H.R.es282 - Providing for consideration of the joint resolution (S.J. Res. 18) disapproving the rule submitted by the Bureau of Consumer Financial Protection relating to Overdraft Lending: Very Large Financial Institutions"; providing for consideration of the joint resolution (S.J. Res. 28) disapproving the rule submitted by the Bureau of Consumer Financial Protection relating to "Defining Larger Participants of a Market for General-Use Digital Consumer Payment Applications"; providing for cons…
Summary
H.Res. 282 is a resolution providing for the consideration of several joint resolutions and bills in the House of Representatives. These include S.J. Res. 18 and S.J. Res. 28, both disapproving rules submitted by the Bureau of Consumer Financial Protection (BCFP) regarding overdraft lending by large financial institutions and defining larger participants in digital payment applications, respectively. The resolution also addresses H.R. 1526, which seeks to limit the authority of district courts to provide injunctive relief, and H.R. 22, aiming to amend the National Voter Registration Act of 1993 by requiring proof of U.S. citizenship for federal elections.
The resolution outlines the procedures for considering these measures, including waiving points of order, setting debate times, and allowing motions to recommit. It also lays on the table House Resolutions 23 and 164 and restricts motions to discharge committees from considering similar bills or resolutions.
Ultimately, this resolution is a procedural step to bring these specific issues to the House floor for debate and potential votes.
Expected Effects
The resolution, if adopted, will allow the House to consider the disapproval of the BCFP rules on overdraft lending and digital payment applications. It also sets the stage for debating limitations on district court injunctive relief and requiring proof of citizenship for voter registration.
The passage of H.Res. 282 does not guarantee the passage of any of the underlying bills or joint resolutions, but it does streamline the process for their consideration. This can lead to a faster debate and vote on these issues.
If the underlying bills and joint resolutions are subsequently passed, there could be significant changes to consumer financial protection, judicial authority, and voter registration requirements.
Potential Benefits
- Streamlines the legislative process for key issues related to consumer finance, judicial authority, and voter registration.
- Allows for focused debate and consideration of specific concerns regarding BCFP regulations.
- Provides an opportunity for Congress to assert its oversight role over regulatory agencies.
- Enables a discussion on potential reforms to the injunctive relief process in district courts.
- Facilitates a debate on measures intended to ensure the integrity of federal elections.
Potential Disadvantages
- Could lead to the weakening of consumer financial protections if the joint resolutions disapproving BCFP rules are passed.
- May limit the ability of district courts to provide injunctive relief, potentially impacting access to justice.
- Could create barriers to voter registration, particularly for naturalized citizens or those with limited access to required documentation.
- The expedited process may limit thorough consideration and public input on these complex issues.
- Could be perceived as politically motivated, potentially exacerbating partisan divisions.
Constitutional Alignment
The resolution itself is a procedural measure within the powers granted to the House of Representatives under Article I, Section 5, which allows each house to determine the rules of its proceedings. The underlying bills and joint resolutions raise constitutional questions related to the separation of powers, due process, and voting rights.
- S.J. Res. 18 & 28 (BCFP Rules): Congressional review of agency regulations is generally permissible, but the extent of congressional power to overturn agency rules can be debated under the principle of separation of powers.
- H.R. 1526 (Injunctive Relief): Limiting the power of federal courts to issue injunctions raises questions about the judiciary's role in checking the other branches of government.
- H.R. 22 (Voter Registration): Requiring proof of citizenship to register to vote implicates the 14th Amendment's Equal Protection Clause and the right to vote. The National Voter Registration Act of 1993 aimed to ease voter registration, and this bill would potentially restrict it.
Impact Assessment: Things You Care About ⓘ
This action has been evaluated across 19 key areas that matter to you. Scores range from 1 (highly disadvantageous) to 5 (highly beneficial).