Elizabeth Warren, it’s not you they hate. It’s what you represent. You want to be an honest cop when so many before you in Washington have looked the other way and pretended that the banking industry could police itself.

I can’t think of a better reason why this presidential adviser shouldn’t be the new chief of an unfettered Consumer Financial Protection Bureau.

She knows where the bodies are buried — in countless toxic forms and statements that only bank lawyers fully understand. She’ll make every attempt to end the silent rip-offs and myriad shenanigans that cost consumers billions.

As the debate about Warren — and what she stands for — rages on, here’s a look at why the banks despise the idea of her as a strong regulator:

Weak consumer regulation was the norm, but banks love the status quo

Prior to the Dodd-Frank financial reform law, which established the consumer bureau, there simply was no real consumer watchdog over banks. The Comptroller of the Currency, Federal Reserve and state regulators wrote rules, but rarely enforced them in a meaningful way to consumers. The CFPB will be the first regulator in American history that didn’t answer to the banks, but to their customers. It will be a true watchdog.

Mortgage abuses were rampant

More than three years after the biggest financial meltdown since 1929, we’re still trying to unravel what the banks did to foul up the global financial system. Did the banks fudge mortgage documents simply to grease the way to securitizing loans? Did they trigger foreclosures even when homeowners were paying their bills? Did they push people into bad loans they knew they would default on? If any or all of these things were true, it certainly wasn’t because the banks were over-regulated. Somebody fell asleep on their watch in Washington like Rip Van Winkle. A consumer financial bureau would keep an eye on an industry that’s operated in darkness for too long.

Credit abuses are rampant

Take a look at your credit card disclosure statement. Do you have any idea how much you will owe if you’re late or lose your job and can’t pay? This is not a mystery to the banks, who have conceived elaborate formulas for charging you more money for credit.

I recently received a letter from Bank of America for my business charge card, for example. They were pleased to inform me that if I was late just one month a new “penalty rate” would apply that would be triple my current rate. What they didn’t tell me is that a late payment fee of at least $15 would also apply and the penalty rate could be in effect for up to six months. I had to call the bank to find this out.

What’s more is the incredible profit they would make on just one late payment. It would be a variable margin — that could rise even more — of nearly 27 percent plus the prime rate of 3.25 percent. That’s a hefty penalty given that my taxes helped bail out the bank when it got in trouble in 2008 and they pay almost nothing for their funds from the Federal Reserve. My one errant transaction could lock in a short-term profit for the bank that would easily rival the near-20 percent margins from industries like pharmaceuticals, Internet services and network equipment. I’m all for profits, but I can get a better deal from Louis the loan shark. A consumer bureau might be able to rein in these practices.

Junk fees are abundant

You ever wonder what all those fees are that creep into your mortgage closing statement? They seem to come out of nowhere. A lot of them are negotiable or completely unnecessary. Do you need to pay a “document” fee when the bank is already charging you interest and closing costs? Can you get cheaper title insurance? Do you need exorbitant mortgage credit insurance, which simply protects the lender if something happens to you? The CFPB already is working to simplify this morass of incomprehensible forms and even wants your opinion on new proposed versions.

Making simple math simple again

Do you know what a LIBOR index is and “lifetime maximum rates?” The banks don’t want you to know this because this is how much your monthly payment can climb based on a variable index. If the index goes up, so does your payment. What triggers an increase? Why can’t credit forms spell this out in plain language? Why can’t they tell you what your payment should be including taxes, insurance and other fees? They should and will if the CFPB ever gets into this world unscathed at the end of July.

So nothing personal Elizabeth Warren.

It’s not the way you dress or the fact that you teach at Harvard and have been an advocate for banking customers. Or that you’re “so bloody disagreeable,” as one former Wall Street banker put it. It’s just that you’re so darned honest about banking abuses and are one of the best people in the country to enact change.

There’s something about your “speak softly and carry a big stick” demeanor that really bugs the money trust. That doesn’t play well in their country clubs as they bemoan government interference and conveniently forget who saved their bacon in the first place.