Congress Demands Full Disclosure on External Access to Consumer Financial Data, Setting 14-Day Deadline

This resolution is Congress firing off a formal subpoena-like request to the President, demanding a massive data dump within 14 days. Essentially, the House wants to know exactly who from the Department of Government Efficiency (DOGE) has been poking around in the systems of the Bureau of Consumer Financial Protection (BCFP), and what sensitive data they touched. This isn't about policy changes; it's pure, intense oversight focusing on data security and access protocols.

The Security Clearance Check-Up

Congress is demanding names, professional backgrounds, and ages for everyone working with DOGE who was not a government employee before January 20, 2025. They specifically name-check individuals like Elon Musk, Jeremy Lewin, and others, asking for documentation on their access if they were involved. The big question here is: Did these external personnel get access to sensitive BCFP systems—like those holding confidential supervisory data, or even worse, personally identifiable information (PII) about consumers—without the proper security clearance? The resolution requires a full breakdown of the clearance level required for the access they got versus the clearance level they actually held. If you've ever had to wait six months for a background check just to get a basic badge at work, you understand that bypassing clearance requirements for access to financial data is a massive red flag. This provision aims to find out if standard security gates were opened for VIPs.

Following the Data Trail

If these DOGE personnel did access non-public information, Congress wants to know if that data ever left the secure BCFP environment. This includes tracking if the information was copied, shared, or changed. Think of the BCFP as holding the digital vault for millions of consumer complaints and sensitive financial information used to supervise banks and lenders. If external, non-vetted personnel are moving that data around, that’s a potential security breach that could impact every consumer whose information is stored there. The resolution demands documentation proving whether any sensitive data was moved outside the BCFP's control, which is the ultimate data security concern.

Paperwork, Approvals, and Conflicts of Interest

To ensure proper procedures were followed, the President must provide copies of every piece of required paperwork for these individuals, including the "Rules of Behavior for Privileged Users Form" and the "Privileged User Access Request Form." They also need to see the business justification, supervisor sign-offs, and proof of required training. Beyond security, the resolution also asks for a list of any potential or actual conflicts of interest involving these DOGE individuals and what steps were taken to manage them. For the average person, this is about making sure that the people reviewing how financial protections are enforced aren't simultaneously working for the entities being regulated.

Counting the Cubicles: BCFP Staffing

Finally, the resolution zeroes in on the BCFP's workforce. It requires a detailed count of the Bureau's full-time employees (FTEs) broken down by division, both before and after March 24, 2025. Crucially, it asks for the total number of BCFP employees who were not actively working on that date because they were on administrative leave or subject to a stop-work order. This provision suggests Congress is looking into whether the DOGE’s influence coincided with significant internal upheaval or staffing reductions at the BCFP, which could impact the agency's ability to protect consumers from financial scams and predatory practices.