John Hickenlooper (D-CO)
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 "Bulletin 2015-07 re: in-person collection of consumer debt".
A Democratic resolution with no cosponsors
Last activity — Read twice and referred to the Committee on Banking, Housing, and Urban Affairs.
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 aims to provide congressional disapproval of a rule submitted by the Bureau of Consumer Financial Protection. The rule in question relates to the withdrawal of a previous rule regarding "Bulletin 2015-07 re: in-person collection of consumer debt." If passed, the resolution declares that the submitted rule shall have no force or effect. The resolution was introduced by Mr. Hickenlooper in the Senate.
Yes
No question was scored yes.
The opposite· 3 of 6
- Scored -5
Does this give people more protection from unfair business practices?
The resolution disapproves a rule that would have withdrawn protections regarding how consumer debt is collected in person, potentially leaving consumers more vulnerable to aggressive collection tactics.
- Scored -4
Would households on low incomes be better off under this?
The reversal of debt collection protections could negatively impact low-income individuals who are frequently targeted by debt collectors.
- Scored -2
Would middle-income households be better off under this?
The loss of consumer debt collection safeguards may negatively affect middle-income households facing debt collection issues.
Who it would affect, and how
Potential Positive Impacts for People
- There are no specific positive impacts or benefits for individuals or groups of people explicitly mentioned in the provided text.
Potential Negative Impacts for People
- There are no specific negative impacts or burdens for individuals or groups of people explicitly mentioned in 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.
- Demographic And Interest Groups
- Would households on low incomes be better off under this? — The reversal of debt collection protections could negatively impact low-income individuals who are frequently targeted by debt collectors. Would middle-income households be better off under this? — The loss of consumer debt collection safeguards may negatively affect middle-income households facing debt collection issues. Would people in cities be better off under this? — Reduced protections on debt collection could disproportionately impact urban populations facing higher rates of consumer debt.
- Economy And Finance
- Does this give people more protection from unfair business practices? — The resolution disapproves a rule that would have withdrawn protections regarding how consumer debt is collected in person, potentially leaving consumers more vulnerable to aggressive collection tactics.
- Governance And Ideology
- Does this give the federal government more power? — The resolution uses congressional authority to overturn a rule proposed by a federal agency, thereby limiting that agency's regulatory reach.
- Social Issues And Justice
- Is this likely to lift people out of poverty? — By removing protections against specific in-person debt collection methods, the resolution may increase financial instability for those in debt.
- 4/13/2026
- Read twice and referred to the Committee on Banking, Housing, and Urban Affairs.
- Introduced in Senate
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.