing to reference you.
So at the summit I said youknow, mckernan is an interesting
(11:38):
pick for this position for CAPBdirector.
You know he is a true, you know, regulator, you know it's a
good pick.
But it's interesting because,for all intents and purposes, it
seems as though they are tryingto sunset the CFPB, which is
why it's so interesting.
You take an agency that, forall intents and purposes,
appears as though they aretrying to close down, or what
(12:01):
everyone thinks they're tryingto close down, and you put a
true regulator in there.
But then you said well, youhave a gut feeling that he's
gonna take the cpb back to.
You know the um, the why am Iblanking on her name?
Um, the kathy kraninger era, youknow, and thinking about it not
(12:21):
, and and I I've been thinkingabout it ever since you said
that the Kraninger era, that wasactually not trying to get
political whatsoever, thatwasn't a bad time for the
mortgage industry.
She was willing to work withthe mortgage industry on a lot
(12:41):
of the issues that we hadconcerns about ATRQM, lo, comp,
and I'm just naming a few.
And so if that's his approachand willing to work with the
mortgage industry, providingclarity on some of these things
that we have concerns about,that's kind of sort of a win in
(13:01):
my mind.
Granted, there's also the farextreme.
Hopefully it's not that farextreme, but if he's willing to
provide clarity, not bad right.
And again, you and I were in DC, you know, last couple of weeks
ago, and that's all we'vetalked about is, can we just get
some clarity, just give us theright direction, point us in the
right direction, and we'rehappy.
Am I reading the tea leavesright way?
(13:25):
Am I understanding this right?
Speaker 4 (13:27):
I think so.
I mean I think that JonathanMcKernan's been around DC for a
while.
He was on the Hill, he workedfor Pat Toomey, who I think was
a great lawmaker, and he wasactually at both Treasury and
FHFA.
So he has been in and for anumber of years and has been
through a number of differentpresidential administrations.
(13:48):
I think has been a very, youknow, has taken his job
seriously as a regulator andbeen a fair and effective
regulator in his past work.
I do think his background in themortgage industry from his work
at FHFA would be a tremendousbenefit to Acuma members and
(14:09):
some of the work that you'retalking about, where there are a
few regulations that are outthere that could probably be
improved upon.
I think them going totally awaycould create a whole host of
problems and industry has beenclear that they don't
(14:30):
necessarily ever want to go backto a timeframe when there's no
regulation and bad actors areable to make things worse and
then people are probably lesslikely to look to lenders for
mortgages and people are justafraid of the system and all
(14:51):
that's not a good thing.
So I think credit unionsbenefit when there's clear rules
of the road, fair and effectiveregulation that's tailored to
their size and scope and uniquestructure as member-owned
cooperatives.
So I'm hopeful that Jonathanwill be a good advocate for that
, and I feel like he will.
Speaker 2 (15:14):
I mean, you said it.
I mean credit unions thrivewhen it's an even playing field
and we have clear instructions.
And I think that's all we everwanted is an even playing field
with clear instructions, whereasothers want a leg up right.
And for those who want that legup you and I talked about this
(15:34):
before and you, zach, and I havetalked about this before For
those who want that leg up, whatdo they think is going to
happen when the administrationchanges winds right or changes
sides?
It's going to come back tenfoldand bite them in the butt.
Hopefully that doesn't makethis podcast explicit by me
saying butt, but anyways.
All right, so let's change gears, but sticking with the credit
(15:56):
union side.
But I'm also going to bring inDoge into this.
I think it's an interestingtopic.
Now I do want to know you know,basically, Doge's role in all
the agencies, but you justmentioned prior to the podcast
that Doge just went to the NCUA.
So walk us through that a bit,because I think this is
interesting.
Was this always on the gameplan or is this kind of sort of
(16:19):
a surprise?
Speaker 4 (16:20):
I mean I think they're going to pretty much
every agency.
It seems like they think thatthere are a number of areas of
fraud, waste and abuse in prettymuch every agency and that
there are improvements that canbe made.
So I'm not I'm not shocked thatthey are also going to.
The NCUA is a little bit lesspolitical than some of the other
(16:45):
agencies, just because of theway it's structured in having
the holdover board members.
That kind of survive even afteran election.
But one of the most interestingthings for me this week was the
announcement from the WhiteHouse that is apparently in
coordination with Doge, talkingabout really taking a look at
(17:07):
any regulation that's out there,and particularly if it doesn't
align with the Loper-Brightdecision, which, as a reminder
to listeners, is related toChevron and says that if an
agency doesn't have clearstatutory authority to engage in
rulemaking, they shouldn't bedoing that.
And basically the White House,sort of thrown into a big mix of
(17:32):
other press releases that theyput out, noted that they are
going to consider any regulationthat doesn't align with Chevron
and Loeppel and think aboutrescinding it without going
through the notice and commentperiod.
So for me, you know, as kind ofan administrative law nerd.
(17:52):
This is just a massiveannouncement to, not to say that
the administration is going tomake a number of regulatory
changes without going throughthe notice and comment period.
To me, that's like abolishingthe filibuster.
It's something that is aprotection for businesses to
(18:14):
raise how regulations impactthem and for stakeholders to be
able to provide their thoughtson what impact this would have.
And, frankly, on both sides ofthe aisle, it's not a good thing
if regulators in DC are makingdecisions in a vacuum without
(18:35):
consulting industry.
That was a huge criticism ofthe Biden administration, cfpb
for not engaging stakeholders inthe regulatory process, and I
think the same dangers apply ifthe Trump administration does it
.
It's people that are rulewriters in DC don't know the ins
(18:56):
and outs of every singlebusiness in the country and they
don't know what the Acumamembers, for example, know about
the inner workings of a creditunion, and without that feedback
, it's to me, I think, reallythe possibility for a number of
problems, even though industry,I'm sure, would be eager to have
less regulation in a number ofcircumstances.
Speaker 2 (19:21):
Very interesting, very interesting, okay.
So just for the sake of time.
Very interesting, veryinteresting, okay.
So just for the sake of time.
I think there's also been somemovement, no-transcript, kind of
shocked about that, and I knowwe I'm sure you're going to keep
us fully updated on that as itgoes forward.
(19:41):
Because we've talked aboutChevron quite a bit.
We posted a policy insights onit.
It was when Chevron was rolledback, we, the whole industry,
talked about it.
I remember seeing stuff fromAmerica's Credit Union, mba, you
name it.
Almost every association outthere talked about it in some
(20:06):
way, shape or form, because itwas massive.
It impacted not just us, itimpacted every type of agency
out there.
I'm sure you're going to keepus fully updated as that goes on
, just for the sake of time.
I know we have to keep thistrain moving, all right.
So let's go on to Congress inthe housing space.
What's going on with Congressin the housing space?
Speaker 4 (20:30):
So you know and you were up on the Hill with me two
weeks ago we met with committeestaff on Senate Banking
Committee on both sides of theaisle.
They both have indicated thatthey're thinking about doing a
Senate banking markup sometimein the next few weeks or months,
which you know.
That in itself is news becausein the past the Banking
Committee has gone fullCongresses without doing markups
(20:53):
.
So the fact that they'realready committed to doing one
in Senate banking is positivefor movement in a bipartisan way
.
So continuing to keep an eye onthat.
The Republicans talked aboutsome of Tim Scott's landmark
legislation that he's beenworking on.
(21:13):
He's been working on.
He's very focused onopportunity zones.
He also has a number of his ownbills that I think he would
like to see move.
Senator Warren, who is theranking member, is also
passionate about housing andreally, if there's any room for
(21:35):
consensus in a bipartisan way inthe country right now, I think
it's on housing People.
Still the interest rates remainfairly high and there's still a
number of challenges to peoplethat are looking to be
homeowners, and members ofCongress on both sides of the
(21:55):
aisle are getting a lot ofpressure on that.
So we will continue to work onthat and watch it, but it seems
like there is at least somemomentum going forward right now
in Congress.
Speaker 2 (22:04):
Okay, and I have to ask this right Because obviously
it's we were down there onLiberation Day.
That's what it was calledLiberation Day.
So we were down there onLiberation Day.
Are you hearing anything fromCongress in general on the
(22:25):
tariffs and their impact onhousing?
They are doing this housingmarkup.
They're obviously voicingconcerns on the impact on
affordable housing.
Are they saying anything?
Speaker 4 (22:34):
Congress is getting.
I can tell you they're gettinga lot of outreach from their
constituents about the tariffs.
It's been a roller coaster thisweek on the tariffs.
I'm sure everyone watching thenews is aware it started out
that the stock market wasgetting close to crashing and
then things looked better for aday and now things are kind of
evening out and there's really alot of mixed analysis of where
(22:56):
that's going to go.
But I will just tell you from apersonal perspective.
I am currently buying a home andmortgage rates when I, when I
locked in, were somewhat decentcompared to a few months ago.
They got really good for a fewdays, like around the tariffs,
and then, as of today, I justchecked again and they're back
up.
So it's kind of been just allover the place.
(23:19):
In terms of mortgage rates,which you know to my earlier
point, that's one of the biggestconcerns of homebuyers.
So I don't know that we aretotally sure yet what's?
This is kind of unchartedterritories.
What's happening right now inthe liberation day post-mortem,
(23:40):
but to the extent that itimpacts the housing market,
that's going to be, I think,important in a lot of things,
including GSE reform, which wetalked about earlier, if we
don't see things going well.
After all of these tariffs,it's going to be pretty hard to
(24:01):
spin out Fannie and Freddie in arocky economy.
So all of this over the summer,we'll see how things play out,
but we are certainly living inexciting and interesting times
where there are massive changeshappening basically on a weekly
basis.
Speaker 2 (24:21):
So that leads me to my next question.
Right, and I don't want to benegative, because we always do
our best to stay positive, andnor do I want to be political,
because we do our best to stayas middle of the road as we
possibly can.
Now, you know, and everythingthat we do, but we also know
(24:42):
that there's, you know,different branches of the
government, right that that runour government, right?
So what happens when you havetwo of the branches?
You have the administration andCongress not agreeing with each
other on this tariff stance,because you have, obviously, the
(25:04):
Trump administration and he isdead set on going down this
tariff path and, for all intentsand purposes, it doesn't look
as though he's going to pull upat any point in time or stop
this train.
And what happens when Congressfinally says enough's enough?
(25:26):
What happens?
What happens in six to 12months when this engine finally
breaks?
Speaker 4 (25:34):
Yeah, and I think one thing that was interesting at
the beginning of this week iswhen the stock market really was
not doing well, I was wonderingbecause Congress is about to go
on recess for two weeks so ifit had not sort of jumped back
up in the last few days, I thinkmembers of Congress over those
two weeks, it would have beeninteresting because I think they
(25:55):
would have gotten a huge earfuland who knows what actions they
would have taken when they cameback.
Things have kind of evened outa little bit over the past day
or two, but that's far from thecertainty that anyone needs on
these issues.
So I think everyone's going tohave to continue to follow it.
(26:15):
But I do think when, to theextent that consumers and
constituents, that their bottomline is impacted and their
pocketbooks are impacted, that'swhen members of Congress hear
the most from them.
So they at some point, if it'snot proving to be beneficial to
(26:38):
consumers, that's when I thinkmembers of Congress start to
potentially jump ship and thinkabout their own elections two or
six years from now where theyhave to defend some of these
items.
But I don't think we're quitethere yet.
I think things got a little bitbetter at the end of the week
and Republicans are feeling morepositive about the outlook.
(27:02):
Um, but I far from certain andwe're going to have to continue
to follow it and see how thingsgo.
Okay, okay.
Speaker 2 (27:10):
Well, we have to start wrapping up Um any final
thoughts before we actually do.
Speaker 4 (27:17):
Um, I think just I would encourage Acumen members
to stay tuned for all of ourupdates that we're doing and to
continue to attend the regionalsummits and annual meeting,
because not only are thingshappening quickly, there's also
a lot of new faces to hear from.
There's also a lot of new facesto hear from, there's new
directors at a lot of theagencies and a lot of people
(27:40):
with views that people should beaware of and want to just stay
closely involved in what'shappening.
So I would say great to talkwith everyone and look forward
to continuing these discussionsover the next couple of months.
Speaker 2 (27:58):
Awesome.
Well, thank you so much foreverything that you do for Acuma
, our community.
It's always good learning fromyou and I guess we'll see you
very soon.
So again, as always, thank you.
Speaker 4 (28:09):
Thank you.
Speaker 2 (28:10):
And to close out, thank you again to Loan Vision
for sponsoring today's episodeand to all of you.
We know your time is valuable.
Thank you for tuning into thelatest episode of Acuma's On
Point Podcast.
We hope you enjoyed it.
Until next time.
Be well, my friends.
Speaker 1 (28:26):
Thanks for listening.
We'll see you next time at theAcuma On Point Podcast.
If not already, be sure tosubscribe and give us a
five-star rating For more greatepisodes and information.
Be sure to visit us online atacumaorg and to get the latest
updates.
Head over to our LinkedIn page.
Popular Podcasts
Bookmarked by Reese's Book Club
Welcome to Bookmarked by Reese’s Book Club — the podcast where great stories, bold women, and irresistible conversations collide! Hosted by award-winning journalist Danielle Robay, each week new episodes balance thoughtful literary insight with the fervor of buzzy book trends, pop culture and more. Bookmarked brings together celebrities, tastemakers, influencers and authors from Reese's Book Club and beyond to share stories that transcend the page. Pull up a chair. You’re not just listening — you’re part of the conversation.
On Purpose with Jay Shetty
I’m Jay Shetty host of On Purpose the worlds #1 Mental Health podcast and I’m so grateful you found us. I started this podcast 5 years ago to invite you into conversations and workshops that are designed to help make you happier, healthier and more healed. I believe that when you (yes you) feel seen, heard and understood you’re able to deal with relationship struggles, work challenges and life’s ups and downs with more ease and grace. I interview experts, celebrities, thought leaders and athletes so that we can grow our mindset, build better habits and uncover a side of them we’ve never seen before. New episodes every Monday and Friday. Your support means the world to me and I don’t take it for granted — click the follow button and leave a review to help us spread the love with On Purpose. I can’t wait for you to listen to your first or 500th episode!
Dateline NBC
Current and classic episodes, featuring compelling true-crime mysteries, powerful documentaries and in-depth investigations. Follow now to get the latest episodes of Dateline NBC completely free, or subscribe to Dateline Premium for ad-free listening and exclusive bonus content: DatelinePremium.com