Sylvia Garcia (D-TX)
Providing for congressional disapproval under chapter 8 of title 5, United States Code, of the rule submitted by the Bureau of Consumer Financial Protection relating to the withdrawal of the rule relating to "Statement of Policy Regarding Prohibition on Abusive Acts or Practices".
A Democratic resolution with no cosponsors
Last activity — Referred to the House Committee on Financial Services.
In committee
Introduced and handed to a committee in the chamber it started in.
The committee holds it, and most bills are never heard from again. A hearing or a committee vote would be news; silence is the usual outcome, and it kills the bill without anyone voting against it.
Its path through Congress
- Introduced
- In Committee
What this bill would do
This joint resolution seeks to provide congressional disapproval of a rule submitted by the Bureau of Consumer Financial Protection. The rule in question involves the withdrawal of a previous rule titled "Statement of Policy Regarding Prohibition on Abusive Acts or Practices." If passed, the resolution dictates that the rule shall have no force or effect.
Yes· 3 of 9
- Scored +5
Would households on low incomes be better off under this?
Maintaining prohibitions on abusive financial practices protects low-income individuals from exploitative financial products or services.
- Scored +5
Would middle-income households be better off under this?
The resolution helps ensure that middle-income consumers remain protected against abusive and unfair financial practices.
- Scored +5
Would Black Americans be better off under this?
Maintaining consumer protection policies can help mitigate predatory financial practices that often disproportionately affect minority communities.
The opposite
No question was scored the opposite.
Who it would affect, and how
Potential Positive Impacts for People
- Maintaining previous policy protections: By disapproving the withdrawal, this resolution would prevent the Bureau of Consumer Financial Protection from rescinding its previous "Statement of Policy Regarding Prohibition on Abusive Acts or Practices" (88 Fed. Reg. 21883 (April 12, 2023)). This ensures the prior rule remains in effect rather than being withdrawn.
Potential Negative Impacts for People
- No specific negative impacts are detailed in the text: The provided text focuses solely on the action of disapproving the rule withdrawal and does not list any resulting negative consequences or burdens.
Groups and Interests Ranking
Every group the model scored this bill for, from -10 to +10. Tap or hover a score for the reason it gave.
- Demographic And Interest Groups
- Would Black Americans be better off under this? — Maintaining consumer protection policies can help mitigate predatory financial practices that often disproportionately affect minority communities. Would Asian Americans be better off under this? — The resolution preserves protections against abusive financial acts, benefiting Asian American consumers. Would Hispanic Americans be better off under this? — Preventing the withdrawal of anti-abuse policies helps protect Hispanic consumers from unfair financial practices. Would households on low incomes be better off under this? — Maintaining prohibitions on abusive financial practices protects low-income individuals from exploitative financial products or services. Would middle-income households be better off under this? — The resolution helps ensure that middle-income consumers remain protected against abusive and unfair financial practices. Would people in cities be better off under this? — Protecting against abusive financial practices provides security to urban residents who interact frequently with various financial services. Would white Americans be better off under this? — The resolution ensures that existing consumer protections against abusive financial practices remain in effect for all citizens.
- Economy And Finance
- Does this give people more protection from unfair business practices? — The resolution prevents the withdrawal of a policy meant to prohibit abusive financial acts or practices, thereby maintaining consumer protections.
- Governance And Ideology
- Does this give the federal government more power? — By disapproving the rule, Congress is exercising its oversight authority to maintain existing regulatory policy through the CFPB.
- 5/11/2026
- Referred to the House Committee on Financial Services.
- Introduced in House
One bill Congress.gov lists as related to this one — companions in the other chamber, earlier versions, and bills this one absorbed or was folded into.