Richard Blumenthal (D-CT)
A joint resolution 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 "Limited Applicability of Consumer Financial Protection Act's 'Time or Space' Exception With Respect to Digital Marketing Providers".
A Democratic resolution with no cosponsors
Last activity — Motion to proceed to consideration of measure rejected in Senate by Voice Vote. (consideration: CR S2268)
Introduced, nothing more yet
Formally proposed, and not yet handed to a committee.
Nearly every bill is sent to a committee within days. Introduction alone is not a sign of support, of momentum, or of any likelihood of passing — any member may introduce any bill.
Its path through Congress
- Introduced
What this bill would do
This joint resolution seeks to express congressional disapproval of a specific rule submitted by the Bureau of Consumer Financial Protection. The rule in question involves the withdrawal of a previous rule regarding the "Limited Applicability of Consumer Financial Protection Act's 'Time or Space' Exception With Respect to Digital Marketing Providers." If passed, this resolution would ensure that the Bureau's rule has no force or effect. It was introduced by Mr. Blumenthal and has been placed on the calendar.
Yes
- Scored +2
Does this give the federal government more power?
The resolution maintains the regulatory authority of the Bureau of Consumer Financial Protection by preventing the withdrawal of its rule.
- Scored +1
Would households on low incomes be better off under this?
Maintaining consumer financial protections can prevent predatory practices often targeting low-income households.
- Scored +1
Would people in cities be better off under this?
Digital marketing consumer protections are relevant to urban residents who frequently interact with digital financial services.
The opposite
- Scored -3
Does this give people more protection from unfair business practices?
By disapproving the Bureau's rule withdrawal, this resolution effectively prevents the reversal of consumer protections regarding digital marketing providers.
Who it would affect, and how
Potential Positive Impacts for People
- There are no specific positive outcomes or benefits for individuals or groups of people listed within the provided text.
Potential Negative Impacts for People
- There are no specific negative consequences or burdens for individuals or groups of people listed within the provided text.
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.
- Economy And Finance
- Does this give people more protection from unfair business practices? — By disapproving the Bureau's rule withdrawal, this resolution effectively prevents the reversal of consumer protections regarding digital marketing providers.
- Demographic And Interest Groups
- Would households on low incomes be better off under this? — Maintaining consumer financial protections can prevent predatory practices often targeting low-income households. Would people in cities be better off under this? — Digital marketing consumer protections are relevant to urban residents who frequently interact with digital financial services.
- Governance And Ideology
- Does this give the federal government more power? — The resolution maintains the regulatory authority of the Bureau of Consumer Financial Protection by preventing the withdrawal of its rule.
- 5/13/2026
- Motion to proceed to consideration of measure rejected in Senate by Voice Vote. (consideration: CR S2268)
- 4/27/2026
- Senate Committee on Banking, Housing, and Urban Affairs discharged, by petition, pursuant to 5 U.S.C. 802(c).
- Placed on Senate Legislative Calendar under General Orders. Calendar No. 397.
- 3/26/2026
- Read twice and referred to the Committee on Banking, Housing, and Urban Affairs.
- Introduced in Senate