Congressional Record, Volume 166 Issue 19 (Wednesday, January 29, 2020)

[Congressional Record Volume 166, Number 19 (Wednesday, January 29, 2020)]
[House]
[Pages H653-H697]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]

STUDENT BORROWER CREDIT IMPROVEMENT ACT

General Leave

Ms. WATERS. Mr. Speaker, I ask unanimous consent that all Members
have 5 legislative days to revise and extend their remarks and include
extraneous materials on H.R. 3621.
The SPEAKER pro tempore. Is there objection to the request of the
gentlewoman from California?
There was no objection.
The SPEAKER pro tempore. Pursuant to House Resolution 811 and rule
XVIII, the Chair declares the House in the Committee of the Whole House
on the state of the Union for the consideration of the bill, H.R. 3621.
The Chair appoints the gentleman from the Northern Mariana Islands
(Mr. Sablan) to preside over the Committee of the Whole.

{time} 1314

In the Committee of the Whole

Accordingly, the House resolved itself into the Committee of the
Whole House on the state of the Union for the consideration of the bill
(H.R. 3621) to amend the Fair Credit Reporting Act to remove adverse
information for certain defaulted or delinquent private education loan
borrowers who demonstrate a history of loan repayment, and for other
purposes, with Mr. Sablan in the chair.
The Clerk read the title of the bill.
The CHAIR. Pursuant to the rule, the bill is considered read the
first time.
General debate shall be confined to the bill and amendments specified
in

[[Page H654]]

the first section of House Resolution 811 and shall not exceed 1 hour
equally divided and controlled by the chair and ranking minority member
of the Committee on Financial Services.
The gentlewoman from California (Ms. Waters) and the gentleman from
North Carolina (Mr. McHenry) each will control 30 minutes.
The Chair recognizes the gentlewoman from California.
Ms. WATERS. Mr. Chairman, I yield myself such time as I may consume.
Mr. Chairman, I rise today in support of H.R. 3621, the Comprehensive
Credit Reporting Enhancement, Disclosure, Innovation, and Transparency
Act, legislation sponsored by Representative Ayanna Pressley of
Massachusetts. This package of bills builds upon reforms that members
of the Financial Services Committee have been developing for several
Congresses.
Mr. Chairman, credit reporting is unlike any other business.
Consumers are not customers of credit reporting agencies; they are the
product. Credit reporting agencies package up consumers' data to sell
to lenders, employers, and other businesses.
Unfortunately, our system of consumer credit reporting is badly
broken, and consumers have little recourse. It is typical for credit
reports to be filled with unacceptable errors that are difficult for
consumers to correct. A Federal Trade Commission study found that one
in five consumers have verified errors in their credit reports, and 1
in 20 consumers have errors so serious that they would be denied credit
or need to pay more for it. This means about 42 million consumers have
errors in their credit reports and 10 million have reports that can be
life-altering.
Consumers are frustrated with the current system. In 2018, the
Consumer Financial Protection Bureau received 126,300 consumer
complaints on credit reporting, which was more than one-third of all
complaints submitted. The Consumer Financial Protection Bureau received
more complaints about credit reporting than any other issue.
This legislative package makes critical reforms to help consumers by
addressing problems with the credit reporting system.
The legislation includes H.R. 3642, the Improving Credit Reporting
for All Consumers Act, a bill sponsored by Representative Alma Adams,
which would address burdens consumers experience when trying to remove
errors from their consumer reports, including by providing a new right
to appeal the results of initial reviews about the accuracy or
completeness of disputed items on the report.
The package also includes H.R. 3622, the Restoring Unfairly Impaired
Credit and Protecting Consumers Act, a bill sponsored by Representative
Rashida Tlaib. This part of the bill would limit how long adverse
credit information stays on consumer reports, and it would protect
consumer victims by removing adverse information relating to predatory,
discriminatory, or otherwise unlawful loans made by a financial
institution. It would also prohibit reporting debt relating to
medically necessary procedures and delay reporting by 1 year for other
medical debt.
In addition, the package includes H.R. 3614, the Restricting Use of
Credit Checks for Employment Decisions Act, a bill sponsored by
Representative Al Lawson. This part of the bill would prohibit
employers from using credit reports for employment decisions, except
when a credit report is otherwise required to conduct a background
check by Federal, State, or local law or for a national security
clearance.
Then there is H.R. 3621, the Student Borrower Credit Improvement Act,
a bill sponsored by Representative Pressley, which is also included in
the legislation. This part of the bill would help student borrowers who
may have been delinquent on paying their private student loans to
repair their credit after they demonstrate a history of timely loan
repayments for these loans, similar to how the credit reports of
borrowers with Federal student loans can be rehabilitated.
Another key measure included in this package is H.R. 3629, the
Clarity in Credit Score Formation Act, sponsored by Representative
Stephen Lynch. This legislation would direct the CFPB to provide
oversight and set standards for validating the accuracy and predictive
value of credit score models, and it would promote innovation by
requiring a study on how the use of nontraditional data might impact
the availability and affordability of credit for consumers with limited
or no traditional credit histories.
Finally, the package includes H.R. 3618, the Free Credit Scores for
Consumers Act, sponsored by Representative Joyce Beatty, which would
direct the nationwide CRAs to give consumers free copies of their
credit scores that are used by creditors in making credit decisions, as
determined by the CFPB, whenever consumers obtain their free annual
consumer reports.

I am pleased that this bill also includes a provision that I have
worked on with a range of other Members that excludes from credit
reports any adverse information about a Federal employee and others who
are affected by a government shutdown.
Mr. Chairman, I urge all Members to support these commonsense reforms
to improve the Nation's consumer reporting system and benefit
hardworking American consumers.
Mr. Chairman, I reserve the balance of my time.
Mr. McHENRY. Mr. Chairman, I yield myself such time as I may consume.
Mr. Chairman, I rise in opposition to the bill before us. This is a
Democrat bill under the guise of consumer protection that will destroy
the accuracy and completeness of consumer credit files. This will lead
to a weaker financial system, undermining a great deal of safety and
soundness that we have built up over decades. This will, in essence,
socialize credit scoring and, therefore, credit allocation.
Mr. Chairman, this is an election year. I see that, and I see that
not just in the rhetoric here in the House but in the legislation that
is before us today.
This bill will weaken underwriting standards. It will make extending
credit a riskier and more expensive activity, ultimately impacting both
the cost and accessibility of credit for all Americans.
Let me be clear. For more than 1 year now, I have made the same
statement on the House floor when the House Financial Services
Committee has a bill here on the floor. Committee Republicans stand
ready to work with the Democrats on issues that are important to the
American people, and this bill is a prime example of this. We support
policies that create jobs, grow our economy, and make our Nation more
secure.
Today is no different. Republicans want to work with Democrats to
help all consumers, especially consumers who may be struggling to
access the necessary credit to apply for a home loan or replace a
broken washing machine or perhaps even start a small business.
We want to reach a bipartisan compromise to reform the Fair Credit
Reporting Act, or FCRA. We want to find a compromise that meaningfully
helps consumers and, at the same time, stands a chance of being signed
into law.
This bill is not that. I fear my colleagues have thrown out
bipartisanship in favor of satisfying political allies in an election
year.
This bill socializes credit modeling giving, the CFPB, an
unaccountable bureau within the government, the ability to develop,
maintain, and regulate credit modeling and factors used in analysis.
You will have politicians making the decisions on how credit is
scored, Mr. Chairman. That is a dangerous thing and something in the
United States we should not stand for.
This bill prevents employers from knowing the creditworthiness of
employees. This creates a situation in which employees who are in
significant debt could be targets of bribes or extortion or perhaps
take money that is owed to other people.
This bill creates a boon for the trial lawyers, creating new
reinvestigation and appeals processes to be exploited by the trial bar.
This bill diminishes the value of a credit score as a determining
factor in extending credit--I don't think that is a secondary fact; I
think that is the primary goal of this bill--by removing past credit
scores after 2 years from a report and prohibiting those scores within
the 2-year period from being used as a factor.
This bill also arbitrarily changes the time period negative
information, such as a missed payment, remain on a consumer's credit
report.

[[Page H655]]

This bill makes it more difficult for private lenders to compete in
the student loan industry by allowing delinquent borrowers or a
borrower who has defaulted on a loan to rehabilitate their credit
outside of the contractual terms.
This bill imposes unfunded mandates on the private sector to really
an unprecedented degree.
These provisions make clear what Democrats want to accomplish in this
bill. They want to socialize credit and the models underlying credit
allocation. This bill takes credit reporting out of the hands of the
private sector and gives it to the government.
Let me be clear. I am no fan of the large credit reporting agencies,
also known as CRAs. In fact, during our one hearing on this topic last
February, nearly 1 year ago at this point--I use the term loosely--that
we discussed this bill, because it was just a discussion draft and much
different from what we have before us. But in that hearing, we didn't
discuss the implications of this bill or the FCRA. I made it clear at
that hearing that I share the chairwoman's concerns with the credit
reporting agencies, their lack of competition, and their oligopoly. In
fact, there were aspects of the original discussion draft of this bill
that are not part of what we have today that I thought had merit and
should be explored in greater detail.
For example, I have concerns that CRAs' operations are not as
consumer-friendly as they could be or should be. Moreover, not once
after that hearing did the committee consult with additional subject
matter experts on the inefficiencies, ineffectiveness, or improvements
needed to the Fair Credit Reporting Act. Not once after that February
hearing did we discuss how to make CRAs work better for the consumer.
Not once did we have real bipartisan discussions about what we could
achieve and get signed into law.
This is something that both Republicans and Democrats actually agree
on, the need to reform this process. I agree that we should be
disclosing public record data sources. I agree we should exclude paid
medically necessary medical debt from consumer credit reports. I agree
we should prohibit certain adverse information resulting from financial
abuse or predatory lending from being included in consumer credit
reports.

In fact, the substitute amendment I filed with the Rules Committee
that was not made in order this day includes the bipartisan reform I
described and more.
Committee Republicans support reforms such as prohibiting the use of
Social Security numbers to verify consumers. Now, this is a primary
source and a primary ingredient for identity fraud. We should take
action there, and I think we can.
Committee Republicans also support facilitating online credit freezes
and the removal of credit files for minors and children. We also
support studying the use of nontraditional data in credit scoring as
well as codifying the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau's, or the
CFPB's, credit reporting registry.
I think there are things that we can do. Bipartisanship is within our
grasp. All my colleagues have to do is reach out and grab it.
As I said, Republicans stand ready to work with Democrats to help
consumers. But this bill is about socializing credit and credit
allocation, and this bill is not the answer to the consumers'
challenge. In fact, the Democrats' bill will only hurt the very
consumers we are trying to help.
Mr. Chairman, I urge my colleagues to oppose this socialization of
credit reporting and vote ``no'' on this bill. I reserve the balance of
my time.
Ms. WATERS. Mr. Chairman, this really should be a bipartisan bill,
but my friends on the opposite side of the aisle have not been willing
to really work in a bipartisan way. His bill was rejected in the Rules
Committee because it was not germane. If he agrees with us on all of
the items he identified, he should be supporting this bill.
Mr. Chairman, I yield 5 minutes to the gentlewoman from Massachusetts
(Ms. Pressley), who is a sponsor of this important legislation.

{time} 1330

Ms. PRESSLEY. Mr. Chair, in this country, our credit reports are our
reputations, determining where you can live, where you can work, and
how much it will cost you to finance everything from a car to a college
degree. But our credit reporting system is fundamentally flawed, rife
with inequities and disparities that stifle the upward mobility of
millions of hardworking Americans.
I am proud to rise in support of my Comprehensive Credit Reporting
Enhancement, Disclosure, Innovation, and Transparency, or Comprehensive
CREDIT, Act, a critical package of reforms that will improve our
fundamentally flawed credit reporting system.
How and what information is shared with credit reporting agencies is
especially important as Americans take on ever-increasing debt simply
for trying to afford basic needs: housing, healthcare, and higher
education.
Trailing only mortgages, student loan debt is now the second highest
form of consumer debt, impacting nearly one-fifth of U.S. households
and totaling over $1.6 trillion. That is trillion with a T. In my home
State of Massachusetts, alone, over 855,000 borrowers owe a total of
$33.3 billion in student loan debt.
That is why I am especially proud the Comprehensive CREDIT Act
includes reforms originally introduced in my Student Borrower Credit
Improvement Act, reforms that would establish a credit rehabilitation
process for private student loan borrowers facing hardship, making
students eligible to have all associated derogatory remarks removed
from their credit reports, which can otherwise stay on for 7 years.
Even if we wipe out all student debt tomorrow, the devastating impact
on consumers' credit would remain for years to come. For that very
reason, we must give folks a real chance at recovery and repair.
It is estimated that one in five Americans has a potential error on
their credit report; but, for too long, credit reporting agencies have
kept consumers in the dark and made it difficult to correct errors that
do come to light. The Comprehensive CREDIT Act will ensure that
consumers can quickly and easily rectify those errors.
At a time when wages are stagnant but the cost of housing, childcare,
and education continue to rise, we should be working to provide our
constituents pathways to financial stability and success. It is why
this bill would restrict the use of credit scores for most hiring
decisions, limit the amount of time that adverse information can remain
on a person's credit profile, and ban the reporting of any debt as a
result of medically necessary procedures.
I urge my colleagues to support the Comprehensive CREDIT Act and
ensure a more equitable and transparent credit reporting system for
all.
Mr. McHENRY. Mr. Chair, I yield 2\1/2\ minutes to the gentleman from
Missouri (Mr. Luetkemeyer), who is the ranking member of the Consumer
Protection and Financial Institutions Subcommittee.
Mr. LUETKEMEYER. Mr. Chair, the bill we are considering today is made
of six extremely partisan pieces of legislation. This package will not
receive substantial bipartisan support and is dead on arrival in the
Senate.
Unfortunately, instead of working in a bipartisan manner to improve
credit reporting for consumers, the majority has chosen to advance
legislation that simply attacks an industry, to the consumers'
detriment.
I think the ranking member made a number of points a while ago with
regard to the willingness of the minority to advance a lot of different
solutions to some of the concerns that we all have, yet they were not
heard.
Each piece of legislation in this package has one of two goals--the
first goal is to expand the authority of the CFPB over credit modeling;
the second is to eliminate as much information from the credit report
as possible--both of which will increase the cost of credit and make it
even more difficult for low- and moderate-income families to receive a
loan.
If the financial institution is unable to analyze a risk, it has to
increase the cost to be able to cover the additional risk. It is just
that simple.
In this Congress, we have had witness after witness come before our
committee and praise and support the use of alternative credit
modeling. Using alternative data can increase access to

[[Page H656]]

credit, particularly for low-income consumers and the underbanked.
Instead of supporting efforts to modernize and increase credit
access, the majority seems inclined to stifle innovation by requiring
the CFPB, an unaccountable government agency, to determine what factors
can be used in credit scoring. Putting the government in charge of
establishing credit scores for consumers is a dangerous notion that
strikes at the heart of economic freedom in this country.
By eliminating the information that appears on the credit report, my
colleagues on the other side of the aisle are weakening one of the most
objective and accurate ways to determine creditworthiness of borrowers.
If lenders can no longer rely on a credit report to reflect the
actual risk of a borrower, the lender will be forced to increase their
rates to ensure they are pricing the additional risk they are taking.
This increased cost of credit will directly affect the individuals who
are on the margins, notably low- and moderate-income borrowers.
While I think the majority may have good intentions with this
legislation, government control of credit modeling and decreased access
to credit for low-income families sounds like a disastrous recipe for
our economy. That is why I am opposing the legislation, Mr. Chair, and
I urge my colleagues to do so as well.
Ms. WATERS. Mr. Chair, I yield 3 minutes to the gentlewoman from Ohio
(Mrs. Beatty), who is the chairwoman of the Subcommittee on Diversity
and Inclusion and a sponsor of legislation that is a part of this bill,
H.R. 3621.
Mrs. BEATTY. Mr. Chair, I want to start by thanking Chairwoman Waters
and the House Democratic Caucus for bringing this package of bills to
the House Floor, the Comprehensive CREDIT Act, which includes my bill,
the Free Credit Scores for Consumers Act. This bill would require the
three national consumer reporting agencies to include a free credit
score with a consumer's free annual credit report.

Under the current law, Mr. Chair, every consumer is entitled to a
free annual credit report from the three national credit reporting
agencies but not a credit score.
It is important for consumers to have free access to the three-digit
number that affects so much of their financial lives; yet too many
Americans do not actually even know what their credit score is, how it
is calculated, or where to find it. This bill would help remedy that
problem.
Critics may say that consumers can already receive a free credit
score online, but what they don't tell them is that these products use
your credit data to sell to third parties so they can, in turn, market
financial products back to you.
This bill allows consumers a one-stop shop to get their credit scores
directly from the credit reporting agencies who hold the information
that makes up those scores, no strings attached. Moreover, my bill
would require more financial literacy information about credit scores
and credit reports to be sent to consumers along with these reports.
I urge my colleagues on the other side to stand up for this bill, to
stand up for their constituents, and to allow consumers to take greater
control of their own financial data.
And do you know why they can do this? Because their constituents are
our constituents, and they have asked for this. So we are asking them
to vote ``yes'' on this piece of legislation.
Mr. McHENRY. Mr. Chair, I yield 3\1/2\ minutes to the gentleman from
Kentucky (Mr. Barr), the Republican ranking member of the Oversight and
Investigations Subcommittee.
Mr. BARR. Mr. Chair, I rise today in strong opposition to H.R. 3621,
a bill that has been misnamed as the Comprehensive CREDIT Act of 2020.
A more appropriate title of the bill would be the ``Incomplete and
Inaccurate Credit Act,'' because the bill's core purpose is to remove
critically important predictive data from credit reports.
Even worse, the bill would give unprecedented authority to the
Consumer Financial Protection Bureau to control, micromanage, and
politicize the development of credit scoring models.
This bill and its authors trust in the abilities of unelected
Washington bureaucrats to price risk for millions of Americans, which
will result in higher cost and fewer choices for consumers and will
harm low- and middle-income borrowers who are trying to build a credit
profile.
The accurate pricing of risk is an essential element of a functioning
economy. Pricing a loan, underwriting an insurance policy, or tailoring
a line of credit for a borrower all require a reliance on risk-based
metrics. Credit scores allow for a holistic view of a consumer's
history with financial products and allow an institution to understand
that consumer's ability to honor his or her obligations.
This bill would upend our current system of pricing risk by turning
over the private sector's creditworthiness models to the government and
placing a wildly unrealistic confidence in central planning rather than
free enterprise.
My Democrat colleagues continue to believe that a centralized
bureaucratic agency is the best and only option to fully protect
consumers. The irony is that this bill would result in much less
accurate credit scoring and would harm the very people my colleagues
purport to help.
If you think that private credit scoring is flawed and disadvantages
the borrowing public, just wait until the government is in charge. We
continue to see the CFPB's incompetence on full display, and credit
scoring will not be any different.
We need a credit reporting system that relies on accurate, risk-
based, predictive metrics. Our goal should be to allow people with good
credit to have access to financial products at a reasonable price and
to provide means for people with lower scores to rebuild their credit
on a path to a more prosperous future.
Putting credit reporting metrics in the hands of unelected
bureaucrats and boxing out the private sector will make financial
products more expensive and less available for all citizens and have
detrimental downstream effects on our credit-based economy. Worse, it
risks politicizing credit scores instead of assigning scores based on
an accurate and fulsome credit history.
We should not replace the accountability of market forces and free
enterprise with the unaccountability of government bureaucracy. This
bill will politicize credit reporting by empowering an inherently
political agency.
The question is not whether the CFPB will fail our constituents; it
is how badly it will fail them.
Mr. Chair, I urge my colleagues to oppose this bill.
Ms. WATERS. Mr. Chair, I yield 3 minutes to the gentlewoman from
North Carolina (Ms. Adams), who is a sponsor of one of the bills in
this comprehensive legislative package, H.R. 3621.
Ms. ADAMS. Mr. Chair, I rise today to join my colleagues in support
of H.R. 3621, the Comprehensive CREDIT Act.
I commend Chairwoman Waters, Congresswoman Pressley, and my
colleagues for their leadership and dedication to ensuring that the
credit reporting system works for everyone.
Our Nation's credit reporting system has an impact on hundreds of
millions of Americans. Credit scores and credit reports are
increasingly relied on for key decisionmaking by creditors, employers,
insurers, and even law enforcement. However, it has been more than 15
years since Congress has enacted comprehensive reform of the credit
reporting system.
In particular, I would like to focus on the consumers who have
experienced financial distress due to inaccurate information on their
credit reports.
When there is an error on a consumer report, the burden falls on the
consumer. It can take months and even, in some cases, years to remove
an error on a consumer's report, all the while the consumer's credit
continues to suffer, potentially preventing them from receiving a much-
needed loan or financing.

{time} 1345

My bill, the Improving Credit Reporting for All Consumers Act, which
is part of this larger package, would help consumers by making it
easier for incorrect information to be removed swiftly and painlessly.
It would make much-needed improvements to the dispute process for
consumers by providing a new right to appeal the results of initial
disputes.

[[Page H657]]

It would also require furnishers to retain better records of negative
information and that consumers be provided copies of any documents used
during the dispute process. All furnishers who regularly report
negative information would also be required to notify customers about
this practice and alert customers when they first send derogatory
information.
The second portion of my bill prohibits credit reporting agencies
from providing consumers with misleading and unfair information about
the various credit monitoring services they offer.
Credit reporting agencies would also be prohibited from misleading
consumers by describing certain products and services as free that are,
in truth, provided at no charge only for a limited trial period before
automatically converting into a paid subscription service.
The naysayers will say that my bill is well-meaning but significantly
flawed because the dispute process would make things more complicated
and difficult, but they would be wrong. The status quo is difficult and
cumbersome, and too many consumers' lives, credit, and opportunities
for healthy financial records hang in the balance.
Credit scores have a significant bearing on your ability to secure
access to loans and other opportunities for upward economic mobility.
This is an issue far too important, life-altering, and impactful. We
must do all that we can to ensure that consumers are fully
knowledgeable about their options and that they have the necessary
protections available to them.
Mr. Chairman, I urge my colleagues to support this bold package.
Mr. McHENRY. Mr. Chairman, I yield 2\1/2\ minutes to the gentleman
from Texas (Mr. Williams), my colleague from Weatherford.
Mr. WILLIAMS. Mr. Chairman, I rise today in opposition to H.R. 3621.
As a business owner and lender, I know firsthand the value that
complete and accurate credit reports have in making sound business
decisions.
For any business that relies on financing, risk-based pricing is
essential in order to offer each customer the lowest rate possible.
Every time a deal is broken, the cost gets passed along to the next
customer.
Your handshake is worth something. When you are trying to get a loan,
people need to know that your signature is worth something as well.
In Texas, a deal is a deal, and you must always live up to your end
of the bargain. For those customers who have been financially
responsible and always paid their debts on time, they are rewarded with
lower rates. For those borrowers who have not paid their debts on time,
financial institutions are forced to price in this inherent risk.
Whether a person is buying a car, a private jet, or a cow, the lender
needs to be paid back in order to be able to continue offering lines of
credit to responsible people in their community.
Mr. Chair, I am concerned that this bill would take us down a path
where lenders are receiving incomplete credit reports that have been
scrubbed of all negative information. In other words, hiding
information results in greater risk for the lender. This would make
borrowing money more expensive for all customers since financial
institutions will have a worse picture about who will be able to repay
their debts and who will not.
Again, I remind you we say and always should remember: A deal is a
deal.
Mr. Chair, I urge my colleagues to vote ``no'' on this bill.
Ms. WATERS. Mr. Chair, our next speaker is a sponsor of one of the
bills in H.R. 3621. She will have an opportunity to correct the ranking
member, who indicated the bill would remove negative credit after 2
years. It does not. She will clear that up and make sure that he
understands the facts of our bill.
Mr. Chair, I yield 3 minutes to the gentlewoman from Michigan (Ms.
Tlaib).
Ms. TLAIB. Mr. Chair, I thank Chairwoman Waters and her intelligent,
hardworking staff for their leadership on this bill.
I also thank my sister-in-service, Congresswoman Ayanna Pressley, for
spearheading this package of bills, the Comprehensive CREDIT Act of
2020. A new decade, a new way, as our chairwoman would say.
I am also proud that our package of bills before us today includes
H.R. 3622, the Restoring Unfairly Impaired Credit and Protecting
Consumers Act. We are all aware of how expensive medical bills are and
how easily one sickness or accident can bring families to financial
ruin. According to the Urban Institute, regardless of age, income,
insurance status, or ethnicity, one in four individuals are at risk of
losing their health, homes, credit standing, and financial security
annually because of the harms of medical debt.
The bill prohibits the reporting of medically necessary debt often
incurred for seeking lifesaving treatment and protects the credit
profile of those struggling with medical debt by stopping the credit
reporting agency from reporting this debt for 1 year, twice the current
practice.
This bill also protects the survivors of financial abuse. A study by
the Federal Trade Commission shows that 21 percent of consumers had
verified errors in their credit report; 13 percent had errors that
affected their credit scores; and 5 percent had errors serious enough
to cause them to be denied or pay more for credit.
Our bill would make sure that fellow Americans suffering from
circumstances beyond their control are not punished or left out of
future opportunities to responsibly build and rebuild credit because of
risk factors beyond their control.

By passing this bill, we will make it easier for our neighbors
struggling to recover from predatory loans and fraudulent activity by
requiring that credit reporting agencies remove negative information
from credit reports relating to loans that are unfair, deceptive,
abusive, and otherwise illegal.
Lastly, and probably the most transformative provision, this bill
shortens the length of time that bad marks stay on your credit report
from 7 years to 4 years.
This package will open up doors for economic opportunities for
millions of people across our country. No one should be stopped from
becoming a homeowner or bettering their life because of bad debt.
Mr. Chair, that is why I urge my colleagues to support this bill.
Mr. McHENRY. Mr. Chairman, I reserve the balance of my time.
Ms. WATERS. Mr. Chairman, I yield 3 minutes to the gentleman from
Massachusetts (Mr. Lynch), who is chairman of the Task Force on
Financial Technology, and a sponsor of H.R. 3629, one of the bills that
is making up this package.
Mr. LYNCH. Mr. Chairman, I thank the gentlewoman from California for
her longtime leadership on this issue. I also thank my colleague, Ms.
Pressley from Massachusetts, for her work as well.
I am extremely grateful that the text of my bill, H.R. 3629, the
Clarity in Credit Score Formation Act, which would require the Consumer
Financial Protection Bureau to periodically evaluate the models and
underlying algorithms used to measure consumer creditworthiness, has
been made part of this measure.
I also appreciate the opportunity to speak in favor of my colleague's
work, which is embodied in H.R. 3621, the Comprehensive CREDIT Act,
which is before us today.
Mr. Chair, as we have heard throughout debate, credit reports and
credit scores are an important part of American consumers' financial
lives. Yet, despite that importance, we continue to see serious
problems with the way creditworthiness is measured and with the credit
models that the credit agencies use.
We know that consumers have consistently faced errors in their credit
reports and that, oftentimes, those errors are serious enough to impact
important opportunities in obtaining housing and other major financial
decisions. These errors can lead directly to consumers being denied
credit or paying substantially more for the credit that they do
receive.
Despite complaints from my Republican colleagues, by expanding the
pool of information used to make credit decisions, applicants and
lenders actually won't have to rely solely on often-flawed data in
credit reports, and consumers can get the credit they deserve for
regularly paying their rent on time and their bills on time and more,
without raising the cost to the system of doing so.

[[Page H658]]

While these new uses of data can allow expanded access to credit,
sometimes that same data can be misconstrued and result in unfair
discrimination. We have seen this most clearly in the credit scores of
our sons and daughters in uniform and military personnel in the Armed
Forces.
It is customary that service to our Nation requires military families
to move around fairly frequently as deployments and unit assignments
change. Taken by itself and out of context, frequently moving your
residence year to year can give the false impression to a credit agency
that an applicant is not in a stable situation and can adversely impact
their ability to access credit.
Other uses of data can be closely related to factors such as race or
gender, or become a proxy for a protected class.
We have already seen examples of this. The Department of Housing and
Urban Development has sued Facebook over its use of data-targeting,
which violates the Fair Housing Act by adversely stereotyping families
who live in public housing projects. Even Housing Secretary Carson has
openly stated: ``Facebook is discriminating against people based upon
who they are and where they live.''
The CHAIR. The time of the gentleman has expired.
Ms. WATERS. Mr. Chairman, I yield an additional 1 minute to the
gentleman from Massachusetts.
Mr. LYNCH. These charges followed on the heels of charges that
Facebook entered into a financial settlement after accusations that
landlords, lenders, and employers improperly used that platform to
unfairly discriminate against families seeking housing opportunities.
That is why we need clarity in credit score formation. That is why we
need this bill.
Importantly, with the expansion of mobile banking, it requires a
study on the impact of using nontraditional data on consumer reports
and the use of alternative data in credit scoring models.
Much to Chairwoman Waters' and Ms. Pressley's credit, this is a very
good bill that will help us harness the power of mobile technology and
alternative data to improve outcomes for consumers.
Mr. Chair, in closing, I thank my colleagues, Mr. Lawson of Florida,
Mrs. Beatty of Ohio, Ms. Pressley of Massachusetts, Ms. Tlaib of
Michigan, and Ms. Adams of North Carolina for their great contribution,
along with Chairwoman Waters, in making this successful legislation.
Mr. Chair, I urge a ``yes'' vote.
Mr. McHENRY. Mr. Chairman, I yield myself such time as I may consume.
Mr. Chairman, I submit for the Record page 114 of the bill, and I
would highlight these sections, line 4, ``Maintenance of Credit
Scores.''
``Subsection A: In General. All consumer credit reporting agencies
shall maintain the consumer's file credit scores relating to the
consumer for a period of 2 years from the date on which such
information is generated.
``Subsection B: Disclosure Only to Consumers. A past credit score
maintained in a consumer's file pursuant to subparagraph A may only be
provided to the consumer to which the credit score relates and may not
be included in a consumer report or used as a factor in generating a
credit score or educational credit score.
``Subsection C: Removal of the Past Credit Scores. A past credit
score maintained in a consumer's file pursuant to subparagraph A shall
be removed from the consumer's file after the end of the 2-year period
described under subparagraph A.''
This is the section of the bill that says that your consumer credit
report can only be 2 years old--your score. Now, the data can be
longer, but your score can only use 2 years of past data.
That is deeply problematic because, as we know, these things are more
long-run occurrences. Creditworthiness doesn't happen overnight, nor do
somebody's riskier habits happen overnight.
So for a 2-year period, we have not seen any testimony why 2 years is
sufficient. The current industry standard is much longer than that, but
each different user of this credit information can determine for
themselves what that appropriate time is, and that is not mandated by
current law.

{time} 1400

So I find this troublesome, and problematic, and riskier than what we
currently have in the law; and that is one of the components of this
bill that I oppose. There are numerous other examples, but I know we
will have more debate and I will be able to bring up those exact
details as those on the other side tout the so-called benefits.
Mr. Chairman, I reserve the balance of my time.
Ms. WATERS. Mr. Chairman, I yield 3 minutes to the gentleman from
Florida (Mr. Lawson), who is the sponsor of H.R. 3614, one of the bills
in this comprehensive package.
Mr. LAWSON of Florida. Mr. Chairman, I rise to support H.R. 3621, a
bill that provides strong consumer protection for our Nation's
borrowers.
Often, we talk about access to capital and how many communities
across this country are either underbanked or shut out of the credit
market altogether. This bill goes further than any other piece of
legislation we have seen in protecting our Nation's student loan
borrowers, potential hires from biased credit reporting, and
guaranteeing that consumers have the necessary information to make
informed financial decisions.
I am particularly thankful that this legislation includes my bill,
H.R. 3614, that will limit the use of credit reports and credit scores
to make hiring decisions.
As with access to capital, there are many barriers in accessing
employment opportunities, particularly for communities of color and
other marginalized groups based on several factors. One of these
factors includes an individual's credit history.
Many people have fallen on hard times, had their identities stolen,
or have become ill, which have negatively impacted their credit
reports. But I ask, should that also impact their ability to become
employed?
Should an arbitrary number based on obscure algorithms that make up a
credit score shut someone out of being employed? The answer is no.
That is why this bill prohibits certain employers from using credit
history to determine someone's eligibility to be employed. This bill is
a much-needed solution in removing employment barriers.
As we move forward, I will continue to work with stakeholders to
protect job applicants while also guaranteeing that organizations and
companies can vet potential applicants adequately.
Mr. Chairman, I thank Congresswoman Pressley, Chairwoman Waters, and
the committee staff who have worked tirelessly into the night to help
draft this bill. I thank them for their advocacy on behalf of the
Nation's consumers.
It is about time we help people gain greater access to the job
market.
Mr. McHENRY. Mr. Chairman, I reserve the balance of my time.
Ms. WATERS. Mr. Chairman, I yield 2 minutes to the gentlewoman from
New York (Mrs. Carolyn B. Maloney), who is the chairwoman of the
Committee on Oversight and Reform.
Mrs. CAROLYN B. MALONEY of New York. Mr. Chair, I thank the
chairwoman for yielding and for being such a leader on this issue and
so many others.
I rise in strong support of H.R. 3621, and I want to thank my
colleague, Ms. Pressley, for her hard work on this bill.
Our credit reporting system is deeply flawed, and it affects millions
of consumers every day. When there is an error on a consumer's credit
report, it can harm their credit for years. Maybe their credit report
says that they didn't pay a bill when they did, or maybe they confused
them with another person.
These kinds of basic errors should be easy to fix, but unfortunately,
they often take years to sort out. And in the meantime, consumers are
being wrongfully denied credit or paying higher rates than they should.
This bill will solve these problems by reforming the dispute process
in order to give consumers more rights and more opportunities to
challenge bad information on their credit reports.
It also helps consumers who have burdensome student loans by removing
negative credit information as soon as they can demonstrate that they
have a history of timely repayment. This is incredibly important.
Finally, I want to thank Chairwoman Waters for her tireless efforts
on this

[[Page H659]]

issue. She has focused on credit reporting for years, and I am very
proud she was able to shepherd so many bills to the floor.
I urge a ``yes'' vote on this bill.
Ms. WATERS. Mr. Chairman, I would like to inquire, through the Chair,
if my colleague has any remaining speakers on his side.
I have no further speakers and I am prepared to close.
Mr. McHENRY. Mr. Chair, I yield myself such time as I may consume.
I include in the Record three documents in opposition to this bill.
The first is a letter to Chairwoman Waters and to me from the Consumer
Data Industry Association expressing their opposition to this bill.

Consumer Data Industry Association,

Washington, DC, January 23, 2020.
Hon. Maxine Waters, Chairwoman,
Hon. Patrick McHenry, Ranking Member,
Committee on Financial Services,
House of Representatives, Washington, DC.
Dear Chairwoman Waters and Ranking Member McHenry: On
behalf of the Consumer Data Industry Association (CDIA), I
want to share our opposition to H.R. 3621, the
``Comprehensive CREDIT Act of 2020.'' This approximately 200-
page bill would impose new costs to consumers and the economy
and negatively impact credit underwriting standards. We
request that House Members vote no when the bill is
considered.
As the trade association representing companies who provide
consumer reporting services, we and our members strive to
ensure that consumer credit reports are accurate, the
information within them is protected and consumers are
empowered to correct inaccurate information in a timely and
straightforward fashion. Our member companies work constantly
to improve the consumer reporting system by making technology
and process improvements to enhance accuracy and improve the
consumer experience.

Overview

The negative outcomes of H.R. 3621 would strike consumers,
community banks, credit unions, automobile dealers, mortgage
lenders, other non-bank lenders, data furnishers, employees
and employers, insurers, property owners and consumer
reporting agencies (CRAs). This legislation makes extensive
and complicated changes to the consumer reporting industry
and the rights and obligations established under the Fair
Credit Reporting Act (FCRA), and will affect the entire
credit allocation and risk management ecosystem; the bill is
not solely targeted at CRAs.
In previous instances when Congress considered major FCRA
changes, extensive hearings were held in the House and
Senate, featuring consumers, regulators, the consumer
reporting industry, data contributors and end users of credit
reports, such as banks and retailers. In the past, this has
resulted in legislation that was supported by most
stakeholders and bi-partisan Congressional majorities. The
legislation in this Congress was taken up by Committee after
only a single hearing last February, which was not focused on
specific legislative issues. We believe proceeding without
additional scrutiny is a mistake, given the bill's complexity
and its impact.
Consumer reports are a critical driver of economic growth
and opportunity. Our economy relies on the ability of CRAs to
interact with lenders, employers, insurers and others to
enable consumers to access low-cost credit, employment
opportunities and housing. The Federal Reserve noted, for
example, that ``[a]vailable evidence indicates that [credit
report] data and the credit-scoring models derived from them
have substantially improved the overall quality of credit
decisions and have reduced the costs of such decision-making.
Almost certainly, consumers would receive less credit and the
price of the credit they received would be higher, if not for
the information provided by credit reporting companies.''
Current law provides consumers with a robust set of
protections and rights. Ongoing debates regarding consumer
privacy have shown that many, including consumer advocates,
identify the FCRA as an example of effective consumer
protection legislation and a model for other segments of the
economy.
In 2010, Congress passed the Wall Street Reform and
Consumer Protection Act (Dodd-Frank Act), which established
the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau (CFPB). That law
gave CFPB authority over much of the consumer reporting
system, and since then, oversight by the Bureau has resulted
in significant improvements within the consumer reporting
system; CRAs, furnishers and users of credit reports have
adopted multiple changes increasing consumer report accuracy
and improving the consumer dispute process.
If H.R. 3621 were to become law, consumers who pay their
bills on time and manage their debts responsibly will pay
more for credit than they do today. Consumers who have faced
challenges with their credit will be worse off as well, as
banks will lose the ability to accurately judge their credit
history because key information will no longer appear on
reports. The economy will suffer, as credit decisions will be
based on fewer facts, and lenders will be forced to increase
prices or reduce the amount of consumer credit available.
The legislation to be considered was passed by the
Committee on Financial Services as six bills, now embodied in
H.R. 3621. We communicated our concerns in a letter on July
6, 2019. Those concerns continue to be valid; the following
highlights some of the concerns we raised then.

Mr. McHENRY. The second document is a letter to Members of the House
of Representatives expressing opposition to each of the bills that was
included in this overarching bill, including opposition to: H.R. 3621,
H.R. 3614, H.R. 3618, H.R. 3622, H.R. 3642, from the United States
Chamber of Commerce.

Chamber of Commerce of the

United States of America,

January 27, 2020.
To the Members of the U.S. House of Representatives: The
U.S. Chamber of Commerce strongly opposes H.R. 3621, the
``Comprehensive Credit Act of 2020,'' which is composed of a
number of bills regarding credit reporting that were reported
out of the House Financial Services Committee in 2019.
The Chamber has previously expressed opposition to each of
the bills below which are now included as part of this
comprehensive package:
H.R. 3621, the ``Student Borrower Credit Improvement Act,''
would arbitrarily remove repayment information regarding
student loans issued by private lenders. Reducing the quality
of information in credit reports would in the aggregate
reduce their utility, making it more difficult for consumers
to access credit or other services.
H.R. 3614, the ``Restricting Use of Credit Checks for
Employment Decisions Act,'' would restrict an employer from
initiating a credit check of an employee despite the fact
that the Fair Credit Reporting Act requires an employee to
first provide consent. This legislation would make it more
difficult for employers to review the backgrounds of
prospective employees, which would make it more difficult to
hire for sensitive positions or would otherwise delay the
hiring process.
H.R. 3618, the ``Free Credit Scores for Consumers Act,''
would require credit bureaus to pay for and disclose for free
a credit scoring model that is owned by a third party. Credit
bureaus already provide ample information to consumers at no
charge to assist them with understanding their credit
standing. The legislation would make it more difficult for
credit bureaus to provide for the accurate flow of useful
information between consumers, furnishers, and entities that
need to make informed decisions.
H.R. 3622, the ``Restoring Unfairly Impaired Credit and
Protecting Consumers Act,'' would reduce the quality of
credit reports by arbitrarily reducing the term of adverse
information and instituting redundant remediation mechanisms.
Disrupting the utility of information in credit reports would
make it more difficult for credit providers, and nonfinancial
entities such as telecommunications companies and utilities
to efficiently provide their services to consumers.
H.R. 3642, the ``Improving Credit Reporting for All
Consumers Act,'' would create dispute resolution requirements
that are redundant to services voluntarily provided by credit
bureaus and existing requirements under both the Fair Credit
Reporting Act and a recent agreement among 38 State Attorneys
General. Additionally, the legislation would frustrate the
ability of credit bureaus to provide information to consumers
by imposing new restrictions on the marketing of products
intended to improve credit standing.
H.R. 3629, the ``Clarity in Credit Score Formation Act of
2019,'' would make the CFPB, not lenders, the de facto
underwriter of consumer loans and is redundant to existing
supervisory and regulatory authority. The CFPB currently
supervises larger participants in consumer reporting under
its authority in the Dodd-Frank Act and has broad regulatory
authority via enforcement of the Fair Credit Reporting Act.
Interference in the proprietary models developed by credit
bureaus and used by lenders would increase lenders' risk and
decrease their ability to provide objective information.
The Chamber urges you to oppose the Comprehensive Credit
Act.
Sincerely,
Neil L. Bradley.

Mr. McHENRY. And finally, I include in the Record Statement of
Administration Policy that says that the President would veto this
bill.

Statement of Administration Policy

H.R. 3621--Comprehensive CREDIT Act of 2020--Rep. Pressley, D-MA, and
Rep. Ocasio-Cortez, D-NY

The Administration opposes passage of H.R. 3621, the
Comprehensive CREDIT Act of 2020. The Administration supports
measures to increase access to affordable consumer credit,
but H.R. 3621 would do the opposite by reducing the
efficiency of consumer lending markets and raising the cost
of consumer credit.
H.R. 3621 would preclude credit reporting agencies from
incorporating a range of relevant data into consumer reports,
which would reduce their predictive value and raise borrowing
costs for responsible borrowers. This legislation would also
prevent the Federal Government from reporting information
regarding debts arising out of criminal monetary penalties.
Additionally, H.R. 3621

[[Page H660]]

would empower the Bureau of Consumer Financial Protection to
control the development of credit-scoring models, which would
hinder market competition that drives innovation and improves
modeling. Finally, this legislation would interfere with the
ability of employers, including executive branch agencies, to
make reasonable background investigation determinations with
respect to candidates for sensitive positions.
If H.R. 3621 were presented to the President, his senior
advisors would recommend that he veto it.

Mr. McHENRY. Mr. Chairman, I might offer to the chair of the
committee at some point to frame the Statement of Administration Policy
on vetoes of some of her bills this Congress. That may be a badge of
honor. I say that in a lighthearted manner, not in an aggressive way,
for sure.
Mr. Chairman, in closing, this is a partisan bill under the guise of
consumer protection that will destroy the accuracy and completeness of
consumer credit files.
Moreover, this bill continues the Democrats' trend of failing to
address the underlying causes of the student loan crisis; the
underlying causes of medical debt; the underlying causes of
homelessness.
Instead, this bill will jeopardize credit for low and middle-income
Americans disproportionately; Americans who fight to pay their bills
each month; make good on their obligations; and have taken the time to
improve their financial situations over time and become eligible for
credit.
What my colleagues fail to understand is this: This bill will weaken
underwriting standards. That strikes at safety and soundness. It will
make extending credit riskier and more expensive for consumers,
ultimately impacting both the costs and accessibility of credit for all
Americans.
This bill alters the very foundation for extending credit in our
financial system which is the ability to assess risk.
This bill will drive us to a riskier financial situation and
financial system. It is a bad bill.
This bill that we are considering today will fundamentally alter the
way credit is extended in this country, and not for the better.
So let's be clear on what this bill does. It socializes credit
modeling and reporting.
This bill gives the CFPB the ability to develop, maintain, and
regulate credit modeling and factors used in analysis.
This bill prevents employers from knowing the creditworthiness of
employees.
This bill is a giveaway to trial attorneys, creating four new re-
investigation and appeals processes to be exploited by the trial bar.
This bill will make it more difficult for private lenders to compete
in the student loan industry dominated by the Federal Government by
allowing delinquent borrowers or borrowers who have defaulted on a loan
to make changes to their credit outside of the contractual obligations
and contractual terms they have agreed to.
As I said earlier, bipartisan compromise was within reach. All my
colleagues had to do was reach out and grab it. Instead, they chose to
push through another partisan bill that is going nowhere in the Senate
and will be vetoed--if it were to even make it through the United
States Senate--vetoed by the President.
And this has been a tremendous waste of time for the American people,
a tremendous waste of time, when we have very important issues to
wrestle with as a Congress and as a country.
So I urge my colleagues to vote ``no'' on socializing credit
reporting.
Mr. Chairman, I yield back the balance of my time.
Ms. WATERS. Mr. Chairman, I yield myself the balance of my time.
Mr. Chair, I include in the Record a letter from the Americans for
Financial Reform and the 85 undersigned consumer, civil rights, labor,
and community organizations who wrote to express their support for H.R.
3621, and a letter from the National Association of Realtors.

Americans for Financial Reform,

January 27, 2020.
Dear Representative: The 85 undersigned consumer, civil
rights, labor, and community organizations write to express
our support for HR 3621, the Comprehensive Credit Reporting
Enhancement, Disclosure, Innovation, and Transparency Act of
2020 (Comprehensive CREDIT Act of 2020).
Credit reports and credit scores play a critical role in
the economic lives of Americans. They are the gatekeeper for
affordable credit, insurance, rental housing, and sometimes
unfortunately even a job. Yet they suffer from unacceptable
rates of inaccuracy. This bill would enact a sea change that
would make the American credit reporting system more accurate
and fairer to consumers.
The Federal Trade Commission's definitive study showed that
21% of consumers had verified errors in their credit reports,
13% had errors that affected their credit scores, and 5% had
errors serious enough to cause them to be denied or pay more
for credit. Trying to fix these errors can be a Kafka-esque
nightmare in which the Big Three nationwide consumer report
agencies (CRAs)--Equifax, Experian and TransUnion--
consistently favor the side of the creditor or debt collector
(``the furnisher'') over the consumer.
The American credit reporting systems suffers from a number
of other flaws and defects. Consumers are unfairly penalized
by negative credit reporting when they have been the victim
of abusive practices, such as predatory mortgages or student
loans resulting from for-profit school fraud, or due to
circumstances out of their control, such as temporary job
loss, illness, or financial abuse by a family member.
Healthcare bills contribute greatly to credit reporting
harms, with over 50% of debt collection items resulting from
medical debt.
Consumers also lack the right to a free annual credit
score. Furthermore, many consumers who attempt to obtain a
free annual credit report or to obtain their scores are
misled into purchasing high-priced credit monitoring or other
subscription services. These services are also marketed to
prevent identify theft, yet they are far less effective in
doing so than a security freeze. This legislation
comprehensively addresses all of these abuses, and more. This
bill would:
Fix the broken system for credit reporting disputes by (1)
giving consumers a new right to appeal the results of initial
disputes; (2) requiring CRAs and furnishers of information to
dedicate sufficient resources and provide well-trained
personnel to handle disputes; (3) requiring CRAs to conduct
an independent analysis of disputes, separate from that of
the furnisher; and (4) requiring furnishers to retain records
for the same time period that negative information remains on
reports.
Improve credit reporting accuracy by directing the Consumer
Financial Protection Bureau (CFPB) to establish accuracy
regulations, including requiring CRAs to better monitor
furnishers for high error rates and to use stricter criteria
to match information from a lender to a consumer's file,
preventing the worst type of credit reporting error, the
``mixed file.''
Restrict the use of credit information for employment by
limiting it to two narrow instances--when required by local,
state or federal law or for national security clearances.
This will severely limit a practice that discriminates
against the long-term unemployed, has a disparate impact on
communities of color, and has very little evidence
demonstrating its effectiveness in predicting job
performance.
Help victims of abusive lending and overly punitive
negative reporting practices by (1) reducing the current
overlong retention periods that adverse credit information
remains on reports to four years (seven years for
bankruptcies); (2) allowing borrowers victimized by the
unfair, deceptive or abusive practices of mortgage lenders or
servicers to have adverse mortgage-related information
removed; and (3) requiring the removal of negative
information about private education loans that were obtained
to attend for-profit colleges found to have engaged in unfair
or deceptive practices.
Protect consumers from the unfair impact of medical debt by
prohibiting CRAs from including medical collections on
reports until 365 days from the date of first delinquency and
prohibiting the reporting of any debt for medically necessary
procedures. This will ensure that consumers have time to
resolve their complex, confusing medical bills. The bill also
mandates that all paid or settled debt, including medical
collections, be removed within 45 days from reports.
Help consumers understand their creditworthiness by giving
consumers the right to a free credit score at the same time
that they obtain their free annual consumer report. The bill
also creates several new instances in which consumers are
entitled to receive both free reports and scores, including
requiring auto, private education and mortgage lenders to
provide prospective loan borrowers the same free reports and
scores that the lenders used in their decision-making before
consumers sign those loan agreements.
Address misleading marketing of credit monitoring
subscriptions and increase access for security freezes to
prevent identity theft by (1) prohibiting the misleading
practice of automatically converting free trial periods into
paid, monthly subscription services by requiring CRAs to
provide explicit opt-ins at the end of the promotions and (2)
providing free credit freezes for security breach victims and
vulnerable consumers, and capping the cost for all other
consumers.
Give a second chance to struggling private education loan
borrowers by allowing them to rehabilitate impaired credit
records through requiring removal of adverse information
about delinquent or defaulted loans if they are able to make
nine out of ten on-time, monthly payments.

[[Page H661]]

Correct provisions in last year's deregulatory law, S2155,
that unwisely preempted states from further improvements to
the credit freeze laws and provided servicemembers with a
credit monitoring right without a remedy.
These credit reporting reforms are urgently needed in order
to ensure that consumers are treated fairly and that the
credit reporting system that underlies so many daily
transactions works better for the public.
We look forward to working with you to swiftly pass this
bill to better protect consumers.
Thank you for your attention.
Sincerely,
Americans for Financial Reform; A2Z Real Estate
Consultants; African American Health Alliance; Alaska Public
Interest Research Group; Allied Progress; Arkansas Community
Organizations; BREAD Organization; CAFE Montgomery MD; Center
for Digital Democracy; Cleveland Jobs with Justice; Community
Action Human Resources Agency (CAHRA); Congregation of Our
Lady of the Good Shepherd, US Provinces; Connecticut Fair
Housing Center; Consumer Action; Consumer Federation of
America; Consumer Federation of California; Consumer Reports.
CWA Local 1081; Delaware Community Reinvestment Action
Council, Inc.; Demos; Denver Area Labor Federation; East Bay
Community Law Center; FAITH IN TEXAS; Famicos Foundation;
FLARA; Florida Alliance for Consumer Protection; Greater
Longview United Way; Groundcover News; Habitat for Humanity
of Camp Co, TX; Hawaiian Community Assets; Housing Action
Illinois; Housing and Family Services of Greater New York,
Inc.
Mary House, Inc.; Maryland Consumer Rights Coalition; Miami
Valley Fair Housing Center, Inc.; Mobilization for Justice
Inc.; Montana Organizing Project; Multi-Cultural Real Estate
Alliance For Urban Change; National Advocacy Center of the
Sisters of the Good Shepherd; National Association of
Consumer Advocates; National Association of Social Workers;
National Association of Social Workers West Virginia Chapter;
National Center for Law and Economic Justice; National
Consumer Law Center (on behalf of its low-income clients);
National Consumers League; National Fair Housing Alliance;
National Housing Law Project; National Housing Resource
Center.
National Rural Social Work Caucus; New Economics for Women;
New Jersey Citizen Action; New Jersey Tenants Organization;
New York Legal Assistance Group; North Carolina Council of
Churches; Partners In Community Building, Inc.; PathWays PA;
Pennsylvania Council of Churches; People Demanding Action;
Progressive Leadership Alliance of Nevada; Project IRENE;
Prosperity Now; Public Citizen; Public Justice Center; Public
Law Center; Public Utility Law Project of New York.
Rocky Mountain Peace and Justice Center; SC Appleseed Legal
Justice Center; Sisters of Mercy South Central Community;
Society of St. Vincent de Paul; St. Paul UMC; Tennessee
Citizen Action; The Center for Survivor Agency and Justice;
The Disaster Law Project; The Greenlining Institute; The
Leadership Conference on Civil and Human Rights; THE ONE LESS
FOUNDATION; Tzedek DC; U.S. PIRG; Urban Asset Builders, Inc.;
Virginia Citizens Consumer Council; Virginia Poverty Law
Center; West Virginia Center on Budget and Policy; Wildfire;
Woodstock Institute; WV Citizen Action Group.
____

January 27, 2020.
Hon. Maxine Waters,
Chairwoman, House Committee on Financial Services,
Washington, DC.
Dear Chairwoman Waters and Ranking Member McHenry: On
behalf of the 1.4 million members of the National Association
of REALTORS (NAR), NAR is pleased to support H.R.
3621, the ``Comprehensive Credit Act of 2020.''
Nearly 70 percent of home sales are financed and a
borrower's credit report and credit score form a critical
gateway to obtaining a mortgage. Unfortunately, inaccurate
credit reports and unfair credit reporting methods raise the
cost and/or limit access to mortgage credit for many
prospective borrowers. To this end, NAR applauds H.R. 3621,
the ``Comprehensive Credit Act of 2020,'' which include the
following bills.
H.R. 3618, the ``Free Credit Scores for Consumers Act of
2019''
H.R. 3621, the ``Student Borrower Credit Improvement Act''
H.R. 3622, the ``Restoring Unfairly Impaired Credit and
Protecting Consumers Act''
H.R. 3642, the ``Improving Credit Reporting for All
Consumers Act''
H.R. 3629, the ``Clarity in Credit Score Formation Act of
2019''
REALTORS believe that balanced financial
regulation and appropriate consumer protection will result in
a more vibrant housing market and overall economy.
Furthermore, creditor and consumer confidence is critical in
the home financing process. REALTORS thank you for
your diligent work to improve the accuracy, consistency, and
availability of quality credit scoring and appraisal
information.
Sincerely,

Vince Malta,

2020 President, National Association
of REALTORS.

Ms. WATERS. Mr. Chair, first, I would like to thank all of the
participants in this comprehensive package. I would like to thank Ms.
Pressley, as the sponsor of this comprehensive piece of legislation,
Mr. Lawson, Ms. Adams, Mrs. Beatty, Mr. Lynch, and Ms. Tlaib, for all
of the work that they put in to ensure that we were covering the years
of complaints that we have gotten about our credit bureaus and the
mishandling of our consumers and a lack of protection for consumers who
have suffered at the hands of our credit bureaus who did not take into
consideration these very serious complaints.
So, Mr. Chairman, the Comprehensive Credit Reporting Enhancement,
Disclosure, Innovation, and Transparency, this act, makes much-needed
and overdue reforms to improve the credit reporting system. The issues
addressed by this bill are important for the economic well-being of
millions of Americans and our economy.
As we have discussed, the bill is supported by, again, Americans for
Financial Reform, the National Association of Consumer Advocates, and
the National Association of Realtors. So, with all of this support, and
with consumers who have been waiting for years for their
Representatives to do something about the fact that their data is all
in the hands of these credit bureaus who are determining whether or not
they can acquire credit; whether or not they are going to be able to
get a loan; whether or not they are going to be able to have a decent
quality of life because they have done everything that they could do to
have good credit; and that when they have said to the credit bureaus,
there is an error, they have got me mixed up with someone else, and
they cannot get this straightened out for them, and they suffer.
So the time has come, and I am so very pleased that my committee is
answering all of the requests from our constituents and your
constituents and all of the constituents of Representatives in this
body, to do something. The time is now, and we are doing that. This
comprehensive piece of legislation will absolutely deal with these
concerns that have been identified for so long.
I urge all Members who care about their constituency, who have been
hearing these issues for so many years, I urge them to vote ``yes'' on
this bill.
Mr. Chairman, I yield back the balance of my time.
The Acting CHAIR (Mr. Payne). All time for general debate has
expired.
In lieu of the amendment in the nature of a substitute recommended by
the Committee on Financial Services, printed in the bill, an amendment
in the nature of a substitute consisting of the text of Rules Committee
Print 116-47, modified by the amendment printed in part A of House
Report 116-383, shall be considered as adopted. The bill, as amended,
shall be considered as an original bill for purpose of further
amendment under the 5-minute rule, and shall be considered as read.
The text of the bill, as amended, is as follows:

H.R. 3621

Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of
the United States of America in Congress assembled,

SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE.

This Act may be cited as the ``Comprehensive Credit
Reporting Enhancement, Disclosure, Innovation, and
Transparency Act of 2020'' or the ``Comprehensive CREDIT Act
of 2020''.

SEC. 2. TABLE OF CONTENTS.

The table of contents for this Act is as follows:

Sec. 1. Short title.
Sec. 2. Table of contents.
Sec. 3. Findings.
Sec. 4. Effective date.
Sec. 5. Discretionary surplus fund.

TITLE I--IMPROVEMENTS TO THE DISPUTE PROCESS

Sec. 101. Dispute procedures and disclosures relating to
reinvestigations.
Sec. 102. Consumer awareness of dispute rights.
Sec. 103. Maintenance of records by furnishers.
Sec. 104. Duties of furnishers relating to dispute procedures, notices,
and disclosures.
Sec. 105. Right to appeal disputes relating to reinvestigations and
investigations.
Sec. 106. Revised consumer reports.
Sec. 107. Indication of dispute by consumers and use of disputed
information.
Sec. 108. Accuracy and completeness report duties for consumer
reporting agencies and furnishers.
Sec. 109. Inclusion of public record data sources in consumer reports.
Sec. 110. Injunctive relief for victims.

TITLE II--FREE CREDIT SCORES FOR CONSUMERS

Sec. 201. Definitions.

[[Page H662]]

Sec. 202. Consumer information on calculation of scores.
Sec. 203. Disclosures relating to credit scores and educational credit
scores.
Sec. 204. Free credit score disclosures and consumer reports.
Sec. 205. Provision of consumer reports and credit scores by private
educational lenders.
Sec. 206. Provision of consumer reports and credit scores by motor
vehicle lenders or indirect auto lenders.
Sec. 207. Provision of consumer reports and credit scores by
residential mortgage lenders.

TITLE III--STUDENT BORROWER CREDIT IMPROVEMENT ACT

Sec. 301. Removal of adverse information for certain private education
loan borrowers.
Sec. 302. Private education loan definitions.

TITLE IV--CREDIT RESTORATION FOR VICTIMS OF PREDATORY ACTIVITIES AND
UNFAIR CONSUMER REPORTING PRACTICES

Sec. 401. Adverse credit information.
Sec. 402. Expedited removal of fully paid or settled debt from consumer
reports.
Sec. 403. Medical debt collections.
Sec. 404. Credit restoration for victims of predatory mortgage lending
and servicing.
Sec. 405. Credit restoration for certain private education loans
borrowers.
Sec. 406. Financial abuse prevention.
Sec. 407. Prohibition of certain factors related to Federal credit
restoration or rehabilitation.

TITLE V--CLARITY IN CREDIT SCORE FORMATION

Sec. 501. Consumer Bureau study and report to Congress on the impact of
non-traditional data.
Sec. 502. Consumer Bureau oversight of credit scoring models.

TITLE VI--RESTRICTIONS ON CREDIT CHECKS FOR EMPLOYMENT DECISIONS

Sec. 601. Prohibition on the use of credit information for most
employment decisions.

TITLE VII--PROHIBITION ON MISLEADING AND UNFAIR CONSUMER REPORTING
PRACTICES

Sec. 701. Prohibition on automatic renewals for promotional consumer
reporting and credit scoring products and services.
Sec. 702. Prohibition on misleading and deceptive marketing related to
the provision of consumer reporting and credit scoring
products and services.
Sec. 703. Prohibition on excessive direct-to-consumer sales.
Sec. 704. Fair access to consumer reporting and credit scoring
disclosures for nonnative English speakers and the
visually and hearing impaired.
Sec. 705. Comparison shopping for loans without harm to credit
standing.
Sec. 706. Nationwide consumer reporting agencies registry.
Sec. 707. Protection for certain consumers affected by a shutdown

TITLE VIII--PROTECTIONS AGAINST IDENTITY THEFT, FRAUD, OR A RELATED
CRIME

Sec. 801. Identity theft report definition.
Sec. 802. Amendment to protection for files and credit records of
protected consumers.
Sec. 803. Enhancement to fraud alert protections.
Sec. 804. Amendment to security freezes for consumer reports.
Sec. 805. Clarification of information to be included with agency
disclosures.
Sec. 806. Provides access to fraud records for victims.
Sec. 807. Required Bureau to set procedures for reporting identity
theft, fraud, and other related crime.
Sec. 808. Establishes the right to free credit monitoring and identity
theft protection services for certain consumers.
Sec. 809. Ensures removal of inquiries resulting from identity theft,
fraud, or other related crime from consumer reports.

TITLE IX--MISCELLANEOUS

Sec. 901. Definitions.
Sec. 902. Technical correction related to risk-based pricing notices.
Sec. 903. FCRA findings and purpose; voids certain contracts not in the
public interest.

SEC. 3. FINDINGS.

Congress finds the following:
(1) General findings on credit reporting.--
(A) Consumer reporting agencies (``CRAs'') are companies
that collect, compile, and provide information about
consumers in the form of consumer reports for certain
permissible statutory purposes under the Fair Credit
Reporting Act (15 U.S.C. 1681 et seq.) (``FCRA''). The three
largest CRAs in this country are Equifax, TransUnion, and
Experian. These CRAs are referred to as nationwide CRAs and
the reports that they prepare are commonly referred to as
credit reports. Furnishers, such as creditors, lenders, and
debt collection agencies, voluntarily submit information to
CRAs about their accounts such as the total amount for each
loan or credit limit for each credit card and the consumer's
payment history on these products. Reports also include
identifying information about a consumer, such as their
birthdate, previous mailing addresses, and current and
previous employers.
(B) In a December 2012 paper, ``Key Dimensions and
Processes in the U.S. Credit Reporting System: A review for
how the nation's largest credit bureaus manage consumer
data'', the Bureau of Consumer Financial Protection
(``Consumer Bureau'') noted that the three nationwide CRAs
maintain credit files on approximately 200 million adults and
receive information from about 10,000 furnishers. On a
monthly basis, these furnishers provide information on over
1.3 billion consumer credit accounts or other trade lines.
(C) The 10 largest institutions furnishing credit
information to each of the nationwide CRAs account for more
than half of all accounts reflected in consumers' credit
files.
(D) Consumer reports play an increasingly important role in
the lives of American consumers. Most creditors, for example,
review these reports to make decisions about whether to
extend credit to consumers and what terms and conditions to
offer them. As such, information contained in these reports
affects whether a person is able to get a private education
loan to pay for college costs, to secure a mortgage loan to
buy a home, or to obtain a credit card, as well as the terms
and conditions under which consumer credit products or
services are offered to them.
(E) Credit reports are also increasingly used for many
noncredit decisions, including by landlords to determine
whether to rent an apartment to a prospective tenant and by
employers to decide whether to hire potential job applicants
or to offer a promotion to existing employees.
(F) CRAs have a statutory obligation to verify
independently the accuracy and completeness of information
included on the reports that they provide.
(G) The nationwide CRAs have failed to establish and follow
reasonable procedures, as required by existing law, to
establish the maximum level of accuracy of information
contained on consumer reports. Given the repeated failures of
these CRAs to comply with accuracy requirements on their own,
legislation is intended to provide them with detailed
guidance improving the accuracy and completeness of
information contained in consumer reports, including
procedures, policies, and practices that these CRAs should
already be following to ensure full compliance with their
existing obligations.
(H) The presence of inaccurate or incomplete information on
these reports can result in substantial financial and
emotional harm to consumers. Credit reporting errors can lead
to the loss of a new employment opportunity or a denial of a
promotion in an existing job, stop someone from being able to
access credit on favorable terms, prevent a person from
obtaining rental housing, or even trigger mental distress.
(I) Current industry practices impose an unfair burden of
proof on consumers trying to fix errors on their reports.
(J) Consumer reports containing inaccurate or incomplete
credit information also undermine the ability of creditors
and lenders to effectively and accurately underwrite and
price credit.
(K) Recognizing that credit reporting affects the lives of
almost all consumers in this country and that the
consequences of errors on a consumer report can be
catastrophic for a consumer, the Consumer Bureau began
accepting consumer complaints about credit reporting in
October 2012.
(L) As of early December 2019, the Consumer Bureau has
handled approximately 391,560 credit reporting complaints
about the top three CRAs, making credit reporting
consistently in the top third most-complained-about subject
matter on which the Consumer Bureau accepts consumer
complaints. Incorrect information in reports and frustrations
about burdensome and time-consuming process to disputing
items is are consistently top reported concerns from
consumers.
(M) Other common types of credit reporting complaints
submitted to the Consumer Bureau related to the improper use
of a report, trouble obtaining a report or credit score,
CRAs' investigations, and credit monitoring or identity
protection.
(N) In the fall 2019 ``Supervisory Highlights'', the
Consumer Bureau noted that one or more of the largest CRAs
continue to struggle to adequately oversee furnishers to
ensure that they were adhering to the CRA's vetting policies
and to establish proper procedures to verify public record
information.
(O) According to the fall 2016 ``Supervisory Highlights'',
Consumer Bureau examiners determined that one or more debt
collectors never investigated indirect disputes that lacked
detail or were not accompanied by attachments with relevant
information from the consumer. Examiners also found that
notifications sent to consumers about disputes considered
frivolous failed to identify for the consumers the type of
material that they could provide in order for the debt
collector to complete the investigation of the disputed item.
(P) A February 2014 Consumer Bureau report titled ``Credit
Reporting Complaint Snapshot'' found that consumers are
confused about the extent to which the nationwide CRAs are
required to provide them with validation and documentation of
a debt that appears on their credit report.
(Q) As evidence that the current system lacks sufficient
market incentives for CRAs to develop more robust procedures
to increase the accuracy and completeness of information on
credit reports, litigation discovery documented by the
National Consumer Law Center (``NCLC''), as part of a
February 2019 report titled ``Automated Injustice Redux: Ten
Years after a Key Report, Consumers Are Still Frustrated
Trying to Fix Credit Reporting Errors'', showed that at least
two of the three largest CRAs use quota systems to force
employees to process disputes

[[Page H663]]

hastily and without the opportunity for conducting meaningful
investigations. At least one nationwide CRA only allowed
dispute resolution staff five minutes to handle a consumer's
call. Furthermore, these CRAs were found to have awarded
bonuses for meeting quotas and punished those who didn't meet
production numbers with probation.
(R) Unlike most other business relationships, where
consumers can register their satisfaction or unhappiness with
a particular credit product or service simply by taking their
business elsewhere, consumers have no say in whether their
information is included in the CRAs databases and limited
legal remedies to hold the CRAs accountable for inaccuracies
or poor service.
(S) Accordingly, despite the existing statutory mandate for
CRAs to follow reasonable procedures to assure the maximum
possible accuracy of the information whenever they prepare
consumer reports, numerous studies, the high volume of
consumer complaints submitted to the Consumer Bureau about
incorrect information on consumer reports, and supervisory
activities by the Consumer Bureau demonstrate that CRAs
continue to skirt their obligations under the law.
(2) Incorrect information on consumer reports.--
(A) Consumers are entitled to dispute errors on their
consumer reports with either the CRA, who issued the report,
or directly with furnishers, who supplied the account
information to the CRA, and request that mistakes be deleted
or removed. Consumers, who believe an investigation has not
correctly resolved their dispute, however, have few options,
other than requesting that a statement about the dispute be
included with their future reports.
(B) CRAs have a statutory obligation under the FCRA to
perform a reasonable investigation by conducting a
substantive and searching inquiry when a consumer disputes an
item on their report. In doing so, CRAs must conduct an
independent review about the accuracy of any disputed item
and cannot merely rely on a furnisher's ``rubber-stamp''
verification of the integrity of the information they have
provided to CRAs.
(C) In ``Report to Congress Under Section 319 of the Fair
and Accurate Credit Transactions Act of 2003'' released by
the Federal Government in December 2012, found that 26
percent of survey participants identified at least one
potentially material error on their consumer reports, and 13
percent experienced a change in their credit score once the
error was fixed.
(D) Consumer Bureau examiners have identified repeated
deficiencies with the nationwide CRAs' information
collection. In the fall 2019 ``Supervisory Highlights'', the
Consumer Bureau noted continued weaknesses with CRAs' methods
and processes for assuring maximum possible accuracy in their
reports. Examiners also found, with certain exceptions, no
quality control policies and procedures in place to test
consumer reports for accuracy.
(E) In its ``Credit Reporting Complaint Snapshot'' released
in February 2014, the Consumer Bureau found that consumers
were uncertain about the depth and validity of the
investigations performed about a disputed item. Consumers
also expressed frustration that, even though they provided
supporting materials that they believed demonstrated the
inaccuracy of the information provided by furnishers, errors
continued to remain on their reports.
(F) In the winter 2015 ``Supervisory Highlights'' released
in March 2015, the Consumer Bureau reported that one or more
nationwide CRAs failed to adequately fulfill their dispute-
handling obligations, including by not forwarding to
furnishers all relevant information found in letters and
supporting documents supplied by consumers when they
submitted disputes failing to notify consumers that they had
completed investigations, and not providing consumers with
the results of the CRAs' reviews about their disputes.
(G) Consumer Bureau examiners also noted in the fall 2016
``Supervisory Highlights'' released in October 2016 that one
or more entities failed to provide adequate guidance and
training to staff about how to differentiate FCRA disputes
from general customer inquiries, complaints, or debt
validation requests. Consumer Bureau supervisors also
directed one or more entities to develop and implement
reasonable procedures to ensure that direct and indirect
disputes are appropriately logged, categorized, and resolved.
(H) Consumers' increasing frustration about the
difficulties of trying to fix credit reporting errors,
evidenced through the volume of consumer complaints related
to errors submitted to the Consumer Bureau, are also echoed
in another Federal Government study issued in January 2015.
In the ``Report to Congress under Section 319 for the Fair
and Accurate Credit Transactions Act of 2003'', the study
found that nearly 70 percent (84 people) of participants from
a previous survey that had filed disputes with CRAs continued
to believe that at least some of the disputed information
remained inaccurate at the time of the follow-up survey.
Despite these views, 50 percent (42 people) of the survey
participants decided to just give up trying to fix the
errors, with only 45 percent (38 people) of them planning to
continue to try to resolve their disputes.
(I) The consistently high volume of consumer complaints
submitted to the Consumer Bureau about credit reporting
errors, coupled with the largest CRAs' repeated quality
control weaknesses found by Consumer Bureau examiners, show
that the nationwide CRAs have failed to establish and follow
reasonable procedures to assure maximum accuracy of
information and to conduct independent investigations of
consumers' disputes. These ongoing problems demonstrate the
need for legislation to--
(i) enhance obligations on furnishers to substantiate
information and require furnishers to keep records for the
same amount of time that adverse information about these
accounts may appear on a person's consumer report;
(ii) eliminate CRAs' discretion to determine the relevancy
of materials provided by consumers to support their dispute
claims by instead requiring them to pass all material onto
furnishers and eliminating CRA's discretion to deem some
disputes frivolous or irrelevant when a consumer resubmits a
claim that they believe has been inadequately resolved;
(iii) enhance educational content on CRAs' websites to
improve consumers' understanding of the dispute process and
to make it easier for all consumers to initiate claims,
including by providing these disclosures in other languages
besides English; and
(iv) create a new consumer right to appeal reviews by CRAs
and furnishers of the initial disputes.
(3) Injunctive relief.--
(A) Despite the fact that the FCRA currently provides
implicit authority for injunctive relief, consumers have been
prevented from exercising this right against CRAs.
Legislation explicitly clarifying this right is intended to
underscore congressional intent that injunctive relief should
be viewed as a remedy available to consumers.
(B) Myriad findings by the courts, regulators, consumers,
and consumer advocates make clear that CRAs have failed to
establish adequate standards for the accuracy and
completeness of consumer reports, yet the nationwide CRAs
have demonstrated little willingness to voluntarily retool
their policies and procedures to fix the problems.
(C) Providing courts with explicit authority to issue
injunctive relief, by telling the CRAs to remedy unlawful
practices and procedures, would further CRAs' mandate under
the FCRA to assure the maximum possible accuracy and
completeness of information contained on credit reports.
(D) Absent explicit authority to issue injunctions, history
suggests that the nationwide CRAs are likely to continue
conducting business as usual in treating any monetary
settlements with individual consumers and fines imposed by
State attorneys general and Federal regulators, simply as the
``cost of doing business''.
(4) Credit scores.--
(A) While nationwide CRAs are required by law to supply
consumers with a free copy of their credit report annually,
they can charge consumers to obtain a credit score
disclosure.
(B) Many consumers do not realize that they have more than
just ``one'' credit score. Because the submission of credit
information to CRAs is voluntary and not all furnishers
submit information to every CRA, the information contained in
a report also varies among CRAs. As a result, the credit
score generated by each CRA is also likely to vary, resulting
in potentially different credit decisions based on an
evaluation of different credit reports obtained from
different CRAs.
(C) A February 2015 Consumer Bureau report titled
``Consumer Voices on Credit Reports and Scores'' found that
consumers had questions about what actions to take to improve
their scores once they had seen them, suggesting that
additional disclosures and educational content would be
helpful to consumers. The Consumer Bureau found that
consumers were confused by conflicting advice on how to
improve their scores.
(D) That report also noted that consumers found the process
for obtaining consumer reports and credit scores confusing.
Consumers also were uncertain about whether, and under what
circumstances, they could obtain a consumer report for free.
(5) Private education loans.--
(A) The Consumer Bureau's October 2014 report titled
``Annual Report of the CFPB Student Loan Ombudsman'' noted
many private education loan borrowers, who sought to
negotiate a modified repayment plan when they were
experiencing a period of financial distress, were unable to
get assistance from their loan holders, which often resulting
in them defaulting on their loans. This pattern resembles the
difficulty that a significant number of mortgage loan
borrowers experienced when they sought to take responsible
steps to work with their mortgage loan servicer to avoid
foreclosure during the Great Recession.
(B) Although private student loan holders may allow a
borrower to postpone payments while enrolled in school full-
time, many limit this option to a certain time period,
usually 48 to 66 months. This limited time period may not be
sufficient for those who need additional time to obtain their
degree or who want to continue their education by pursing a
graduate or professional degree. The Consumer Bureau found
that borrowers who were unable to make payments often
defaulted or had their accounts sent to collections before
they were even able to graduate.
(6) Deceptive practices at certain proprietary education
institutions and career education programs.--
(A) NCLC cited the proliferation of law enforcement actions
against many for-profit schools in its June 2014 report,
titled ``Ensuring Educational Integrity: 10 Steps to Improve
State Oversight of For-profit Schools'', to demonstrate the
pervasive problem in this sector of targeting low-income
students with deceptive high-pressure sales techniques
involving inflated job placement rates and misleading data on
graduate wages, and false representations about the
transferability of credits and the employability of graduates
in occupations that require licensure. Student loan borrowers
at these schools may be left with nothing but worthless
credentials and large debt. Those who default on their
student loans face years with damaged credit that will
adversely impact their ability to rent or buy homes, purchase
cars, and find employment.

[[Page H664]]

(B) The closure and bankruptcy of Corinthian Colleges,
which was found to have deceived students by steering them
into high-interest student loans based on misleading
graduation rates and employment data, is a good example of
the problem. Even after its closure, many Corinthian students
remained saddled with student loan debt, worthless degrees,
and few prospects for employment.
(C) Attending a two-year, for-profit college costs, on
average, four times as much as attending a community college.
Students at for-profit colleges represent only about 11
percent of the total higher education population but a
startling 44 percent of all Federal student loan defaults,
according to the United States Department of Education
(``DOE'').
(D) According to NCLC, a disproportionate number of for-
profit students are low-income and people of color. These
schools target veterans, working parents, first-generation
students, and non-English speaking students, who may be more
likely than their public or private nonprofit school
counterparts to drop out, incur enormous student debt, and
default on this debt. In the 2011-2012 school year, 28
percent of African Americans and 15 percent of Latinos
attending four-year institutions were enrolled in a for-
profit school, compared to 10 percent of Whites.
(E) As highlighted in a press release titled ``Obama
Administration Announces Final Rules to Protect Students from
Poor-Performing Career College Programs'', that was issued by
the DOE on October 30, 2014, ``[t]oo often, students at
career colleges--including thousands of veterans--are charged
excessive costs, but don't get the education they paid for.
Instead, students in such programs are provided with poor
quality training, often for low-wage jobs or in occupations
where there are simply no job opportunities. They find
themselves with large amounts of debt and, too often, end up
in default. In many cases, students are drawn into these
programs with confusing or misleading information.''.
(7) Medical debt.--
(A) Research by the Consumer Bureau has found that the
inclusion of medical collections on consumer reports has
unfairly reduced consumers' credit scores.
(B) The Consumer Bureau's review of 5 million anonymized
credit files from September 2011 to September 2013, for
example, found that credit scores may underestimate a
person's creditworthiness by up to 10 points for those who
owe medical debt, and may underestimate a person's
creditworthiness by up to 22 points after the medical debt
has been paid. For consumers with lower credit scores,
especially those on the brink of what is considered subprime,
a 10 to 22 point decrease in their credit scores can have a
significant impact on their lives, including by affecting
whether they are able to qualify for credit and, if so, the
terms and conditions under which it is extended to them.
(C) The Consumer Bureau found that half of all collections
trade lines that appear on consumer reports are related to
medical bills claimed to be owed to hospitals and other
medical providers. These trade lines affect the reports of
nearly 1/5 of all consumers in the credit reporting system.
(D) The Consumer Bureau has found that there are no
objective or enforceable standards that determine when a debt
can or should be reported as a collection trade line. Because
debt buyers and collectors determine whether, when, and for
how long to report a collection account, there is only a
limited relationship between the time period reported, the
severity of a delinquency, and when or whether a collection
trade line appears on a consumer's credit report.
(E) Medical bills can be complex and confusing for many
consumers, which results in consumers' uncertainty about what
they owe, to whom, when, or for what, that may cause some
people, who ordinarily pay their bills on time, to delay or
withhold payments on their medical debts. This uncertainty
can also result in medical collections appearing on consumer
reports. In a December 2014 report titled ``Consumer Credit
Reports: A Study of Medical and Non-Medical Collections'',
the Consumer Bureau found that a large portion of consumers
with medical collections show no other evidence of financial
distress and are consumers who ordinarily pay their other
financial obligations on time. Unlike with most credit
products or services, such as credit cards, installment
loans, utilities, or wireless or cable services that have
contractual account disclosures describing the terms and
conditions of use, most consumers are not told what their
out-of-pocket medical costs will be in advance. Consumers
needing urgent or emergency care rarely know, or are
provided, the cost of a medical treatment or procedure before
the service is rendered.
(F) The Consumer Bureau concluded that the presence of
medical collections is less predictive of future defaults or
serious delinquencies than the presence of a nonmedical
collection in a study titled ``Data Point: Medical Debt and
Credit Scores'', issued in May 2014.
(G) FICO's latest credit scoring model, ``FICO 9'', changes
the treatment of paid collections to disregard any collection
matters that the consumer has paid in full. FICO 9, however,
is not yet widely used by lenders.
(H) VantageScore's latest credit scoring model,
``VantageScore 4.0'', will be available in the fall of 2017.
This model will penalize medical collections less than non-
medical ones.
(I) The three nationwide CRAs entered into a settlement
agreement with the New York State attorney general in 2015 to
address deficiencies in their dispute resolution process and
enhance the accuracy of items on reports. These policy
changes will be implemented in a three-phrased rollout,
culminating by June 2018. Subsequently, these CRAs entered
into a cooperative agreement with 31 State Attorneys General,
which was the basis of the creation of the National Consumer
Assistance Plan (``NCAP'') to change some of their business
practices.
(J) While the CRAs appear to be voluntarily adopting policy
changes on a nationwide basis, they are not obligated to do
so for consumers who reside in States that are not party to
any of the consent orders.
(K) As a result of the settlement agreements, the three
nationwide CRAs will set a 180-day waiting period before
including medical collections on a report and will remove a
medical collection from a report once it is paid by an
insurance company. While this change will benefit many, once
a medical collection appears on a report, it will only be
deleted or suppressed if it is found to have been the
insurance company's obligation to pay and the insurer pays
it. Given the research showing there is little predictive
value in medical debt information, medical collections that
are paid or settled should quickly be removed from a report,
regardless of who pays or settles this debt.
(8) Financial abuse by known persons.--
(A) Financial abuse and exploitation are frequently
associated with domestic violence. This type of abuse may
result in fraudulent charges to a credit card or having
fraudulent accounts created by the abuser in the survivor's
name that could affect ratings by CRAs. Financial abuse may
also result in the survivor's inability to make timely
payments on their valid obligations due to loss or changes in
income that can occur when their abuser steals from or
coerces the survivor to relinquish their paychecks or savings
that could affect ratings by CRAs.
(B) By racking up substantial debts in the survivor's name,
abusers are able to exercise financial control over their
survivors to make it economically difficult for the survivor,
whose credit is often destroyed, to escape the situation.
(C) Domestic abuse survivors with poor credit are likely to
face significant obstacles in establishing financial
independence from their abusers. This can be due, in part,
because consumer reports may be used when a person attempts
to obtain a checking account, housing, insurance, utilities,
employment, and even a security clearance as required for
certain jobs.
(D) Providing documentation of identity (``ID'') theft in
order to dispute information on one's consumer report can be
particularly challenging for those who know their financial
abuser.
(E) While it is easier for consumers who obtain a police
report to remove fraudulent information from their consumer
report and prevent it from reappearing in the future,
according to the Empire Justice Center, safety and other
noncredit concerns may impact the capacity of a survivor of
financial abuse committed by a known person to turn to law
enforcement to get a police report.
(F) According to the Legal Aid Society in New York,
domestic abuse survivors, seeking to remove adverse
information stemming from financial abuse by contacting their
furnishers directly, are likely to face skepticism about
claims of ID theft perpetrated by a partner because of an
assumption that they are aware of, and may have been
complicit in, the activity which the survivor alleges stems
from financial abuse.
(9) Deceptive and misleading marketing practices.--
(A) The Consumer Bureau's February 2015 report titled
``Consumer Voices on Credit Reports and Scores'' found that
some consumers did not obtain a copy of their consumer report
due to concerns about security or of being trapped into
purchasing unwanted products like an additional report or a
credit monitoring service.
(B) In January 2017, the Consumer Bureau fined TransUnion
and Equifax for deceptively marketing credit scores for
purchase by consumers as the same credit scores typically
used by lenders to determine creditworthiness and for luring
consumers into costly subscription services that were
advertised as ``free'' or ``$1'' that automatically charged
recurring fees unless cancelled by consumers. The Consumer
Bureau also found that Equifax was illegally advertising its
products on webpages that consumers accessed through
AnnualCreditReport.com before consumers obtained their free
disclosures. Because of these troubling practices, TransUnion
was ordered to pay $13.9 million in restitution to harmed
consumers and a civil penalty of $3 million to the Consumer
Bureau. Equifax was ordered to pay more than $3.7 million to
affected consumers as well as a civil money penalty of $2.5
million to the Consumer Bureau. As part of the consent
orders, the CRAs are also supposed to change the way that
they sell their products to consumers. The CRAs must also
obtain consumers' express consent before enrolling them into
subscription services as well as make it easer for consumers
to cancel these programs.
(C) The Consumer Bureau fined the other nationwide CRA--
Experian--in March 2017 for deceiving consumers about the use
of credit scores that it marketed and sold to consumers as
credit scores that were used by lenders and for illegally
advertising its products on web pages that consumers accessed
through AnnualCreditReport.com before they obtained their
free annual disclosures. Experian was ordered to pay more
than $3.7 million in restitution to harmed consumers and a
civil monetary penalty of $2.5 million to the Consumer
Bureau.
(D) The Consumer Bureau's January and March 2017 consent
orders with the three nationwide CRAs show that these CRAs
have enticed consumers into purchasing products and services
that they may not want or need, in some instances by
advertising products or services ``free'' that automatically
converted into an ongoing subscription service at the regular
price unless cancelled by the consumer. Although these CRAs
must now change their deceptive marketing practices,
codifying these duties is an appropriate way to ensure that
these companies never revert back to such misleading tactics.

[[Page H665]]

(E) Given the ubiquitous use of consumer reports in
consumers' lives and the fact that consumers' participation
in the credit reporting system is involuntary, CRAs should
also prioritize providing consumers with the effective means
to safeguard their personal and financial information and
improve their credit standing, rather than seeking to exploit
consumers' concerns and confusion about credit reporting and
scoring, to boost their companies' profits.
(F) Vulnerable consumers, who have legitimate concerns
about the security of their personal and financial
information, deserve clear, accurate, and transparent
information about the credit reporting tools that may be
available to them, such as fraud alerts and freezes.
(10) Clarity in credit scoring.--
(A) The February 2015 report of the Bureau of Consumer
Financial Protection titled ``Consumer Voices on Credit
Reports and Scores'' found that some consumers are reluctant
to comparison shop for loans and other types of consumer
credit products out of fear that they will lower their credit
scores by doing so.
(B) The Consumer Bureau found that one of the most common
barriers for people in reviewing their own credit reports and
shopping for the best credit terms was a lack of
understanding of the differences between ``soft'' and
``hard'' inquiries and whether requesting a copy of their own
report would adversely impact their credit standing.
(C) The Bureau of Consumer Financial Protection revealed
that consumers with accurate perceptions of their
creditworthiness may be better equipped to shop for favorable
credit terms.
(11) Credit checks and employment decisions.--
(A) The use of consumer reports as a factor in making
hiring decisions has been found to be prevalent in a diverse
array of occupations, and is not limited to certain high-
level management or executive positions.
(B) According to the California Labor Federation, only 25
percent of employers researched the credit history of job
applicants in 1998. However, this practice had increased to
43 percent by 2006 and to 60 percent by 2011.
(C) A study titled ``Do Job Applicant Credit Histories
Predict Job Performance Appraisal Ratings or Termination
Decisions?'', published in 2012, found that, while credit
history might conceptually measure a person's level of
responsibility, ability to meet deadlines, dependability, or
integrity, it does not, in practice, actually predict an
employee's performance or likelihood to quit. Credit reports
contain many inaccuracies and credit history can be
contaminated by events that are sometimes outside a person's
control, such as a sudden medical expense after an accident
or the loss of a job during an economic downturn. The study
found that there is no benefit from using credit history to
predict job performance or turnover.
(D) Despite the absence of data showing a correlation
between job performance and credit-worthiness, employers
continue to use credit checks as a proxy for assessing
character and integrity. According to a 2012 Society for
Human Resource Management survey, organizations indicated
that they used credit checks on job candidates primarily to
reduce or prevent theft and embezzlement and to minimize
legal liability for negligent hiring.
(E) The use of credit checks for employment purposes
creates a true ``catch-22'' for unemployed people with
impaired credit. For example, the financial hardship caused
by losing a job may cause some unemployed individuals to make
late or partial payments on their bills, but their poor
credit standing caused by this negative information on their
consumer report can also impede their chances of obtaining a
new job to end their financial distress.
(F) A September 2014 report by the New York City Council's
Committee on Civil Rights noted that, for those who have been
unemployed for an extended period of time and whose credit
has suffered as they fell behind on bills, the use of credit
reports in the hiring process can exacerbate and perpetuate
an already precarious situation.
(G) In a March 2013 Demos report titled ``Discredited: How
Employment Credit Checks Keep Out Qualified Workers Out of a
Job'', one in four survey participants who were unemployed
said that a potential employer had requested to check their
credit report as part of a job application. Among job
applicants with blemished credit histories in the survey, one
in seven had been told that they were not being hired because
of their credit history.
(H) While job applicants must give prior approval for a
prospective employer to pull their credit reports under the
FCRA, this authorization, as a practical matter, does not
constitute an effective consumer protection because an
employer may reject any job applicant who refuses a credit
check.
(I) Some negative information on a report may stem from
uncontrollable circumstances, or significant life events in a
consumer's life, such as a medical crisis or a divorce. Demos
found that poor credit is associated with household
unemployment, lack of health coverage, and medical debt,
which are factors that reflect economic conditions in the
country and personal misfortune that have little relationship
with how well a job applicant would perform at work.
(J) In October 2011, FICO noted that from 2008 to 2009
approximately 50 million people experienced a 20-point drop
in their credit scores and about 21 million saw their scores
decline by more than 50 points. While the Great Recession
reduced many consumers' credit scores due to foreclosures and
other financial hardships, the financial crisis had a
particularly harsh impact on African Americans and Latinos,
as racial and ethnic minorities and communities of color were
frequently targeted by predatory mortgage lenders who steered
borrowers into high-cost subprime loans, even when these
borrowers would have qualified for less costly prime credit.
(K) A May 2006 Brookings Institution report titled ``Credit
Scores, Reports, and Getting Ahead in America'' found that
counties with a relatively higher proportion of racial and
ethnic minorities in the United States tended to have lower
credit scores compared with counties that had a lower
concentration of communities of color.
(L) Studies have consistently found that African American
and Latino households tend, on average, to have lower credit
scores than White households. The growing use of credit
checks, therefore, may disproportionately screen otherwise
qualified racial and ethnic minorities out of jobs, leading
to discriminatory hiring practices, and further exacerbating
the trend where unemployment for African American and Latino
communities is elevated well above the rate of Whites.
(M) A 2012 Demos survey found that 65 percent of White
respondents reported having good or excellent credit scores
while over half of African American households reported only
having fair or bad credit.
(12) Deceptive and misleading marketing practices.--
(A) The Consumer Bureau's February 2015 report titled
``Consumer Voices on Credit Reports and Scores'' found that
some consumers did not obtain a copy of their consumer report
due to concerns about security or of being trapped into
purchasing unwanted products like an additional report or a
credit monitoring service.
(B) In January 2017, the Consumer Bureau fined TransUnion
and Equifax for deceptively marketing credit scores for
purchase by consumers as the same credit scores typically
used by lenders to determine creditworthiness and for luring
consumers into costly subscription services that were
advertised as ``free'' or ``$1'' that automatically charged
recurring fees unless cancelled by consumers. The Consumer
Bureau also found that Equifax was illegally advertising its
products on webpages that consumers accessed through
AnnualCreditReport.com before consumers obtained their free
disclosures. Because of these troubling practices, TransUnion
was ordered to pay $13.9 million in restitution to harmed
consumers and a civil penalty of $3 million to the Consumer
Bureau. Equifax was ordered to pay more than $3.7 million to
affected consumers as well as a civil money penalty of $2.5
million to the Consumer Bureau. As part of the consent
orders, the CRAs are also supposed to change the way that
they sell their products to consumers. The CRAs must also
obtain consumers' express consent before enrolling them into
subscription services as well as make it easer for consumers
to cancel these programs.
(C) The Consumer Bureau fined the other nationwide CRA--
Experian--in March 2017 for deceiving consumers about the use
of credit scores that it marketed and sold to consumers as
credit scores that were used by lenders and for illegally
advertising its products on web pages that consumers accessed
through AnnualCreditReport.com before they obtained their
free annual disclosures. Experian was ordered to pay more
than $3.7 million in restitution to harmed consumers and a
civil monetary penalty of $2.5 million to the Consumer
Bureau.
(D) The Consumer Bureau's January and March 2017 consent
orders with the three nationwide CRAs show that these CRAs
have enticed consumers into purchasing products and services
that they may not want or need, in some instances by
advertising products or services ``free'' that automatically
converted into an ongoing subscription service at the regular
price unless cancelled by the consumer. Although these CRAs
must now change their deceptive marketing practices,
codifying these duties is an appropriate way to ensure that
these companies never revert back to such misleading tactics.
(E) Given the ubiquitous use of consumer reports in
consumers' lives and the fact that consumers' participation
in the credit reporting system is involuntary, CRAs should
also prioritize providing consumers with the effective means
to safeguard their personal and financial information and
improve their credit standing, rather than seeking to exploit
consumers' concerns and confusion about credit reporting and
scoring, to boost their companies' profits.
(F) Vulnerable consumers, who have legitimate concerns
about the security of their personal and financial
information, deserve clear, accurate, and transparent
information about the credit reporting tools that may be
available to them, such as fraud alerts and freezes.
(13) Protections for consumers' credit information.--
(A) Despite heightened awareness, incidents of ID theft
continue to rise. In February 2015, the Federal Government
reported that ID theft was the top consumer complaint that it
received for the 15th consecutive year. As these incidents
increase, consumers experience significant financial loss and
emotional distress from the inability to safeguard
effectively and inexpensively their credit information from
bad actors.
(B) According to a Carnegie Mellon study, children are 50
times more likely than adults to have their identities
stolen. Child identities are valuable to thieves because most
children do not have existing files, and their parents may
not notice fraudulent activity until their child applies for
a student loan, a job, or a credit card. As a result, the
fraudulent activity of the bad actors may go undetected for
years.
(C) Despite the increasing incidents of children's ID
theft, parents who want to proactively prevent their children
from having their identity stolen, may not be able to do so.
Only one of the three nationwide CRAs currently allows
parents from any State to set up a freeze for a minor child.
At the other two nationwide CRAs, parents can only obtain a
freeze after a child has become an ID theft victim because,
it is only at this point, that these CRAs have an existing

[[Page H666]]

credit file for the child. While many States have enacted
laws to address this problem, there is no existing Federal
law.
(D) According to Javelin Strategy & Research's 2015
Identity Fraud study, $16 billion was stolen by fraudsters
from 12.7 million American consumers in 2014. Similarly, the
United States Department of Justice found an estimated 7
percent of all residents age 16 or older (about 17.6 million
persons) in this country were victims of one or more
incidents of ID theft in 2014, and the number of elderly
victims age 65 or older (about 86 percent) increased from 2.1
million in 2012 to 2.6 million in 2014.
(E) Consumers frequently express concern about the security
of their financial information. According to a 2015
MasterCard survey, a majority of consumers (77 percent) have
anxiety about the possibility that their financial
information and Social Security numbers may be stolen or
compromised, with about 55 percent of consumers indicating
that they would rather have naked pictures of themselves
leaked online than have their financial information stolen.
(F) That survey also revealed that consumers' fears about
the online security of their financial information even
outweighed consumers' worries about other physical security
dangers such as having their houses robbed (59 percent) or
being pickpocketed (46 percent).
(G) According to Consumer Reports, roughly 50 million
American consumers spent about $3.5 billion in 2010 to
purchase products aimed at protecting their identity, with
the annual cost of these services ranging from $120 to $300.
As risks to consumers' personal and financial information
continue to grow, consumers need additional protections to
ensure that they have fair and reasonable access to the full
suite of ID theft and fraud prevention measures that may be
right for them.

SEC. 4. EFFECTIVE DATE.

Except as otherwise specified, the amendments made by this
Act shall take effect 2 years after the date of the enactment
of this Act.

SEC. 5. DISCRETIONARY SURPLUS FUND.

(a) In General.--The dollar amount specified under section
7(a)(3)(A) of the Federal Reserve Act (12 U.S.C.
289(a)(3)(A)) is reduced by $26,000,000.
(b) Effective Date.--The amendment made by subsection (a)
shall take effect on September 30, 2029.

TITLE I--IMPROVEMENTS TO THE DISPUTE PROCESS

SEC. 101. DISPUTE PROCEDURES AND DISCLOSURES RELATING TO
REINVESTIGATIONS.

(a) In General.--Section 611(a) of the Fair Credit
Reporting Act (15 U.S.C. 1681i(a)) is amended to read as
follows:
``(a) Reinvestigations of Disputed Information by a
Consumer Reporting Agency.--
``(1) Reinvestigations required.--
``(A) In general.--Subject to subsection (f), if the
completeness or accuracy of any item of information contained
in a consumer's file at a consumer reporting agency is
disputed by the consumer and the consumer notifies the agency
(either directly or indirectly through a reseller or an
authorized third party) of such dispute, the agency shall,
free of charge--
``(i) conduct a reasonable reinvestigation using the
process described in paragraph (3) to determine whether the
disputed information is inaccurate, incomplete, or cannot be
verified;
``(ii) notify the consumer that a notation described in
section 605(e) will be added to the consumer's file until the
reinvestigation has been completed and that such notation can
be removed at the request of the consumer; and
``(iii) before the end of the 30-day period beginning on
the date on which the consumer reporting agency receives the
notice of the dispute from the consumer or the reseller--

``(I) record the current status of the disputed
information; or
``(II) delete or modify the item in accordance with
paragraph (3)(D).

``(B) Extension of period to reinvestigate.--Except as
provided in subparagraph (C), the 30-day period described in
subparagraph (A) may be extended for period not to exceed 15
days if the consumer reporting agency receives additional
information from the consumer or the reseller regarding the
dispute after the date on which the consumer reporting agency
notified any person who provided any item of information in
dispute under paragraph (2)(A).
``(C) Limitations on extension of period to
reinvestigate.--Subparagraph (B) shall not apply to any
reinvestigation in which, during the 30-day period described
in subparagraph (A), the disputed information is found to be
inaccurate or incomplete, or the consumer reporting agency
determines that the disputed information cannot be verified.
``(2) Prompt notice of dispute to furnisher of information;
provision of information regarding dispute provided by the
consumer or reseller.--
``(A) In general.--Before the end of the period of 5
business days beginning on the date on which a consumer
reporting agency receives notice of a dispute from any
consumer or reseller under paragraph (1)(A), the consumer
reporting agency shall provide notification of the dispute to
any person who provided any item of information in dispute,
at the address and in the manner established with such
person. The notice shall include all information, including
substantiating documents, regarding the dispute that was
submitted to the consumer reporting agency.
``(B) Provision of additional information regarding dispute
after notification to the furnisher of information.--If a
consumer reporting agency receives additional information
regarding the dispute from the consumer or reseller after the
agency provides the notification described under subparagraph
(A) and before the end of the 30-day period described in
paragraph (1)(A), the consumer reporting agency shall, not
later than 3 business days after receiving such information,
provide such information to the person who provided the
information in dispute.
``(3) Reasonable standards for consumer reporting agencies
for conducting reinvestigations and resolving disputes
submitted by consumers.--
``(A) In general.--In conducting a reinvestigation of
disputed information, a consumer reporting agency shall, at a
minimum--
``(i) maintain sufficient resources and trained staff,
commensurate with the volume and complexity of disputes
received or reasonably anticipated to be received, to
determine whether the disputed information is accurate,
complete, or can be verified by the person who provided the
information;
``(ii) ensure that all staff involved at any level of the
reinvestigation process, including any individual with
ultimate authority over determining whether the disputed
information is inaccurate, incomplete, or cannot be verified,
are located within the United States;
``(iii) verify that the personally identifiable information
of the consumer submitting the dispute matches the personally
identifiable information contained in the consumer's file,
and that such information is accurate and complete;
``(iv) verify that the consumer reporting agency has a
record of the information being disputed; and
``(v) conduct a reasonable review that considers all
information, including substantiating documents, provided by
the consumer or reseller.
``(B) Consumer reporting.--The consumer reporting agency
shall not impose any limitation or otherwise impede the
ability of a consumer to submit information about the
disputed item.
``(C) Independent analysis.--The reinvestigation conducted
under subparagraph (A) shall be an independent analysis,
separate from any investigation by a reseller or a person who
provided the disputed information.
``(D) Deletion or modification of information contained in
a consumer file.--If the disputed information is found to be
inaccurate, incomplete, or cannot be verified, the dispute
resolution staff of the consumer reporting agency shall have
the direct authority to delete or modify such information in
the consumer's file, as appropriate, during the 30-day period
described in paragraph (1)(A), shall promptly notify the
consumer of the results of the reinvestigation as described
in paragraph (4), and shall promptly notify any person who
provided such information to the consumer reporting agency of
the modification or deletion made to the consumer's file.
``(4) Notice to consumer of results of reinvestigation.--
``(A) In general.--Not later than 5 business days after the
conclusion of a reinvestigation conducted under this
subsection, the consumer reporting agency shall provide
written notice to the consumer of the results of the
reinvestigation by postal mail or, if authorized by the
consumer for that purpose, by other means available to the
agency.
``(B) Contents of notice to consumer of results of
reinvestigation.--The notice described in subparagraph (A)
shall include--
``(i) a statement that the reinvestigation of the disputed
information has been completed;
``(ii) a statement informing the consumer as to whether the
disputed information was determined to be inaccurate,
incomplete, or unverifiable, including a statement of the
specific reasons supporting the determination;
``(iii) if information in the consumer's file has been
deleted or modified as a result of the reinvestigation--

``(I) a copy of the consumer report and credit score or
educational score (if applicable) that is based upon the
consumer's revised file;
``(II) a statement identifying the specific information
from the consumer's file that was deleted or modified because
such information was determined to be inaccurate, incomplete,
or unverifiable by the consumer reporting agency;
``(III) a statement that the consumer has the right, free
of charge, to obtain an additional consumer report and credit
score or educational credit score (if applicable) within the
12-month period following the date of the conclusion of the
reinvestigation, regardless of whether the consumer obtained
or will obtain a free annual consumer report and credit score
or educational score (if applicable) under section 612; and
``(IV) a statement that the consumer has the right, free of
charge, to request under subsection (d) that the consumer
reporting agency furnish notifications of the consumer's
revised report;

``(iv) a description of the procedure used by the dispute
resolution staff of the consumer reporting agency to
determine the accuracy or completeness of the information,
including the business name, mailing address, telephone
number, and Internet website address (if available) of any
person who provided information who was contacted by the
staff in connection with the determination;
``(v) a statement that the consumer has the right, free of
charge, to add a narrative statement to the consumer's file
disputing the accuracy or completeness of the information,
regardless of the results of the reinvestigation by the
agency, and the process for submitting such a narrative
pursuant to subsection (b);
``(vi) a copy of all information relating to the consumer
that was used by the consumer reporting agency in carrying
out the reinvestigation and relied upon as the basis for the
determination about the accuracy and completeness of the
disputed information;
``(vii) a statement that a consumer may, free of charge,
challenge the results of the reinvestigation by appeal within
120 days after the date the notice of the results of the
reinvestigation was provided to the consumer and the process
for submitting an appeal;

[[Page H667]]

``(viii) a statement informing the consumer that a notation
described in section 605(e) will be added to the file of the
consumer during the period in which the consumer appeals the
results of a reinvestigation and that such notation can be
removed at the request of the consumer; and
``(ix) any other information, as determined by the Bureau.
``(5) Requirements relating to reinsertion of previously
deleted or modified material.--
``(A) Certification of new determination that item is
accurate or complete.--A consumer reporting agency may not
reinsert into a consumer's file any information that was
previously deleted or modified pursuant to paragraph (3)(D),
unless the person who provided the information--
``(i) requests that the consumer reporting agency reinsert
such information;
``(ii) submits a written certification that the information
is accurate and complete; and
``(iii) provides a statement describing the specific
reasons why the information should be inserted.
``(B) Notice to consumer before reinsertion can occur.--
Upon receipt of a request for reinsertion of disputed
information under subparagraph (A), the consumer reporting
agency shall, not later than 5 business days before the
consumer reporting agency reinserts the information into the
consumer's file, notify the consumer in writing of such
request for reinsertion. Such notice shall include--
``(i) the business name, mailing address, telephone number,
and Internet website address (if available) of any person who
provided information to or contacted the consumer reporting
agency in connection with the reinsertion;
``(ii) a copy of the information relating to the consumer,
the certification that the information is accurate or
complete, and the statement of the reasons supporting
reinsertion provided by the person who provided the
information to the consumer reporting agency under
subparagraph (A);
``(iii) a statement that the consumer may obtain, free of
charge and within the 12-month period following the date the
notice under this subparagraph was issued, a consumer report
and credit score or educational score (if applicable) from
the consumer reporting agency that includes the reinserted
information, regardless of whether the consumer obtained or
will obtain a free annual consumer report and credit score or
educational credit score (if applicable) under section 612;
``(iv) a statement that the consumer may appeal the
determination that the previously deleted or modified
information is accurate or complete and a description of the
procedure for the consumer to make such an appeal pursuant to
subsection (i); and
``(v) a statement that the consumer has the right to add a
narrative statement, free of charge, to the consumer's file
disputing the accuracy or completeness of the disputed
information and a description of the process to add such a
narrative statement pursuant to subsection (b).
``(6) Expedited dispute resolution.--If a consumer
reporting agency determines that the information provided by
the consumer is sufficient to substantiate that the item of
information is inaccurate, incomplete, or cannot be verified
by the person who furnished such information, and the
consumer reporting agency deletes or modifies such
information within 3 business days of receiving notice of the
dispute, the consumer reporting agency shall be exempt from
the requirements of paragraph (4), if the consumer reporting
agency provides to the consumer--
``(A) prompt notice confirming the deletion or modification
of the information from the consumer's file in writing or by
other means, if agreed to by the consumer when the
information is disputed;
``(B) a statement of the consumer's right to request that
the consumer reporting agency furnish notifications of a
revised consumer report pursuant to subsection (d);
``(C) not later than 5 business days after deleting or
modifying the information, a copy of the consumer report and
credit score or educational score (if applicable) that is
based upon the consumer's revised file; and
``(D) a statement that the consumer may obtain, free of
charge and within the 12-month period following the date the
notice under this paragraph was sent to the consumer, a
consumer report and credit score or educational score (if
applicable) from the consumer reporting agency, regardless of
whether the consumer obtained or will obtain their free
annual consumer report and credit score or educational score
(if applicable) under section 612.
``(7) No excuse for failure to conduct reinvestigation.--A
consumer reporting agency may not refuse to conduct a
reinvestigation under this subsection because the agency
determines that the dispute was submitted by an authorized
third party, unless the agency has clear and convincing
evidence that the third party is not authorized to submit the
dispute on the consumer's behalf. If the consumer reporting
agency refuses to reinvestigate a dispute for these reasons,
it shall provide a clear and conspicuous notice to the
consumer explaining the reasons for the refusal and
describing the specific information the consumer is required
to provide for the agency to conduct the reinvestigation.''.
(b) Ensuring Consumer Reporting Agencies Furnish Certain
Notifications Without Charge.--Section 611(d) of the Fair
Credit Reporting Act (15 U.S.C. 1681i(d)) is amended by
inserting ``and without charge'' after ``request of the
consumer''.
(c) Including Specialty Consumer Reporting Agencies in
Reports.--
(1) In general.--Section 611(e) of the Fair Credit
Reporting Act (15 U.S.C. 1681i(e)) is amended by inserting
``or 603(x)'' after ``section 603(p)''.
(2) Technical amendment.--Section 611(e)(1) of the Fair
Credit Reporting Act (15 U.S.C. 1681i(e)(1)) is amended by
striking ``The Commission'' and inserting ``The Bureau''.
(d) Conforming Amendments.--The Fair Credit Reporting Act
(15 U.S.C. 1681 et seq.) is further amended--
(1) in section 605B(c)(2), by striking ``section
611(a)(5)(B)'' and inserting ``section 611(a)(5)'';
(2) in section 611--
(A) in subsection (c), by striking ``unless there is
reasonable grounds to believe that it is frivolous or
irrevelant,''; and
(B) in subsection (f)(3)--
(i) in subparagraph (A), by striking ``paragraph (6), (7),
or (8) of subsection (a)'' and inserting ``paragraph (4) or
(5) of subsection (a)''; and
(ii) in subparagraph (B), by striking ``in the manner
required under paragraph (8)(A)''; and
(3) in section 623(b)(1)(B), by striking ``relevant''
before ``information''.
(e) Global Technical Corrections to References to
Nationwide Specialty Consumer Reporting Agency.--The Fair
Credit Reporting Act (15 U.S.C. 1681 et seq.) is further
amended--
(1) by striking ``section 603(w)'' and inserting ``section
603(x)'' each place such term appears; and
(2) in section 612(a)(1)(A), by striking ``(w)'' and
inserting ``(x)''.

SEC. 102. CONSUMER AWARENESS OF DISPUTE RIGHTS.

Section 611 of the Fair Credit Reporting Act (15 U.S.C.
1681i) is amended by adding at the end the following new
subsection:
``(h) Increased Consumer Awareness of Dispute Rights.--
``(1) In general.--Not later than 180 days after the date
of enactment of this subsection, each consumer reporting
agency described under subsection (p) or (x) of section 603
shall--
``(A) establish an Internet website accessible to
consumers; and
``(B) post on the home page of such website a hyperlink to
a separate webpage established and maintained solely for the
purpose of providing information to a consumer about how to
dispute an item of information in the consumer report of the
consumer.
``(2) Dispute webpage requirements.--For a consumer
reporting agency described under subsection (p) or (x) of
section 603, the separate dispute webpage described in
paragraph (1)(B)--
``(A) may not include any type or form of marketing,
advertising, information, or material associated with any
products or services offered or sold to consumers;
``(B) shall clearly and conspicuously disclose a concise
statement regarding how to file a dispute through the agency,
free of charge, in the manner and format prescribed by the
Bureau;
``(C) shall describe the types of documents that will be
used by the agency in resolving the dispute, including the
business name and mailing address to which a consumer may
send such documents;
``(D) shall include a clear and concise explanation of and
the process for using electronic or other means to submit
such documents, free of charge, and without any character or
data limitation imposed by the agency;
``(E) shall include a statement that the consumer may
submit information, free of charge, that the consumer
believes will assist the consumer reporting agency in
determining the results of the reinvestigation of the
dispute;
``(F) shall clearly and conspicuously disclose a statement
describing the procedure likely to be used by the consumer
reporting agency in carrying out a reinvestigation to
determine the accuracy or completeness of the disputed item
of information, including the time period in which the
consumer will be notified of the results of the
reinvestigation, and a statement that the agency may extend
the reinvestigation period by an additional 15 days if the
consumer submits additional information after a certain date;
and
``(G) shall provide translations of all information on the
webpage in each of the 10 most commonly spoken languages,
other than English, in the United States, as determined by
the Bureau of the Census on an ongoing basis, and in formats
accessible to individuals with hearing or vision
impairments.''.

SEC. 103. MAINTENANCE OF RECORDS BY FURNISHERS.

Section 623 of the Fair Credit Reporting Act (15 U.S.C.
1681s-2) is amended by adding at the end the following new
subsection:
``(f) Duty of Furnishers to Maintain Records of
Consumers.--
``(1) In general.--A person who furnishes information to a
consumer reporting agency relating to a consumer who has an
account with that person shall maintain all information
necessary to substantiate the accuracy and completeness of
the information furnished, including any records establishing
the liability and terms and conditions under which credit was
extended to a consumer and any payment history with respect
to such credit.
``(2) Retention period.--Records described under paragraph
(1) shall be maintained until the information with respect to
which the records relate may no longer be included in a
consumer report pursuant to section 605.
``(3) Transfer of ownership.--If a person providing
information to a consumer reporting agency is acquired by
another person, or if another person acquires the right to
repayment connected to such information, the acquiring person
shall be subject to the requirements of this subsection with
respect to such information to the same extent as the person
who initially provided such information to the consumer
reporting agency. The person selling or transferring the
right to repayment shall provide the information described in
paragraph (1) to the transferee or the acquirer.''.

[[Page H668]]

SEC. 104. DUTIES OF FURNISHERS RELATING TO DISPUTE
PROCEDURES, NOTICES, AND DISCLOSURES.

(a) Duty to Provide Accurate and Complete Information.--
Section 623(a) of the Fair Credit Reporting Act (15 U.S.C.
1681s-2(a)) is amended--
(1) in the subsection heading, by inserting ``and
Complete'' after ``Accurate'';
(2) in paragraph (1)--
(A) by inserting ``or incomplete'' after ``inaccurate''
each place that term appears; and
(B) in subparagraph (D), by inserting ``or completeness''
after ``accuracy''; and
(3) in paragraph (8)--
(A) in subparagraph (A), by inserting ``and completeness''
after ``accuracy''; and
(B) in subparagraph (D), by inserting ``or completeness''
after ``accuracy''.
(b) Negative Information Notices to Consumers.--Section
623(a)(7) of the Fair Credit Reporting Act (15 U.S.C. 1681s-
2(a)(7)) is amended to read as follows:
``(7) Duty of furnishers to inform consumers about
reporting negative information.--
``(A) General negative information warning notice to all
consumers prior to furnishing such information.--
``(i) In general.--Any person that regularly furnishes
negative information to a consumer reporting agency described
in subsection (p) or (x) of section 603 about activity on any
accounts of a consumer held by such person or transactions
associated with credit extended to a consumer by such person
shall provide a written general negative information warning
notice to each such consumer before such person may furnish
any negative information relating to such a consumer.
``(ii) Content.--Such notice shall--

``(I) be clear and conspicuous;
``(II) describe the types of activities that constitute
negative information;
``(III) inform the consumer that the person may report
negative information relating to any such accounts or
transactions to a consumer reporting agency described in
subsection (p) or (x) of section 603;
``(IV) state that the negative information may appear on a
consumer report of the consumer for the periods described in
section 605 and that during such periods, the negative
information may adversely impact the consumer's credit score;
``(V) state that in some limited circumstances, the
negative information may result in other adverse actions,
including a denial of a new job or a promotion from existing
employment; and
``(VI) state that the consumer has right to--

``(aa) obtain a copy of their consumer report and credit
score or educational score (if applicable), which in some
instances can be obtained free of charge, from any consumer
reporting agency to which negative information may be been
sent; and
``(bb) dispute, free of charge, any errors on a consumer
report relating to the consumer.
``(iii) Timing of notice.--Such person shall provide such
notice to a consumer not later than 90 days before the date
on which the person furnishes negative information relating
to such consumer.
``(B) Specific negative information notice to a consumer.--
``(i) In general.--Any person described in subparagraph (A)
that has furnished negative information relating to activity
on any accounts of a consumer held by such person or
transactions associated with credit extended to a consumer by
such person to a consumer reporting agency described in
subsection (p) or (x) of section 603 shall send a written
notice to each such consumer.
``(ii) Content.--Such notice shall--

``(I) be clear and conspicuous;
``(II) inform the consumer that the person has furnished
negative information relating to such accounts or
transactions to a consumer reporting agency described in
subsection (p) or (x) of section 603;
``(III) identify any consumer reporting agency to which the
negative information was furnished, including the name of the
agency, mailing address, Internet website address, and toll-
free telephone number; and
``(IV) include the statements described in subclauses (IV),
(V), and (VI) of subparagraph (A)(ii).

``(iii) Time of notice.--Such person shall provide such
notice to a consumer not later than 5 business days after the
date on which the person furnished negative information
relating to such consumer.
``(C) Notice effective for subsequent submissions.--After
providing the notice described in subparagraph (B), the
person may submit additional negative information to a
consumer reporting agency described in subsection (p) or (x)
of section 603 without providing additional notice to the
consumer, unless another person acquires the right to
repayment connected to the additional negative information.
The acquiring person shall be subject to the requirements of
this paragraph and shall be required to send consumers the
written notices described in this paragraph, if applicable.
``(D) Non-traditional data furnishers.--Any person that
furnishes negative information to a consumer reporting agency
described in subsection (p) or (x) of section 603 relating to
any accounts of, or transactions associated with, a consumer
by such person involving non-traditional data shall be
subject to the requirements described in subparagraphs (A),
(B), and (C).
``(E) Model notices.--
``(i) Duty of bureau.--Not later than 6 months after date
of the enactment of this paragraph, the Bureau shall issue
model forms for the notices described in subparagraphs (A)
and (B) that a person may use to comply with the requirements
of this paragraph.
``(ii) Use of model notice not required.--No provision of
this paragraph may be construed to require a person to use
the model notices prescribed by the Bureau.
``(iii) Compliance using model notices.--A person shall be
deemed to be in compliance with the requirements of
subparagraph (A)(ii) or (B)(ii) (as applicable) if the person
uses the model notice prescribed by the Bureau.
``(F) Issuance of general negative warning notice without
submitting negative information.--No provision of this
paragraph may be construed to require a person described in
subparagraph (A) or (D) to furnish negative information about
a consumer to a consumer reporting agency described in
subsection (p) or (x) of section 603.
``(G) Safe harbor.--A person shall not be liable for
failure to perform the duties required by this paragraph if
the person reasonably believes that the person is prohibited,
by law, from contacting the consumer.
``(H) Effective date.--The requirements of subparagraphs
(A), (B), (C), and (D) shall not take effect until the date
that is 6 months after the date of the issuance of model
forms for notices under subparagraph (E).
``(I) Definitions.--In this paragraph, the following
definitions shall apply:
``(i) Negative information.--The term `negative
information' means information concerning a consumer's
delinquencies, late payments, insolvency, or any form of
default.
``(ii) Non-traditional data.--The term `non-traditional
data' relates to telecommunications payments, utility
payments, rent payments, remittances, wire transfers, and
such other items as determined by the Bureau.''.
(c) Duties of Furnishers After Receiving Notice of Dispute
From a Consumer.--Section 623(a)(8)(E) of the Fair Credit
Reporting Act (15 U.S.C. 1681s-2(a)(8)(E)) is amended to read
as follows:
``(E) Duties of furnishers after receiving notice of
dispute from a consumer.--After receiving a notice of dispute
from a consumer pursuant to subparagraph (D), the person that
provided the information in dispute to a consumer reporting
agency shall--
``(i) promptly provide to each consumer reporting agency to
which the person furnished the disputed information the
notice of dispute;
``(ii) review all information, including any substantiating
documents, provided by the consumer about the disputed
information and conduct an investigation, separate from any
reinvestigation by a consumer reporting agency or a reseller
conducted with respect to the disputed information;
``(iii) before the expiration of the period under section
611(a)(1) within which a consumer reporting agency would be
required to complete its action if the consumer had elected
to dispute the information under that section, complete an
investigation of the disputed information pursuant to the
standards described in subparagraph (G);
``(iv) notify the consumer, in writing, of the receipt of
the dispute that includes--

``(I) a statement about any information additional to the
information that the person is required to maintain under
subsection (f) that would support the person's ability to
carry out an investigation to resolve the consumer's dispute;
and
``(II) a statement that the consumer reporting agency to
which the disputed information was provided will include a
notation described in section 605(e) in the consumer's file
until the investigation has been completed, and information
about how a consumer may request that such notation is
removed by the agency;

``(v) if the investigation determines the disputed
information is inaccurate, incomplete, or unverifiable,
promptly notify each consumer reporting agency to which the
person furnished such information in accordance with
paragraph (2); and
``(vi) notify the consumer of the results of the
investigation, in writing, in accordance with subparagraph
(H).''.
(d) Eliminating Furnishers' Authority to Dismiss Disputes
as Frivolous or Irrelevant.--Section 623(a)(8) of the Fair
Credit Reporting Act (15 U.S.C. 1681s-2(a)(8)) is amended by
striking subparagraph (F) and redesignating subparagraph (G)
as subparagraph (F).
(e) Additional Duties.--Section 623(a)(8) of the Fair
Credit Reporting Act (15 U.S.C. 1681s-2(a)(8)), as amended by
subsection (d), is further amended by adding at the end the
following new subparagraphs:
``(G) Reasonable standards for furnishers for conducting
investigations and resolving disputes submitted by
consumers.--In any investigation conducted by a person who
furnishes information to a consumer reporting agency of an
item of information being disputed by a consumer, the person,
at a minimum--
``(i) shall maintain sufficient resources and trained
staff, commensurate with the volume and complexity of
disputes received or reasonably anticipated to be received,
to conduct investigations;
``(ii) shall verify that the person has a record of the
particular information being disputed, consistent with the
requirements of subsection (f);
``(iii) shall verify that the personally identifiable
information of the consumer submitting the dispute matches
the personally identifiable information contained on such
records;
``(iv) shall conduct a reasonable review to determine
whether the disputed information is accurate, complete, and
can be verified that considers all the information, including
any substantiating documents, provided by the consumer about
the disputed information;
``(v) shall ensure that the investigation is an independent
analysis that is separate from any reinvestigation by a
consumer reporting agency

[[Page H669]]

or a reseller conducted with respect to the disputed
information; and
``(vi) may not impose any limitations or otherwise impede
the ability of a consumer to submit information, including
any substantiating documents, about the disputed information.
``(H) Contents of the notice to the consumer about the
results of the investigation by the furnisher.--The notice of
the results of the investigation described in subparagraph
(E) shall include--
``(i) a statement informing the consumer as to whether the
disputed information was determined to be inaccurate,
incomplete, or unverifiable;
``(ii) a statement of the specific reasons supporting the
results of the investigation;
``(iii) a description of the procedure used by the dispute
resolution staff of the person who furnishes information to a
consumer reporting agency to determine the accuracy or
completeness of the information, including the business name,
mailing address, telephone number, and Internet website
address (if available) of any person who was contacted by the
staff in connection with the determination;
``(iv) a copy of all information relating to the consumer
that was used in carrying out the investigation and was the
basis for any determination about the accuracy or
completeness of the disputed information;
``(v) a statement that consumer will receive, free of
charge, a copy of their consumer report and credit score or
educational credit score (if applicable), from any consumer
reporting agency to which the disputed information had been
provided, regardless of whether the consumer obtained or will
obtain a free consumer report and credit score or educational
credit score (if applicable) in the 12-month period preceding
receipt of the notice described in this subparagraph pursuant
to section 612(a)(1);
``(vi) if the disputed information was found to be
inaccurate, incomplete, or unverifiable, a statement that the
consumer report of the consumer shall be revised to reflect
the change to the consumer's file as a result of the
investigation;
``(vii) a statement that the consumer has the right to
appeal the results of the investigation under paragraph (10),
free of charge, within 120 days after the date of the notice
of the results of the investigation was provided to the
consumer and the process for submitting an appeal;
``(viii) a statement that the consumer may add a narrative
statement, free of charge, to the consumer's file held by the
consumer reporting agency to which the information has been
furnished disputing the accuracy or completeness of the
information, regardless of the results of the investigation
by the person, and the process for contacting any agency that
received the consumer's information from the person to submit
a narrative statement;
``(ix) a statement informing the consumer that a notation
described in section 605(e) will be added to the consumer's
file during the period in which the consumer appeals the
results of an investigation and that such notation can be
removed at the request of the consumer; and
``(x) a statement that the consumer has the right to
request a copy of their consumer report and credit score or
educational credit score (if applicable), free of charge,
within the 12-month period following the date of the
conclusion of the investigation from any consumer reporting
agency in which the disputed information had been provided,
regardless of whether the consumer obtained or will obtain a
free annual consumer report and credit score or educational
credit score (if applicable) under this subparagraph or
section 612(a)(1).''.
(f) Conforming Amendment.--Section 615(a)(4)(B) is
amended--
(1) by striking ``, under section 611, with a consumer
reporting agency''; and
(2) by striking ``furnished by the agency'' and inserting
``to a consumer reporting agency under section 611 or to a
person who furnished information to an agency under section
623''.

SEC. 105. RIGHT TO APPEAL DISPUTES RELATING TO
REINVESTIGATIONS AND INVESTIGATIONS.

(a) Appeals of Reinvestigations Conducted by a Consumer
Reporting Agency.--Section 611 of the Fair Credit Reporting
Act (15 U.S.C. 1681i) is amended--
(1) in subsection (b), by inserting ``or if the consumer is
unsatisfied with the results of an appeal conducted under
subsection (i),'' after ``resolve the dispute,''; and
(2) by inserting after subsection (h) (as added by section
102) the following new subsection:
``(i) Consumer Right To Appeal Results of a Consumer
Reporting Agency Reinvestigation.--
``(1) In general.--Within 120 days after the date of
receipt of the results of a reinvestigation conducted under
subsection (a), a consumer (or authorized third party) may,
free of charge, appeal the results of such reinvestigation by
submitting a notice of appeal to the consumer reporting
agency.
``(2) Notice of appeal.--
``(A) Requirements.--A notice of appeal described in
paragraph (1) may be submitted in writing, or through a toll-
free telephone number or other electronic means established
by the consumer reporting agency (including on the Internet
website described in subsection (h)), and--
``(i) shall identify the information contained in the
consumer's file that is the subject of the appeal;
``(ii) shall describe the specific reasons for submitting
the notice of appeal; and
``(iii) may provide any information the consumer believes
is relevant to substantiate the validity of the dispute.
``(B) Consumer reporting agency notice to consumer.--Upon
receipt of such notice of appeal, the consumer reporting
agency shall promptly provide to the consumer a statement
confirming the receipt of the consumer's notice of appeal
that shall include--
``(i) an approximate date on which the consumer's appeal
review will be completed;
``(ii) the process and procedures by which such review will
be conducted; and
``(iii) an employee reference number or other employee
identifier for each of the specific individuals designated by
the consumer reporting agency who, upon the request of the
consumer, may discuss the substance and status of the appeal.
``(3) Consumer reporting agency requirements upon receipt
of notice of appeal.--
``(A) In general.--Not later than 20 days after receiving a
notice of appeal, the consumer reporting agency shall review
the appeal. If the consumer reporting agency determines the
information is inaccurate, incomplete, or cannot be verified,
the consumer reporting agency shall delete or modify the item
of information being disputed by the consumer from the file
of the consumer before the end of the 20-day period beginning
on the date on which the consumer reporting agency receives a
notice of an appeal from the consumer.
``(B) Notice of appeal to furnisher; information regarding
dispute provided by the consumer.--
``(i) In general.--Before the end of the period of 3
business days beginning on the date on which a consumer
reporting agency receives a notice of appeal, the consumer
reporting agency shall provide notice of the appeal,
including all information relating to the specific appeal
that the consumer reporting agency has received from the
consumer, to any person who provided any information in
dispute.
``(ii) Provision of additional information regarding the
dispute.--If the consumer reporting agency receives
additional information from the consumer after the agency
provides the notice required under clause (i) and before the
end of the 20-day period described in subparagraph (A), the
consumer reporting agency shall, not later than 3 business
days after receiving such information, provide such
information to any person who provided the information in
dispute and shall have an additional 10 business days to
complete the appeal review.
``(C) Minimum standards for appeals employees.--
``(i) Designation.--Upon receipt of a notice of appeal
under paragraph (1), a consumer reporting agency shall
designate one or more specific employees who--

``(I) shall be assigned an employee reference number or
other employee identifier that can be used by the consumer to
discuss the appeal with the specific individuals handling the
appeal;
``(II) shall have direct authority to resolve the dispute
that is the subject of the notice of appeal from the review
stage to its completion;
``(III) shall meet minimum training and ongoing
certification requirements at regular intervals, as
established by the Bureau;
``(IV) shall be located within the United States;
``(V) may not have been involved in the reinvestigation
conducted or terminated pursuant to subsection (a); and
``(VI) may not be subject to any requirements linking
incentives, including promotion, to the number of appeals
processed within a certain time period.

``(ii) Requirements.--Such employees shall conduct a robust
review of the appeal and make a determination regarding the
accuracy and completeness of the disputed information by--

``(I) conducting an independent analysis, separate from any
investigation by a reseller or person who provided the
disputed information, and separate from any prior
reinvestigation conducted by the consumer reporting agency of
the disputed information;
``(II) verifying that the personally identifiable
information of the consumer submitting the dispute matches
the personally identifiable information contained on the
consumer's file;
``(III) analyzing the notice of appeal and all information,
including any substantiating documents, provided by the
consumer with the notice of appeal;
``(IV) evaluating the validity of any information submitted
by any person that was used by the consumer reporting agency
in the reinvestigation of the initial dispute;
``(V) verifying that the consumer reporting agency has a
record of the information being disputed; and
``(VI) applying any additional factors or investigative
processes, as specified by the Bureau.

``(D) Notice of appeal results.--Not later than 5 days
after the end of the 20-day period described under
subparagraph (A) (or the 10-day extension period, as
applicable) the consumer reporting agency shall provide the
consumer with written notice of the results of the appeal by
postal mail or, if requested by the consumer, by other means.
The contents of such notice shall include--
``(i) a statement that the appeal is completed and the date
on which it was completed, the results of the appeal, and the
specific reasons supporting the results of the appeal;
``(ii) a copy of all information relating to the consumer
that was used as a basis for deciding the results of the
appeal;
``(iii) a consumer report that is based upon the consumer's
file as that file may have been revised as a result of the
appeal;
``(iv) a description of the procedure used to determine the
accuracy and completeness of the information, including the
business name, telephone number, mailing address, and
Internet website address (if applicable) of any person who
provided information that was contacted in connection with
such information, if reasonably available;
``(v) information describing that the consumer may submit a
statement, without charge, disputing the accuracy or
completeness of information in the consumer's file that was
the subject

[[Page H670]]

of an appeal under this subsection by submitting a statement
directly to each consumer reporting agency that received the
information;
``(vi) a description of the consumer's rights pursuant to
subsection (d) (relating to furnishing notifications to
certain users of consumer reports); and
``(vii) any other information, as determined by the Bureau.
``(E) No excuse for failure to conduct appeal.--A consumer
reporting agency may not refuse to conduct a review of an
appeal under this subsection because the agency determines
that the notice of appeal was submitted by an authorized
third party, unless the agency has clear and convincing
evidence that the third party is not authorized to submit the
notice of appeal on the consumer's behalf. If the consumer
reporting agency refuses to conduct a review of the appeal
for these reasons, it shall provide a clear and conspicuous
written notice to the consumer explaining the reasons for the
refusal and describing any information the consumer is
required to provide for the agency to conduct a review of the
appeal.''.
(b) Appeals of Investigations Conducted by Furnishers of
Information.--Section 623(a) of the Fair Credit Reporting Act
(15 U.S.C. 1681s-2(a)) is amended by adding at the end the
following new paragraph:
``(10) Duty of furnishers of information upon notice of
appeal of investigation.--
``(A) In general.--Within 120 days of the date of receipt
of the results of an investigation conducted under paragraph
(8)(E), a consumer may, free of charge, appeal such results
by submitting a notice of appeal to the person who provided
the information in the dispute to a consumer reporting agency
(hereafter in this paragraph referred to as the `furnisher').
``(B) Notice of appeal.--A notice of appeal described in
subparagraph (A) may be submitted in writing, through a toll-
free telephone number, or by other electronic means
established by the furnisher, and--
``(i) shall identify the information contained in the
consumer's file that is the subject of the appeal;
``(ii) shall describe the specific reasons for submitting
the notice of appeal; and
``(iii) may include any information, including
substantiating documents, the consumer believes is relevant
to the appeal.
``(C) Furnisher actions.--Upon receipt of such notice of
appeal, the furnisher shall--
``(i) before the end of the period of 3 business days
beginning on the date on which the furnisher receives the
notice of appeal, notify each consumer reporting agency to
which the person furnished such information a statement
identifying the items of information that a consumer is
appealing; and
``(ii) notify the consumer confirming the receipt of the
consumer's notice of appeal, including an approximate date
when the consumer's appeal will be completed, the process and
procedures by which a review of the appeal will be conducted,
and the specific individual designated by the consumer
reporting agency who, upon the request of the consumer, may
discuss the substance and status of the appeal.
``(D) Furnisher requirements upon receipt of notice of
appeal.--Not later than 20 days after receiving a notice of
appeal, the furnisher shall determine whether the item of
information being disputed by the consumer is inaccurate,
incomplete, or cannot be verified, and shall notify the
consumer reporting agency of the determination. If the
furnisher cannot verify the accuracy or completeness of the
disputed information, the furnisher shall, before the end of
the 20-day period beginning on the date on which the
furnisher receives notice of an appeal from the consumer,
submit instructions to the consumer reporting agency that the
item of information being disputed by the consumer should be
deleted from the file of the consumer.
``(E) Minimum standards for appeals employees.--Upon
receipt of a notice of appeal under subparagraph (A), a
furnisher shall designate one or more specific employees
who--
``(i) shall be assigned an employee reference number or
other employee identifier that can be used by the consumer to
discuss the appeal with the specific individuals handling the
appeal;
``(ii) shall have direct authority to resolve the dispute
that is the subject of the notice of appeal on behalf of the
furnisher from the review stage to its completion;
``(iii) shall meet minimum training and ongoing
certification requirements at regular intervals, as
established by the Bureau;
``(iv) may not have been involved in an investigation
conducted pursuant to paragraph (8); and
``(v) may not be subject to any requirements linking
incentives, including promotion, to the number of appeals
processed within a certain time period.
``(F) Requirements for appeals process.--Such employees
shall conduct a robust review of the appeal and make a
determination regarding the accuracy and completeness of the
disputed information by--
``(i) conducting an independent analysis, separate from any
reinvestigation by a reseller or consumer reporting agency,
of the disputed information;
``(ii) verifying that the personally identifiable
information related to the dispute is accurate and complete;
``(iii) analyzing the notice of appeal and all information,
including substantiating documents, provided by the consumer
with the notice of appeal;
``(iv) evaluating the validity of any information submitted
by any person that was used by the furnisher in the initial
investigation into the dispute;
``(v) verifying that the information being disputed relates
to the consumer in whose file the information is located;
``(vi) verifying that the furnisher has a record of the
information being disputed; and
``(vii) applying any additional factors or investigative
processes, as specified by the Bureau.
``(G) Extension of review period.--If a consumer submits
additional information related to the appeal after the period
of 3 business days described in subparagraph (C)(i) and
before the end of the 20-day period described in subparagraph
(D), the furnisher shall have an additional 10 business days
to complete the review of the appeal.
``(H) Notice of appeal results.--Not later than 5 days
after the end of the 20-day period described in subparagraph
(D) (or the 10-day extension described under subparagraph
(G), as applicable) the furnisher shall provide the consumer
with written notice of the results of the appeal by mail or,
if requested by the consumer, by other means. The contents of
such notice shall include--
``(i) a statement that the appeal is completed and the date
on which it was completed, the results of the appeal, and the
specific reasons supporting the results of the appeal;
``(ii) a copy of all information relating to the consumer
that was used as a basis for deciding the results of the
appeal;
``(iii) if the appeal results in any change to the consumer
report, a notification that the consumer shall receive a
copy, free of charge, of a revised consumer report (based
upon the consumer's file as that file was changed as a result
of the appeal) and a credit score or educational credit score
(if applicable) from each consumer reporting agency that had
been furnished incorrect information;
``(iv) a description of the procedure used to determine the
accuracy and completeness of the information, including the
business name, telephone number, mailing address, and
Internet website address (if applicable), of any person who
provided information that was contacted in connection with
such information, if reasonably available;
``(v) information describing that the consumer may submit a
statement, without charge, disputing the accuracy or
completeness of information in the consumer's file that was
the subject of an appeal under this paragraph by submitting a
statement directly to each consumer reporting agency that
received the information; and
``(vi) a notification that the consumer may request the
furnisher to submit to each consumer reporting agency the
consumer's request to furnish notifications pursuant to
section 611(d) (relating to furnishing notifications to
certain users of consumer reports).''.
(c) Technical Amendment.--Section 623(a)(8)(A) of the Fair
Credit Reporting Act (15 U.S.C. 1681s-2(a)(8)(A)) is amended
by striking ``reinvestigate'' and inserting ``investigate''.
(d) Conforming Amendments.--Section 609 of the Fair Credit
Reporting Act (15 U.S.C. 1681g) is amended--
(1) in subsection (c)--
(A) by striking ``Commission'' and inserting ``Bureau''
each place that term appears;
(B) in the subsection heading, by striking ``Rights to
Obtain and Dispute Information in Consumer Reports and to
Obtain Credit Scores'' and inserting ``Key Consumer Reporting
Rights''; and
(C) in paragraph (1)--
(i) in the heading, by striking ``Commission'' and
inserting ``Bureau'';
(ii) in subparagraph (B)--

(I) in clause (ii), by striking ``a consumer report without
charge under section 612'' and inserting ``consumer reports
and credit scores or educational credit scores (as
applicable) without charge under section 612'';
(II) in clause (iii), by inserting ``or section 623'' after
``section 611'';
(III) by striking clauses (iv) and (vi);
(IV) by inserting after clause (iii) the following new
clause:

``(iv) the right of a consumer to appeal a determination of
a reinvestigation conducted by a consumer reporting agency
under section 611(i) or an investigation conducted by a
furnisher of information under section 623(a)(10);''; and

(V) by adding at the end the following new clause:

``(vi) the method and circumstances under which consumers
can obtain a 1-year fraud alert, 7-year fraud alert, active
duty alert, or security freeze as described in section 605A
through a consumer reporting agency described under section
603(p).'';
(iii) in subparagraph (C) (as amended by subparagraph (A))
by inserting ``and the Commission'' after ``Bureau''; and
(iv) by adding at the end the following new subparagraph:
``(D) Publication of summary rights.--A consumer reporting
agency described under subsection (p) or (x) of section 603
shall display in a clear and conspicuous manner, including on
the Internet website of the consumer reporting agency, the
summary of rights prepared by the Bureau under this
paragraph.''; and
(2) in subsection (d), by inserting ``Bureau and the''
before ``Commission''.

SEC. 106. REVISED CONSUMER REPORTS.

Section 611 of the Fair Credit Reporting Act (15 U.S.C.
1681i), as amended by section 105(a)(2), is further amended
by adding at the end the following new subsection:
``(j) Requirement to Send Revised Consumer Report to
Consumer.--Upon receiving a notice described in section
623(a)(8)(E)(iv), each consumer reporting agency shall send
to the consumer a revised consumer report and credit score or
education credit score (if applicable) based upon the
consumer's file as that file was changed as a result of the
investigation.''.

SEC. 107. INDICATION OF DISPUTE BY CONSUMERS AND USE OF
DISPUTED INFORMATION.

Section 605(f) of the Fair Credit Reporting Act (15 U.S.C.
1681c(f)) is amended to read as follows:

[[Page H671]]

``(f) Indication of Dispute.--
``(1) In general.--A consumer reporting agency shall
include in any consumer report based on the consumer's file a
notation identifying any item of information that is
currently in dispute by the consumer if--
``(A) a consumer disputes the completeness or accuracy of
any item of information contained in a consumer's file
pursuant to section 611(a)(1);
``(B) a consumer files with a consumer reporting agency an
appeal of a reinvestigation pursuant to section 611(i); or
``(C) the consumer reporting agency is notified by a person
that furnished any items of information that are currently in
dispute by the consumer that--
``(i) a consumer disputes the completeness or accuracy of
any information furnished by a person to any consumer
reporting agency pursuant to paragraph (3) or (8) of section
623(a); or
``(ii) a consumer submits a notice of appeal under section
623(a)(10).
``(2) Opt out.--A consumer may submit a request to a
consumer reporting agency or a person who furnished the
information in dispute, as applicable, to have the notation
described in paragraph (1) omitted from the consumer report.
Upon receipt of such a request--
``(A) by a consumer reporting agency, such agency shall
remove the notation within 1 business day; and
``(B) by a person who furnished the information in dispute,
such person shall submit such request to each consumer
reporting agency to which the person furnished such
information within 1 business day and such agency shall
remove the notation within 1 business day of receipt of such
request.''.

SEC. 108. ACCURACY AND COMPLETENESS REPORT DUTIES FOR
CONSUMER REPORTING AGENCIES AND FURNISHERS.

Section 607(b) of the Fair Credit Reporting Act (15 U.S.C.
1681e) is amended to read as follows:
``(b) Accuracy and Completeness of Report.--
``(1) In general.--In preparing a consumer report, a
consumer reporting agency shall maintain reasonable
procedures to ensure maximum possible accuracy and
completeness of the information concerning the individual to
whom the consumer report relates.
``(2) Bureau rule to assure maximum possible accuracy and
completeness with credit reporting practices.--
``(A) Rule.--Not later than 18 months after the date of
enactment of this subsection, the Bureau shall issue a final
rule establishing the procedures described in paragraph (1).
``(B) Requirements.--In formulating the rule required under
subparagraph (A), the Bureau shall--
``(i) develop standards for matching the personally
identifiable information included in the consumer's file with
the personally identifiable information furnished by the
person who provided the information to the consumer reporting
agency (hereafter in this subsection referred to as the
`furnisher'), including the full name of a consumer, the date
of birth of a consumer, the full social security number of a
consumer, and any other information that the Bureau
determines would aid in assuring maximum possible accuracy
and completeness of such consumer reports;
``(ii) establish processes for a consumer reporting agency
to monitor the integrity of the data provided by furnishers
and the compliance of furnishers with the requirements of
this title;
``(iii) establish processes for a consumer reporting agency
to regularly reconcile data relating to accounts in
collection, including those that have not been paid in full,
by specifying the circumstances under which the consumer
reporting agency shall remove or suppress negative or adverse
information from a consumer's file that has not been updated
by a furnisher who is also a debt collector (as defined in
section 803 of the Fair Debt Collection Practices Act) within
the time period established by the Bureau;
``(iv) establish procedures to require each consumer
reporting agency to review and monitor the quality of
information received from any source, including information
from public records, by regularly and on an ongoing basis
comparing the information received to the information
available from the original source and ensuring that the
information received is the most current information;
``(v) develop standards and procedures for consumer
reporting agencies to identify furnishers that repeatedly
fail to provide accurate and complete information, to take
corrective action against such furnishers, and to reject
information submitted by such furnishers;
``(vi) develop standards and procedures for consumer
reporting agencies to adopt regarding collection of public
record data, including standards and procedures to consider
the ultimate data source, how the public record information
is filed and its availability and accessibility, and whether
information relating to the satisfaction of judgments or
other updates to the public record are available on a
reasonably timely basis from a particular source; and
``(vii) establish any other factors, procedures, or
processes determined by the Bureau to be necessary to assist
consumer reporting agencies in achieving maximum possible
accuracy and completeness of the information in consumer
reports.
``(3) Corrective action for furnishers that repeatedly
furnish inaccurate or incomplete information.--Upon
identifying a furnisher that repeatedly fails to furnish
accurate, complete, or verifiable information to consumer
reporting agencies, the Bureau shall--
``(A) ensure the prompt removal of any adverse information
relating to a consumer's accounts submitted by such
furnisher; and
``(B) take corrective action, which may include--
``(i) mandatory revised training and training materials for
the staff of the furnisher regarding the furnishing of
accurate and complete information;
``(ii) sharing industry best practices and procedures
regarding accuracy and completeness; or
``(iii) temporarily prohibiting a furnisher from providing
information to a consumer reporting agency.''.

SEC. 109. INCLUSION OF PUBLIC RECORD DATA SOURCES IN CONSUMER
REPORTS.

Section 605(d) of the Fair Credit Reporting Act (15 U.S.C.
1681c(d)) is amended by adding at the end the following:
``(3) Public record data source.--Any consumer reporting
agency that furnishes a consumer report that contains public
record data shall also include in such report the source from
which that data was obtained, including the particular court,
if any, and the date that the data was initially reported or
publicized.''.

SEC. 110. INJUNCTIVE RELIEF FOR VICTIMS.

(a) In General.--The Fair Credit Reporting Act (15 U.S.C.
1681 et seq.) is amended--
(1) in section 616--
(A) in subsection (a), by amending the subsection heading
to read as follows: ``Damages'';
(B) by redesignating subsections (c) and (d) as subsections
(d) and (e), respectively; and
(C) by inserting after subsection (b) the following new
subsection:
``(c) Injunctive Relief.--In addition to any other remedy
set forth in this section, a court may award injunctive
relief to require compliance with the requirements imposed
under this title with respect to any consumer. In the event
of any successful action for injunctive relief under this
subsection, the court may award to the prevailing party costs
and reasonable attorney fees (as determined by the court)
incurred during the action by such party.''; and
(2) in section 617--
(A) in subsection (a), by amending the subsection heading
to read as follows: ``Damages'';
(B) by redesignating subsection (b) as subsection (c); and
(C) by inserting after subsection (a) the following new
subsection:
``(b) Injunctive Relief.--In addition to any other remedy
set forth in this section, a court may award injunctive
relief to require compliance with the requirements imposed
under this title with respect to any consumer. In the event
of any successful action for injunctive relief under this
subsection, the court may award to the prevailing party costs
and reasonable attorney fees (as determined by the court)
incurred during the action by such party.''.
(b) Enforcement by Federal Trade Commission.--Section
621(a)(2)(A) of the Fair Credit Reporting Act (15 U.S.C.
1681s(a)(2)(A)) is amended--
(1) by amending the subparagraph heading to read as
follows: ``Negligent, willful, or knowing violations''; and
(2) by inserting ``negligent, willful, or'' before
``knowing''.

TITLE II--FREE CREDIT SCORES FOR CONSUMERS

SEC. 201. DEFINITIONS.

(a) In General.--Section 603 of the Fair Credit Reporting
Act (15 U.S.C. 1681a) is amended by adding at the end the
following new subsection:
``(bb) Credit Score and Educational Credit Score
Definitions.--
``(1) Credit score.--The term `credit score' means a
numerical value or a categorization derived from a
statistical tool or modeling system used by a person who
makes or arranges a loan or extends credit to predict the
likelihood of certain credit behaviors, including default, as
determined by the Bureau.
``(2) Educational credit score.--The term `educational
credit score' means a numerical value or categorization
derived from a statistical tool or modeling system based upon
information from a consumer report that assists consumers in
understanding how a lender or creditor may view the
consumer's creditworthiness in deciding whether to make a
loan or extend credit to that consumer.
``(3) Key factors.--The term `key factors' means any
relevant elements or reasons affecting the credit score for
the particular individual, listed in the order of importance
based on the effect of each element or reason on the credit
score or educational credit score.
``(4) Credit scoring model.--The term `credit scoring
model' means a scoring algorithm, formula, model, program, or
mechanism used to generate a credit score or an educational
credit score.''.
(b) Conforming Amendments.--The Fair Credit Reporting Act
(15 U.S.C. 1681 et seq.) is amended--
(1) in section 605(d)(2), by striking ``(as defined in
section 609(f)(2)(B))''; and
(2) in section 615--
(A) by striking ``as defined in section 609(f)(2)(A)'' each
place that term appears; and
(B) in subsection (a)(2)(B), by striking ``set forth in
subparagraphs (B) through (E) of section 609(f)(1)'' and
inserting ``with respect to a credit score described in
section 609(f)(2), if available''.

SEC. 202. CONSUMER INFORMATION ON CALCULATION OF SCORES.

Section 609(f) of the Fair Credit Reporting Act (15 U.S.C.
1681g(f)) is amended to read as follows:
``(f) Disclosure of Credit Score and Educational Credit
Score by Consumer Reporting Agencies.--
``(1) In general.--Upon the request of a consumer for a
credit score or educational credit score, a consumer
reporting agency shall supply to the consumer a statement--
``(A) containing--

[[Page H672]]

``(i) a current credit score at the time of the request
generated using a commonly used credit scoring model to
generate credit scores, subject to regulations of the Bureau;
``(ii) an educational credit score at the time of the
request, if it is not practicable to generate such a credit
score, as determined by the Bureau; or
``(iii) an explanation that the consumer's file does not
have sufficient information from which to generate such a
credit score or educational credit score; and
``(B) with respect to each previous credit score in the
file of the consumer--
``(i) the date on which the credit score was generated;
``(ii) the name of any entity that the credit score was
provided to; and
``(iii) the credit score itself.
``(2) Requirements.--A statement provided under clause (i)
or (ii) of paragraph (1)(A) shall include--
``(A) a minimum of 4 key factors, if available, that
adversely affected the credit score or educational credit
score, except that if one of the key factors consists of the
number of enquiries made with respect to a consumer report,
that factor shall be provided to the consumer in addition to
the factors required by this subparagraph;
``(B) to the extent possible, specific actions a consumer
could take with respect to each key factor listed in
subparagraph (A) to improve the consumer's credit score or
educational credit score;
``(C) a minimum of 4 key factors, if available, that
positively affected the credit score or educational credit
score;
``(D) the range of possible credit scores or educational
credit scores under the credit scoring model used;
``(E) the distribution of credit scores or educational
credit scores among consumers who are scored under the same
credit scoring model by the consumer reporting agency, and
using the same scale as that of the score that is provided to
a creditor or consumers--
``(i) in the form of a bar graph containing a minimum of 6
bars that illustrates the percentage of consumers with credit
scores or educational credit scores within the range of
scores represented by each bar; or
``(ii) by another clear and readily understandable
graphical depiction, statement, or illustration comparing the
consumer's credit score or educational credit score to the
scores of other consumers, as determined by the Bureau;
``(F) the date on which the credit score or educational
credit score was created; and
``(G) the name of the person that developed the credit
scoring model on which the credit score or educational credit
score was based.
``(3) Applicability to certain uses.--This subsection shall
not be construed so as to compel a consumer reporting agency
to--
``(A) develop or disclose a credit score if the agency does
not distribute credit scores used by a person who makes or
arranges a loan or extends credit to predict the likelihood
of certain credit behaviors; or
``(B) develop or disclose an educational credit score if
the agency does not develop educational credit scores that
assist in understanding the general credit behavior of a
consumer and predicting the future credit behavior of the
consumer.
``(4) Maintenance of credit scores.--
``(A) In general.--All consumer reporting agencies shall
maintain in the consumer's file credit scores relating to the
consumer for a period of 2 years from the date on which such
information is generated.
``(B) Disclosure only to consumers.--A past credit score
maintained in a consumer's file pursuant to subparagraph (A)
may only be provided to the consumer to which the credit
score relates and may not be included in a consumer report or
used as a factor in generating a credit score or educational
credit score.
``(C) Removal of past credit scores.--A past credit score
maintained in a consumer's file pursuant to subparagraph (A)
shall be removed from the consumer's file after the end of
the 2-year period described under subparagraph (A).''.

SEC. 203. DISCLOSURES RELATING TO CREDIT SCORES AND
EDUCATIONAL CREDIT SCORES.

Section 609(f) of the Fair Credit Reporting Act (15 U.S.C.
1681g(f)), as amended by section 202, is further amended by
adding at the end the following new paragraphs:
``(5) Website disclaimer.--A consumer reporting agency that
generates or provides credit scores or educational credit
scores shall clearly and conspicuously display on the home
page of the agency's Internet website, and as part of any
application, solicitation, or marketing material or media
providing information related to a credit score or
educational credit score, the following notice, in boldface
type of 18-point font or larger and in a text box with
boldface outer borders:

`` `CREDIT SCORE DISCLAIMER. `` `

There is no ``one'' credit score. There are many scoring
formulas derived from a wide variety of models available to a
consumer and used by lenders and creditors. Different lenders
and creditors use different scoring formulas to determine
whether to extend credit or make a loan to you, and the terms
of the credit or loan. An educational credit score is not a
credit score that a person who makes a loan or extends credit
to you is likely to use. Educational credit scores are merely
intended to be used as an educational tool to help consumers
understand how the information contained in a consumer report
may affect the terms and conditions of a loan or extension of
credit that may be available to a consumer. Lenders and
creditors may also rely on information not contained in your
consumer report and not reflected in the calculation of your
credit score.'.
``(6) Additional requirements for educational credit
scores.--
``(A) Disclaimer.--If an educational credit score is
provided pursuant to paragraph (1), a consumer reporting
agency shall clearly and conspicuously include in a prominent
location on the statement, in boldface type of 18-point font
or larger, and in a text box with boldface outer borders, the
following notice:

`` `EDUCATIONAL CREDIT SCORE DISCLAIMER. `` `

The educational credit score provided to you is not a
credit score that a lender or creditor is likely to use to
make a loan or extend credit to you. There are many different
credit scores derived from a wide variety of models used by
lenders and creditors. An educational credit score is merely
an educational tool. It is intended to provide consumers with
a basic understanding of how the information contained in a
consumer report may affect the terms and conditions of credit
that are available. The credit scores you receive directly
from different lenders and creditors may not be the same as
an educational credit score. There are a number of reasons
for this:
`` `(1) Each company may use a different formula for
calculating credit scores and the differences in the formulas
may lead to differences in your scores.
`` `(2) Companies may produce scores that give results on
different scales.
`` `(3) Not all lenders or creditors report to every
consumer reporting agency, and therefore the information
contained in your consumer report that the consumer reporting
agencies use to calculate your educational credit score may
differ among agencies.'.
``(B) Prohibition on misleading representations.--A
consumer reporting agency may not refer to an educational
credit score as a credit score in any application,
solicitation, marketing, or other informational materials or
media.
``(7) Modification of disclaimers.--The Bureau may modify
the content, format, and manner of the disclaimers required
under paragraphs (5) and (6), if warranted, after conducting
consumer testing or research.''.

SEC. 204. FREE CREDIT SCORE DISCLOSURES AND CONSUMER REPORTS.

(a) In General.--Section 612 of the Fair Credit Reporting
Act (15 U.S.C. 1681j) is amended--
(1) in subsection (a)--
(A) in paragraph (1)--
(i) in subparagraph (A), by inserting after ``section 609''
the following: ``(including the disclosure of a credit score
or educational credit score under subsection (f) of such
section)''; and
(ii) in subparagraph (C)--

(I) by striking ``Commission'' and inserting ``Bureau'';
and
(II) by inserting ``, credit scores, and educational credit
scores (as applicable)'' after ``consumer reports'' each
place that term appears;

(B) in paragraph (2)--
(i) by striking ``15 days'' and inserting ``3 business
days''; and
(ii) by inserting ``, credit score, or educational credit
score'' after ``consumer report'';
(C) in paragraph (3), by inserting ``, credit score, or
educational credit score'' after ``consumer report''; and
(D) in paragraph (4), by inserting ``, credit scores, or
educational credit scores'' after ``consumer reports'';
(2) in subsection (b), by inserting ``(including the
disclosure of a credit score or educational credit score, as
applicable, under subsection (f) of such section)'' after the
first instance of ``section 609'';
(3) in subsection (c)--
(A) by inserting ``(including the disclosure of a credit
score or educational credit score under subsection (f) of
such section)'' after ``pursuant to section 609'';
(B) in paragraph (2), by striking ``; or'' and inserting a
semicolon;
(C) in paragraph (3), by striking the period at the end and
inserting a semicolon; and
(D) by adding at the end the following new paragraphs:
``(4) has disputed information, or submitted an appeal of
an investigation or reinvestigation of such information,
under section 611 or 623, regardless of whether the consumer
has already received a credit report, credit score, or
educational credit score under section 611 or 623; or
``(5) has had information that was previously deleted under
section 611(a)(5) reinserted into the consumer's file,
regardless of whether the consumer has already received a
credit report, credit score, or educational credit score
under such section.'';
(4) in subsection (d), by inserting ``(including the
disclosure of a credit score or educational credit score
under subsection (f) of such section)'' after ``section
609'';
(5) in subsection (f)(1)--
(A) by striking ``reasonable charge'' and all that follows
through ``section 609'' and inserting ``reasonable charge on
a consumer for providing a consumer report to a consumer'';
(B) by striking subparagraph (B);
(C) by redesignating clauses (i) and (ii) as subparagraphs
(A) and (B), respectively (and conforming the margins
accordingly); and
(D) in subparagraph (B) (as so redesignated), by striking
``disclosure; and'' and inserting ``disclosure.''; and
(6) by adding at the end the following new subsections:
``(h) Centralized Source for Obtaining Free Copy of
Consumer Report and Scores.--
``(1) Nationwide consumer reporting agencies.--
``(A) In general.--Not later than 180 days after the date
of enactment of this subsection, each consumer reporting
agency described under subsection (p) of section 603 shall
prominently

[[Page H673]]

display on the home page of the agency's website--
``(i) a hyperlink labeled `Get Your Free Annual Credit
Reports along with either your Credit Scores or Educational
Credit Scores provided for under Federal Law' or
substantially similar text, as determined by the Bureau; and
``(ii) a disclosure titled `Consumer's Right to Free Credit
Scores, Educational Credit Scores, and Reports under Federal
Law' or substantially similar text, as determined by the
Bureau that includes the following statement:
`` `All consumers are entitled to obtain a free copy of
their consumer report and credit score or educational credit
score annually from each of the nationwide consumer reporting
agencies. Under Federal law, a consumer is entitled to obtain
additional free copies of their consumer reports, along with
a copy of either the consumer's credit score or educational
credit score (under certain circumstances), including:
`` `(1) When a consumer is unemployed and intends to apply
for employment within 60 days.
`` `(2) When a consumer is a recipient of public welfare
assistance.
`` `(3) When a consumer has a reasonable belief that their
report contains inaccuracies as a result of fraud.
`` `(4) When a consumer asserts in good faith a suspicion
that the consumer has been or is about to become a victim of
identity theft, fraud, or a related crime, or harmed by the
unauthorized disclosure of the consumer's financial or
personally identifiable information.
`` `(5) When a consumer files a dispute or an appeal of the
results of a dispute with a consumer reporting agency or a
person who furnished information to the consumer reporting
agency regarding the accuracy or completeness of the
information contained on their report.
`` `(6) After a furnisher of information discovers it has
furnished inaccurate or incomplete information to a consumer
reporting agency, and the furnisher notifies the agency of
the error.
`` `(7) After an adverse action is taken against a consumer
or a consumer receives a risk-based pricing notice.
`` `(8) When a mortgage lender, private educational lender,
indirect auto lender, or motor vehicle lender obtains and
uses a consumer's reports or scores for underwriting
purposes.'.
``(B) Hyperlink requirements.--The hyperlink described in
subparagraph (A)(i) shall be prominently located on the top
of the home page and should link directly to the website of
the centralized source established pursuant to section 211(d)
of the Fair and Accurate Credit Transactions Act of 2003 (15
U.S.C. 1681j note).
``(C) Modifications.--The Bureau may modify the disclosure
described in subparagraph (A)(ii) as necessary to include
other circumstances under which a consumer has the right to
receive a free consumer report, credit score, or educational
credit score.
``(2) Nationwide specialty consumer reporting agencies.--
``(A) In general.--Not later than 180 days after the date
of enactment of this subsection, each nationwide specialty
consumer reporting agency shall prominently display on the
Internet home webpage of the agency a disclosure titled
`Consumer's Right to Free Consumer Reports and Credit Score
or Educational Credit Score (as applicable) under Federal
Law'. Such disclosure shall include the following statement:
`` `Upon request, all consumers are entitled to obtain a
free copy of their consumer report and credit score or
educational credit score (as applicable) during any 12-month
period from each of the nationwide specialty consumer
reporting agencies. Federal law also provides further
circumstances under which a consumer is entitled to obtain
additional free copies of their consumer report and credit
score or educational credit score (as applicable) including:
`` `(1) When a consumer is unemployed and intends to apply
for employment within 60 days.
`` `(2) When a consumer is a recipient of public welfare
assistance.
`` `(3) When a consumer has a reasonable belief that their
report contains inaccuracies as a result of fraud.
`` `(4) When a consumer files a dispute or an appeal of the
results of a dispute with a consumer reporting agency or a
person who furnished information to the consumer reporting
agency regarding the accuracy or completeness of the
information contained on their report.
`` `(5) After a furnisher of information discovers it has
furnished inaccurate or incomplete information to a consumer
reporting agency, and the furnisher notifies the agency of
the error.
`` `(6) After an adverse action is taken against a consumer
or a consumer receives a risk-based pricing notice.
`` `(7) When a mortgage lender, private educational lender,
indirect auto lender, or motor vehicle lender obtains and
uses a consumer's reports or scores for underwriting
purposes.'.
``(B) Modifications.--The Bureau may modify the disclosure
described in subparagraph (A) as necessary to include other
circumstances under which a consumer has the right to receive
a free consumer report and credit score or educational credit
score (as applicable).
``(C) Toll-free telephone access.--The information
described in this paragraph shall also be made available via
a toll-free telephone number. Such number shall be
prominently displayed on the home page of the website of each
nationwide specialty consumer reporting agency. Each of the
circumstances under which a consumer may obtain a free
consumer report and credit score or educational credit score
(as applicable) shall be presented in an easily
understandable format and consumers shall be directed to an
individual who is a customer service representative not later
than 2 minutes after the initial phone connection is made by
the consumer. Information provided through such telephone
number shall comply with the requirements of section 633.
``(D) Online consumer reports; exemption.--Upon receipt of
a request by a consumer for a consumer report, each
nationwide specialty consumer reporting agency shall provide
access to such report electronically on the Internet website
described in section 611(h).
``(i) Automatic Provision of Free Consumer Reports and
Credit Scores or Educational Credit Scores.--A consumer
reporting agency shall provide to a consumer a free copy of
the file and credit score or educational credit score of the
consumer who--
``(1) obtains a 1-year fraud alert, 7-year fraud alert,
active duty alert, or security freeze as described in section
605A; or
``(2) has disputed information, or submitted an appeal of
an investigation or reinvestigation of such information,
under section 611 or 623.''.
(b) Technical Amendment.--Section 615(h)(7) of such Act (15
U.S.C. 1681m(h)(7)) is amended by striking ``section'' each
place such term appears and inserting ``subsection''.

SEC. 205. PROVISION OF CONSUMER REPORTS AND CREDIT SCORES BY
PRIVATE EDUCATIONAL LENDERS.

Section 609 of the Fair Credit Reporting Act (15 U.S.C.
1681g) is amended by adding at the end the following new
subsection:
``(h) Disclosure of Consumer Reports and Credit Scores by
Private Educational Lenders.--
``(1) In general.--If a private educational lender obtains
a copy of any consumer reports or credit scores and uses such
reports or scores in connection with an application of a
consumer for a private education loan, the private
educational lender shall provide to the consumer, not later
than 3 business days after obtaining such reports or scores
and before the date on which the consumer enters into a loan
agreement with the private educational lender, a copy of any
such reports or scores, along with the statement described
under subsection (f)(2).
``(2) Costs.--None of the costs to the private educational
lender associated with procuring consumer reports or credit
scores under this subsection may be charged, directly or
indirectly, to the consumer.
``(3) Rule of construction.--Nothing in this subsection
shall be construed to eliminate any requirement for creditors
and lenders to provide credit score disclosures, including
the statement described under subsection (f)(2), to consumers
as part of an adverse action or risk-based pricing notice.''.

SEC. 206. PROVISION OF CONSUMER REPORTS AND CREDIT SCORES BY
MOTOR VEHICLE LENDERS OR INDIRECT AUTO LENDERS.

Section 609 of the Fair Credit Reporting Act (15 U.S.C.
1681g), as amended by section 205, is further amended by
adding at the end the following new subsection:
``(i) Disclosure of Consumer Reports and Credit Scores Used
by Motor Vehicle Lenders or Indirect Auto Lenders.--
``(1) In general.--If a motor vehicle lender or indirect
auto lender obtains a copy of any consumer reports or credit
scores and uses such reports or scores in connection with an
application of a consumer for a motor vehicle loan or lease,
the motor vehicle lender or indirect auto lender shall
provide to the consumer a document, separate from the
consumer's lease or purchase agreement and before the
consumer enters into a lease or purchase agreement,
disclosing any consumer reports and credit scores, including
the statement described in subsection (f)(2), used by the
lender to determine whether to extend credit to the consumer.
``(2) Costs.--None of the costs to the motor vehicle lender
or indirect auto lender associated with procuring consumer
reports or credit scores under this subsection may be
charged, directly or indirectly, to the consumer.
``(3) Rule of construction.--Nothing in this subsection
shall be construed to eliminate any requirement for creditors
and lenders to provide credit score disclosures, including
the statement described under subsection (f)(2), to consumers
as part of an adverse action or risk-based pricing notice.
``(4) Definitions.--
``(A) Indirect auto lender.--The term `indirect auto
lender' has the meaning given the term by the Bureau, and
shall include a person extending a loan made with respect to
a car, boat, motorcycle, recreational vehicle, or other
similar vehicle used primarily for personal or household
purposes.
``(B) Motor vehicle lender.--The term `motor vehicle
lender' has the meaning given the term by the Board of
Governors of the Federal Reserve System, and shall include a
person extending a loan made with respect to a car, boat,
motorcycle, recreational vehicle, or other similar vehicle
used primarily for personal or household purposes.''.

SEC. 207. PROVISION OF CONSUMER REPORTS AND CREDIT SCORES BY
RESIDENTIAL MORTGAGE LENDERS.

Section 609(g) of the Fair Credit Reporting Act (15 U.S.C.
1681g(g)) is amended--
(1) by redesignating paragraph (2) as paragraph (5);
(2) in paragraph (1)--
(A) by striking ``a consumer credit score'' and inserting
``any consumer reports or credit scores'';
(B) by striking ``, as defined in subsection (f),'';
(C) by striking ``the following to the consumer as soon as
reasonably practicable:'' and inserting ``, not later than 3
business days after using such reports or scores, a document
disclosing any consumer reports and credit scores used by the
lender to determine whether to extend credit to the consumer
along with the statement described in subsection (f)(2).'';
(D) by striking subparagraphs (A), (B), (C), (E), and (F);

[[Page H674]]

(E) by redesignating subparagraph (D) as paragraph (3) (and
adjusting the margins accordingly); and
(F) by redesignating subparagraph (G) as paragraph (4) (and
adjusting the margins accordingly);
(3) by inserting before paragraph (3) (as so designated)
the following new paragraph:
``(2) Rule of construction.--Nothing in this subsection
shall be construed to eliminate any requirement for lenders
to provide credit score disclosures, including the statement
described under subsection (f)(2), to consumers as part of an
adverse action or risk-based pricing notice.'';
(4) in paragraph (3) (as so designated), in the quoted
material--
(A) by inserting ``, free of charge,'' after ``disclose to
you''; and
(B) by striking ``affecting your credit scores'' and
inserting ``affecting your credit score or scores'';
(5) in paragraph (5) (as so redesignated) by inserting ``or
scores'' after ``credit score'' each place such term appears;
and
(6) by adding at the end the following new paragraphs:
``(6) Actions not required.--This subsection shall not
require any person to disclose any credit score or related
information obtained by the person after a loan has closed.
``(7) No procurement costs.--None of the costs to the
creditor or lender associated with procuring any consumer
reports or scores under this subsection may be charged,
directly or indirectly, to the consumer.''.

TITLE III--STUDENT BORROWER CREDIT IMPROVEMENT ACT

SEC. 301. REMOVAL OF ADVERSE INFORMATION FOR CERTAIN PRIVATE
EDUCATION LOAN BORROWERS.

(a) In General.--The Fair Credit Reporting Act (15 U.S.C.
1681 et seq.), as amended by section 405, is further amended
by inserting after section 605D the following new section:

``Sec. 605E. Credit rehabilitation for distressed private
education loan borrowers.

``(a) In General.--A consumer reporting agency may not
furnish any consumer report containing any adverse item of
information relating to a delinquent or defaulted private
education loan of a borrower if the borrower has
rehabilitated the borrower's credit with respect to such loan
by making 9 on-time monthly payments (in accordance with the
terms and conditions of the borrower's original loan
agreement or any other repayment agreement that antedates the
original agreement) during a period of 10 consecutive months
on such loan after the date on which the delinquency or
default occurred.
``(b) Interruption of 10-month Period for Certain
Consumers.--
``(1) Permissible interruption of the 10-month period.--A
borrower may stop making consecutive monthly payments and be
granted a grace period after which the 10-month period
described in subsection (a) shall resume. Such grace period
shall be provided under the following circumstances:
``(A) With respect to a borrower who is a member of the
Armed Forces entitled to incentive pay for the performance of
hazardous duty under section 301 of title 37, United States
Code, hazardous duty pay under section 351 of such title, or
other assignment or special duty pay under section 352 of
such title, the grace period shall begin on the date on which
the borrower begins such assignment or duty and end on the
date that is 6 months after the completion of such assignment
or duty.
``(B) With respect to a borrower who resides in an area
affected by a major disaster or emergency declared under the
Robert T. Stafford Disaster Relief and Emergency Assistance
Act, the grace period shall begin on the date on which the
major disaster or emergency was declared and end on the date
that is 3 months after such date.
``(2) Other circumstances.--
``(A) In general.--The Bureau may allow a borrower
demonstrating hardship to stop making consecutive monthly
payments and be granted a grace period after which the 10-
month period described in subsection (a) shall resume.
``(B) Borrower demonstrating hardship defined.--In this
paragraph, the term `borrower demonstrating hardship' means a
borrower or a class of borrowers who, as determined by the
Bureau, is facing or has experienced unusual extenuating life
circumstances or events that result in severe financial or
personal barriers such that the borrower or class of
borrowers does not have the capacity to comply with the
requirements of subsection (a).
``(c) Procedures.--The Bureau shall establish procedures to
implement the credit rehabilitation described in this
section, including--
``(1) the manner, content, and form for requesting credit
rehabilitation;
``(2) the method for validating that the borrower is
satisfying the requirements of subsection (a);
``(3) the manner, content, and form for notifying the
private educational loan holder of--
``(A) the borrower's participation in credit rehabilitation
under subsection (a);
``(B) the requirements described in subsection (d); and
``(C) the restrictions described in subsection (f);
``(4) the manner, content, and form for notifying a
consumer reporting agency of--
``(A) the borrower's participation in credit rehabilitation
under subsection (a); and
``(B) the requirements described in subsection (d);
``(5) the method for verifying whether a borrower qualifies
for the grace period described in subsection (b);
``(6) the manner, content, and form of notifying a consumer
reporting agency and private educational loan holder that a
borrower was granted a grace period.
``(d) Standardized Reporting Codes.--A consumer reporting
agency shall develop standardized reporting codes for use by
any private educational loan holder to identify and report a
borrower's status of making and completing 9 on-time monthly
payments during a period of 10 consecutive months on a
delinquent or defaulted private education loan, including
codes specifying the grace period described in subsection (b)
and any agreement to modify monthly payments. Such codes
shall not appear on any report provided to a third party, and
shall be removed from the consumer's credit report upon the
consumer's completion of the rehabilitation period under this
section.
``(e) Elimination of Barriers to Credit Rehabilitation.--A
consumer report in which a private educational loan holder
furnishes the standardized reporting codes described in
subsection (d) to a consumer reporting agency, or in which a
consumer reporting agency includes such codes, shall be
deemed to comply with the requirements for accuracy and
completeness under sections 607(b), 623(a)(1), and 632.
``(f) Prohibition on Civil Actions for Consumers Pursuing
Rehabilitation.--A private educational loan holder may not
commence or proceed with any civil action against a borrower
with respect to a delinquent or defaulted loan during the
period of rehabilitation if the private educational loan
holder has been notified, in accordance with the procedures
established by the Bureau pursuant to subsection (c)--
``(1) of such borrower's intent to participate in
rehabilitation;
``(2) that such borrower has satisfied the requirements
under subsection (a); or
``(3) that such borrower was granted a grace period.
``(g) Impact on Statute of Limitations for Prior Debt.--
Payments by a borrower on a private education loan that are
made during and after a period of rehabilitation under this
section shall have no effect on the statute of limitations
with respect to payments that were due on such private
education loan before the beginning of the period of
rehabilitation.
``(h) Payment Plans.--If a private educational loan holder
enters into a payment plan with a borrower on a private
education loan during a period of rehabilitation, such
payment plan shall be reasonable and affordable, as
determined by the Bureau.
``(i) Rules of Construction.--
``(1) Application to subsequent default or delinquency.--A
borrower who satisfies the requirements under subsection (a)
shall be eligible for additional credit rehabilitation
described in subsection (a) with respect to any subsequent
default or delinquency of the borrower on the rehabilitated
private education loan.
``(2) Interruption of consecutive payment period
requirement.--The grace period described in subsection
(b)(1)(A) shall not apply if any regulation promulgated under
section 987 of title 10, United States Code (commonly known
as the Military Lending Act), or the Servicemembers Civil
Relief Act (50 U.S.C. App. 501 et seq.) allows for a grace
period or other interruption of the 10-month period described
in subsection (a) and such grace period or other interruption
is longer than the period described in subsection (b)(1)(A)
or otherwise provides greater protection or benefit to the
borrower who is a member of the Armed Forces.''.
(b) Table of Contents Amendment.--The table of contents of
the Fair Credit Reporting Act, as amended by section 405, is
further amended by inserting after the item relating to
section 605D the following new item:

``605E. Credit rehabilitation for distressed private education loan
borrowers who demonstrate a history of loan repayment.''.
(c) Conforming Amendment.--Section 623(a)(1) of the Fair
Credit Reporting Act (15 U.S.C. 1681s-2(a)(1)) is amended by
striking subparagraph (E).

SEC. 302. PRIVATE EDUCATION LOAN DEFINITIONS.

Section 603 of the Fair Credit Reporting Act (15 U.S.C.
1681a), as amended by section 201(a), is further amended by
adding at the end the following new subsection:
``(cc) Private Education Loan Definitions.--The terms
`private education loan' and `private educational lender'
have the meanings given such terms, respectively, in section
140(a) of the Truth in Lending Act.''.

TITLE IV--CREDIT RESTORATION FOR VICTIMS OF PREDATORY ACTIVITIES AND
UNFAIR CONSUMER REPORTING PRACTICES

SEC. 401. ADVERSE CREDIT INFORMATION.

(a) In General.--Section 605 of the Fair Credit Reporting
Act (15 U.S.C. 1681c), as amended by sections 107, 109, and
201, is further amended--
(1) in subsection (a)--
(A) by striking ``Except as authorized under subsection
(b), no'' and inserting ``No'';
(B) in paragraph (1), by striking ``10 years'' and
inserting ``7 years'';
(C) in paragraph (2), by striking ``Civil suits, civil
judgments, and records'' and inserting ``Records'';
(D) in paragraph (3), by striking ``seven years'' and
inserting ``4 years'';
(E) in paragraph (4), by striking ``seven years'' and
inserting ``4 years'';
(F) in paragraph (5)--
(i) by striking ``, other than records of convictions of
crimes''; and
(ii) by striking ``seven years'' and inserting ``4 years'';
and
(G) by adding at the end the following new paragraphs:
``(9) Civil suits and civil judgments (except as provided
in paragraph (8)) that, from date of entry, antedate the
report by more than 4 years

[[Page H675]]

or until the governing statute of limitations has expired,
whichever is the longer period.
``(10) A civil suit or civil judgment--
``(A) brought by a private education loan holder that, from
the date of successful completion of credit restoration or
rehabilitation in accordance with the requirements of section
605D or 605E, antedates the report by 45 calendar days; or
``(B) brought by a lender with respect to a covered
residential mortgage loan (as defined in section 605C(b))
that antedates the report by 45 calendar days.
``(11) Records of convictions of crimes which antedate the
report by more than 7 years.
``(12) Any other adverse item of information relating to
the collection of debt that did not arise from a contract or
an agreement to pay by a consumer, including fines, tickets,
and other assessments, as determined by the Bureau, excluding
tax liability.'';
(2) by striking subsection (b) and redesignating
subsections (c) through (h) as subsections (b) through (g),
respectively; and
(3) in subsection (b) (as so redesignated), by striking
``7-year period referred to in paragraphs (4) and (6)'' and
inserting ``4-year period referred to in paragraphs (4) and
(5)''.
(b) Conforming Amendments.--The Fair Credit Reporting Act
(15 U.S.C. 1681) is amended--
(1) in section 616(e) (as redesignated by section
110(a)(1)(B)), by striking ``section 605(g)'' each place that
term appears and inserting ``section 605(f)''; and
(2) in section 625(b)(5)(A), by striking ``section 605(g)''
and inserting ``section 605(f)''.

SEC. 402. EXPEDITED REMOVAL OF FULLY PAID OR SETTLED DEBT
FROM CONSUMER REPORTS.

Section 605(a) of the Fair Credit Reporting Act (15 U.S.C.
1681c(a)), as amended by section 401, is further amended by
adding at the end the following new paragraph:
``(13) Any other adverse item of information related to a
fully paid or settled debt that had been characterized as
delinquent, charged off, or in collection which, from the
date of payment or settlement, antedates the report by more
than 45 calendar days.''.

SEC. 403. MEDICAL DEBT COLLECTIONS.

(a) Removal of Fully Paid or Settled Medical Debt From
Consumer Reports.--Section 605(a) of the Fair Credit
Reporting Act (15 U.S.C. 1681c(a)), as amended by section
402, is further amended by adding at the end the following
new paragraph:
``(14) Any other adverse item of information related to a
fully paid or settled debt arising from the receipt of
medical services, products, or devices that had been
characterized as delinquent, charged off, or in collection
which, from the date of payment or settlement, antedates the
report by more than 45 calendar days.''.
(b) Establishing an Extended Time Period Before Certain
Medical Debt Information May Be Reported.--Section 605(a) of
the Fair Credit Reporting Act (15 U.S.C. 1681c(a)), as
amended by subsection (a), is further amended by adding at
the end the following new paragraph:
``(15) Any information related to a debt arising from the
receipt of medical services, products, or devices, if the
date on which such debt was placed for collection, charged to
profit or loss, or subjected to any similar action antedates
the report by less than 365 calendar days.''.
(c) Prohibition on Reporting Medically Necessary
Procedures.--Section 605(a) of the Fair Credit Reporting Act
(15 U.S.C. 1681c(a)), as amended by subsection (b), is
further amended by adding at the end the following new
paragraph:
``(16) Any information related to a debt arising from a
medically necessary procedure.''.
(d) Medically Necessary Procedure Defined.--Section 603 of
the Fair Credit Reporting Act (15 U.S.C. 1681a), as amended
by section 901, is further amended by adding at the end the
following:
(ee) Medically Necessary Procedure.--The term `medically
necessary procedure' means--
``(1) health care services or supplies needed to diagnose
or treat an illness, injury, condition, disease, or its
symptoms and that meet accepted standards of medicine; and
``(2) health care to prevent illness or detect illness at
an early stage, when treatment is likely to work best
(including preventive services such as pap tests, flu shots,
and screening mammograms).''.
(e) Technical Amendment.--Section 604(g)(1)(C) of the Fair
Credit Reporting Act (15 U.S.C. 1681b(g)(1)(C)) is further
amended by striking ``devises'' and inserting ``devices''.

SEC. 404. CREDIT RESTORATION FOR VICTIMS OF PREDATORY
MORTGAGE LENDING AND SERVICING.

(a) In General.--The Fair Credit Reporting Act (15 U.S.C.
1681 et seq.) is amended by inserting after section 605B the
following new section:

``Sec. 605C. Credit restoration for victims of predatory
mortgage lending

``(a) In General.--A consumer reporting agency may not
furnish any consumer report containing any adverse item of
information relating to a covered residential mortgage loan
(including the origination and servicing of such a loan, any
loss mitigation activities related to such a loan, and any
foreclosure, deed in lieu of foreclosure, or short sale
related to such a loan), if the action or inaction to which
the item of information relates--
``(1) resulted from an unfair, deceptive, or abusive act or
practice, or a fraudulent, discriminatory, or illegal
activity of a financial institution, as determined by the
Bureau or a court of competent jurisdiction; or
``(2) is related to an unfair, deceptive, or abusive act,
practice, or a fraudulent, discriminatory, or illegal
activity of a financial institution that is the subject of a
settlement agreement initiated on behalf of a consumer or
consumers and that is between the financial institution and
an agency or department of a local, State, or Federal
Government, regardless of whether such settlement includes an
admission of wrongdoing.
``(b) Covered Residential Mortgage Loan Defined.--In this
section, the term `covered residential mortgage loan' means
any loan primarily for personal, family, or household use
that is secured by a mortgage, deed of trust, or other
equivalent consensual security interest on a dwelling (as
defined in section 103(w) of the Truth in Lending Act),
including a loan in which the proceeds will be used for--
``(1) a manufactured home (as defined in section 603 of the
Housing and Community Development Act of 1974);
``(2) any installment sales contract, land contract, or
contract for deed on a residential property; or
``(3) a reverse mortgage transaction (as defined in section
103 of the Truth in Lending Act).''.
(b) Table of Contents Amendment.--The table of contents of
the Fair Credit Reporting Act is amended by inserting after
the item relating to section 605B the following new item:

``605C. Credit restoration for victims of predatory mortgage
lending.''.
(c) Effective Date.--The amendments made by this section
shall take effect at the end of the 18-month period beginning
on the date of the enactment of this Act.

SEC. 405. CREDIT RESTORATION FOR CERTAIN PRIVATE EDUCATION
LOANS BORROWERS.

(a) In General.--The Fair Credit Reporting Act (15 U.S.C.
1681 et seq.), as amended by section 404, is further amended
by inserting after section 605C the following new section:

``Sec. 605D. Credit restoration for certain private education
loans borrowers

``(a) Process for Certification as a Qualifying Private
Education Loan Borrower.--
``(1) In general.--A consumer may submit a request to the
Bureau, along with a defraudment claim, to be certified as a
qualifying private education loan borrower with respect to a
private education loan.
``(2) Certification.--The Bureau shall certify a consumer
described in paragraph (1) as a qualifying private education
loan borrower with respect to a private education loan if the
Bureau or a court of competent jurisdiction determines that
the consumer has a valid defraudment claim with respect to
such loan.
``(b) Removal of Adverse Information.--Upon receipt of a
notice described in subsection (d)(5), a consumer reporting
agency shall remove any adverse information relating to any
private education loan with respect to which a consumer is a
qualifying private education loan borrower from any consumer
report within 45 calendar days of receipt of such
notification.
``(c) Disclosure.--The Bureau shall disclose the results of
a certification determination in writing to the consumer that
provides a clear and concise explanation of the basis for the
determination of whether such consumer is a qualifying
private education loan borrower with respect to a private
education loan and, as applicable, an explanation of the
consumer's right to have adverse information relating to such
loan removed from their consumer report by a consumer
reporting agency.
``(d) Procedures.--The Bureau shall--
``(1) establish procedures for a consumer to submit a
request described in subsection (a);
``(2) establish procedures to efficiently review, accept,
and process such a request;
``(3) develop ongoing outreach initiatives and education
programs to inform consumers of the circumstances under which
such consumer may be eligible to be certified as a qualifying
private education loan borrower with respect to a private
education loan;
``(4) establish procedures, including the manner, form, and
content of the notice informing a private educational loan
holder of the prohibition on reporting any adverse
information relating to a private education loan with respect
to which a consumer is a qualifying private education loan
borrower; and
``(5) establish procedures, including the manner, form, and
content of the notice informing a consumer reporting agency
of the obligation to remove any adverse information as
described in subsection (c).
``(e) Standardized Reporting Codes.--A consumer reporting
agency shall develop standardized reporting codes for use by
private education loan holders to identify and report a
qualifying private education loan borrower's status of a
request to remove any adverse information relating to any
private education loan with respect to which such consumer is
a qualifying private education loan borrower. A consumer
report in which a person furnishes such codes shall be deemed
to comply with the requirements for accuracy and completeness
required under sections 607(b), 623(a)(1), and 632. Such
codes shall not appear on any report provided to a third
party, and shall be removed from the consumer's credit report
upon the successful restoration of the consumer's credit
under this section.
``(f) Defraudment Claim Defined.--For purposes of this
section, the term `defraudment claim' means a claim made with
respect to a consumer who is a borrower of a private
education loan with respect to a proprietary educational
institution or career education program in which the consumer
alleges that--
``(1) the proprietary educational institution or career
education program--
``(A) engaged in an unfair, deceptive, or abusive act or
practice, or a fraudulent, discriminatory, or illegal
activity--

[[Page H676]]

``(i) as defined by State law of the State in which the
proprietary educational institution or career education
program is headquartered or maintains or maintained
significant operations; or
``(ii) under Federal law;
``(B) is the subject of an enforcement order, a settlement
agreement, a memorandum of understanding, a suspension of
tuition assistance, or any other action relating to an
unfair, deceptive, or abusive act or practice that is between
the proprietary educational institution or career education
program and an agency or department of a local, State, or
Federal Government; or
``(C) misrepresented facts to students or accrediting
agencies or associations about graduation or gainful
employment rates in recognized occupations or failed to
provide the coursework necessary for students to successfully
obtain a professional certification or degree from the
proprietary educational institution or career education
program; or
``(2) the consumer has submitted a valid defense to
repayment claim with respect to such loan, as determined by
the Secretary of Education.''.
(b) Table of Contents Amendment.--The table of contents of
the Fair Credit Reporting Act, as amended by section 404, is
further amended by inserting after the item relating to
section 605C the following new item:

``605D. Credit restoration for certain private education loans
borrowers.''.

SEC. 406. FINANCIAL ABUSE PREVENTION.

(a) In General.--The Fair Credit Reporting Act (15 U.S.C.
1681 et seq.), as amended by section 301, is further amended
by inserting after section 605E the following new section:

``Sec. 605F. Financial abuse prevention

``For a consumer who is the victim of intentionally abusive
or harmful financial behavior, as determined by a court of
competent jurisdiction including a family court, juvenile
court, or other court with personal jurisdiction, that was
conducted by a spouse, family or household member, caregiver,
or person with whom such consumer had a dating relationship
in a manner which resulted in the inclusion of an adverse
item of information on the consumer report of the consumer,
and the consumer did not participate in or consent to such
behavior, the consumer may apply to a court of competent
jurisdiction, including a family court, juvenile court, or
other court with personal jurisdiction, for an order to
require the removal of such adverse information from the
consumer's file maintained by any consumer reporting
agency.''.
(b) Table of Contents Amendment.--The table of contents of
the Fair Credit Reporting Act, as amended by section 301, is
further amended by inserting after the item relating to
section 605E the following new item:

``605F. Financial abuse prevention.''.

SEC. 407. PROHIBITION OF CERTAIN FACTORS RELATED TO FEDERAL
CREDIT RESTORATION OR REHABILITATION.

The Fair Credit Reporting Act (15 U.S.C. 1681 et seq.), as
amended by section 502, is further amended--
(1) by adding at the end the following new section:

``Sec. 632. Prohibition of certain factors related to Federal
credit restoration or rehabilitation

``(a) Restriction on Credit Scoring Models.--A credit
scoring model may not--
``(1) take into consideration, in a manner adverse to a
consumer's credit score or educational credit score, any
information in a consumer report concerning the consumer's
participation in credit restoration or rehabilitation under
section 605C, 605D, or 605E; or
``(2) treat negatively, in a manner adverse to a consumer's
credit score or educational credit score, the absence of
payment history data for an existing account, whether the
account is open or closed, where the absence of such
information is the result of a consumer's participation in
credit restoration or rehabilitation under section 605C,
605D, or 605E.
``(b) Restriction on Persons Obtaining Consumer Reports.--A
person who obtains a consumer report may not--
``(1) take into consideration, in a manner adverse to a
consumer, any information in a consumer report concerning the
consumer's participation in credit restoration or
rehabilitation under section 605C, 605D, or 605E; or
``(2) treat negatively the absence of payment history data
for an existing account, whether the account is open or
closed, where the absence of such information is the result
of a consumer's participation in credit restoration or
rehabilitation under section 605C, 605D, or 605E.
``(c) Accuracy and Completeness.--If a person who furnishes
information to a consumer reporting agency requests the
removal of information from a consumer report or a consumer
reporting agency removes information from a consumer report
in compliance with the requirements under section 605C, 605D,
or 605E, or such information was removed pursuant at section
605(a)(11), such report shall be deemed to satisfy the
requirements for accuracy and completeness with respect to
such information.
``(d) Prohibition Related to Adverse Actions and Risk-Based
Pricing Decisions.--No person shall use information related
to a consumer's participation in credit restoration or
rehabilitation under section 605C, 605D, or 605E in
connection with any determination of--
``(1) the consumer's eligibility or continued eligibility
for an extension of credit;
``(2) the terms and conditions offered to a consumer
regarding an extension of credit; or
``(3) an adverse action made for employment purposes.'';
and
(2) in the table of contents for such Act, by inserting
after the item relating to section 631 the following new
item:

``632. Prohibition of certain factors related to Federal credit
restoration or rehabilitation.''.

TITLE V--CLARITY IN CREDIT SCORE FORMATION

SEC. 501. CONSUMER BUREAU STUDY AND REPORT TO CONGRESS ON THE
IMPACT OF NON-TRADITIONAL DATA.

(a) Study.--The Bureau of Consumer Financial Protection
shall carry out a study to assess the impact (including the
availability and affordability of credit and other noncredit
decisions, the potential positive and negative impacts on
consumer credit scores, and any unintended consequences) of
using traditional modeling techniques or alternative modeling
techniques to analyze non-traditional data from a consumer
report and of including non-traditional data on consumer
reports on the following:
(1) Consumers with no or minimal traditional credit
history.
(2) Traditionally underserved communities and populations.
(3) Consumers residing in rural areas.
(4) Consumers residing in urban areas.
(5) Racial and ethnic minorities and women.
(6) Consumers across various income strata, particularly
consumers earning less than 120 percent of the area median
income (as defined by the Secretary of Housing and Urban
Development).
(7) Immigrants, refugees, and non-permanent residents.
(8) Minority financial institutions (as defined under
section 308(b) of the Financial Institutions Reform,
Recovery, and Enforcement Act of 1989 (12 U.S.C. 1463 note))
and community financial institutions.
(9) Consumers residing in federally assisted housing,
including consumers receiving Federal rental subsidies.
(b) Additional Considerations.--In assessing impacts under
subsection (a), the Bureau of Consumer Financial Protection
shall also consider impacts on--
(1) the privacy, security, and confidentiality of the
financial, medical, and personally identifiable information
of consumers;
(2) the control of consumers over how such information may
or will be used or considered;
(3) the understanding of consumers of how such information
may be used or considered and the ease with which a consumer
may decide to restrict or prohibit such use or consideration
of such information;
(4) potential discriminatory effects; and
(5) disparate outcomes the use or consideration of such
information may cause.
(c) Consideration of Recent Government Studies.--In
assessing impacts under subsection (a), the Bureau of
Consumer Financial Protection shall also consider recent
Government studies on alternative data, including--
(1) the report of the Bureau of Consumer Financial
Protection titled ``CFPB Data Point: Becoming Credit
Visible'' (published June 2017); and
(2) the report of the Comptroller General of the United
States titled ``Financial Technology: Agencies Should Provide
Clarification on Lenders' Use of Alternative Data''
(published December 2018).
(d) Report.--Not later than 1 year after the date of the
enactment of this Act, the Bureau of Consumer Financial
Protection shall issue a report to the Committee on Financial
Services of the House of Representatives and the Committee on
Banking, Housing, and Urban Affairs of the Senate containing
all findings and determinations, including any
recommendations for any legislative or regulatory changes,
made in carrying out the study required under subsection (a).
(e) Definitions.--In this section:
(1) Alternative modeling techniques.--The term
``alternative modeling techniques'' means statistical and
mathematical techniques that are not traditional modeling
techniques, including decision trees, random forests,
artificial neutral networks, nearest neighbor, genetic
programming, and boosting algorithms.
(2) Consumer report.--The term ``consumer report'' has the
meaning given such term in section 603 of the Fair Credit
Reporting Act (15 U.S.C. 1681a).
(3) Non-traditional data.--The term ``non-traditional
data'' means data related to telecommunications, utility
payments, rent payments, remittances, wire transfers, data
not otherwise regularly included in consumer reports issued
by consumer reporting agencies described under section
603(p), and such other items as the Bureau of Consumer
Financial Protection deems appropriate.
(4) Traditional modeling techniques.--The term
``traditional modeling techniques'' means statistical and
mathematical techniques (including models, algorithms, linear
and logistic regression methods, and their outputs) that are
traditionally used in automated underwriting processes.

SEC. 502. CONSUMER BUREAU OVERSIGHT OF CREDIT SCORING MODELS.

The Fair Credit Reporting Act (15 U.S.C. 1681 et seq.), as
amended by section 701, is further amended--
(1) by adding at the end the following new section:

``Sec. 631. Credit scoring models

``(a) Validated Credit Scoring Models.--Not later than 1
year after the date of the enactment of this section, the
Bureau shall (in consultation with the Board of Governors of
the Federal Reserve System, the Comptroller of the Currency,
the Board of Directors of the Federal Deposit Insurance
Corporation, and the National Credit Union Administration
Board) issue final regulations applicable to any person that

[[Page H677]]

creates, maintains, utilizes, or purchases credit scoring
models used in making credit decisions to establish standards
for validating the accuracy and predictive value of all such
credit scoring models, both before release for initial use
and at regular intervals thereafter, for as long as such
credit scoring models are made available for purchase or use
by such person.
``(b) Prohibition.--At least once every 2 years, the Bureau
shall conduct a review of credit scoring models to determine
whether the use of any particular factors, or the weight or
consideration given to certain factors by credit scoring
models, is inappropriate, including if such factors do not
enhance or contribute to the accuracy and predictive value of
the models. Upon the conclusion of its review, the Bureau may
prohibit a person described in subsection (a) from weighing,
considering, or including certain factors in, or making
available for purchase or use, certain credit scoring models
or versions, as the Bureau determines appropriate.''; and
(2) in the table of contents for such Act, as amended by
section 701, by adding after the item relating to section 630
the following new item:

``631. Credit scoring models.''.

TITLE VI--RESTRICTIONS ON CREDIT CHECKS FOR EMPLOYMENT DECISIONS

SEC. 601. PROHIBITION ON THE USE OF CREDIT INFORMATION FOR
MOST EMPLOYMENT DECISIONS.

(a) In General.--Section 604 of the Fair Credit Reporting
Act (15 U.S.C. 1681b) is amended--
(1) in subsection (a)(3)(B), by inserting ``, subject to
the requirements of subsection (b)'' after ``purposes''; and
(2) in subsection (b)--
(A) in paragraph (1)--
(i) by amending the paragraph heading to read as follows:
``Use of Consumer Reports for Employment Purposes'';
(ii) in subparagraph (A), by redesignating clauses (i) and
(ii) as subclauses (I) and (II), respectively (and conforming
the margins accordingly);
(iii) by redesignating subparagraphs (A) and (B) as clauses
(i) and (ii), respectively (and conforming the margins
accordingly);
(iv) by striking the period at the end of clause (ii) (as
so redesignated) and inserting ``; and'';
(v) by striking ``agency may furnish'' and inserting
``agency--
``(A) may furnish''; and
(vi) by adding at the end the following new subparagraph:
``(B) except as provided in paragraph (5), may not furnish
a consumer report for employment purposes with respect to any
consumer in which any information contained in the report
bears on the consumer's creditworthiness, credit standing, or
credit capacity.''; and
(B) by adding at the end the following new paragraphs:
``(5) Requirements for consumer reports bearing on the
consumer's creditworthiness, credit standing, or credit
capacity.--
``(A) In general.--A person may use a consumer report for
employment purposes with respect to any consumer in which any
information contained in the report bears on the consumer's
creditworthiness, credit standing, or credit capacity only
if--
``(i) either--

``(I) the person is required to obtain the report by a
Federal, State, or local law or regulation; or
``(II) the information contained in the report is being
used with respect to a national security investigation (as
defined in paragraph (4)(D));

``(ii) none of the cost associated with obtaining the
consumer report will be passed on to the consumer to whom the
report relates; and
``(iii) the information contained in the consumer report
will not be disclosed to any other person other than--

``(I) in an aggregate format that protects a consumer's
personally identifiable information; or
``(II) as may be necessary to comply with any applicable
Federal, State, or local equal employment opportunity law or
regulation.

``(B) Disclosures.--A person who procures, or causes to be
procured, a consumer report described in subparagraph (A) for
employment purposes shall, in the disclosure made pursuant to
paragraph (2), include--
``(i) an explanation that a consumer report is being
obtained for employment purposes;
``(ii) the reasons for obtaining such a report; and
``(iii) the citation to the applicable Federal, State, or
local law or regulation described in subparagraph (A)(i)(I).
``(C) Adverse actions.--In using a consumer report
described in subparagraph (A) for employment purposes and
before taking an adverse action based in whole or in part on
the report, the person intending to take such adverse action
shall, in addition to the information described in paragraph
(3), provide to the consumer to whom the report relates--
``(i) the name, address, and telephone number of the
consumer reporting agency that furnished the report
(including, for a consumer reporting agency that compiles and
maintains files on consumers on a nationwide basis, a toll-
free telephone number established by such agency);
``(ii) the date on which the report was furnished; and
``(iii) the specific factors from the report upon which the
adverse action (as defined in section 603(k)(1)(B)(ii)) was
based.
``(D) National security investigations.--The requirements
of paragraph (4) shall apply to a consumer report described
under subparagraph (A).
``(E) Non-circumvention.--With respect to a consumer report
in which any information contained in the report bears on the
consumer's creditworthiness, credit standing, or credit
capacity, if a person is prohibited from using the consumer
report pursuant to subparagraph (A), such person may not,
directly or indirectly, either orally or in writing, require,
request, suggest, or cause any employee or prospective
employee to submit such information to the person as a
condition of employment.
``(F) Non-waiver.--A consumer may not waive the
requirements of this paragraph with respect to a consumer
report.
``(6) Rule of construction.--Nothing in this subsection
shall be construed to require a consumer reporting agency to
prevent a Federal, State, or local law enforcement agency
from accessing information in a consumer report to which the
law enforcement agency could otherwise obtain access.''.
(b) Technical Amendment.--The Fair Credit Reporting Act (15
U.S.C. 1681 et seq.) is amended by striking ``section
604(b)(4)(E)(i)'' each place such term appears and inserting
``section 604(b)(4)(D)(i)''.
(c) Rule of Construction.--The amendments made by this Act
may not be construed as limiting the ability of a person to
use non-financial or non-credit related consumer report
information.

TITLE VII--PROHIBITION ON MISLEADING AND UNFAIR CONSUMER REPORTING
PRACTICES

SEC. 701. PROHIBITION ON AUTOMATIC RENEWALS FOR PROMOTIONAL
CONSUMER REPORTING AND CREDIT SCORING PRODUCTS
AND SERVICES.

The Fair Credit Reporting Act (15 U.S.C. 1681 et seq.) is
amended--
(1) by adding at the end the following new section:

``Sec. 630. Promotional periods

``(a) Termination Notice.--With respect to any product or
service related to a consumer report or a credit score that
is provided to a consumer under promotional terms, the seller
or provider of such product or service shall provide clear
and conspicuous notice to the consumer within a reasonable
period of time before the promotional period ends.
``(b) Opt-In.--With respect to any such product or service,
the seller or provider may not continue to sell or provide
such product or service to the consumer after the end of the
promotional period unless the consumer specifically agrees at
the end of the promotional period to continue receiving the
product or service.''; and
(2) in the table of contents for such Act, by inserting
after the item relating to section 629 the following new
item:

``630. Promotional periods.''.

SEC. 702. PROHIBITION ON MISLEADING AND DECEPTIVE MARKETING
RELATED TO THE PROVISION OF CONSUMER REPORTING
AND CREDIT SCORING PRODUCTS AND SERVICES.

Section 609 of the Fair Credit Reporting Act (15 U.S.C.
1681g), as amended by section 206, is further amended--
(1) in subsection (a)--
(A) in paragraph (1)--
(i) by striking ``request, except'' and all that follows
through ``consumer to whom'' and inserting ``request, unless
the consumer to whom'';
(ii) by striking ``disclosure; and'' and inserting
``disclosure.''; and
(iii) by striking subparagraph (B); and
(B) in paragraph (6), by inserting ``or educational credit
score (if applicable) under subsection (f) or section 612''
before the period at the end; and
(2) by adding at the end the following new subsection:
``(j) Disclosures on Products and Services.--The Bureau, in
consultation with the Federal Trade Commission, shall issue
regulations within 18 months of the date of the enactment of
this subsection requiring each consumer reporting agency and
reseller to clearly and conspicuously disclose all material
terms and conditions, including any fee and pricing
information associated with any products or services offered,
advertised, marketed, or sold to consumers by the agency or
reseller. Such disclosures shall be made in all forms of
communication to consumers and displayed prominently on the
agency or reseller's website and all other locations where
products or services are offered, advertised, marketed, or
sold to consumers.''.

SEC. 703. PROHIBITION ON EXCESSIVE DIRECT-TO-CONSUMER SALES.

The Fair Credit Reporting Act (15 U.S.C. 1681 et seq.), as
amended by section 407, is further amended--
(1) by adding after section 632 the following new section:

``Sec. 633. Fair and reasonable fees for products and
services

``The Bureau may, with respect to any product or service
offered by a consumer reporting agency to a consumer, set a
fair and reasonable maximum fee that may be charged for such
product or service, except where such maximum fee is
otherwise provided under this title.''; and
(2) in the table of contents for such Act, by adding at the
end the following new item:

``633. Fair and reasonable fees for products and services.''.

SEC. 704. FAIR ACCESS TO CONSUMER REPORTING AND CREDIT
SCORING DISCLOSURES FOR NONNATIVE ENGLISH
SPEAKERS AND THE VISUALLY AND HEARING IMPAIRED.

The Fair Credit Reporting Act (15 U.S.C. 1681 et seq.), as
amended by section 903, is further amended--
(1) by adding at the end the following new section:

``Sec. 635. Fair access to information for nonnative English
speakers and the visually and hearing impaired

``(a) In General.--Not later than 180 days after the date
of the enactment of this section, the Bureau shall issue a
rule to require consumer reporting agencies and persons who
furnish information to consumer reporting agencies

[[Page H678]]

under this title, to the maximum extent reasonably
practicable--
``(1) to provide any information, disclosures, or other
communication with consumers--
``(A) in each of the 10 most commonly spoken languages,
other than English, in the United States, as determined by
the Bureau of the Census on an ongoing basis; and
``(B) in formats accessible to individuals with hearing or
vision impairments; and
``(2) to ensure that--
``(A) customer service representatives, including employees
assigned to handle disputes or appeals under sections 611 and
623, who are available to assist consumers are highly
familiar with the requirements of this title;
``(B) such representatives are available during regular
business hours and outside of regular business hours,
including evenings and weekends; and
``(C) at least one among such representatives is fluent in
each of the 10 most commonly spoken languages, other than
English, in the United States, as determined by the Bureau of
the Census on an ongoing basis.
``(b) Bureau Consultation.--The Bureau shall consult with
advocates for civil rights, consumer groups, community
groups, and organizations that serve traditionally
underserved communities and populations in issuing the rule
described in subsection (a).''; and
(2) in the table of contents for such Act, by adding at the
end the following new item:

``635. Fair access to information for nonnative English speakers and
the visually and hearing impaired.''.

SEC. 705. COMPARISON SHOPPING FOR LOANS WITHOUT HARM TO
CREDIT STANDING.

Section 605 of the Fair Credit Reporting Act (15 U.S.C.
1681c), as amended by section 401, is further amended by
adding at the end the following new subsection:
``(h) Encouraging Comparison Shopping for Loans.--
``(1) In general.--With respect to multiple enquiries of
the same type made to a consumer reporting agency for a
consumer report or credit score with respect to a consumer,
any credit scoring model shall treat such enquiries as a
single enquiry if the enquiries are made within a 120-day
period.
``(2) Definition of enquiries of the same type.--With
respect to multiple enquiries made to a consumer reporting
agency for a consumer report or credit score with respect to
a consumer, such enquiries are `of the same type' if the
consumer reporting agency has reason to believe that the
enquiries are all made for the purpose of determining the
consumer's creditworthiness for an extension of credit
described in one of the following:
``(A) A covered residential mortgage loan (as defined in
section 605C).
``(B) A motor vehicle loan or lease (as described in
section 609(i)).
``(C) A private education loan.
``(D) Any other consumer financial product or service, as
determined by the Bureau.''.

SEC. 706. NATIONWIDE CONSUMER REPORTING AGENCIES REGISTRY.

The Fair Credit Reporting Act (15 U.S.C. 1681 et seq.), as
amended by section 704, is further amended--
(1) by adding at the end the following new section:

``Sec. 636. Nationwide consumer reporting agencies registry

``(a) In General.--Not later than 1 year after the date of
enactment of this section, the Bureau shall establish and
maintain a publicly accessible registry of consumer reporting
agencies described in subsection (p) or (x) of section 603
(and any other agencies the Bureau determines provide similar
services to such consumer reporting agencies) that includes
current contact information of each such agency, including
the Internet website address of the Internet website
described under section 611(h), and information on how
consumers can obtain their consumer report, credit scores, or
educational credit scores (as applicable) by toll-free
telephone, postal mail, or electronic means.
``(b) Registry Requirements.--The registry described in
subsection (a) shall--
``(1) identify the largest agencies and the markets and
demographics covered by such agencies; and
``(2) disclose, with respect to each agency, whether the
agency is subject to the supervisory authority of the Bureau
under this title.
``(c) Information Updates.--Each agency described under
subsection (a) shall submit to the Bureau contact information
for the registry, including any updates to such information.
The Bureau shall--
``(1) independently verify information submitted by each
agency; and
``(2) update the registry not less frequently than
annually.''; and
(2) in the table of contents for such Act by adding at the
end the following new item:

``636. Nationwide consumer reporting agencies registry.''.

SEC. 707. PROTECTION FOR CERTAIN CONSUMERS AFFECTED BY A
SHUTDOWN.

(A) Definition of Employee Affected by a Shutdown.--Section
603 of the Fair Credit Reporting Act (15 U.S.C. 1681a), as
amended by section 901, is further amended by adding at the
end the following:
``(ee) Employee Affected by a Shutdown.--With respect to a
shutdown, the term `employee affected by a shutdown' means a
consumer who--
``(1) is an employee of--
``(A) the Federal Government, and who is furloughed or
excepted from a furlough during the shutdown;
``(B) the District of Columbia, and who is furloughed or
excepted from a furlough during the shutdown;
``(C) the District of Columbia Courts, and who is
furloughed or excepted from a furlough during the shutdown;
``(D) the Public Defender Service for the District of
Columbia, and who is furloughed or excepted from a furlough
during the shutdown; or
``(E) a Federal contractor (as defined under section 710 of
title 41, United States Code) or other business, and who has
experienced a substantial reduction in pay (directly or
indirectly) due to the shutdown; and
(2) who--
``(A) is listed in the database established under section
63; or
``(B) has self-certified pursuant to such section.
``(ff) Shutdown.--The term `shutdown' means any period in
which there is more than a 24-hour lapse in appropriations as
a result of a failure to enact a regular appropriations bill
or continuing resolution.
(gg) Covered Shutdown Period.--The term `covered shutdown
period' means, with respect to a shutdown, the period
beginning on the first day of the shutdown and ending on the
date that is 90 days after the last day of the shutdown.''.
(b) Exclusion for Employees Affected by a Shutdown.--
Section 605(a) of the Fair Credit Reporting Act (15 U.S.C.
1681c(a)), as amended by section 809, is further amended by
adding at the end the following:
``(18) Any adverse item of information with respect to an
action or inaction taken during a covered shutdown period by
an employee affected by a shutdown.''.
(c) Amendment to Summary of Rights for Employees Affected
by a Shutdown.--Secgtion 609(a) of the Fair Credit Reporting
Act (15 U.S.C. 1681g(a)) is amended by adding at the end the
following:
``(7) Information on the rights of an employee affected by
a shutdown, including which consumers may be an employee
affected by a shutdown and the process for a consumer to
self-certify as an employee affected by a shutdown under
section 637.''.
(d) Database and Self-certification for Employees Affected
by a Shutdown.--
(1) In general.--The Fair Credit Reporting Act (15 U.S.C.
1681 et seq.), as amended by section 706, is further amended
by adding at the end the following new section:

``Sec. 637. DATABASE AND SELF-CERTIFICATION FOR EMPLOYEES
AFFECTED BY A SHUTDOWN

``(a) Database.--
``(1) In general.--With respect to each shutdown, the
consumer reporting agencies described in section 603(p) shall
jointly establish a database that includes employees affected
by the shutdown as reported pursuant to paragraph (2).
``(2) Contents of database.--
``(A) Furloughed employees and contractors.--Each authority
of the executive, legislative, or judicial branch of the
Federal Government or District of Columbia shall provide to
the consumer reporting agencies described in section 603(p) a
list identifying--
``(i) employees of such authority that are furloughed,
excepted from furlough, or not receiving pay because of a
shutdown; and
``(ii) to the extent practicable, employees of contractors
of such authority.
``(B) Self-certified consumers.--A consumer that self-
certifies as an employee affected by a shutdown pursuant to
subsection (b) shall be included in the database, unless the
Bureau determines such consumer is not an employee affected
by a shutdown.
``(3) Access to database.--The consumer reporting agencies
described in section 603(p) shall make the database
established under this subsection available to the Bureau,
other consumer reporting agencies, furnishers of information
to consumer reporting agencies, and users of consumer
reports. A consumer reporting agency described in section
603(x) shall periodically access the database to confirm the
accuracy of information such an agency has that identifies a
consumer as an employee affected by a shutdown.
``(B) Self-Certification Process.--A consumer shall be
deemed to be an employee affected by a shutdown if such
consumer self-certifies through--
``(1) the website established under subsection (c); or
``(2) a toll-free telephone number established by a
consumer reporting agency.
``(c) Website.--The consumer reporting agencies described
in section 603(p) shall jointly establish a website for a
consumer to self-certify as an employee affected by a
shutdown. Such website may not include any advertisement or
other solicitation.
``(d) Opt-out.--The consumer reporting agencies described
in section 603(p) shall provided a process through the
website described under subsection (c) for consumers to opt-
out of having their name included in the database established
under this section.''.
(2) Table of contents amendment.--The table of contents of
the Fair Credit Reporting Act, as amended by section 706, if
further amended by adding at the end the following new item:
``637. Database and self-certification for employees affected by a
shutdown.''.
(e) Prohibition on Adverse Actions Against Employees
Affected by a Shutdown.--Section 604 of the Fair Credit
Reporting Act (15 U.S.C. 1681b) is amended by adding at the
end the following:
``(h) Prohibition on Adverse Actions Against Employees
Affected by a Shutdown.--If a user of a consumer report knows
that a consumer is an employee affected by a shutdown, such
user may not take an adverse action based on--

[[Page H679]]

``(1) an adverse item of information contained in such
report with respect to an action or inaction taken during a
covered shutdown period by the employee; or
``(2) information on the consumer included in the database
established under section 637.''.
(f) Bureau Regulations or Guidance.--Not later than 30 days
after the date of the enactment of this Act, the Director of
the Bureau of Consumer Financial Protection shall issue rules
or guidance, as appropriate, to carry out the requirements of
this Act.

TITLE VIII--PROTECTIONS AGAINST IDENTITY THEFT, FRAUD, OR A RELATED
CRIME

SEC. 801. IDENTITY THEFT REPORT DEFINITION.

Paragraph (4) of section 603(q) of the Fair Credit
Reporting Act (15 U.S.C. 1681a(q)(4)) is amended to read as
follows:
``(4) Identity theft report.--The term `identity theft
report' has the meaning given that term by rule of the
Bureau, and means, at a minimum, a report--
``(A) that is a standardized affidavit that alleges that a
consumer has been a victim of identity theft, fraud, or a
related crime, or has been harmed by the unauthorized
disclosure of the consumer's financial or personally
identifiable information, that was developed and made
available by the Bureau; or
``(B)(i) that alleges an identity theft, fraud, or a
related crime, or alleges harm from the unauthorized
disclosure of the consumer's financial or personally
identifiable information;
``(ii) that is a copy of an official, valid report filed by
a consumer with an appropriate Federal, State, or local law
enforcement agency (including the United States Postal
Inspection Service), or such other government agency deemed
appropriate by the Bureau; and
``(iii) the filing of which subjects the person filing the
report to criminal penalties relating to the filing of false
information if the information in the report is actually
false.''.
(b) Rulemaking.--Not later than the end of the 2-year
period beginning on the date of enactment of this Act, the
Director of the Bureau of Consumer Financial Protection shall
issue final rules to carry out the amendment made by
subsection (a).

SEC. 802. AMENDMENT TO PROTECTION FOR FILES AND CREDIT
RECORDS OF PROTECTED CONSUMERS.

(a) Amendment to Definition of ``File''.--Section 603(g) of
the Fair Credit Reporting Act (15 U.S.C. 1681a(g)) is amended
by inserting ``, except that such term excludes a record
created pursuant to section 605A(j)'' after ``stored''.
(b) Amendment to Protection for Files and Credit Records.--
Section 605A(j) of the Fair Credit Reporting Act (15 U.S.C.
1681c-1(j)) is amended--
(1) in paragraph (1)--
(A) in subparagraph (B)(ii), by striking ``an incapacitated
person or a protected person'' and inserting ``a person'';
and
(B) by amending subparagraph (E) to read as follows:
``(E) The term `security freeze'--
``(i) has the meaning given in subsection (i)(1)(C); and
``(ii) with respect to a protected consumer for whom the
consumer reporting agency does not have a file, means a
record that is subject to a security freeze that a consumer
reporting agency is prohibited from disclosing to any person
requesting the consumer report for the purpose of opening a
new account involving the extension of credit.''; and
(2) in paragraph (4)(D), by striking ``a protected consumer
or a protected consumer's representative under subparagraph
(A)(i)'' and inserting ``a protected consumer described under
subparagraph (A)(ii) or a protected consumer's
representative''.

SEC. 803. ENHANCEMENT TO FRAUD ALERT PROTECTIONS.

Section 605A of the Fair Credit Reporting Act (15 U.S.C.
1681c-1) is amended--
(1) in subsection (a)--
(A) in the subsection heading, by striking ``One-Call'' and
inserting ``One-Year'';
(B) in paragraph (1)--
(i) in the paragraph heading, by striking ``Initial
alerts'' and inserting ``In general'';
(ii) by inserting ``or has been or is about to be harmed by
the unauthorized disclosure of the consumer's financial or
personally identifiable information,'' after ``identity
theft,'';
(iii) in subparagraph (A)--

(I) by inserting ``(which period may be extended upon
request of the consumer or such representative)'' after ``1
year''; and
(II) by striking ``and'' at the end;

(iv) in subparagraph (B)--

(I) by inserting ``1-year'' before ``fraud alert''; and
(II) by striking the period at the end and inserting ``;
and''; and

(v) by adding at the end the following new subparagraph:
``(C) upon the expiration of the period described in
subparagraph (A) or any extension of such period, and in
response to a direct request by the consumer or such
representative, continue the fraud alert for a period of 1
additional year if the information asserted in this paragraph
remains applicable.''; and
(C) in paragraph (2)--
(i) in the paragraph heading, by inserting ``and credit or
educational credit scores'' after ``reports'';
(ii) by inserting ``1-year'' before ``fraud alert'';
(iii) in subparagraph (A), by inserting ``and credit score
or educational credit score'' after ``file''; and
(iv) in subparagraph (B), by striking ``any request
described in subparagraph (A)'' and inserting ``the consumer
reporting agency includes the 1-year fraud alert in the file
of a consumer'';
(2) in subsection (b)--
(A) in the subsection heading, by striking ``Extended'' and
inserting ``Seven-Year'';
(B) in paragraph (1)--
(i) in subparagraph (A), by inserting ``(which period may
be extended upon request of the consumer or such
representative)'' after ``7-year period beginning on the date
of such request'';
(ii) in subparagraph (B)--

(I) by striking ``the 5-year period beginning on the date
of such request'' and inserting ``such 7-year period
(including any extension of such period)''; and
(II) by striking ``and'' at the end;

(iii) in subparagraph (C)--

(I) by striking ``extended'' and inserting ``7-year''; and
(II) by striking the period at the end and inserting ``;
and''; and

(iv) by adding at the end the following new subparagraph:
``(D) upon the expiration of such 7-year period or any
extension of such period, and in response to a direct request
by the consumer or such representative, continue the fraud
alert for a period of 7 additional years if the consumer or
such representative submits an updated identity theft
report.''; and
(C) in paragraph (2)--
(i) in the paragraph heading, by inserting ``and credit or
educational credit scores'' after ``reports''; and
(ii) by amending subparagraph (A) to read as follows:
``(A) disclose to the consumer that the consumer may
request a free copy of the file and credit score or
educational credit score of the consumer pursuant to section
612(d) during each 12-month period beginning on the date on
which the 7-year fraud alert was included in the file and
ending on the date of the last day that the 7-year fraud
alert applies to the consumer's file; and'';
(3) in subsection (c)--
(A) in paragraph (1), by inserting ``or educational credit
score'' after ``credit score'';
(B) by redesignating paragraphs (1), (2), and (3), as
subparagraphs (A), (B), and (C), respectively (and conforming
the margins accordingly);
(C) by striking ``Upon the direct request'' and inserting:
``(1) In general.--Upon the direct request''; and
(D) by adding at the end the following new paragraph:
``(2) Access to free reports and credit or educational
credit scores.--If a consumer reporting agency includes an
active duty alert in the file of an active duty military
consumer, the consumer reporting agency shall--
``(A) disclose to the active duty military consumer that
the active duty military consumer may request a free copy of
the file and credit score or educational credit score of the
active duty military consumer pursuant to section 612(d),
during each 12-month period beginning on the date that the
activity duty military alert is requested and ending on the
date of the last day the active duty alert applies to the
file of the active duty military consumer; and
``(B) provide to the active duty military consumer all
disclosures required to be made under section 609, without
charge to the consumer, not later than 3 business days after
any request described in subparagraph (A).'';
(4) by amending subsection (d) to read as follows:
``(d) Procedures.--Each consumer reporting agency described
in section 603(p) shall include on the webpage required under
subsection (i) policies and procedures to comply with this
section, including policies and procedures--
``(1) that inform consumers of the availability of 1-year
fraud alerts, 7-year fraud alerts, active duty alerts, and
security freezes (as applicable);
``(2) that allow consumers to request 1-year fraud alerts,
7-year fraud alerts, and active duty alerts (as applicable)
and to place, temporarily lift, or fully remove a security
freeze in a simple and easy manner; and
``(3) for asserting in good faith a suspicion that the
consumer has been or is about to become a victim of identity
theft, fraud, or a related crime, or harmed by the
unauthorized disclosure of the consumer's financial or
personally identifiable information, for a consumer seeking a
1-year fraud alert or security freeze.'';
(5) in subsection (e), by inserting ``1-year or 7-year''
before ``fraud alert'';
(6) in subsection (f), by striking ``or active duty alert''
and inserting ``active duty alert, or security freeze (as
applicable)'';
(7) in subsection (g)--
(A) by inserting ``or has been harmed by the unauthorized
disclosure of the consumer's financial or personally
identifiable information, or to inform such agency of the
consumer's participation in credit restoration or
rehabilitation under section 605C, 605D, or 605E,'' after
``identity theft,''; and
(B) by inserting ``or security freezes'' after ``request
alerts'';
(8) in subsection (h)--
(A) in paragraph (1)--
(i) in the paragraph heading, by striking ``initial'' and
inserting ``1-year''; and
(ii) by striking ``initial'' and inserting ``1-year'' each
place such term appears; and
(B) in paragraph (2)--
(i) in the paragraph heading, by striking ``extended'' and
inserting ``7-year''; and
(ii) by striking ``extended'' and inserting ``7-year'' each
place such term appears; and
(9) in subsection (i)(4)--
(A) by striking subparagraphs (E) and (I); and
(B) by redesignating subparagraphs (F), (G), (H), and (J)
as subparagraphs (E), (F), (G), and (H), respectively.

SEC. 804. AMENDMENT TO SECURITY FREEZES FOR CONSUMER REPORTS.

(a) In General.--Section 605A(i) of the Fair Credit
Reporting Act (15 U.S.C. 1681c-1(i)) is amended--

[[Page H680]]

(1) by amending the subsection heading to read as follows:
``Security Freezes for Consumer Reports'';
(2) in paragraph (3)(E), by striking ``Upon receiving'' and
all that follows through ``subparagraph (C),'' and inserting
``Upon receiving a direct request from a consumer for a
temporary removal of a security freeze, a consumer reporting
agency shall'';
(3) by adding at the end the following:
``(7) Relation to state law.--This subsection does not
modify or supersede the laws of any State relating to
security freezes or other similar actions, except to the
extent those laws are inconsistent with any provision of this
title, and then only to the extent of the inconsistency. For
purposes of this subsection, a term or provision of a State
law is not inconsistent with the provisions of this
subsection if the term or provision affords greater
protection to the consumer than the protection provided under
this subsection as determined by the Bureau.''.
(b) Amendment to Webpage Requirements.--Section
605A(i)(6)(A) of the Fair Credit Reporting Act (15 U.S.C.
1681c-1(i)(6)(A)) is amended--
(1) in clause (ii), by striking ``initial fraud alert'' and
inserting ``1-year fraud alert'';
(2) in clause (iii), by striking ``extended fraud alert''
and inserting ``7-year fraud alert''; and
(3) in clause (iv), by striking ``fraud''.
(c) Amendment to Exceptions for Certain Persons.--Section
605A(i)(4)(A) of the Fair Credit Reporting Act (15 U.S.C.
1681c-1(i)(4)(A)) is amended to read as follows:
``(A) A person, or the person's subsidiary, affiliate,
agent, subcontractor, or assignee with whom the consumer has,
or prior to assignment had, an authorized account, contract,
or debtor-creditor relationship for the purposes of reviewing
the active account or collecting the financial obligation
owed on the account, contract, or debt.''.
(e) Effective Date.--The amendments made by subsection (a)
shall take effect on the date of the enactment of this Act.

SEC. 805. CLARIFICATION OF INFORMATION TO BE INCLUDED WITH
AGENCY DISCLOSURES.

Section 609(c)(2) of the Fair Credit Reporting Act (15
U.S.C. 1681g(c)(2)) is amended--
(1) in subparagraph (B)--
(A) by striking ``consumer reporting agency described in
section 603(p)'' and inserting ``consumer reporting agency
described in subsection (p) or (x) of section 603'';
(B) by striking ``the agency'' and inserting ``such an
agency''; and
(C) by inserting ``and an Internet website address'' after
``hours''; and
(2) in subparagraph (E), by striking ``outdated under
section 605 or'' and inserting ``outdated, required to be
removed, or''.

SEC. 806. PROVIDES ACCESS TO FRAUD RECORDS FOR VICTIMS.

Section 609(e) of the Fair Credit Reporting Act (15 U.S.C.
1681g(e)) is amended--
(1) in paragraph (1)--
(A) by striking ``resulting from identity theft'';
(B) by striking ``claim of identity theft'' and inserting
``claim of fraudulent activity''; and
(C) by striking ``any transaction alleged to be a result of
identity theft'' and inserting ``any fraudulent
transaction'';
(2) in paragraph (2)(B)--
(A) by striking ``identity theft, at the election of the
business entity'' and inserting ``fraudulent activity'';
(B) by amending clause (i) to read as follows:
``(i) a copy of an identity theft report; or''; and
(C) by amending clause (ii) to read as follows:
``(ii) an affidavit of fact that is acceptable to the
business entity for that purpose.'';
(3) in paragraph (3), by striking ``identity theft'' and
inserting ``fraudulent activity'';
(4) by striking paragraph (8) and redesignating paragraphs
(9) through (13) as paragraphs (8) through (12),
respectively; and
(5) in paragraph (10) (as so redesignated), by striking
``or a similar crime'' and inserting ``, fraud, or a related
crime''.

SEC. 807. REQUIRED BUREAU TO SET PROCEDURES FOR REPORTING
IDENTITY THEFT, FRAUD, AND OTHER RELATED CRIME.

Section 621(f)(2) of the Fair Credit Reporting Act (15
U.S.C. 1681s(f)(2)) is amended--
(1) in the paragraph heading, by striking ``Model form''
and inserting ``Standardized affidavit'';
(2) by striking ``The Commission'' and inserting ``The
Bureau'';
(3) by striking ``model form'' and inserting ``standardized
affidavit'';
(4) by inserting after ``identity theft'' the following:
``, fraud, or a related crime, or otherwise are harmed by the
unauthorized disclosure of the consumer's financial or
personally identifiable information,''; and
(5) by striking ``fraud.'' and inserting ``identity theft,
fraud, or other related crime. Such standardized affidavit
and procedures shall not include a requirement that a
consumer obtain a police report.''.

SEC. 808. ESTABLISHES THE RIGHT TO FREE CREDIT MONITORING AND
IDENTITY THEFT PROTECTION SERVICES FOR CERTAIN
CONSUMERS.

(a) Enforcement of Credit Monitoring for Servicemembers.--
(1) In general.--Subsection (k) of section 605A (15 U.S.C.
1681c-1(a)) is amended by striking paragraph (4).
(2) Effective date.--This subsection and the amendment made
by this subsection shall take effect on the date of the
enactment of this Act.
(b) Free Credit Monitoring and Identity Theft Protection
Services for Certain Consumers.--Subsection (k) of section
605A (15 U.S.C. 1681c-1), is amended to read as follows:
``(k) Credit Monitoring and Identity Theft Protection
Services.--
``(1) In general.--Upon the direct request of a consumer, a
consumer reporting agency described in section 603(p) that
maintains a file on the consumer and has received appropriate
proof of the identity of the requester (as described in
section 1022.123 of title 12, Code of Federal Regulations)
shall provide the consumer with credit monitoring and
identity theft protection services not later than 1 business
day after receiving such request sent by postal mail, toll-
free telephone, or secure electronic means as established by
the agency.
``(2) Fees.--
``(A) Classes of consumers.--The Bureau may establish
classes of consumers eligible to receive credit monitoring
and identity theft protection services free of charge.
``(B) No fee.--A consumer reporting agency described in
section 603(p) may not charge a consumer a fee to receive
credit monitoring and identity theft protection services if
the consumer or a representative of the consumer--
``(i) asserts in good faith a suspicion that the consumer
has been or is about to become a victim of identity theft,
fraud, or a related crime, or harmed by the unauthorized
disclosure of the consumer's financial or personally
identifiable information;
``(ii) is unemployed and intends to apply for employment in
the 60-day period beginning on the date on which the request
is made;
``(iii) is a recipient of public welfare assistance;
``(iv) is an active duty military consumer or a member of
the National Guard (as defined in section 101(c) of title 10,
United States Code);
``(v) is 65 years of age or older; or
``(vi) is a member of a class established by the Bureau
under subparagraph (A).
``(3) Bureau rulemaking.--The Bureau shall issue
regulations--
``(A) to define the scope of credit monitoring and identity
theft protection services required under this subsection; and
``(B) to set a fair and reasonable fee that a consumer
reporting agency may charge a consumer (other than a consumer
described under paragraph (2)(B)) for such credit monitoring
and identity theft protection services.
``(4) Relation to state law.--This subsection does not
modify or supersede of the laws of any State relating to
credit monitoring and identity theft protection services or
other similar actions, except to the extent those laws are
inconsistent with any provision of this title, and then only
to the extent of the inconsistency. For purposes of this
subsection, a term or provision of a State law is not
inconsistent with the provisions of this subsection if the
term or provision affords greater protection to the consumer
than the protection provided under this subsection as
determined by the Bureau.''.
(c) Rulemaking.--Not later than the end of the 2-year
period beginning on the date of enactment of this Act, the
Director of the Bureau of Consumer Financial Protection shall
issue final rules to carry out the amendment made by
subsection (b).

SEC. 809. ENSURES REMOVAL OF INQUIRIES RESULTING FROM
IDENTITY THEFT, FRAUD, OR OTHER RELATED CRIME
FROM CONSUMER REPORTS.

Section 605(a) of the Fair Credit Reporting Act (15 U.S.C.
1681c(a)), as amended by section 403, is further amended by
adding at the end the following:
``(17) Information about inquiries made for a credit report
based on requests that the consumer reporting agency verifies
were initiated as the result of identity theft, fraud, or
other related crime.''.

TITLE IX--MISCELLANEOUS

SEC. 901. DEFINITIONS.

Section 603 of the Fair Credit Reporting Act (15 U.S.C.
1681a), as amended by section 302, is further amended by
adding at the end the following:
``(dd) Definitions Related to Days.--
``(1) Calendar day; day.--The term `calendar day' or `day'
means a calendar day, excluding any federally recognized
holiday.
``(2) Business day.--The term `business day' means a day
between and including Monday to Friday, and excluding any
federally recognized holiday.''.

SEC. 902. TECHNICAL CORRECTION RELATED TO RISK-BASED PRICING
NOTICES.

Section 615(h)(8) of the Fair Credit Reporting Act (15
U.S.C. 1681m) is amended--
(1) in subparagraph (A), by striking ``this section'' and
inserting ``this subsection''; and
(2) in subparagraph (B), by striking ``This section'' and
inserting ``This subsection''.

SEC. 903. FCRA FINDINGS AND PURPOSE; VOIDS CERTAIN CONTRACTS
NOT IN THE PUBLIC INTEREST.

(a) FCRA Findings and Purpose.--Section 602 of the Fair
Credit Reporting Act (15 U.S.C. 1681(a)) is amended--
(1) in subsection (a)--
(A) by amending paragraph (1) to read as follows:
``(1) Many financial and non-financial decisions affecting
consumers' lives depend upon fair, complete, and accurate
credit reporting. Inaccurate and incomplete credit reports
directly impair the efficiency of the financial system and
undermine the integrity of using credit reports in other
circumstances, and unfair credit reporting and credit scoring
methods undermine the public confidence which is essential to
the continued functioning of the financial services system
and the provision of many other consumer products and
services.''; and
(B) in paragraph (4), by inserting after ``agencies'' the
following: ``, furnishers, and credit scoring developers'';
and
(2) in subsection (b)--
(A) by striking ``It is the purpose of this title to
require'' and inserting the following: ``The purpose of this
title is the following:

[[Page H681]]

``(1) To require''; and
(B) by adding at the end the following:
``(2) To prohibit any practices and procedures with respect
to credit reports and credit scores that are not in the
public interest.''.
(b) Voiding of Certain Contracts Not in the Public
Interest.--
The Fair Credit Reporting Act (15 U.S.C. 1681 et seq.), as
amended by section 703, is further amended--
(1) by adding at the end the following new section:

``Sec. 634. Voiding of certain contracts not in the public
interest

``(a) In General.--Any provision contained in a contract
that requires a person to not follow a provision of this
title, that is against the public interest, or that otherwise
circumvents the purposes of this title shall be null and
void.
``(b) Rule of Construction.--Nothing in subsection (a)
shall be construed as affecting other provisions of a
contract that are not described under subsection (a).''; and
(2) in the table of contents for such Act, by inserting
after the item relating to section 633 the following new
item:

``634. Voiding of certain contracts not in the public interest.''.

The Acting CHAIR. No further amendment to the bill, as amended, shall
be in order except those printed in part B of House Report 116-383.
Each such further amendment may be offered only in the order printed in
the report, by a Member designated in the report, shall be considered
read, shall be debatable for the time specified in the report, equally
divided and controlled by the proponent and an opponent, shall not be
subject to amendment, and shall not be subject to a demand for division
of the question.

{time} 1415

Amendment No. 1 Offered by Mr. DeSaulnier

The Acting CHAIR. It is now in order to consider amendment No. 1
printed in part B of House Report 116-383.
Mr. DeSAULNIER. Mr. Chairman, I have an amendment at the desk.
The Acting CHAIR. The Clerk will designate the amendment.
The text of the amendment is as follows:

In title IX, add at the end the following:

SEC. 904. GAO STUDY ON THE USE OF CREDIT IN HOUSING
DETERMINATIONS.

(a) Study.--The Comptroller General of the United States
shall carry out a study of the use of consumer reports and
credit scores in housing determinations to determine whether
consumer reports or credit scores are being used as tools to
perform the equivalent of banned red-lining.
(b) Contents of Study.--In carrying out the study required
under subsection (a), the Comptroller General shall--
(1) examine both rental applications and mortgage
applications; and
(2) include a demographic breakdown by race, gender, age,
sexual orientation, city/suburban/rural, socioeconomic
status, and any other demographic that the Comptroller
General determines appropriate.
(c) Report.--The Comptroller General shall issue a report
to the Congress containing all findings and determinations
made in carrying out the study required under subsection (a).

The Acting CHAIR. Pursuant to House Resolution 811, the gentleman
from California (Mr. DeSaulnier) and a Member opposed each will control
5 minutes.
The Chair recognizes the gentleman from California.
Mr. DeSAULNIER. Mr. Chairman, I yield myself such time as I may
consume.
Mr. Chairman, I first state my admiration for the chair of the
committee and Ms. Pressley and everyone who has worked on this piece of
legislation.
Mr. Chairman, credit scores and credit reports impact our daily
lives, often in ways that we don't realize. They determine whether you
can get a loan for a car that you need to get to work every day. They
determine whether you can get a loan to buy a home or rent an apartment
and how much interest you are going to pay on your home loan. They
impact your insurance premium and your cell phone. In many States,
these scores can even determine whether you get a job or not.
Unfortunately, even though they can have an enormous consequence on a
person's life, these reports have very little oversight and can easily
be inaccurate. Even when inaccuracies are spotted by consumers, the
process for removing or correcting the mistakes is perhaps
intentionally complicated and time consuming for the average American.
A person with multiple jobs or no knowledge of credit reporting systems
could very well give up--and often does--because the system is too
complex for them.
This is not only a frustrating cycle but is also damaging to a
person's financial reputation. We need to know more about how mistakes
are made, who is responsible for fixing them, and what the impacts of
those mistakes are on individual Americans' lives.
For too long, financial stability has been used as an excuse to keep
lower income people out of traditionally wealthy and middle-class
neighborhoods. This process, known as ``redlining,'' has been banned,
but we continue to see the segregation of our neighborhoods along
demographic and economic lines. Credit scores are being weaponized to
exclude and separate communities.
To address this problem, we need reliable data. That is why this
amendment would require the nonpartisan GAO to study how credit scores
are used in housing decisions and examine whether individuals are being
discriminated against in those decisions based on race, gender, age,
sexual orientation, geographic location, socioeconomic status, and
more.
Our society cannot continue to be broken into neighborhoods and
communities based on the color of our skin or the amount of money in
our bank accounts. This amendment will help us right this wrong and
encourage housing decisions that are more equitable and fair for all
Americans.
Mr. Chairman, I encourage my colleagues to join me in support of this
amendment, and I reserve the balance of my time.
Mr. McHENRY. Mr. Chairman, I claim the time in opposition, although I
am not opposed to this amendment.
The Acting CHAIR. Without objection, the gentleman from North
Carolina is recognized for 5 minutes.
There was no objection.
Mr. McHENRY. Mr. Chairman, let me first say I oppose any disparate
treatment of any person or population. That has no place in our society
or our communities.
To that end, the data derived from this study would have been helpful
to have had before we drafted a bill or we brought it to the House
floor. I think it is important data for us to consider here as we make
law.
The underlying bill removes important predictive information from
consumer credit reports that helps lenders in assessing a borrower's
ability to repay. Undermining this responsibility makes it riskier and
more expensive for lenders to extend credit, which, ultimately,
increases the cost for consumers. Now, that is problematic; but that is
the bill, and the bill is problematic.
Buying a home is the biggest purchase that most Americans will make
in their lifetime. And while the study is fine and will give us more
data, it does nothing to make mortgages more affordable or available
for those consumers who desire homeownership. The fact is the
underlying bill will make mortgages even more expensive for consumers
and consumer credit more expensive for those who seek it.
As I said, I am not opposed to this amendment, but more data is
obviously always useful.
Mr. Chairman, I reserve the balance of my time.
Mr. DeSAULNIER. Mr. Chairman, I yield myself such time as I may
consume.
I agree, and as a former small business owner, I see the value of
credit reports if done fairly and equitably. It should be balanced
against the need for the lenders and the people who are seeking credit.
In my area in northern California, I hear stories over and over again
about people who are working two jobs, and, through no mistake of their
own, their credit report is not perfect. They don't have the time or
the expertise to hire someone or to go back in and correct the
problems. Often, problems can be left on even when they go through the
process.
As somebody who was in the retail business, I see this as another
example of customer service being put on the customer.
Twenty, 30 years ago, to the credit agencies and retailers--at least,
in theory--customer service meant you reached out to the client and
tried to figure out what the problem is. My experience and the
experience I get anecdotally and the research that I see is that,
particularly in difficult housing markets, the ability for people to
get into the housing market either for

[[Page H682]]

rental or for purchase is inhibited and is an obstacle to current
reporting.
So, for this amendment, it is about getting more knowledge in a
dynamic that only 10 years ago was almost disastrous to the economy
when the housing implosion happened and is happening in many ways again
as we, as researchers say, in urban areas resegregate based on
ethnicity and demographics.
So, in order to get a better understanding, I think this amendment is
a minimal standard of understanding how the situation has changed and
how we can protect both the people who are the lenders and also the
people who may not be lenders but are just trying to get to a point
where they can rent an apartment or own a home.
Mr. Chairman, I reserve the balance of my time.
Mr. McHENRY. Mr. Chairman, I yield back the balance of my time.
Mr. DeSAULNIER. Mr. Chairman, I urge my colleagues to support this
commonsense amendment, and I yield back the balance of my time.
The Acting CHAIR. The question is on the amendment offered by the
gentleman from California (Mr. DeSaulnier).
The amendment was agreed to.

Amendment No. 2 Offered by Ms. Shalala

The Acting CHAIR. It is now in order to consider amendment No. 2
printed in part B of House Report 116-383.
Ms. SHALALA. Mr. Chairman, I have an amendment at the desk.
The Acting CHAIR. The Clerk will designate the amendment.
The text of the amendment is as follows:

In title IX, add at the end the following:

SEC. 904. GAO STUDY ON THE EFFECTS OF CREDIT SCORES IMPACTED
BY A STUDENT BORROWER'S DEFAULTED OR DELINQUENT
PRIVATE EDUCATION LOAN.

(a) Study.--The Comptroller General of the United States
shall carry out a study on how credit scores impacted by a
student borrower's defaulted or delinquent private education
loan impacts applying for future loans, including information
on the treatment of different demographic populations.
(b) Report.--The Comptroller General shall issue a report
to the Congress containing all findings and determinations
made in carrying out the study required under subsection (a).

The Acting CHAIR. Pursuant to House Resolution 811, the gentlewoman
from Florida (Ms. Shalala) and a Member opposed each will control 5
minutes.
The Chair recognizes the gentlewoman from Florida.
Ms. SHALALA. Mr. Chairman, I yield myself such time as I may consume.
Mr. Chairman, when you default on a student loan, you impact your
credit score. Indeed, your credit score with all three credit agencies
will most likely drop. That means that buying or renting a house,
purchasing or leasing a vehicle, going back to school, or receiving
competitive offers for credit cards will be very difficult.
Each year, more than 1 million student loan borrowers go into
default. Nearly 40 percent of borrowers today are expected to default
on their student loans by 2023.
We know that people most at risk of defaulting on their student loans
are more likely to be Hispanic or African American. Defaulters are more
likely to be older, to be Pell grant recipients, and to come from a
nontraditional educational background when compared to borrowers who
never default.
Research also tells us that people of color are more burdened by
their educational debt. They have less parental wealth to draw on, as
well as higher rates of unemployment.
By the time their loan falls into default, a typical borrower will
see their score drop around 60 points, to an average of 550, which is
considered very poor.
Entering default makes it harder to obtain future loans and prevents
borrowers from receiving any additional Federal student aid until their
loans return to good standing. Loan providers can then begin to garnish
their wages, to impose restrictions on earnings, and to take their tax
refund.
A student loan default stays on your credit report for 7 years--even
if you pay off the loan in full. Having that notification on your
credit report will make lenders nervous about working with you and hurt
your economic stability for years.
Mr. Chairman, my amendment instructs the GAO to carry out a thorough
review on how credit scores impacted by a student loan default can
destroy people's lives. The amendment also asks the GAO to examine how
multiple delinquencies on private student loans can hurt borrowers,
including a demographic breakdown by race, gender, age, sexual
orientation, and socioeconomic status.
Allowing student loans to enter delinquency can often have a negative
effect on a borrower's credit score and in credit reports due to the
fact that each loan is reported individually.
Mr. Chairman, Congress has a vested interest in ensuring that we
expand the middle class, we grow the economy, and we protect consumers
from irreversible financial damage to their credit. I believe that H.R.
3621, with the inclusion of this amendment, will establish parity for
student borrowers and provide Congress with the necessary tools to
craft meaningful legislation that will help avoid the tragedy of
student loan default.
I thank Congresswoman Kendra Horn for sharing my concerns on this
issue and for cosponsoring this amendment.
Mr. Chairman, I urge my colleagues to support the amendment, and I
yield back the balance of my time.
Mr. McHENRY. Mr. Chairman, I claim the time in opposition, although I
am not opposed to the amendment.
The Acting CHAIR. Without objection, the gentleman from North
Carolina is recognized for 5 minutes.
There was no objection.
Mr. McHENRY. Mr. Chairman, as I said in the previous statement, this
study would have been helpful to have informed our analysis prior to
drafting and debating this bill.
But there is a broader theme fundamental to this amendment and many
of the amendments that will be offered later in this debate: My
Democrat colleagues are not fully satisfied with their effort back in
2010 that nationalized the student loan program. They are coming back
for the final 8 percent.
It was the Democrat Congress and Democrat President that nationalized
the student loan marketplace, and now they want to do away with this
small portion, the 8 percent of the marketplace, that is private
student lending.
In fact, the private educational loans, while only 8 percent of the
market, if you look at how they perform, they have a 98 percent
repayment rate, which is far better than the nationalized 92 percent of
the student loan marketplace. Meanwhile, Federal student loan default
rates are in the double digits.
This is simply an attempt to gather data to be used to make it more
difficult for private lenders to compete in the student loan market.
The fact is the underlying bill still removes important predictive
information from consumer credit reports that helps lenders assess a
borrower's ability to repay.

{time} 1430

The underlying bill will weaken underwriting standards and make
credit more expensive, especially for those who are on the margins,
ultimately harming the very consumers we want to help.
As I said, I am not opposed to the amendment. More data is useful and
good, and the GAO provides a wonderful resource for Congress in this
data collection. So with that, as I said, more data is useful.
Mr. Chair, I yield back the balance of my time.
The Acting CHAIR. The question is on the amendment offered by the
gentlewoman from Florida (Ms. Shalala).
The amendment was agreed to.

Amendment No. 3 Offered by Mr. Timmons

The Acting CHAIR. It is now in order to consider amendment No. 3
printed in part B of House Report 116-383.
Mr. TIMMONS. Mr. Chair, I have an amendment at the desk.
The Acting CHAIR. The Clerk will designate the amendment.
The text of the amendment is as follows:

In title IX, add at the end the following:

SEC. 904. GAO STUDY ON CONSUMER REPORTING AGENCY COMPLIANCE
WITH CONSENT ORDERS.

(a) Study.--The Comptroller General of the United States
shall carry out a study of the compliance by consumer
reporting agencies that compile and maintain files on
consumers on a nationwide basis with consent orders, and the
impact such compliance has on consumers.
(b) Report.--Not later than the end of the 180-day period
beginning on the date of enactment of this Act, the
Comptroller General

[[Page H683]]

shall issue a report to the Committee on Financial Services
of the House of Representatives and the Committee on Banking,
Housing, and Urban Affairs of the Senate containing all
findings and determinations made in carrying out the study
required under subsection (a).
(c) Definitions.--In this section, the terms ``consumer''
and ``consumer reporting agency that compiles and maintains
files on consumers on a nationwide basis'' have the meaning
given those terms, respectively, under section 603 of the
Fair Credit Reporting Act.

The Acting CHAIR. Pursuant to House Resolution 811, the gentleman
from South Carolina (Mr. Timmons) and a Member opposed each will
control 5 minutes.
The Chair recognizes the gentleman from South Carolina.
Mr. TIMMONS. Mr. Chair, my amendment is simple. It would require the
GAO to carry out a study on the compliance of consumer reporting
agencies with the underlying legislation proposed by my colleague from
Massachusetts. It would also study what effect the compliance of
reporting agencies would have on consumers.
This is important because if this bill were somehow able to become
law, the results would be disastrous not only for reporting agencies
but also for the average consumer.
The purpose of a credit score is to show an individual's
creditworthiness. This bill would significantly water down the
integrity of these credit scores.
If you are removing predictive data, if you are drastically
shortening the amount of time adverse yet accurate information remains
on a report, and if you remove medical debt from a report, then what
exactly is the purpose of a credit score? What will a credit score be
good for if this bill were to become law?
The bottom line is this bill would significantly weaken the process
for determining creditworthiness and would enable individuals to obtain
loans that they do not have the means to pay back.
It would also give the CFPB, an unaccountable government agency,
control over private credit scoring models.
It is imperative that we know exactly how compliance with this bill
would affect reporting agencies and, as a result, consumers.
Mr. Chair, I urge all of my colleagues to support this amendment, and
I reserve the balance of my time.
Mr. LAWSON of Florida. Mr. Chair, I claim the time in opposition to
the amendment, even though I am not opposed to it.
The Acting CHAIR. Without objection, the gentleman from Florida is
recognized for 5 minutes.
There was no objection.
Mr. LAWSON of Florida. Mr. Chair, I urge my colleagues to support
this amendment.
As we know, the three major credit rating agencies, Equifax,
Experian, and TransUnion, retain credit profile information on more
than 200 million Americans.
The underlying bill represents a comprehensive reform of our Nation's
credit reporting system. This amendment would direct the GAO to review
just how well the credit reporting agencies are complying with these
new requirements and how that affects consumers.
We know that the credit reporting agencies have not been complying
with the law today. For example, the Fair Credit Reporting Act contains
provisions requiring credit reports to be accurate, but it is estimated
that more than 42 million Americans have inaccurate credit reports.
The credit reporting agencies need to do better by consumers, and if
they did, perhaps consumer reporting problems would not consistently
rank in the top three of consumer complaints to the Consumer Financial
Protection Bureau.
Mr. Chair, I support this study. If adopted, I hope that Mr. Timmons
would also support the underlying bill.
Mr. Chair, I reserve the balance of my time.
Mr. TIMMONS. Mr. Chair, I would inquire how much time is remaining.
The Acting CHAIR. The gentleman from South Carolina has 3\1/2\
minutes remaining.
Mr. TIMMONS. Mr. Chair, I yield 1\1/2\ minutes to the gentleman from
North Carolina (Mr. McHenry), the ranking member.
Mr. McHENRY. Mr. Chair, I thank my colleague from South Carolina, the
second newest member of the Financial Services Committee, for offering
this good, thoughtful amendment.
This amendment will give us a better picture of the consent orders
that impact credit reporting agencies, including the CFPB's consent
orders related to marketing and sale of services.
This is a good amendment in what is otherwise a bad bill.
Often in legislating, we try to make bad bills less bad or not-so-
good bills good, but I am grateful that Mr. Timmons offered this
amendment and grateful for his participation representing upstate South
Carolina and being a sound policymaker.
Mr. Chair, I ask my colleagues to support the amendment.
Mr. LAWSON of Florida. Mr. Chair, I yield myself the balance of my
time.
Mr. Chair, in closing, I urge all of my colleagues to support this
amendment, and I yield back the balance of my time.
Mr. TIMMONS. Mr. Chair, in closing, I would again urge all of my
colleagues to support this amendment, and I yield back the balance of
my time.
The Acting CHAIR. The question is on the amendment offered by the
gentleman from South Carolina (Mr. Timmons).
The amendment was agreed to.

Amendment No. 4 Offered by Mr. Clay

The Acting CHAIR. It is now in order to consider amendment No. 4
printed in part B of House Report 116-383.
Mr. CLAY. Mr. Chair, I have an amendment at the desk.
The Acting CHAIR. The Clerk will designate the amendment.
The text of the amendment is as follows:

Page 44, line 18, before the period insert ``(increased by
$1,000,000)''.
In title IX, add at the end the following:

SEC. 904. POSITIVE CREDIT REPORTING PERMITTED.

(a) In General.--Section 623 of the Fair Credit Reporting
Act (15 U.S.C. 1681s-2), as amended by section 103, is
further amended by adding at the end the following new
subsection:
``(g) Full-file Credit Reporting.--
``(1) In general.--Subject to the requirements of
paragraphs (2) through (5) and notwithstanding any other
provision of law, a person that has obtained the written
authorization of a consumer may furnish to a consumer
reporting agency information relating to the performance of a
consumer in making payments--
``(A) under a lease agreement with respect to a dwelling;
or
``(B) pursuant to a contract for services provided by a
utility or telecommunication firm.
``(2) Limitations.--
``(A) Withheld payments due to habitability or sanitary
conditions.--No person shall furnish or threaten to furnish
negative information relating to the performance of a
consumer in making payments under a lease agreement with
respect to a dwelling if the consumer has withheld payment
pursuant to--
``(i) any right or remedy for breach of the warranty of
habitability; or
``(ii) any violation of a Federal, State, or municipal law,
code, or regulation regarding sanitary conditions.
``(B) Services provided by a utility or telecommunication
firm.--Information about a consumer's usage of any services
provided by a utility or telecommunication firm may be
furnished to a consumer reporting agency only to the extent
that such information relates to--
``(i) payment by the consumer for such services; or
``(ii) other terms of the provision of such services to the
consumer, including any deposit, discount, or conditions for
interruption or termination of such services.
``(3) Payment plan.--A utility or telecommunication firm
may not report payment information to a consumer reporting
agency with respect to an outstanding balance of a consumer
as late if--
``(A) the utility or telecommunication firm and the
consumer have entered into a payment plan (including a
deferred payment agreement, an arrearage management program,
or a debt forgiveness program) with respect to such
outstanding balance; and
``(B) the consumer is meeting the obligations of the
payment plan, as determined by the utility or
telecommunication firm.
``(4) Prohibition on use by debt collectors.--A debt
collector (as defined in section 803(6) of the Fair Debt
Collection Practices Act) may not use the information
described in paragraph (1).
``(5) Relation to state law.--Notwithstanding section 625,
this subsection shall not preempt any law of a State with
respect to furnishing to a consumer reporting agency
information relating to the performance of a consumer in
making payments pursuant to a lease agreement with respect to
a dwelling or a contract for a utility or telecommunications
service. For purposes of this paragraph, the term `law of a
State' shall include all laws, decisions, rules, regulations,

[[Page H684]]

or other State action having the effect of law, as issued by
a State, any political subdivisions thereof, or any agency or
instrumentality of either the State or a political
subdivision thereof.
``(6) Utility or telecommunication firm defined.--In this
subsection, the term `utility or telecommunication firm'--
``(A) means an entity that provides utility services to the
public through pipe, wire, landline, wireless, cable, or
other connected facilities, or radio, electronic, or similar
transmission (including the extension of such facilities);
and
``(B) includes an entity that provides natural gas or
electric service to consumers.''.
(b) GAO Study and Report.--Not later than 2 years after the
date of enactment of this Act, the Comptroller General of the
United States shall submit to Congress a report on the impact
on consumers of furnishing information pursuant to subsection
(g) of section 623 of the Fair Credit Reporting Act (15
U.S.C. 1681s-2), as added by subsection (a).

The Acting CHAIR. Pursuant to House Resolution 811, the gentleman
from Missouri (Mr. Clay) and a Member opposed each will control 5
minutes.
The Chair recognizes the gentleman from Missouri.
Mr. CLAY. Mr. Chair, I rise in support of my amendment.
This amendment would clarify the law for reporting certain positive
consumer credit information to the credit reporting agencies and seeks
to expand access to credit through the use of alternative data.
In addition, this amendment addresses several concerns identified by
consumer advocates, including removing a provision that would have
preempted State laws and ensuring consumers provide written consent if
their utility or rental history is to be considered.
Also, the bill requires a 2-year study and report from GAO on the
impact of furnishing additional information, which will help us gather
data to further ensure that American consumers have the tools they need
to obtain and improve credit and that policymakers can continue to work
to make improvements to the law.
The way in which alternative data is used is important. One of the
most important factors is consumer choice. If the use of alternative
data is truly voluntary--that is, consumers make knowing and voluntary
decisions to allow the use of the data, and the information is used
only for that limited purpose and in ways that consumers would expect--
then it is much more likely to be helpful.
I am pleased to have the support of the National Consumer Law Center
on this important provision. They support it because, unlike prior
versions, it would permit the reporting of utility and rental payment
information only when the consumer has provided written authorization,
that is, only when the consumer chooses to.
In the critical area of lending, it is estimated that the use of
alternative data by lenders could expand access to credit to over 40
million consumers in the United States. Imagine the economic activity
that would generate.
As internet access increases and data becomes more readily available,
marketplace or fintech leaders mostly rely on online platforms and
frequently underwrite loans using alternative data. Despite fintech
lending serving a small part of the consumer lending market, it
continues to grow at a rapid rate. That is why it is critical that
consumers have as much control over the use of their data as possible.
In fact, according to the GAO, since 2013, personal loans provided by
fintech lenders tripled to about $17.7 billion by 2017.
Alternative data used in credit scoring could potentially increase
accuracy, visibility, and scorability in credit reporting by including
additional information beyond that which is conventionally used by loan
officers.
I would add that my amendment does not preempt State consumer
protection laws protecting the privacy of utility customers and
hindering States from regulating tenant screening agencies. This is
important to the regulation and monitoring of traditional and fintech
firms. At times, States have a better view than the Federal regulators.
Lastly, the two largest populations of credit invisibles and
unscorables are either African American or Hispanic millennials who
live in lower income neighborhoods like those that I represent in north
St. Louis. These populations are especially vulnerable to predatory
lenders and other unscrupulous lenders.
Mr. Chair, it is time we try this new method to help millions of
Americans improve their credit scores.
Mr. Chair, I reserve the balance of my time.
Mr. HILL of Arkansas. Mr. Chair, I claim the time in opposition to
the amendment.
The Acting CHAIR. The gentleman from Arkansas is recognized for 5
minutes.
Mr. HILL of Arkansas. Mr. Chair, it doesn't bring me pleasure to
claim the time in opposition to my good friend from Missouri, and he
knows how much I appreciate the work he has done on this matter.
The amendment is certainly, Mr. Chair, well intentioned, but as
currently drafted, I would argue that this language does more harm to
consumers than good.
Let me step back and say that, unrelated to Mr. Clay's amendment, I
introduced H.R. 4231, the Credit Access and Inclusion Act, which
expands consumers' access to credit by allowing them to use their rent,
utility, and telecom payments to help build their credit scores. In
other words, it would help more people have access to credit with those
additional facts.
As my friend noted, and as we have heard in our Task Force on
Financial Technology and in the Financial Services Committee's Consumer
Protection and Financial Institutions Subcommittee, additional data
allows millions more to have access to the credit they need.
This bill, the Credit Access and Inclusion Act, was introduced in the
114th Congress and the 115th Congress by my friend, former
Representative Keith Ellison of Minnesota. I joined in the last
Congress with him and cosponsored it, and in the 116th, I have
introduced it.
So I find it interesting that in the last two Congresses, my bill was
the appropriate way to handle additional data, but in this Congress, it
is not.
Mr. Chair, I would also raise the point that there is a bipartisan
Senate companion to my bill introduced by Senators Scott and Manchin.

{time} 1445

Furthermore, the language I have introduced was offered as an
amendment to this bill by Gwen Moore but was ruled out of order in the
Rules Committee.
As I have outlined, H.R. 4231, my legislation, has strong,
bipartisan, bicameral support. I believe Mr. Clay is trying to do
something similar with the text he has offered today. But in my view,
his version makes it more difficult for consumers to establish a credit
history which is underscored by the lack of bipartisan and bicameral
support for this text.
As drafted, Mr. Clay's amendment creates a new barrier because it
requires written consumer authorization before furnishing a customer's
payment information to a consumer reporting agency for a lease, for a
utility, or for a telecom service. This is in stark contrast with how
the current credit reporting methodology works.
This amendment requires consumers to opt-in to have their rental,
utility, or telecommunication payments included in their credit
reports. I believe that is a defective viewpoint.
Mr. Chair, I reserve the balance of my time.
Mr. CLAY. Mr. Speaker, just in quick response to my friend from
Arkansas, some consumer advocates have expressed concern that consumers
may be evaluated as higher risk for using alternative data than they
would be with no reports at all; so we worked on this language to try
to find the sweet spot.
The Acting CHAIR. The time of the gentleman has expired.
Mr. HILL of Arkansas. Mr. Chair, may I ask how much time remains.
The Acting CHAIR. The gentleman from Arkansas has 2 minutes
remaining.
Mr. HILL of Arkansas. Mr. Chair, let me thank Mr. Clay for his work
on this. Requiring an opt-in and excluding data that would not allow
lenders to get the full picture of a consumer's financial health, in my
view, makes it more difficult for consumers to access credit because
practically no rental, utility, or telecommunication companies would
actually furnish the Expanded Access program.
Therein lies the conundrum here. Therein lies the challenge with Mr.
Clay's approach compared to my approach. But it doesn't stop me from

[[Page H685]]

thanking my friend for his work on this. I know it is an area that we
share an interest in. I know that this area is keenly important to him.
However, this amendment, as it is currently drafted, I cannot support
it.
I urge my colleagues to vote ``no.'' But I hope my colleague would be
open to working together to finding a better solution that truly
benefits consumers, expands additional data, and allows people to offer
these products because it will qualify more credit-needy Americans for
badly needed credit.
I think in the case of Mr. Clay's approach, ``perfect is the enemy of
the good.'' I think we ought to work within the system that we have and
make it better. That is why I support my measure I have introduced in
the House and oppose this amendment.
Mr. Chair, I yield back the balance of my time.
The Acting CHAIR. The question is on the amendment offered by the
gentleman from Missouri (Mr. Clay).
The question was taken; and the Acting Chair announced that the ayes
appeared to have it.
Mr. CLAY. Mr. Chair, I demand a recorded vote.
The Acting CHAIR. Pursuant to clause 6 of rule XVIII, further
proceedings on the amendment offered by the gentleman from Missouri
will be postponed.

Amendment No. 5 Offered by Mr. Steil

The Acting CHAIR. It is now in order to consider amendment No. 5
printed in part B of House Report 116-383.
Mr. STEIL. Mr. Chair, I have an amendment at the desk.
The Acting CHAIR. The Clerk will designate the amendment.
The text of the amendment is as follows:

Page 163, beginning on line 5, strike ``(i) either--'' and
all that follows through ``(I) the person'' and insert
``(i)(I) the person'' (and adjust the margin of the
subsequent subclause accordingly).
Page 163, line 8, strike ``or'' at the end.
Page 163, line 12, add ``or'' at the end.
Page 163, after line 12, insert the following:
``(III) the report is necessary for a background check or
related investigation of financial information that is
required by a Federal, State, or local law or regulation;''.

The Acting CHAIR. Pursuant to House Resolution 811, the gentleman
from Wisconsin (Mr. Steil) and a Member opposed each will control 5
minutes.
The Chair recognizes the gentleman from Wisconsin.
Mr. STEIL. Mr. Chair, I rise to urge support for my amendment to H.R.
3621.
Mr. Chair, I want to start by thanking Chairwoman Waters, Ranking
Member McHenry, Representative Lawson, and Representative McAdams for
working with me to reach this commonsense agreement on this amendment.
As my colleagues know, for certain jobs, employers are required by
law to review the financial history of prospective employees. For
instance, in some States, insurance commissioners require companies to
review an agent's financial condition and history prior to granting a
license.
This is a consumer protection issue. It is important to ensure that
the professionals who consumers trust to carry out major financial
transactions on their behalf aren't themselves in financial distress.
This amendment clarifies that an employer may use a credit report
when it is necessary for a financial background check, required by
Federal, State, or local laws or regulations.
By clarifying this issue, my amendment ensures that the underlying
bill does not conflict with important consumer protection laws that are
already on the books. Failing to address this conflict will be bad for
workers and consumers.
I again urge support on this amendment, and I reserve the balance of
my time.
Mr. LAWSON of Florida. Mr. Chair, I claim the time in opposition to
the amendment, although I am not opposed to it.
The Acting CHAIR. Without objection, the gentleman is recognized for
5 minutes.
There was no objection.
Mr. LAWSON of Florida. Mr. Chair, I rise to support Mr. Steil's and
Mr. McAdams' amendment.
Mr. Chairman, this bipartisan amendment would add clarity to title VI
of the bill that addresses restricting the use of credit reports in
most employment decisions.
As we know, in many cases, the use of credit reports unnecessarily
exposes consumers' financial information and potentially puts existing
employees and job applicants in an uncomfortable position of having to
discuss private matters such as: divorce; domestic abuse; or health and
genetic conditions in explaining their impaired credit history.
While financial events that cause diverse information to land on the
credit profile do not determine alone what value the person can bring
to an employer, there are some circumstances where financial background
is more relevant to a job.
While this bill already contains exemptions that address this, such
as exemptions when the credit file is needed for national security, or
is otherwise required for Federal or State or local laws or
regulations, we were able to draft a bipartisan compromise that adds a
tailored exemption if Federal, State, or local laws or regulations
require an investigation for financial information of an employee.
This compromise strikes the right balance of commonsense solutions
without creating loopholes that would hurt consumers.
I want to thank Representative Steil and Representative McAdams for
their work on this, and hope Mr. Steil will vote for the underlying
bill if the amendment is adopted.
Mr. Chair, I yield back the balance of my time.
Mr. STEIL. Mr. Chair, I appreciate my colleague's remarks regarding
this amendment. I think this is the commonsense solution that we need
to make sure that employers are protected as they are looking for their
employees as it relates to this.
I appreciate the gentleman's work and Mr. McAdams' work on this
amendment, and I urge my colleagues' support.
Mr. Chair, I yield back the balance of my time.
The Acting CHAIR. The question is on the amendment offered by the
gentleman from Wisconsin (Mr. Steil).
The amendment was agreed to.

Amendment No. 6 Offered by Mr. Gottheimer

The Acting CHAIR. It is now in order to consider amendment No. 6
printed in part B of House Report 116-383.
Mr. GOTTHEIMER. Mr. Chairman, I have an amendment at the desk.
The Acting CHAIR. The Clerk will designate the amendment.
The text of the amendment is as follows:

In title V, add at the end the following:

SEC. 503. REVIEW OF CHANGES TO CREDIT SCORING MODELS.

Section 631 of the Fair Credit Reporting Act (15 U.S.C.
1681 et seq.), as added by section 502, is amended by adding
at the end the following:
``(c) Review of Changes to Credit Scoring Models.--With
respect to a person that creates credit scoring models used
in making credit decisions, if such person creates a new
credit scoring model (including a revision to an existing
scoring model) that would, when compared to previous credit
scoring models created by such person, lower the credit
scores of a class of consumers, the Director of the Bureau
may review such new credit scoring model and, if the Director
determines that such new credit scoring model is
inappropriate (including, with respect to a revision to an
existing scoring model, if such revision does not enhance or
contribute to the accuracy and predictive value of the
existing scoring model), the Director may prohibit such new
credit scoring model.''.

The Acting CHAIR. Pursuant to House Resolution 811, the gentleman
from New Jersey (Mr. Gottheimer) and a Member opposed each will control
5 minutes.
The Chair recognizes the gentleman from New Jersey.
Mr. GOTTHEIMER. Mr. Chairman, I yield myself such time as I may
consume.
Mr. Chairman, I rise today in support of my amendment to H.R. 3621,
the Comprehensive CREDIT Act of 2020.
According to my good friend from New Jersey Tom Bracken, who is the
president and CEO of the New Jersey Chamber of Commerce: ``Everyone
needs to be evaluated properly regarding their ability to secure
credit.'' Individuals want to be confident that the due diligence
involved in evaluating their credit worthiness is accurate.
Now, here is the problem that my amendment is trying to solve, a
problem Americans face every single day. There are a handful of credit
bureaus

[[Page H686]]

in the United States that are deciding Americans' fate in a black box
on whether they should get access to credit or not--whether they should
get, or how much they should be paying for a car, a house, a loan to
send their children to college, a rate on a credit card, and how much
they can receive for a small business loan.
Houdini himself couldn't figure out how these scores are calculated.
And here is the rub: Each of these companies comes up with a magic
number, your credit score.
Last week, The New York Times reported that one of the controllers of
that black box is developing a new credit model to decide our financial
fates in, and that this new model may lower the scores for 40 million
Americans.
Yes, this new model--just to say this again--may lower the scores for
40 million Americans who work every single day to keep their credit
scores high. These are hardworking people in our communities who are
going to be penalized after spending years doing everything right. But
they are going to change those scores based on external factors that
have nothing to do with them and how hard they have worked to keep
their credit scores up.
Not only does your score determine your ability to obtain credit at a
fair price, but they are also used by countless sectors, from insurance
companies to landlords and even employers, to decide if you are welcome
or not.
These changes could harm 40 million Americans, again, even though
they have done absolutely nothing wrong. These changes could cost
people thousands of dollars in higher-priced credit, or worse yet,
result in the denial of a job, apartment rental, or ability to buy a
home.
I am focusing on working to expand credit access to the millions of
credit-invisible Americans, consumers who have no credit history.
Now, many of these new creditworthy consumers are going to wake up
and find that the rules they thought they were playing by are changing
because of economic forecasts that they have no control over.
My amendment is simple. It will allow for a level of oversight to
review any potential model changes to ensure that they are not being
done arbitrarily, if the changes decrease the credit scores for
Americans. If it is found that there is no justification for the
changes, the models can be blocked from deployment.
The review is not mandatory, giving flexibility for the market to
work on their own approach to make sure that Americans who work hard
and care about their credit health are not being whacked for doing the
right thing.
This amendment is an important safeguard for consumers who all too
often are left holding the bag when it comes to their credit scores.
I am proud to offer this amendment today that will protect consumers
and make sure that no one's credit scores get docked arbitrarily after
they have played by the rules.
I urge my colleagues to support this commonsense amendment. Again,
this is not about being able to price for risk and make sure that we
don't set the right scores and rates. This is about arbitrarily
changing someone's score simply because there is macro outside
externalities that have nothing to do with them or their behavior, and
suddenly, they wake up one day and their credit scores are really
changing their lives and having a significant impact on them.
Mr. Chair, I reserve the balance of my time.
Mr. McHENRY. Mr. Chairman, I claim the time in opposition to the
amendment.
The Acting CHAIR. The gentleman from North Carolina is recognized for
5 minutes.
Mr. McHENRY. Mr. Chair, this amendment epitomizes what is wrong with
the approach taken by the majority in this bill.
This amendment is about socializing credit score models and putting
that power within the government, and clearance from the government in
order to use different models.
In short, this amendment says, if you don't like the outcome of
something, we will just have the CFPB lean in and deem it
inappropriate.
That is what it is about.
This amendment directs the CFPB to review the reasons a class of
consumers may have been negatively impacted by a newly introduced
credit scoring model and determine whether the model is inappropriate.
I would say to my colleague, this amendment appears to be duplicative
of the authority already given, already vested in the CFPB's
organizational statute and in the underlying bill for the CFPB to
intervene in private-sector decisions.
I would also further ask the House: Do we really want to give a
government agency veto power over new credit models?

{time} 1500

As I raised in our committee markup, as I raised in our hearing back
in February, and as I have raised on this day here on the House floor
and many times before, I have concerns about the consumer credit
reporting agencies and their structure. I think there is a way for us
to have a bipartisan consensus.
While I respect my colleague on the other side of the aisle, and
there are times when we can work together, this is not one of those
times. I see this is as further vesting governmental power in something
that the private sector should be deciding in the private-sector
allocation of risk, rather than socializing credit models.
Mr. Chairman, I urge a ``no'' vote, and I reserve the balance of my
time.
Mr. GOTTHEIMER. Mr. Chairman, I want to thank the ranking member for
his leadership. We work together quite often, and I know we disagree on
this one.
The challenge I have here is you have just a couple companies that
control, through this black box, all this information that no one can
figure out how they get your score and how the score is developed. It
is completely arbitrary.
People are working really hard to try to get their scores up so they
can get a loan, so they can get a mortgage, and just to make their
lives better. They work really hard at it. It just doesn't make any
sense to me to have this arbitrary change in the number that no one can
understand. Again, you just have a few people sitting in a room
somewhere making this decision.
The idea would be to make sure there is some sort of review, so that
if a few people just go make this decision without any real
competition--I am a pro-business Democrat--they go off and make this
decision in this room somewhere, it really can affect every aspect of
your life. Suddenly your credit goes down, and now they want to bring
your credit down again, these credit scores down and change the number,
with nothing to do with your own behavior at all. It is just that they
decided this on externalities.
So I agree with the ranking member that we should always make sure
that we are circumspect here and we allow the markets to play out. But
in this case, this isn't the market with competition.
In this case it is arbitrary, and there should be review. In the
review you can have a perfect review and in the end it would be that,
okay, this makes sense. I can see why we need to make these changes. I
understand why we need to do this. And, of course, price for the risk
here, and that makes sense.
But in this case you can't just be someone in the back room making a
decision and then you wake up one day, you have done nothing wrong and
they had a huge impact on how much you are paying for your credit, how
much you are paying to take out a loan, if you own a small business to
take out a loan, or get a lease for a car, things that affect your life
every single day. That is really what we are talking about here.
So I appreciate the ranking member's concerns, but I think in this
case it is very focused. It is to really ensure that you don't have an
oligopoly with all control.
Mr. Chairman, I yield back the balance of my time.
Mr. McHENRY. Mr. Chairman, as I said, this amendment is about
socializing credit modeling. My colleague raised this issue that a few
people in a room are making a decision that will affect millions of
Americans.
I think the consumer credit reporting agencies are deeply
problematic. There is not real competition. When you have three
controlling this marketplace with very little competition, the varied

[[Page H687]]

entries being massive because it is heavily regulated by government, a
set of laws that act on them and regulations that act on them, that is
problematic. It is an oligopoly.
I have said that I think there are reasonable reforms that we could
achieve in a bipartisan way through this House that could make it into
law. This bill is dead on arrival in the Senate, and the President said
he is going to veto it.
This is not a bipartisan undertaking. In fact, instead of having that
private-sector, behind-closed-doors group making this decision, you
vest one government bureau with somebody under statute who is
appointed, who cannot be fired, who can show up drunk at work
basically, and the President doesn't have the authority to fire them
under the statute, and you are going to give the CFPB this power and
have a single director make this decision on the allocation of credit
for all Americans?
So private sector, a small group making a decision and you have three
choices for your credit scores. Or do you want to have one government
bureaucrat make all the decisions for the American people?
So this is a fundamental debate, not just here on the House floor but
on wider politics about how you allocate capital in the United States:
Is it the government that should do this? Or should it be individual
action and individual citizens who have that control?
I fundamentally believe it is the individual citizens not government
bureaucrats behind closed doors who are making those decisions. We need
real innovation for consumer credit scores and consumer credit
modeling. We need big data involved, we need machine learning, and we
need to make sure that we root out inherent bias within the data
sources. I think there are enormous things we can do. But investing in
a government bureau that is unaccountable and a single director that is
making these decisions is a worse outcome than what is already not that
great.
So I appreciate my colleague raising this issue because we both agree
this is a problem. We just haven't been able to come to terms with how
to do it.
So while I oppose this amendment, I certainly respect my colleague
from New Jersey as a serious policy maker, but on this we just don't
agree.
Mr. GOTTHEIMER. Will the gentleman yield?
Mr. McHENRY. I yield to the gentleman from New Jersey.
Mr. GOTTHEIMER. Mr. Chairman, it sounds like we are finding a place
of common ground here where we certainly need more competition in this
space, and the fact that the gentleman said big data and other
externalities being brought to bear, I am looking forward to working
with him on that because I think certainly we have got to make this
better.
Mr. McHENRY. Mr. Chairman, as I said, my colleague is a serious
policy maker. At times we can come together, at other times we see
things differently, and I think that is okay.
Mr. Chairman, I yield back the balance of my time.
The Acting CHAIR. The question is on the amendment offered by the
gentleman from New Jersey (Mr. Gottheimer).
The amendment was agreed to.

Amendment No. 7 Offered by Mr. Kildee

The Acting CHAIR. It is now in order to consider amendment No. 7
printed in part B of House Report 116-383.
Mr. KILDEE. Mr. Chairman, I have an amendment at the desk.
The Acting CHAIR. The Clerk will designate the amendment.
The text of the amendment is as follows:

Page 134, line 25, before ``in an area'' insert ``or
works''.
Page 135, beginning on line 5, strike ``the date that is 3
months after such date.'' and insert the following: ``the
date that is the earlier of--
``(i) 6 months after the date on which the major disaster
or emergency was declared; and
``(ii) the later of--

``(I) 3 months after the date on which the major disaster
or emergency was declared; and
``(II) the date that the Director of the Bureau, in
consultation with the Administrator of the Federal Emergency
Management Agency, determines is the date on which
substantially all provision of assistance by the Federal
Emergency Management Agency under such major disaster or
emergency declaration has concluded.''.

The Acting CHAIR. Pursuant to House Resolution 811, the gentleman
from Michigan (Mr. Kildee) and a Member opposed each will control 5
minutes.
The Chair recognizes the gentleman from Michigan.
Mr. KILDEE. Mr. Chairman, I thank Congresswoman Ayanna Pressley and
Chairwoman Maxine Waters for their leadership on this legislation and
for advocating for consumers.
The credit reporting system in this country is not consumer focused
and is in need of a major overhaul.
Consumer complaints about their credit reports are one of the most
frequently reported issues submitted to the Consumer Financial
Protection Bureau. Over 40 million Americans have errors in their
credit reports. In fact, just last week one credit reporting company
announced it was changing the credit scoring model which could
arbitrarily reduce credit scores for millions of Americans without
allowing any public input whatsoever.
Having poor credit makes it harder and more expensive to borrow
money, buy a home, or own a car. It also negatively impacts a person's
ability to be approved for an apartment, get car insurance, and even to
get a job. The lack of transparency and accuracy in the credit
reporting system leaves borrowers at the mercy of credit reporting
agencies, which is holding American families back.
The Comprehensive CREDIT Act is a much-needed, comprehensive overhaul
of the credit reporting system. This bill would enhance consumer rights
and increase the accountability and transparency of consumer reporting
agencies.
Specifically, the bill would help rehabilitate credit for student
borrowers with private loans. Right now Americans are experiencing a
student loan debt crisis. Student loan debt is now at $1.3 trillion.
This is the largest source of debt in the U.S., even more than credit
card debt. This is delaying young people from making critical
investments in their own future like buying a house, starting a family,
or saving for their own children to go to college.
The Comprehensive CREDIT Act would combat this by requiring a credit
reporting agency to remove a delinquent or defaulted private education
loan on a borrower's consumer report if they have shown a good history
of loan repayment for 10 consecutive months after the delinquency or
default. If a borrower has demonstrated a good faith effort to resume
loan repayment after a delinquency or default, then they should not be
punished with a lowered credit score.
I also support the underlying legislation very strongly, and I have
introduced an amendment that I think would strengthen the bill even
further. My amendment would provide a 6-month grace period to preserve
the credit score of borrowers living and working in an area impacted by
a major disaster or emergency if there is an interruption in their 10
consecutive months of loan repayment.
In 2016 in my own hometown, the people of Flint experienced a
drinking water emergency. I know many of you have heard me discuss this
on many occasions. During that period people were not able to access
safe drinking water, families were saddled with unexpected medical
bills, parents and children poisoned by their water experienced adverse
health conditions, and homeowners and businesses were negatively
affected.
People whose livelihoods were damaged by this crisis or any other
natural disaster or emergency should not be penalized for failing to
pay back student loans until they get back on their feet. When
experiencing a crisis, borrowers should be provided flexibility to
repay their loans when they are able to without affecting their
underlying credit score. This relief would be provided to people living
and working in an area experiencing a major disaster or emergency.
My amendment and the underlying bill will help decrease the burden of
student loans on Americans and improve their credit scores, especially
those people living in areas impacted by emergencies or natural
disasters.
Mr. Chairman, I ask my colleagues to join me in supporting this
amendment, and I reserve the balance of my time.
Mr. McHENRY. Mr. Chairman, I claim the time in opposition.

[[Page H688]]

The Acting CHAIR. The gentleman from North Carolina is recognized for
5 minutes.
Mr. McHENRY. Mr. Chairman, I want to commend my colleague, Mr.
Kildee, for representing his constituents' interests. The people in
this Chamber know of his commitment to his neighbors in Flint, and he
has been quite vocal and passionate about their plight. He has brought
that debate here to the House floor in a very proper and good way, so
he should be commended for that, I believe.
We know that when you have a local concern like this you want to fix
it. So many times when you have something that is applicable at the
national level you learn from local circumstances.
So let's look at the underlying bill first in order to describe this.
What this bill says to the 8 percent of the student loan marketplace--8
percent--this has nothing to do with the 92 percent that is controlled
by the Federal Government. That is an Education and Labor Committee of
jurisdiction and is not a part of this bill.
Eight percent of the student loan marketplace is private. Private
lenders are engaged, and those terms are already a part of a set of
Federal laws and State laws. The underlying bill ignores the
contractual terms of that, ignores the fact that you have in that 8
percent of the student loan marketplace only 2 percent who are not
paying or in default. Ninety-eight percent are paying. So my friend is
trying to fix a problem on 2 percent. The Federal student loan
portfolio has double-digit default rates and folks not paying.
So we have a big issue here. It is a big societal issue. It is
impacting two generations of Americans, and it is because Congress has
passed bad law that is saddling and enabling a generation of students
to saddle themselves with debt that they cannot repay. It is
unconscionable what we have done.
So what that bill does is say to that 8 percent of the marketplace:
If you are behind--8 percent of the marketplace, 2 percent not paying
or in default. So let's go to that 2 percent.
We are saying: If you have been in default for months, perhaps years,
and you make payments, and over 10 months you make nine of 10--why?
Well, I couldn't determine during committee debate why it was nine. Why
not 11 of 12? Why not 5 of 6? Why not three of seven? Nine of ten,
because that was the determination we have gotten. And now we have an
amendment that says, nine of ten? Well, maybe a little different.
So I get the expression of resolve for fixing people's problems, but
this bill is really bad. It is a really fundamentally flawed bill when
you have these arbitrary timelines like this and it says you sort of
pay and you sort of pay for a period of time and then all that fact
that you didn't pay is just waved away.
So that is the absurdity of the underlying bill.
I say to Mr. Kildee, I am sorry to take up the debate to talk about
how flawed that is. The gentleman's expression, though, about natural
disasters is a reasonable one. If we can do a standalone bill on that
then I think we would have not a dissenting vote on the House floor. So
I would love to work with the gentleman on that, but I cannot support
this amendment, and I have to oppose it.
Mr. Chairman, I reserve the balance of my time.

{time} 1515

Mr. KILDEE. Mr. Chairman, I appreciate my friend's expression. We
served together my first 6 years on the Financial Services Committee.
And if the event occurs that we need to pursue this relief in another
fashion, I would look to forward to working with him. But it is my hope
that we can act on this within this legislation.
I do disagree with his assessment of the underlying legislation, but
that is fine. That is the nature of this place, that we have
disagreements sometimes over issues like this.
In this case, where we do have a chance, as the gentleman described,
to deal with a specific set of circumstances affecting specific
individuals, we ought to take that opportunity and do something.
I didn't know when I was elected that the community that I represent
was going to face the crisis that it did, and nobody serving in this
body knows whether or not their community, in the next month or year or
10 years, will face a similar circumstance.
So let's take the opportunity we have, as small as it may be in terms
of the way the gentleman describes it. It is not small when it happens
to you, and it is not small when it happens to your community.
So I appreciate the gentleman's willingness to work with me in the
future on this. I ask my colleagues to join me in supporting this
amendment, and I yield back the balance of my time.
Mr. McHENRY. Mr. Chair, may I inquire how much time remains.
The Acting CHAIR. The gentleman from North Carolina has 1 minute
remaining.
Mr. McHENRY. Mr. Chair, I would say to the gentleman from Michigan
that I commend him for offering this amendment; I commend him for the
respect for this institution and how he interacts legislatively. He can
be passionate about representing his constituents, his point of view,
his legislation, his amendments, but, at the same time, where we can
come to terms, we do that on a regular basis.
So it is not all dysfunction here; it is not all dismay; it is not
all disaster; it is not all acrimony. There are those of us who can
still talk amidst a broken and divided government that we have.
So I commend him for offering this amendment, and, again, as I said,
I am opposed to the amendment.
Mr. Chair, I yield back the balance of my time.
The Acting CHAIR. The question is on the amendment offered by the
gentleman from Michigan (Mr. Kildee).
The amendment was agreed to.

Amendment No. 8 Offered by Mr. King of Iowa

The Acting CHAIR. It is now in order to consider amendment No. 8
printed in part B of House Report 116-383.
Mr. KING of Iowa. Mr. Chairman, I have an amendment at the desk made
in order by the rule.
The Acting CHAIR. The Clerk will designate the amendment.
The text of the amendment is as follows:

Page 135, beginning on line 3, strike ``date on which the
major disaster or emergency was declared'' and insert
``initial date of the incident period of the major disaster
or emergency''.

The Acting CHAIR. Pursuant to House Resolution 811, the gentleman
from Iowa (Mr. King) and a Member opposed each will control 5 minutes.
The Chair recognizes the gentleman from Iowa.
Mr. KING of Iowa. Mr. Chairman, this amendment, in reading through
the bill, brings something forward that we have experienced a number of
times in the natural disasters that have poured forth and the flooding
in my district over the 17 years-plus that I have represented the folks
in the Missouri River bottom, in particular; but, also, it affects
everybody else around the country.
In reading the base bill, it says that the 3-month grace period that
is granted for a student loan begins on the date that the declaration
of disaster is issued, and often that declaration of disaster is issued
sometimes months after the disaster is over.
The crisis is also over for the former student who was paying their
student loans and having difficulty meeting those obligations because
they have been the victim of a natural disaster, whether it be a
hurricane, whether it be a flood, whether it be a tornado or some other
type of natural disaster. This morning, I saw there was an earthquake
down across from Florida, across the Caribbean.
What this amendment does is move that date back to the initial date
of the disaster itself rather than the date that it was declared a
disaster. The language in the current bill says, ``date on which the
major disaster or emergency was declared.'' Instead, the language
becomes, ``initial date of the incident period of the major disaster or
emergency.''
Mr. Chairman, I would point out some of these dates along the way
that stand out to me.
There was flooding in North Dakota that began on October 9 of 2019
and continued until October 26 of 2019. That disaster was declared not
then, but declared on January 21, 2020. That would have been the first
date that the grace period would kick in under this language. I ask
that that grace period kick in immediately. Although the announcement
will come from FEMA and wouldn't be on the first day of the disaster,
that is the first day that they feel the financial stress.

[[Page H689]]

I will go through a number of these.
The courageous people of Hornick, Iowa, bounced back from that flood
as strongly as anybody I have seen, but that began on March 12, and the
disaster declaration came March 23. So they lost some of those days.
And I look down to Tropical Storm Michael in North Carolina, and that
disaster began October 10 to 12, 2018, and 4 months later, January 31,
2019, was the declaration.
So the credit of these people who are trying diligently to pay their
student loans is damaged unless they have this grace period that begins
when the stress period begins, and that is what my amendment does, Mr.
Chairman, and I reserve the balance of my time.
Mr. LAWSON of Florida. Mr. Chairman, I claim the time in opposition,
although I am not opposed.
The Acting CHAIR. Without objection, the gentleman from Florida is
recognized for 5 minutes.
There was no objection.
Mr. LAWSON of Florida. Mr. Chairman, this amendment will allow for
more time for private student loan borrowers in the process of
rehabilitating their loans to repay their loans when also impacted by a
geographical disaster or emergency.
By changing the language from when a disaster or emergency is
federally declared to when the actual disaster began, private student
loan borrowers will have more time outside of when an emergency is
officially federally declared to explain and have their situation taken
into consideration for hardship.
For example, it was a shame that it took President Trump more than 2
weeks to declare the major disaster declaration after Puerto Rico
received a string of earthquakes beginning December 28. Consumers
should not be penalized by politics when they are in dire need for
help.
As climate change and other disasters continue to have devastating
consequences across this country, students who are demonstrating that
they can rehabilitate their loans and improve their credit scores
should not have to additionally suffer because extreme events like
these cause hardships that would reasonably interrupt a payment.
It can take years for communities to recover from natural and other
disasters, and this amendment further allows victims of these disasters
the time that they deserve, a fair chance to improve their credit
scores and future credit opportunities.
I support this amendment, and I reserve the balance of my time.
Mr. KING of Iowa. Mr. Chairman, may I inquire as to how much time
remains.
The Acting CHAIR. The gentleman from Iowa has 2\1/4\ minutes
remaining. The gentleman from Florida has 3 minutes remaining.
Mr. KING of Iowa. Mr. Chairman, I yield myself such time as I may
consume.
I appreciate the gentleman's remarks with regard to this amendment.
I would point out that we have 435 Members in this United States
Congress, and it was envisioned by our Founding Fathers that we would
get ideas from every one of those districts. And they also recognized
that we are all human, and no matter how diligent we might be, no
matter how much we care about the people we are helping, sometimes
things just kind of slide along, look good on the surface, and we are
busy. So that is why we all want to look at this, and that is why I
have the privilege to be here to offer this amendment.
Having gone through natural disaster after natural disaster after
natural disaster, suffered from them myself--in fact, the 1993 flood is
probably why I am in Congress today, because I realized the degree of
risk was not proportional to the potential for profit if you are under
water.
So I want to help those students who want to keep their credit in
line, and I appreciate the support across Congress to do so.
Mr. Chairman, I reserve the balance of my time.
Mr. LAWSON of Florida. Mr. Chair, I yield myself the balance of my
time.
I urge all of my colleagues to support this amendment, and I yield
back the balance of my time.
Mr. KING of Iowa. Mr. Chairman, I appreciate the gentleman's remarks
again, and I would just point out that, of this list of disasters that
we have and the delays we have in declaring these disasters, there is
one here on April 29.
A disaster declaration was declared for severe storms and flooding
within the Sac and Fox Tribe in Mississippi and Iowa--and I actually
live in Sac County, although that is not part of that reservation--with
an incident period spanning March 13 till April 1. However, the
disaster declaration was April 29, so there was a month-and-a-half
delay in that one.
I have other examples of this, Mr. Chairman, but I think that we have
made our point here today, and I appreciate the attendance and
diligence of the Members on both sides of the aisle.
Mr. Chairman, I urge adoption of my amendment, and I yield back the
balance of my time.
The Acting CHAIR. The question is on the amendment offered by the
gentleman from Iowa (Mr. King).
The amendment was agreed to.

Amendment No. 9 Offered by Ms. Sanchez

The Acting CHAIR. It is now in order to consider amendment No. 9
printed in part B of House Report 116-383.
Ms. SANCHEZ. Mr. Chairman, I have an amendment at the desk.
The Acting CHAIR. The Clerk will designate the amendment.
The text of the amendment is as follows:

Page 44, line 18, before the period insert ``(increased by
$1,000,000)''.
Page 182, line 8, strike ``military'' and insert
``uniformed''.
Page 182, line 10, strike ``military'' and insert
``uniformed''.
Page 182, line 11, strike ``military'' and insert
``uniformed''.
Page 182, line 14, strike ``military'' and insert
``uniformed''.
Page 182, beginning on line 16, strike ``military''.
Page 182, line 19, strike ``military'' and insert
``uniformed''.
Page 182, line 21, strike ``military'' and insert
``uniformed''.
Page 192, line 7, strike ``military'' and insert
``uniformed''.
In title IX, add at the end the following:

SEC. 904. PROTECTIONS FOR ACTIVE DUTY UNIFORMED CONSUMER.

(a) Definitions.--Section 603 of the Fair Credit Reporting
Act (15 U.S.C. 1681a) is amended--
(1) in subsection (q), by amending paragraph (1) to read as
follows:
``(1) Active duty uniformed consumer.--The term `active
duty uniformed consumer' means a consumer who is--
``(A) in military service and on active service (as defined
in section 101(d) of title 10, United States Code); or
``(B) a member of the uniformed services (as defined in
section 101(a) of title 10, United States Code) who is not a
member of the armed forces and is on active service.''; and
(2) by inserting after subsection (dd) (as added by section
901) the following:
``(ee) Extended Active Duty Uniformed Consumer.--The term
`extended active duty uniformed consumer' means an active
duty uniformed consumer that is deployed--
``(1) in a combat zone (as defined under section 112(c) of
the Internal Revenue Code of 1986); or
``(2) aboard a United States vessel.''.
(b) Prohibition on Including Certain Adverse Information in
Consumer Reports.--Section 605 of the Fair Credit Reporting
Act (15 U.S.C. 1681c) is amended--
(1) in subsection (a), as amended by section 809, by adding
at the end the following:
``(18) Any item of adverse information about a consumer, if
the action or inaction that gave rise to the item occurred
while the consumer was an extended active duty uniformed
consumer.''; and
(2) by inserting after subsection (h) (as added by section
705) the following:
``(i) Notice of Status as an Extended Active Duty Uniformed
Consumer.--With respect to an item of adverse information
about a consumer, if the action or inaction that gave rise to
the item occurred while the consumer was an extended active
duty uniformed consumer, the consumer may provide appropriate
proof, including official orders, to a consumer reporting
agency that the consumer was an extended active duty
uniformed consumer at the time such action or inaction
occurred. The consumer reporting agency shall promptly delete
that item of adverse information from the file of the
consumer and notify the consumer and the furnisher of the
information of the deletion.''.
(c) Communications Between the Consumer and Consumer
Reporting Agencies.--Section 605A of the Fair Credit
Reporting Act (15 U.S.C. 1681c-1) is amended--
(1) in subsection (c), as amended by section 803, by adding
at the end the following:
``(2) Negative information alert.--Any time a consumer
reporting agency receives an item of adverse information
about a consumer, if the consumer has provided appropriate
proof that the consumer is an extended active duty uniformed
consumer, the consumer reporting agency shall promptly notify
the consumer--
``(A) that the agency has received such item of adverse
information, along with a description of the item; and

[[Page H690]]

``(B) the method by which the consumer can dispute the
validity of the item.
``(3) Contact information for extended active duty
uniformed consumers.--With respect to any consumer that has
provided appropriate proof to a consumer reporting agency
that the consumer is an extended active duty uniformed
consumer, if the consumer provides the consumer reporting
agency with separate contact information to be used when
communicating with the consumer while the consumer is an
extended active duty uniformed consumer, the consumer
reporting agency shall use such contact information for all
communications while the consumer is an extended active duty
uniformed consumer.''; and
(2) in subsection (e), by amending paragraph (3) to read as
follows:
``(3) subparagraphs (A) and (B) of subsection (c)(1), in
the case of a referral under subsection (c)(1)(C).''.
(d) Conforming Amendment.--The Fair Credit Reporting Act
(15 U.S.C. 1681 et seq.) is amended by striking ``active duty
military'' each place such term appears and inserting
``active duty uniformed''.
(e) Sense of Congress.--It is the sense of Congress that
any person making use of a consumer report containing an item
of adverse information should, if the action or inaction that
gave rise to the item occurred while the consumer was an
extended active duty uniformed consumer, take such fact into
account when evaluating the creditworthiness of the consumer.

The Acting CHAIR. Pursuant to House Resolution 811, the gentlewoman
from California (Ms. Sanchez) and a Member opposed each will control 5
minutes.
The Chair recognizes the gentlewoman from California.
Ms. SANCHEZ. Mr. Chairman, I yield myself such time as I may consume.
I am proud to vote today to protect consumers and improve our credit
reporting system.
I thank Chairwoman Waters and Representative Pressley for their hard
work on this important legislative package, and I want to thank the
Financial Services staff who have worked diligently behind the scenes.
I would also like to thank the National Military Family Association,
the National Consumer Law Center, and the Consumer Federation of
America for their support of my amendment.
My amendment today, which is based upon a bill that I have long
championed, is focused on our friends and family in uniform who are
serving abroad. Specifically, my amendment would allow servicemembers
the ability to dispute negative information, or dings, on their credit
report that occurred while they were serving in a combat zone or aboard
a U.S. vessel.
Those who are serving in the Army, Navy, Air Force, Marine Corps,
Coast Guard, National Guard, the commissioned corps of the National
Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration, and the Public Health Service
would benefit from this amendment.
This amendment isn't without guardrails. A credit reporting agency
must be notified that the servicemember was on extended Active Duty at
the time the hit to the credit report occurred. The credit reporting
agency would then be required to conduct a review of the information
and delete any negative information from the credit report should
certain requirements be met.
We must acknowledge the realities of deployment in today's
technological world. Life goes on at home while our military members
are deployed. Sometimes a bill payment is missed when an electronic
payment agreement lapses, a credit card on file expires, or an
unauthorized credit card is issued.
This amendment allows for credit reports that more accurately reflect
the full picture. This idea was born out of the incredible courage of
two parents who faced an overwhelming grief that I hope never to
experience.
John Kelsall, president of my local chamber of commerce at the time,
and his wife, Teri, a long-time southern California nonprofit leader,
lost their son. Lieutenant Commander Jonas Kelsall, a proud Navy SEAL,
was killed in Afghanistan in 2011. In order to keep their son's legacy
alive, the Kelsalls founded a nonprofit veterans business incubator to
assist U.S. military veterans upon their return to civilian life.
Whenever I was back home, John and Teri would catch me up on the
latest challenges and success stories from their organization. However,
one hurdle kept coming up over and over and over again for these
veteran would-be entrepreneurs.

{time} 1530

Terri and John shared stories of servicemembers and veterans who had
trouble obtaining loans to help start their businesses. Why? Because
while they were deployed, they missed payments, and this negatively
affected their credit scores, even though, oftentimes, the delays were
out of their control.
I knew something had to be done. That is why, in 2014, I joined our
colleague, Congressman Lamborn of Colorado, in introducing legislation
to address this problem. I have been proud to strengthen the text of
this bill over the years with the help of the National Consumer Law
Center and military family support groups. Our country continues to ask
so much from our men and women who serve in uniform. They deserve peace
of mind during their Active Duty deployments.
Mr. Chair, I urge all of my colleagues to support this amendment and
the underlying legislative package, and I reserve the balance of my
time.
Mr. McHENRY. Mr. Chair, I claim the time in opposition, but I am not
opposed to it.
The Acting CHAIR. Without objection, the gentleman from North
Carolina is recognized for 5 minutes.
There was no objection.
Mr. McHENRY. Mr. Chairman, this amendment introduces to the Fair
Credit Reporting Act a definition for Active Duty uniformed consumer
and establishes a special regime for the treatment of such consumers.
It is understandable and commendable that we want to help the men and
women who serve our country. They are involved in unique circumstances,
not just here domestically but globally.
While I support the need for our servicemen and women broadly, this
amendment does not remedy the overarching issues in the underlying
bill. There are some deeply problematic pieces to this bill, as I have
said in this overall debate. Because of that, I would offer to work
with the gentlewoman on this as a standalone measure that I believe we
could pass with a wide majority through the House. Who knows in the
Senate, given these days. But I believe that it would even have the
opportunity for the President's signature, which is important for our
process here in lawmaking.
Unfortunately, the overall bill, even if this is added, won't see the
light of day because the Senate is not going to take it up, and the
President has already said he is going to veto it.
Mr. Chair, I would offer to the gentlewoman to work with her on a
standalone measure to achieve the very thing of her amendment. I am
happy to yield if she has a response or if she is interested in working
in a bipartisan way for a standalone measure to achieve this.
I yield to the gentlewoman from California.
Ms. SANCHEZ. Mr. Chair, I thank my colleague for the offer to work on
this as a standalone bill. It was originally a standalone bill. It is
being offered as an amendment to the bill. I understand that you have
reservations on the underlying bill.
My hope is that it will pass as an amendment and that the underlying
bill will pass. But should that bill not be successful in being taken
up in the Senate, I would surely love to work with my colleague on a
standalone bill that will accomplish this very important goal of
helping our men and women who serve in uniform make their lives just a
little bit easier.
We ask a lot of them as a Nation, and so I think helping them when
they are on Active Duty and sometimes are late or miss payments is a
worthwhile endeavor.
Mr. McHENRY. Mr. Chair, reclaiming my time, I appreciate the offer
and would be happy to work with the gentlewoman on that standalone
measure.
Mr. Chair, I yield back the balance of my time.
Ms. SANCHEZ. Mr. Chair, again, I want to say that I have attempted to
pass this bill as a standalone bill. I believe that it is properly
included in the underlying bill, which I think is an excellent piece of
legislation.
Our country asks a lot of our men and women, and while you are on
Active Duty, the last thing that you should worry about is late
payments or missed payments, oftentimes because you are in far-flung
regions of the world when it is not like you can just mail a letter
back to make sure that your payment gets in on time.

[[Page H691]]

Mr. Chair, I believe very strongly in this amendment. I ask my
colleagues to support the amendment and support the underlying bill. I
yield back the balance of my time.
The Acting CHAIR. The question is on the amendment offered by the
gentlewoman from California (Ms. Sanchez).
The amendment was agreed to.

Amendment No. 10 Offered by Mr. Cohen

The Acting CHAIR. It is now in order to consider amendment No. 10
printed in part B of House Report 116-383.
Mr. COHEN. Mr. Chair, as I have an amendment at the desk, I stand and
seek recognition.
The Acting CHAIR. The Clerk will designate the amendment.
The text of the amendment is as follows:

Page 137, line 16, insert before the period the following:
``as soon as possible, but in no case later than 5 days after
such completion''.

The Acting CHAIR. Pursuant to House Resolution 811, the gentleman
from Tennessee (Mr. Cohen) and a Member opposed each will control 5
minutes.
The Chair recognizes the gentleman from Tennessee.
Mr. COHEN. Mr. Chair, this amendment creates a specific time period
for credit reporting agencies to change a consumer's credit report
after consecutive payments have been made on certain private education
loans.
This bill offers credit rehabilitation for distressed private
education loan borrowers. My amendment simply states that once a
consumer has made the consecutive payments outlined in the standardized
reporting codes, the consumer reporting agency must update a consumer's
report immediately or within 5 business days, at the most.
Credit reports and credit scores are tied to so many important
factors in consumers' lives. They determine interest rates on
mortgages, bank loans, and credit cards, and deposits for rent. They
can even lower insurance premiums.
Every day counts. Consumers shouldn't have to wait in limbo, not
knowing exactly when a charge is going to be removed from their credit
report, especially if they have been making consecutive payments and
meet the criteria to have it removed.
This amendment is supported by the National Consumer Law Center,
which stated that ``putting a specific timeframe for compliance is a
good idea. It provides clarity on what action needs to be taken for
both compliance and enforcement purposes. It also ensures borrowers
will get the benefits of the law promptly.''
Mr. Chair, I thank Chairwoman Waters, Mr. Lawson, Congresswoman
Pressley, and the Financial Services Committee staff--especially Yana
Miles, Glen Sears, Avy Malik, Clement Abonyi, and Lisa Peto--for all of
their hard work on this issue. I encourage my colleagues to support
this amendment.
Mr. Chair, I yield 1 minute to the gentlewoman from Massachusetts
(Ms. Pressley), the sponsor of this comprehensive bill.
Ms. PRESSLEY. Mr. Chair, my bill, the Comprehensive CREDIT Act, will
greatly improve a fundamentally flawed credit reporting system,
providing much-needed relief for families across the country.
It works to protect consumers from unfair and misleading credit
reporting practices, affirming the rights of all Americans to an
equitable and transparent credit reporting process. My bill takes the
burden off consumers while holding credit reporting agencies
accountable and restoring fairness to the system.
I thank my colleague from Tennessee (Mr. Cohen) for offering this
amendment. CRAs are all too quick to add penalties and negative marks
to credit reports, but the same urgency never seems to be applied to
improving those reports.
Once borrowers take the steps prescribed in this bill to improve
their credit reports, they deserve to have the reports updated to
reflect that in a reasonable timeframe.
Credit scores are meant to be predictive, and the best predictor of
future behavior is their most recent behavior. Our bill takes the
burden off of consumers while holding debt reporting agencies
accountable and restoring fairness to the system. This amendment would
further strengthen our bill by ensuring that these changes happen in a
timely manner.
Mr. Chair, I am proud to support this amendment, and I urge my
colleagues to do the same.
Mr. McHENRY. Mr. Chair, I claim time in opposition to the amendment.
The Acting CHAIR. The gentleman from North Carolina is recognized for
5 minutes.
Mr. McHENRY. Mr. Chair, it sounds like a bit of a broken record, but
this amendment does two things.
First, it continues to undermine the ability of private lenders to
negotiate terms of their loans with student borrowers. Second, it
continues the bill's theme of removing negative information, even if
accurate, from credit scores and credit reports.
Now, it was the decision by a Democratic House, Democratic Senate,
Democratic President that has saddled a generation--in fact, two
generations--of students with this massive, federally administered
student loan program.
This bill only deals with the 8 percent that is in the private
marketplace. It is trying to put bad rules there to take that final 8
percent, when in reality we should be focused on the 92 percent that
the Federal Government has saddled, the 92 percent that is the Federal
student loan program.
They want to remove predictive information, which will lead to
students taking on even more debt. We should be addressing the
underlying factors that are causing the crisis, like the rising costs
of higher education, the lack of underwriting standards in the Federal
program.
Instead, we are going to weaken the standards in the private market,
the part of the marketplace that is actually working really, really
well, where you only have default rates or folks who are not paying at
2 percent or less. In the Federal program, we have double digits that
are in the same sort of category.
The underlying bill requires consumer reporting agencies to develop
and use reporting codes to reflect a borrower's participation in the
credit rehabilitation program. The amendment would require these codes
to be removed no later than 5 days after the consumer makes nine
payments in 10 months.
Why nine payments in 10 months? As I said the last time I spoke about
this, because that kind of feels right, apparently. That is kind of
what we determined in the committee debate. Not that people have paid
every month but, you know, they have paid 9 out of 10 months.
What we are talking about here is not science in the underlying bill.
In fact, the 5-day period, I am not sure how the sponsor came up with
that. But this amendment expedites the requirement of a flawed program
within the bill, so not making a titanic change, a major change to the
bill. But it is a bad program that he is basically speeding up, in my
view--a bad program, in my view--that he is obviously trying to enact
more quickly.

Under this amendment, there will be no record of the borrower ever
being delinquent or having been in default.
Let's go back to the private loan market statistics. Again, 2 percent
in the private student loan marketplace is in default of their loans,
compared to the Federal student loan program, which has a default rate
of 18 percent.
Fannie and Freddie didn't have a default rate that high, and they got
nationalized as a result of the financial crisis and sparked a
financial crisis. We have 18 percent that is in default in the student
loan program.
Why are we messing with this small program when we should be taking
on this bigger issue that is one that is a major struggle? There are a
lot of ideas on both sides of the aisle for how we deal with that.
We shouldn't be weakening underwriting standards, either in the
Federal program or in the private program. We should have strong
underwriting standards. We should not lead to more financial
instability but a fairly structured and smart marketplace.
Mr. Chair, I oppose this amendment and, again, reiterate that this
amendment is about speeding up a bad program that is deeply flawed in
the underlying bill, and that is why I oppose it.
Mr. Chair, I reserve the balance of my time.

[[Page H692]]

Mr. COHEN. Mr. Chair, first of all, Federal student loans already
have the option to rehabilitate the loan after the borrower has made 9
out of 10 consecutive on-time payments.
H.R. 3621 simply brings private student loans in line with Federal
student loans, so 9 out of 10. It is not science like climate change
is, but it is pretty good, and it is based on current law for Federal
student loans.
Secondly, I would submit, don't try to make the perfect the enemy of
the good. I was here for 8 years in the minority, and I don't remember
the majority bringing any bills to help consumers on any student loans,
any loans, or anything at all. Fortunately, we are in the majority, and
we are bringing you bills to help consumers, and this bill helps people
with student loans.
Mr. Chair, I once again reiterate that I urge people to support this,
and I reserve the balance of my time.
Mr. McHENRY. Mr. Chair, may I inquire how much time is remaining on
both sides.
The Acting CHAIR. The gentleman from North Carolina has 30 seconds
remaining. The gentleman from Tennessee has 1\1/4\ minutes.
Mr. McHENRY. Mr. Chair, I am prepared to close, and I reserve the
balance of my time.
Mr. COHEN. Mr. Chair, I yield myself the balance of my time.
Mr. Chair, simply, for the college students, for the debtors, for
fairness, for justice, pass this bill, pass this amendment. I yield
back the balance of my time.
Mr. McHENRY. Mr. Chair, I yield myself the balance of my time.
Mr. Chair, this is more aggressive than the bad Federal student loan
program. If you are a delinquent borrower, you cannot access this like-
kind program. What this amendment is saying is, if you are a delinquent
borrower, you can get in the front of the line and get that waived away
as if you had been paying the whole time. This is a bad idea.
If you want to address the problem, let's address the cost of
college, not doing this gamesmanship of trying to socialize on the back
end through credit scores and credit reporting agencies.
Mr. Chair, I oppose the amendment, and I yield back the balance of my
time.

{time} 1545

The Acting CHAIR. The question is on the amendment offered by the
gentleman from Tennessee (Mr. Cohen).
The amendment was agreed to.

Amendment No. 11 Offered by Mr. Cohen

The Acting CHAIR. It is now in order to consider amendment No. 11
printed in part B of House Report 116-383.
Mr. COHEN. Mr. Chair, I have an amendment at the desk.
The Acting CHAIR. The Clerk will designate the amendment.
The text of the amendment is as follows:

Page 162, line 15, after ``purposes'' insert the following:
``, including for the purpose of denying employment,''.

The Acting CHAIR. Pursuant to House Resolution 811, the gentleman
from Tennessee (Mr. Cohen) and a Member opposed each will control 5
minutes.
The Chair recognizes the gentleman from Tennessee.
Mr. COHEN. Mr. Chair, first, I would just like to make some closing
remarks on the previous argument. The gentleman is right. We need to
make college more affordable, and I passed a bill in Tennessee when I
was a senator, a referendum on the ballot that has raised over $5
billion to send kids to college in Tennessee, $5 billion free
scholarship money. So, yes, I don't talk the talk, I walk the walk.
Mr. Chairman, my amendment makes it unequivocally clear that credit
reports should not be used as the sole reason for the denial of
employment.
This amendment is for the countless constituents who have contacted
my office with disturbing stories of being denied a job opportunity
because of their credit report.
This amendment is for the many people in this country who are
currently in a vicious cycle: To pay down their debt, they need a job,
but they can't get hired because of their debt.
According to the Society for Human Resource Management, 43 percent of
employers are conducting pre-employment credit checks, claiming that a
potential employee's credit score is somehow an accurate predictor of
future job performance. Nobody says that. Like nobody says that you
have to have a crime in an impeachment article to impeach a President.
Abuse of power is sufficient.
Yet, there has not been any proof that a credit report or a credit
score can predict how an employee will perform, none whatsoever.
A credit report doesn't tell the whole story. Maybe a person had a
long stretch of unemployment. Maybe they unexpectedly had a health or a
medical crisis.
This practice has had a disproportionate impact on some of our most
vulnerable, credit-challenged citizens; recent college grads, divorced
women, low-income families, senior citizens, and minorities.
Everyone deserves the opportunity to begin rebuilding their credit
history by obtaining employment. We should be doing everything in our
power to help people find jobs during these tough economic times, not
hinder them.
Making sure credit reports are not used as a means for denial of
employment has been a very important issue to me and my office, and I
have introduced a bill, the Equal Employment for All Act, every
Congress for the last 11 years.
Unfortunately, in eight of those years, we were in the minority and
so we couldn't get a hearing. But now, Mr. Lawson has brought a bill,
which I appreciate greatly, and he is on the committee and this issue
is now before us.
What matters most is that important issues like this are addressed
and fixed by Congress and get to the floor for a vote. I would like to
thank Mr. Lawson.
I would also like to go back and thank my former staffer, Michael
Fulton, who worked tirelessly on the Equal Employment for All Act and
the Fair Access to Credit Scores Act. I am happy to see that language
to provide free credit scores is also included in the Comprehensive
CREDIT Act of 2020.
I want to thank again Chairwoman Waters and the dedicated staff on
the Financial Services Committee. And I encourage all of my colleagues
to support my amendment and vote for the overall bill.
Mr. Chairman, I reserve the balance of my time.
Mr. McHENRY. Mr. Chair, I claim the time in opposition. I am opposed
to the amendment.
The Acting CHAIR. The gentleman from North Carolina is recognized for
5 minutes.
Mr. McHENRY. Mr. Chairman, this amendment is more of the same. It
prevents employers from identifying and fulfilling the needs of their
companies.
Now, use of a credit score, you would argue, is not perfect for every
job, but there are certain cases where that would, in fact, be a
reasonable thing and a reasonable limitation on employment; and I would
ask the amendment sponsor if that is the case.
Are there reasonable limitations that we could find here for the
types of employment where a credit report may be helpful to an
employer?
I would ask the bill's sponsor, Mr. Cohen of Tennessee, who is here
in the room, so your amendment says you cannot use the credit report
for anything related to hiring; is that correct?
I yield to the gentleman from Tennessee.
Mr. COHEN. Right.
Mr. McHENRY. I understand that correctly. Is there any reasonable
limitation--as an employer, is there any reasonable expectation for
using a credit report in a hiring process, in your view?
Mr. COHEN. I am still having trouble hearing. Like in the 8 years
when I was in the minority, I couldn't hear the majority party give me
a chance to bring this to a vote. But I don't think the answer is yes.
The answer is no.
Mr. McHENRY. Reclaiming my time. If the amendment sponsor doesn't
wish to engage in debate, then don't come to the House floor, Mr.
Chair, unless you want to engage in a debate. I am offering a
reasonable question. The gentleman may be so far in left field he can't
hear me in this Chamber.
But I would say this: As an employer, if you are handling cash, as an
example, every day, is it a reasonable thing to check somebody's credit
report to see if somebody has perhaps--I don't know--had problems with
cash, or is

[[Page H693]]

massively in debt, or has not paid their bills. Is that a reasonable
thing?
Is it a reasonable thing if you get hired by the FBI to know that you
have massive debt and, therefore, could fall victim to extortion?
I think there is a reasonable limitation. And what the gentleman has
already exposed with his unwillingness to even engage in a simple
colloquy--the gentleman has been around this House long enough to know
this general process, but he doesn't want to answer the question.
The reason he doesn't want to answer the question is he doesn't
believe any employer should be able to look at a consumer credit report
for any hiring procedure, and I think that is patently absurd, Mr.
Chair.

So if employers have a real fear that hiring or retaining an
individual can jeopardize the integrity of an institution, I think they
should be able to check a credit report; just like in certain
circumstances, somebody's criminal background could be harmful.
I will give you an example. Elder abuse. I think it is reasonable to
know if somebody has committed a violent crime or has extorted money
from people. I think that is a reasonable circumstance, is it not?
So I would say this: I offered a reasonable opportunity for a debate
on this. This is an absurd amendment that should be rejected.
Mr. Chair, I reserve the balance of my time.
Mr. COHEN. Mr. Chair, it can't be the sole reason for denying a job,
number one. That is what the bill says. And there are exemptions for
circumstances when Federal, State, or local law call for it, or a
national security clearance.
Indeed, I think that if you are an administrator, if you are over,
say, the foreign policy of the United States and the Defense
Department, people should know if you have great debts to, like, Russia
or something. People should have a right to know that because it could
relate to your employment. But that is another issue.
Mr. Chair, I yield 1 minute to the gentlewoman from Texas (Ms.
Jackson Lee).
Ms. JACKSON LEE. Mr. Chairman, I rise to support the underlying bill
by Representative Pressley, and I thank her for her outstanding
leadership. And I rise, in particular, to support the reasonable, smart
amendment of Mr. Cohen. It says very clearly that it is the sole
reason.
Let me be clear again, to my good friend. A credit score, or owing
bills, is not criminal. It is not a criminal act. It doesn't in any way
diminish your ability to do your job.
One percent of the American people own 90 percent of the wealth. That
means that students with debt, and millennials, mostly, are not in that
category. That means that you are not encouraging leadership if you use
a credit score as the sole reason for denying an able leader that
happens to be a millennial to get a job. I am outraged and insulted by
the premise.
Mr. Cohen's amendment is a smart amendment that indicates, give these
individuals a chance, as does the underlying bill by Ms. Pressley.
I rise enthusiastically to give relief to millennials and those with
major student debt; one, under this act; and two, under Mr. Cohen's
amendment not to deny them a job.
I support the Cohen amendment. I support the underlying bill by Ms.
Pressley, the Comprehensive CREDIT Act of 2020, and I believe we should
vote ``yes'' on that amendment and ``yes'' on the bill. Do our job for
the millennials.
Mr. McHENRY. Mr. Chair, I reserve the balance of my time.
Mr. COHEN. Mr. Chair, is the gentleman ready to close? Is the
gentleman ready to learn if a President has debts to Russia before he
can count the money?
Mr. McHENRY. I will inquire of the Chair; how much time remains on
both sides.
The Acting CHAIR. The gentleman from North Carolina has 1\1/2\
minutes remaining. The gentleman from Tennessee has 30 seconds
remaining.
Mr. McHENRY. I have the right to close and I intend to do so.
Mr. COHEN. Mr. Chairman, I yield back the balance of my time.
Mr. McHENRY. Mr. Chair, for the express purpose of this amendment, in
legislative text it says that you cannot use a consumer credit report
or the information therein to deny employment. And the gentleman in the
very debate, Mr. Chair, said that he thinks some different standard.
But that is not what this amendment does.
This is a deeply-flawed amendment that has not been--I think it has
been thought through, because the gentleman wants to ban every
potential limitation on employment, even in a sensitive industry, even
dealing with the elderly, even dealing with children; and I think that
is way too far to the left and out of the mainstream.
And this amendment is not conforming with the rhetoric that he used
on the floor. In fact, it is much more far-reaching.
But it is also quite fitting with the overall bill, because the
overall bill is about socializing credit; and if you socialize credit,
you can't use any form or factor, and so I think this is really
problematic.
If employers have a real fear that hiring an individual can
jeopardize the integrity of an institution, for instance, a financial
institution, or cause harm to the very people they are trying to care
for, or share sensitive information on their customers, then they
should have the opportunity to not hire those people that will cause
harm or wreck our financial system.
So this is a way-out-left amendment, and it is a way-out-left bill.
So while I oppose it, I wish the gentleman well. And I wish that we
could actually engage in some reasonable debate like I had with other
Members. But I realize not all Members are the same.
Mr. Chairman, I yield back the balance of my time.
The Acting CHAIR. The question is on the amendment offered by the
gentleman from Tennessee (Mr. Cohen).
The amendment was agreed to.

Amendment No. 12 Offered by Mr. Takano

The Acting CHAIR. It is now in order to consider amendment No. 12
printed in part B of House Report 116-383.
Mr. TAKANO. Mr. Chairman, I have an amendment at the desk.
The Acting CHAIR. The Clerk will designate the amendment.
The text of the amendment is as follows:

Page 143, after line 8, insert the following:
(c) Prohibition on Inclusion of Arrest Information if There
Is No Conviction.--Section 605(a) of the Fair Credit
Reporting Act (15 U.S.C. 1681c(a)), as amended by section
809, is further amended by adding at the end the following:
``(18) Records of an arrest, if the consumer was not
convicted of any crime in connection with the arrest.''.

The Acting CHAIR. Pursuant to House Resolution 811, the gentleman
from California (Mr. Takano) and a Member opposed each will control 5
minutes.
The Chair recognizes the gentleman from California.
Mr. TAKANO. Mr. Chair, I rise to offer an amendment to the
Comprehensive CREDIT Act of 2020 that would prohibit the inclusion of
arrest records on a consumer report if the arrest did not lead to a
conviction.
Consumer reporting in this country is extremely broken, and consumer
reports regularly have unexpected errors. Millions of public records do
not contain accurate information, which means that reports have been
found to include outdated information and misclassified offenses.
Additionally, incomplete reports fail to say whether or not a person
who faced an arrest was exonerated or if criminal charges against them
were dropped.
An arrest does not prove criminal conduct and it is not a presumption
of guilt. If a consumer was arrested and there was no subsequent
conviction, that arrest should not be allowed to show on a consumer
report.
Now, due to the extreme bias in our criminal justice system, people
of color are arrested and convicted at disproportionate levels in this
country. For example, we know that African Americans and Hispanics are
approximately two to three times more likely to be arrested than their
White counterparts.

{time} 1600

These disproportionate levels of arrests can negatively impact the
ability for African Americans and Hispanics to obtain housing or find
employment. That is why California, New York, and Kentucky have
prohibited the inclusion of arrest records without a conviction on
consumer reports. We need to

[[Page H694]]

follow their lead and implement this nationwide.
I am encouraged by the work of my colleagues on the Financial
Services Committee to limit the time adverse information can remain on
a consumer credit report, including information pertaining to
convictions.
My amendment goes one step further by prohibiting arrest records from
being included if they do not lead to a criminal conviction. Consumers
deserve a fair shot in society and should not be penalized for wrongful
arrests or arrests that did not lead to a guilty conviction.
Mr. Chairman, I urge my colleagues to support my amendment, and I
reserve the balance of my time.
Mr. McHENRY. Mr. Chairman, I claim the time in opposition to the
amendment.
The Acting CHAIR. The gentleman from North Carolina is recognized for
5 minutes.
Mr. McHENRY. Mr. Chairman, this amendment would prohibit the
inclusion of any arrest records on a consumer report if the arrest did
not result in a conviction, but looking at the intention here, I would
say to my colleague, I see the intention here.
In my view, this needs a little more work. And I say this to a Member
who is not on the Financial Services Committee. So it is a very
thoughtful amendment. I appreciate the gentleman's approach.
The difficulty here, and I am happy to yield, but the difficulty here
is at what level? Is it multiple arrests that would be--I mean, I see
this as the right intent.
You don't want somebody who makes a mistake, and their court date--
because State courts are backed up, and you have a court date 6 months
or a year in advance. You did something dumb. You are going to pay the
price. You are a law-abiding citizen otherwise, but you broke the law,
and you are accused of something very serious. In that period of time,
you can't buy a house, potentially, you can't buy a car. I see that as
the intention.
Now, you also have the circumstance where you have somebody who has a
traumatic life event and has a serious break from their previous
reality, and over a short period of time, over that same 6 months,
let's say, they have multiple arrests in increasing severity. We talk
about the opioid crisis, but we have a larger societal crisis around
mental illness and around abuse of illicit and otherwise heavily
regulated drugs. So we have these periods of time that we have got to
wrestle with in Federal law, but I see the gentleman's intent.
So, while I am opposed to this amendment because I think it is too
broad because I think there are severe penalties for that period of
time, I think it is probably right and just to have a pause, and if
something changes, then they need to remove the fact that you are even
accused of a crime. That shouldn't be pertinent to somebody's long-term
credit.
So that is how I see it. If I am off base in some way, I am happy to
engage on that.
I yield to the gentleman from California for a response.
Mr. TAKANO. Mr. Chairman, I appreciate the gentleman yielding.
I want to point out to the gentleman that my amendment pertains to
records of arrests that appear on consumer reports that did not lead to
a conviction, so, what is recorded on the report is an arrest.
I don't believe most Americans believe that it is fair for that
consumer to suffer adverse ability to gain housing or to gain credit or
whatever it may be, a job, but employers look at job----
Mr. McHENRY. Mr. Chairman, reclaiming my time, on that subject
matter, it is the period of time between the arrest and the court date
is my concern.
Mr. TAKANO. Mr. Chairman, is the gentleman concerned about the
pending arrest?
Mr. McHENRY. Yes.
Mr. TAKANO. Mr. Chairman, we believe in those instances where there
has been an arrest and there is a pending trial, so the arrest shows up
on their record and there is a pending trial, we think it is a very
small number of cases.
I do agree with the gentleman from North Carolina that is something
we should address, and I would be more than happy to work with him on
final language if this should gain legs. I believe we can cure that
particular instance.
Mr. McHENRY. Mr. Chairman, I would say I think the gentleman from
California (Mr. Takano) has offered a thoughtful amendment. We don't
want any unjust actions taken against somebody because they are accused
of something at one period of time or made a mistake and the courts
found that that was not, in fact, something illegal.
So I think he has the right intent. I think the gentleman's
inclination is right. I would be happy to work with him on a standalone
measure to achieve something similar, but I appreciate that.
Mr. Chairman, I reserve the balance of my time.
Mr. TAKANO. Mr. Chairman, I yield myself such time as I may consume.
I appreciate the spirit in which the gentleman from North Carolina
understands the intent here. I believe that most Americans seeing this
language on its face would say it makes common sense. There is a kind
of netherworld for that person who has been arrested but, yet, who has
not been tried.
I still say that our system of jurisprudence says that the person who
has been arrested and not yet tried is still presumed to be innocent,
and I still maintain that it is reasonable for Congress to hold a
consumer reporting agency accountable to only reporting records of
arrest for those who have been convicted.
I understand there is some netherworld here, but I still think we
need to err on the side of our system of jurisprudence, which says that
we presume a person to be innocent until proven guilty, and a person
who has been arrested and not yet gone to trial is in that status.

Mr. Chairman, I reserve the balance of my time.
Mr. McHENRY. Mr. Chairman, again, I still have concerns, but in the
interest of due process, the direction of this amendment I think is a
thoughtful one, and the gentleman's explanation is a strong explanation
of his amendment.
I would say in language such as no conviction, perhaps acquittal may
be some better form of this, but this is something I am happy to work
on if this ever gets to a conference committee, which I don't believe
the bill will. But I am happy to engage with my colleague from
California on the contents of this, and, as a separate measure,
potentially, to work with him on that.
Mr. Chairman, I yield back the balance of my time.
Mr. TAKANO. Mr. Chairman, I yield myself the balance of my time.
I urge that my colleagues back this very commonsense amendment, which
would ensure that any person who has been arrested but never convicted
or whose case has never been brought to trial--actually, not been
convicted. I want to make it very clear, if they have not been
convicted, they should not be listed on a consumer credit report.
Mr. Chairman, I yield back the balance of my time.
The Acting CHAIR. The question is on the amendment offered by the
gentleman from California (Mr. Takano).
The amendment was agreed to.

Amendment No. 13 Offered by Mr. Brown of Maryland

The Acting CHAIR. It is now in order to consider amendment No. 13
printed in part B of House Report 116-383.
Mr. BROWN of Maryland. Mr. Chairman, I have an amendment at the desk.
The Acting CHAIR. The Clerk will designate the amendment.
The text of the amendment is as follows:

Page 44, line 18, before the period insert ``(increased by
$15,000,000)''.
At the end of title IX, add the following:

SEC. 904. SENSE OF CONGRESS.

It is the sense of Congress that efforts to enhance
cybersecurity and implement routine security updates of
databases maintained by the nationwide consumer reporting
agencies that contain sensitive consumer data, including the
credit history and personal information of millions of
Americans, is critical to the national interest of the United
States.

SEC. 905. CYBERSECURITY SUPERVISION AND EXAMINATION OF LARGE
CONSUMER REPORTING AGENCIES.

(a) In General.--The Fair Credit Reporting Act (15 U.S.C.
1681 et seq.), as amended by section 706, is further amended
by adding at the end the following:

[[Page H695]]

``SEC. 637. CYBERSECURITY SUPERVISION AND EXAMINATION OF
LARGE CONSUMER REPORTING AGENCIES.

``(a) In General.--Consumer reporting agencies described
under section 603(p) shall be subject to cybersecurity
supervision and examination by the Bureau.
``(b) Minimum Training Requirements.--Consumer reporting
agencies described under section 603(p) shall meet minimum
training and ongoing certification requirements with respect
to cybersecurity at regular intervals, as established by the
Director of the Bureau.''.
(b) Clerical Amendment.--The table of contents of the Fair
Credit Reporting Act, as amended by section 706, is further
amended by adding at the end the following:

``637. Cybersecurity supervision and examination of large consumer
reporting agencies.''.

The Acting CHAIR. Pursuant to House Resolution 811, the gentleman
from Maryland (Mr. Brown) and a Member opposed each will control 5
minutes.
The Chair recognizes the gentleman from Maryland.
Mr. BROWN of Maryland. Mr. Chairman, I yield myself such time as I
may consume.
I want to first recognize the hard work of the Financial Services
Committee, under the leadership of Chairwoman Waters, and also the work
and the commitment of Congresswoman Pressley on the underlying bill.
This legislative package reforms the credit reporting industry and
improves consumer protections.
Credit scores play a critical role in the lives and financial futures
of American consumers. The information relied upon by the industry is
personal to us, things like when we were born, where we live, and where
we work. This data is some of the most valuable information that we
have in today's digital economy. It often is how we prove our very
identity, if not existence. It is key to every aspect of our lives,
from applying to college, purchasing a car, obtaining housing,
investing in our futures, and, eventually, to collecting retirement.
Credit agencies have not adequately secured this data and have
violated our trust. The most egregious example of this is the Equifax
breach of 2017. This theft was not a high-tech cyberattack. The
weaknesses in the Equifax systems were known, as were the fixes, yet
Equifax failed to take action.
The credit agencies have demonstrated that they are not able to
secure their systems by themselves. It is time for Congress to protect
Americans from threats against their credit history and the misuse of
their personal information.
My amendment, Mr. Chairman, addresses this issue in two ways:
First, it requires credit agencies to ensure they are meeting minimum
training requirements for cybersecurity. Every major corporation and
most Federal, State, and local government entities understand that
cybersecurity training is crucial and have established training
requirements and standards. Credit agencies should do the same.
Second, it gives the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau the
authority to examine the cybersecurity protocols and training of credit
agencies, to ensure these agencies are taking appropriate steps to
secure our critical personal information. This oversight will ensure
that credit agencies are proactively adapting to the change in threats
more institutions face in cyberspace.
Mr. Chairman, I urge my colleagues to support this amendment and the
underlying legislation, and I yield back the balance of my time.
Mr. McHENRY. Mr. Chairman, I rise in opposition to this amendment,
though I am not opposed to it.
The Acting CHAIR. Without objection, the gentleman from North
Carolina is recognized for 5 minutes.
There was no objection.
Mr. McHENRY. Mr. Chairman, I yield myself such time as I may consume.
I am happy to see my friends on the other side of the aisle take the
same interest that we have on this side of the aisle in protecting
cybersecurity and protecting consumer data. I think it is great that
this is a bipartisan concern that we share.
This amendment reaffirms the data security concerns that Republicans
have highlighted in the past with respect to credit reporting agencies,
including back in February of last year, the only time we had a hearing
in the House Financial Services Committee on the credit reporting
agencies. We want to ensure that these credit reporting agencies
protect our data.
The collection and maintenance of our personal information and
exposing that to risk is deeply problematic. All we need to do is look
back a few years ago to the Equifax breach to understand how vital
cybersecurity standards are, not only at the consumer credit reporting
agencies, but across the financial sector.
I appreciate the gentleman from Maryland using the language from my
substitute amendment that I offered before the Rules Committee and
before the House Financial Services Committee and incorporating it into
this amendment. I am disappointed that the rest of the bill was not as
bipartisan as this amendment text.
Since this bill is not going anywhere, I would ask whether or not the
author of the amendment would be interested in drafting a separate
suspensionable--I think it has wide bipartisan support--a suspension-
worthy version of this as a stand-alone bill.
I yield to the gentleman from Maryland.
Mr. BROWN of Maryland. Mr. Chairman, I thank the gentleman for
yielding.
I don't share the gentleman from New Jersey's pessimism this early in
the game, so I will reserve judgment and a response for the appropriate
time.
Mr. McHENRY. Mr. Chairman, reclaiming my time, I thank my new
colleague, but bipartisanship is kind of rare to happen around here, so
when it is offered, let's just go try to get it, try to work on it.
That would be my suggestion, Mr. Chairman. Since this is the language,
verbatim, from my substitute, I am trying to be charitable.
But with that, like I said, I am not opposed to the amendment. In
fact, I am proud to really have written the contents of what is being
offered. I am grateful that the gentleman offered it and the Rules
Committee approved it, because they didn't approve my stand-alone
amendment in the nature of a substitute.
Mr. Chairman, we are not going to resolve those broader issues, but I
am happy to work with the gentleman if he is ever interested in a
bipartisan bill on this measure. I am happy to do that.
I am fine with the passage of this. I think the underlying bill is
still deeply flawed. This doesn't tip the balance for me to make an
awful bill really good, but it does make an awful bill just slightly
less awful.
Mr. Chairman, I yield back the balance of my time.

{time} 1615

The Acting CHAIR. The question is on the amendment offered by the
gentleman from Maryland (Mr. Brown).
The question was taken; and the Acting Chair announced that the ayes
appeared to have it.
Mr. BROWN of Maryland. Mr. Chair, I demand a recorded vote.
The Acting CHAIR. Pursuant to clause 6 of rule XVIII, further
proceedings on the amendment offered by the gentleman from Maryland
will be postponed.

Amendment No. 14 Offered by Mr. Panetta

The Acting CHAIR. It is now in order to consider amendment No. 14
printed in part B of House Report 116-383.
Mr. PANETTA. Mr. Chair, I do have an amendment at the desk.
The Acting CHAIR. The Clerk will designate the amendment.
The text of the amendment is as follows:

Page 135, line 21, insert ``, including homelessness (as
defined by the Secretary of Housing and Urban Development),''
after ``barriers''.

The Acting CHAIR. Pursuant to House Resolution 811, the gentleman
from California (Mr. Panetta) and a Member opposed each will control 5
minutes.
The Chair recognizes the gentleman from California.
Mr. PANETTA. Mr. Chair, I thank Mr. Lawson, Ms. Pressley, and the
ranking member for their work on this bill.
I rise to offer an amendment to H.R. 3621, the Student Borrower
Credit Improvement Act.
As we all know, this bill that we are considering today strengthens
consumer protections for all Americans by making overdue reforms to
credit reporting.

[[Page H696]]

Specifically, the Student Borrower Credit Improvement Act gives
borrowers facing economic hardship an opportunity to repair their
credit profiles and prevent certain prior delinquencies from being
reported.
These borrowers, who are working to do everything right, deserve that
chance to repair their credit scores. But at times, when a borrower
experiences sudden economic hardship, it can be nearly impossible to
make payments on time. That is why the legislation in front of us
allows borrowers to pause their repayments when they demonstrate undue
hardship resulting from an unusual extenuating life circumstance.
My amendment would include homelessness, as defined by HUD, as an
extenuating life circumstance demonstrating a hardship, therefore
making them eligible for that type of grace period that this
legislation allows.
When a borrower experiences homelessness, it is nearly impossible to
focus on anything else, and securing a safe place to live becomes a top
priority.
This amendment would ensure that a borrower who is experiencing
homelessness can focus on finding a place to stay without worrying
about missing a payment.
A Federal Reserve study has shown that student loan debt has caused a
third of borrowers to move in with their parents after school. But many
students with debt lack that type of support system, and faced with a
lack of housing options, they do become homeless.
On the central coast of California, where I represent, there are some
borrowers who face homelessness even before graduating college.
Students at the local university, the University of California at Santa
Cruz, many of them have been forced to live in vehicles in the
university's parking lots.
By including my amendment in this legislation, we can ensure that
borrowers experiencing homelessness are given a temporary reprieve and
preserve their ability to repair their credit.
Mr. Chair, I reserve the balance of my time.
Mr. McHENRY. Mr. Chair, I claim the time in opposition to the
amendment, even though I am not opposed to it.
The Acting CHAIR. Without objection, the gentleman from North
Carolina is recognized for 5 minutes.
There was no objection.
Mr. McHENRY. Mr. Chair, as we all know, homelessness is an issue that
has plagued the lives of many Americans across this country, and we
know the particular crisis that is in Los Angeles.
I know that the gentleman is trying to deal with the particular
issues of his home State, and so I commend him for that. But he is also
highlighting something that has been a big debate--not debate, but a
big point of discussion, I would say, and shared concern about
homelessness that we have in the Financial Services Committee.
I know every committee of jurisdiction has homelessness as a part of
their agenda, but we are the committee that does housing, and we are
trying to draw some consensus on how we deal with this homelessness
crisis.
We have a crisis of affordability across the country, but in
particular, in high growth areas. It is a blessing that it is a high-
growth area, but there is an enormous number of challenges that come
along the way.
It means that commutes get longer for people who are working-class
folks. It means that you have folks who are making serious life
decisions with a great limitation, right? So that impairs, I think,
economic growth.
It is not just in New York or Los Angeles or San Francisco where
there is a homelessness crisis. I say this not using it as words of
attack to the sponsor of this. It is not. We have a homelessness crisis
in every community in America because we have homeless. We have a
veterans homelessness crisis because if we have a single veteran who is
homeless, that is not in keeping with who we are as America.
So I think it is important to raise this issue of homelessness in
every way we can. I think a number of the policies that have been
offered this Congress will make things worse, not better.
For the affordability challenge, I feel like national rent control
policies and things of that sort will move us in the wrong direction
for ensuring that we have enough housing stock for those who seek it.
With the changing nature of how people want to live, we have to make
sure that housing stock fits with that so you are able to grow housing
stock to meet that need, not just for young people, but for old people
and everybody in between, as I find out I am getting old, right?
But with this, I appreciate my colleague for offering this amendment.
I think it is a thoughtful approach. It gives us the opportunity to
have a wider discussion about homelessness and the challenges therein
to those experiencing it, to the communities that are struggling with
it, and to all of us to come to terms with the best way to approach it.
Look, this doesn't tip the balance in my view of the underlying bill.
For those of you who have been paying attention to this debate, I won't
repeat myself on this, but this is the final amendment.
I think the bill's sponsor is of goodwill in trying to address this.
The underlying bill is still deeply problematic to me, but I commend my
colleague for raising that.
Mr. Chair, I reserve the balance of my time.
Mr. PANETTA. Mr. Chair, I thank Mr. McHenry for his very thoughtful
comments.
Mr. Chair, I yield the remainder of my time to the gentlewoman from
Massachusetts (Ms. Pressley).
Ms. PRESSLEY. Mr. Chair, I find very often we tend to stereotype and
present a very shallow narrative as to who experiences homelessness or
is on the precipice of experiencing it.
The reality is that struggle is certainly not a character flaw, and
hardship is transcendent. Many of us have disruptive life events: a
layoff, a death, a natural disaster, displacement. I could go on.
The point is that far too many Americans are living on the brink of
financial collapse. So while this administration continues to undo
basic protections for those experiencing homelessness, we must be
working to support them and help them to regain stability.
There is no hierarchy of hurt. As someone who faced multiple eviction
notices growing up, I can tell you that losing one's home is every bit
as traumatic as losing one's job or being diagnosed with a life-
threatening illness.
We should be working to help people find housing, not punishing and
criminalizing those without it.
This amendment would make it clear that Americans facing homelessness
are able to get relief under our bill. I am proud to support it.
Mr. Chair, I thank my colleague from California for offering this
amendment. And in that this is the final amendment, I want to thank
Chairwoman Waters for her leadership; the dedicated Financial Services
Committee staff; Representative Lawson; and my dedicated A Team,
specifically Aya Ibrahim, who has been the lead on this bill.
Mr. McHENRY. Mr. Chair, again, for the overall bill, to put a bow on
this, if you will, this bill is about socializing credit scores. If you
socialize credit scores, you can socialize credit. If you can socialize
credit, then you can have government make the decision about the
allocation of credit in the private sector.
This is a larger narrative from the far left in this country, which
has now taken the opportunity to attempt to make legislative gains.
The President has said he will not sign this bill, thankfully, which
is good for the American consumer. Furthermore, I don't see this seeing
the light of day in the Senate.
Having said that, we still need to have a serious bipartisan
conversation about how to reform the credit reporting agencies and the
law that underlies their regulatory framework.
Mr. Chair, I am grateful for the opportunity to debate here on the
House floor. While I am not opposed to this amendment, I remain opposed
to the overall bill and will urge my colleagues to vote ``no'' on that.
But, again, I commend the gentleman from California (Mr. Panetta) for
his offering of a thoughtful amendment dealing with homelessness and
raising this issue, not as a local issue, but as one of national import
and one worthy of debate here on the House floor.
Mr. Chair, I yield back the balance of my time.

[[Page H697]]

Mr. PANETTA. Mr. Chair, I yield back the balance of my time.
The Acting CHAIR. The question is on the amendment offered by the
gentleman from California (Mr. Panetta).
The amendment was agreed to.
Mr. LAWSON of Florida. Mr. Chair, I move that the Committee do now
rise.
The motion was agreed to.
Accordingly, the Committee rose; and the Speaker pro tempore (Mr.
Panetta) having assumed the chair, Mr. Payne, Acting Chair of the
Committee of the Whole House on the state of the Union, reported that
that Committee, having had under consideration the bill (H.R. 3621) to
amend the Fair Credit Reporting Act to remove adverse information for
certain defaulted or delinquent private education loan borrowers who
demonstrate a history of loan repayment, and for other purposes, had
come to no resolution thereon.

____________________