Floor SpeechNeutral2026-05-13

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 WITHDRAWAL OF THE RULE...

EnvironmentForeign Policy

Context

On 2026-05-13, Senator Chris Van Hollen (D-MD) delivered a floor speech titled "PROVIDING FOR CONGRESSIONAL DISAPPROVAL UNDER CHAPTER 8 OF TITLE 5, UNITED STATES CODE, OF THE RULE SUBMITTED BY THE BUR" in the Senate.

Full Text

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 WITHDRAWAL OF THE RULE...

Congressional Record, Volume 172 Issue 81 (Wednesday, May 13, 2026) [Congressional Record Volume 172, Number 81 (Wednesday, May 13, 2026)] [Senate] [Pages S2265-S2266] From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [ www.gpo.gov ] 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 WITHDRAWAL OF THE RULE RELATING TO ``CONSUMER FINANCIAL PROTECTION CIRCULAR 2024-05: IMPROPER OVERDRAFT OPT-IN PRACTICES''--Motion to Proceed Mr. VAN HOLLEN. Mr. President, I move to proceed to Calendar No. 386, S.J. Res. 130. The PRESIDING OFFICER. The clerk will report the motion. The legislative clerk read as follows: Motion to proceed to Calendar No. 386, S.J. Res. 130, 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 withdrawal of the rule relating to ``Consumer Financial Protection Circular 2024-05: Improper Overdraft Opt-In Practices''. Mr. VAN HOLLEN. Mr. President, colleagues, overdraft fees are among the most abusive junk fees in our financial system. The average overdraft [[Page S2266]] is only $26 and is usually repaid within a few days, but many large banks charge $35 a fee per overdraft. That works out to an annual percentage of about more than 16,000 percent. So I want you to imagine that you are walking into a 7-Eleven. You are a little short on cash. You want to buy a cup of coffee. You go to the ATM machine. You take out 50 bucks. You buy a $2.50 cup of coffee, but it costs you about $40; and you don't even know it because the bank doesn't tell you. And then the next day you go to buy some groceries. This time you use your debit card, and they charge you another 35 bucks and don't tell you you have overdrawn. Well, these fees fall hardest on families living paycheck to paycheck. Federal law requires that these banks can charge an overdraft fee on these withdrawals only if consumers opt in--if they opt in. But many financial institutions use deceptive tricks and confusing fine print to get consumers to enter into these programs and then do not inform them of the costs. And banks not that long ago made about $30 billion in one year from these overdraft fees. So in 2024, the CFPB issued guidelines requiring banks to show proof that one of our constituents--one of our consumers--actually opted in, and that is what the Trump administration got rid of. They got rid of the enforcement mechanism that prevents our consumers from being gouged. I know a 35-buck fee is a drop in the bucket for Trump and his billionaire buddies. I know he is focused on his billion-dollar ballroom, but we need to focus on our constituents. And I will close with this. Just yesterday, President Trump said: I don't think about Americans' financial situation. Well, when they got rid of this rule, he proved he did not care about the financial situation of people living paycheck to paycheck. We should care. I urge my colleagues to adopt this resolution. Mr. President, I ask for the yeas and nays. Vote on Motion to Proceed The PRESIDING OFFICER. The question is on agreeing to the motion to proceed. Is there a sufficient second? There appears to be a sufficient second. The clerk will call the roll. The legislative clerk called the roll. The result was announced--yeas 47, nays 53, as follows: [Rollcall Vote No. 123 Leg.] YEAS--47 Alsobrooks Baldwin Bennet Blumenthal Blunt Rochester Booker Cantwell Coons Cortez Masto Duckworth Durbin Fetterman Gallego Gillibrand Hassan Heinrich Hickenlooper Hirono Kaine Kelly Kim King Klobuchar Lujan Markey Merkley Murphy Murray Ossoff Padilla Peters Reed Rosen Sanders Schatz Schiff Schumer Shaheen Slotkin Smith Van Hollen Warner Warnock Warren Welch Whitehouse Wyden NAYS--53 Armstrong Banks Barrasso Blackburn Boozman Britt Budd Capito Cassidy Collins Cornyn Cotton Cramer Crapo Cruz Curtis Daines Ernst Fischer Graham Grassley Hagerty Hawley Hoeven Husted Hyde-Smith Johnson Justice Kennedy Lankford Lee Lummis Marshall McConnell McCormick Moody Moran Moreno Murkowski Paul Ricketts Risch Rounds Schmitt Scott (FL) Scott (SC) Sheehy Sullivan Thune Tillis Tuberville Wicker Young The motion was rejected. The PRESIDING OFFICER (Mr. Justice). The Senator from Delaware. ____________________

Referenced legislation: SJRES130, SJRES130

View original source →

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 WITHDRAWAL OF THE RULE... Congressional Record, Volume 172 Issue 81 (Wednesday, May 13, 2026) [Congressional Record Volume 172, Number 81 (Wednesday, May 13, 2026)] [Senate] [Pages S2265-S2266] From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [ www.gpo.gov ] 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 WITHDRAWAL OF THE RULE RELATING TO ``CONSUMER FINANCIAL PROTECTION CIRCULAR 2024-05: IMPROPER OVERDRAFT OPT-IN PRACTICES''--Motion to Proceed Mr. VAN HOLLEN. Mr. President, I move to proceed to Calendar No. 386, S.J. Res. 130. The PRESIDING OFFICER. The clerk will report the motion. The legislative clerk read as follows: Motion to proceed to Calendar No. 386, S.J. Res. 130, 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 withdrawal of the rule relating to ``Consumer Financial Protection Circular 2024-05: Improper Overdraft Opt-In Practices''. Mr. VAN HOLLEN. Mr. President, colleagues, overdraft fees are among the most abusive junk fees in our financial system. The average overdraft [[Page S2266]] is only $26 and is usually repaid within a few days, but many large banks charge $35 a fee per overdraft. That works out to an annual percentage of about more than 16,000 percent. So I want you to imagine that you are walking into a 7-Eleven. You are a little short on cash. You want to buy a cup of coffee. You go to the ATM machine. You take out 50 bucks. You buy a $2.50 cup of coffee, but it costs you about $40; and you don't even know it because the bank doesn't tell you. And then the next day you go to buy some groceries. This time you use your debit card, and they charge you another 35 bucks and don't tell you you have overdrawn. Well, these fees fall hardest on families living paycheck to paycheck. Federal law requires that these banks can charge an overdraft fee on these withdrawals only if consumers opt in--if they opt in. But many financial institutions use deceptive tricks and confusing fine print to get consumers to enter into these programs and then do not inform them of the costs. And banks not that long ago made about $30 billion in one year from these overdraft fees. So in 2024, the CFPB issued guidelines requiring banks to show proof that one of our constituents--one of our consumers--actually opted in, and that is what the Trump administration got rid of. They got rid of the enforcement mechanism that prevents our consumers from being gouged. I know a 35-buck fee is a drop in the bucket for Trump and his billionaire buddies. I know he is focused on his billion-dollar ballroom, but we need to focus on our constituents. And I will close with this. Just yesterday, President Trump said: I don't think about Americans' financial situation. Well, when they got rid of this rule, he proved he did not care about the financial situation of people living paycheck to paycheck. We should care. I urge my colleagues to adopt this resolution. Mr. President, I ask for the yeas and nays. Vote on Motion to Proceed The PRESIDING OFFICER. The question is on agreeing to the motion to proceed. Is there a sufficient second? There appears to be a sufficient second. The clerk will call the roll. The legislative clerk called the roll. The result was announced--yeas 47, nays 53, as follows: [Rollcall Vote No. 123 Leg.] YEAS--47 Alsobrooks Baldwin Bennet Blumenthal Blunt Rochester Booker Cantwell Coons Cortez Masto Duckworth Durbin Fetterman Gallego Gillibrand Hassan Heinrich Hickenlooper Hirono Kaine Kelly Kim King Klobuchar Lujan Markey Merkley Murphy Murray Ossoff Padilla Peters Reed Rosen Sanders Schatz Schiff Schumer Shaheen Slotkin Smith Van Hollen Warner Warnock Warren Welch Whitehouse Wyden NAYS--53 Armstrong Banks Barrasso Blackburn Boozman Britt Budd Capito Cassidy Collins Cornyn Cotton Cramer Crapo Cruz Curtis Daines Ernst Fischer Graham Grassley Hagerty Hawley Hoeven Husted Hyde-Smith Johnson Justice Kennedy Lankford Lee Lummis Marshall McConnell McCormick Moody Moran Moreno Murkowski Paul Ricketts Risch Rounds Schmitt Scott (FL) Scott (SC) Sheehy Sullivan Thune Tillis Tuberville Wicker Young The motion was rejected. The PRESIDING OFFICER (Mr. Justice). The Senator from Delaware. ____________________ Referenced legislation: SJRES130, SJRES130