[Congressional Record Volume 166, Number 118 (Friday, June 26, 2020)]
[House]
[Pages H2571-H2580]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]




                              {time}  1615
PROVIDING FOR CONGRESSIONAL DISAPPROVAL OF RULE SUBMITTED BY OFFICE OF 
 THE COMPTROLLER OF THE CURRENCY RELATING TO ``COMMUNITY REINVESTMENT 
                           ACT REGULATIONS''

  Ms. WATERS. Madam Speaker, pursuant to House Resolution 1017, I call 
up the joint resolution (H.J. Res. 90) providing for congressional 
disapproval under chapter 8 of title 5, United States Code, of the rule 
submitted by the Office of the Comptroller of the Currency relating to 
``Community Reinvestment Act Regulations'', and ask for its immediate 
consideration in the House.
  The Clerk read the title of the joint resolution.
  The SPEAKER pro tempore. Pursuant to House Resolution 1017, the joint 
resolution is considered read.
  The text of the joint resolution is as follows:

                              H.J. Res. 90

       Resolved by the Senate and House of Representatives of the 
     United States of America in Congress assembled, That Congress 
     disapproves the rule submitted by the Office of the 
     Comptroller of the Currency relating to ``Community 
     Reinvestment Act Regulations'' (85 Fed. Reg. 34734; published 
     June 5, 2020), and such rule shall have no force or effect.
  The SPEAKER pro tempore. The joint resolution shall be debatable for 
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.


                             General Leave

  Ms. WATERS. Madam Speaker, I ask unanimous consent that all Members 
may have 5 legislative days within which to revise and extend their 
remarks on H.J. Res. 90 and to insert extraneous material thereon.
  The SPEAKER pro tempore. Is there objection to the request of the 
gentlewoman from California?
  There was no objection.
  Ms. WATERS. Madam Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume.
  Madam Speaker, I rise in support of H.J. Res. 90, a Congressional 
Review Act resolution of disapproval to nullify the Office of the 
Comptroller of the Currency's rule undermining the Community 
Reinvestment Act.
  I introduced this resolution with our Consumer Protection and 
Financial Institutions Subcommittee chair, Representative Meeks, and I 
am proud we are joined by 70 other Members who have cosponsored the 
resolution.
  The Community Reinvestment Act is a civil rights act. It is a law 
enacted in 1977 to prevent the discriminatory practice of redlining, in 
which banks discriminate against prospective customers in nearby 
neighborhoods, often based on their racial or ethnic background. The 
law requires banks to invest and lend responsibly in low- and moderate-
income communities where they are chartered.
  Unfortunately, implementation of the Community Reinvestment Act has 
not been robust. Today, 98 percent of the banks routinely pass their 
Community Reinvestment Act exams. However, research has shown that more 
than 60 metro areas across the country are now experiencing modern-day 
redlining today. These findings clearly demonstrate the need to 
strengthen the implementation of the law. Unfortunately, the OCC's rule 
would do the opposite.
  Despite the warnings of a wide range of stakeholders, former 
Comptroller Otting rushed to finalize this rule in his final days on 
the job. So, without the support--without the support--of the Federal 
Reserve or the Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation, the other banking 
regulators were responsible for enforcing the law.
  Mr. Otting appears to have been determined to undermine the Community 
Reinvestment Act ever since the law complicated his efforts to quickly 
obtain regulatory approval for OneWest Bank, a bank that he ran with 
Treasury Secretary Mnuchin, to merge with another bank in 2015.
  I am deeply concerned that the OCC's final rule will harm low-income 
and minority communities that are disproportionately suffering during 
this crisis, effectively turning the Community Reinvestment Act into 
the community disinvestment act.
  If this resolution is not adopted, we will have different rules for 
different banks, leading to regulatory arbitrage and a race to the 
bottom of weaker standards that will only hurt the people the law is 
intended to help.
  Notably, the OCC rule was adopted with insufficient and incomplete 
data, and it incentivizes large deals at the expense of smaller and 
more continuous financial transactions that truly benefit LMI 
communities.
  For example, the OCC final rule allows CRA credit to be given for 
activities in LMI-qualified opportunity zones, but the rule does not 
ensure that these activities promote community development that 
includes affordable housing or small business economic development. 
This can lead to the unacceptable result of banks receiving CRA funding 
for building luxury housing in opportunity zones, providing no direct 
benefit to LMI communities.
  Additionally, the OCC concedes it does not have all the data it needs 
to properly implement its new CRA framework, with the rules stating 
that the OCC will need to issue yet another notice of proposed 
rulemaking in the future to help set specific benchmarks, thresholds, 
and minimums. It doesn't speak highly of a rule when the office says it 
is half baked.
  A wide range of stakeholders have criticized OCC's efforts. For 
example, a group of civil rights and consumer groups issued a statement 
noting: ``The new OCC rules stick with an overly simplistic metrics 
system that creates a loophole for banks to exploit, allowing them to 
get a passing CRA rating by making investments in communities where 
they can reap the largest rewards, while leaving too many credit needs 
unmet for underserved consumers and neighbors.''
  During these difficult times, communities across the country have 
taken to the streets to demand justice and to tell their elected 
officials that they can no longer ignore the needs of communities of 
color. In a letter supporting this resolution from various 
organizations led by the Leadership Conference on Civil and Human 
Rights and National Community Reinvestment Coalition, they wrote: ``In 
the weeks since the OCC finalized its rule, our Nation has been facing 
a long overdue reckoning with our troubled legacy of racial and ethnic 
discrimination. . . . Now is certainly not the time to weaken the most 
important civil rights laws we have at our disposal to correct those 
disparities.''
  Congress must block any effort by the Trump administration to weaken 
our civil rights laws and send a strong message to Federal regulators 
that they should be doing all they can during this pandemic to help, 
not hurt, low- and moderate-income communities, and especially 
communities of color.
  By passing this resolution, Congress will block the OCC's harmful 
rule so that, once the pandemic passes, banking regulators can renew 
efforts to collaborate, modernize, and strengthen the Community 
Reinvestment Act with a new joint rulemaking that truly benefits the 
community the law was intended to help.
  Madam Speaker, I urge my colleagues in the House to vote ``yes'' on 
H.J. Res. 90.
  Madam Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.
  Mr. McHENRY. Madam Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may 
consume, and I rise in opposition to the resolution.
  Madam Speaker, as I said, I rise in opposition to this resolution. 
First, before I get into the contents of my discussion here, I want to 
thank Chairwoman Waters for her steadfast and long-time leadership in 
supporting minority, rural, low- and middle-income communities, LMI 
communities. Her service in the California Assembly and Senate and 
Congress has been commensurate with that work and that focus.
  Committee Republicans share the chairwoman's goal of strengthening

[[Page H2572]]

these communities. For example, we know that community development 
financial institutions and minority depository institutions play 
critical roles in getting necessary funds to the smallest of small 
businesses in these communities.
  Committee Republicans support the efforts of the Paycheck Protection 
Program to target small lenders as well as small businesses in 
communities across America.
  Committee Republicans believe the reforms made in the underlying 
final rule promulgated by the Office of the Comptroller of the Currency 
will continue to support minority, rural, and LMI communities into the 
21st century.
  Madam Speaker, the Community Reinvestment Act was enacted in 1977, 
nearly 43 years ago. Its purpose was to ensure depository institutions 
like banks and savings associations help meet the needs of their local 
communities. The law tasks the OCC, as well as the other bank 
regulators, with issuing rules to carry out that purpose. However, the 
last time the CRA regulations were meaningfully updated was in 1995.
  I think we can all agree that a lot has changed in the past 25 years, 
including how banks can best serve their communities. Much of this 
change has been driven by technology and innovation.
  In 1995, it was cutting edge when you could call your bank and get 
your balance and the last couple of checks that cleared your account. 
Calling up and not having to talk with somebody and a computer tell you 
the answer, that was cutting edge. And at that time, only 24 percent of 
Americans had accessed the internet.
  Since that time, we have witnessed a massive shift to online and 
mobile delivery of banking services, and that is for good in many, many 
ways. This virus has really enhanced that trend just in the last few 
months. This means that where banks get their deposits doesn't 
necessarily match up with where their branches are physically located.
  Second, the number of bank branches has steadily declined since the 
financial crisis, but the CRA regulations continue to place a very 
heavy emphasis on banks' physical footprints rather than where they 
truly serve.
  At the same time, CRA exams have gotten more complex and less 
transparent. Banks can only guess which of their community investments 
will receive credit, because the exams are quite highly subjective. The 
written evaluations can be thousands of pages long, and yet the 
regulators and the public have no clear data to help understand where 
all the CRA money has gone.
  But there are, sadly, a few things that have not changed in the last 
25 years--sadly--including socioeconomic conditions in the poorest 
communities, economic opportunity, and the persistent lack of capital 
in those communities. The CRA is intended to help address those issues, 
and that is why it is a vital and important law and, properly 
structured, can deliver in a better way.
  But, clearly, we know the status quo is not working. It is not 
working for the communities that we care desperately about giving 
opportunity to, economic opportunity to, and that is really what this 
is driven towards with this law.
  Modernizing this regulatory framework is long overdue. Here are a few 
aspects of the rule that I believe represent major improvements over 
the old regulations.
  First, the rule provides for a public list of activities that will 
count for CRA credit so the community can understand, the banks can 
understand, and we, as elected officials who have oversight of this 
program, we can understand, too. And they will have that public list on 
what counts for CRA credit.
  This list will eliminate regulatory ambiguity and provide certainty 
over the types of investments that will lead to a good evaluation. With 
more certainly, banks will naturally make more investments. That is how 
capitalism works. This change alone is likely to increase community 
reinvestment across the board.
  Second, the rule provides a better model for where the activity can 
count. Banks will be incentivized to invest where they take deposits 
instead of only around their branches. Let me explain.
  Previously, a bank was only evaluated on its lending and investment 
in an area around its physical footprint, but banking today is very 
different than it was a generation ago when this regulation was 
written. Banking today, with the help of new technology and innovation 
has changed substantially. So, if an online bank chooses a headquarters 
in one State--let me give you an example: Utah.
  Utah has a lot of online banks and they domicile in Salt Lake City, 
so that is where the community giving is around Salt Lake City, even if 
they take most of their deposits from Chairwoman Waters' district or my 
district. So, if you have that headquarters for an online bank, it 
should not prevent them from making investments in other States or 
localities that desperately need capital.
  Under the final rule, banks will get credit for investing in so-
called banking deserts. This has been a priority of mine for the last 
decade, to help those who are in communities where they can't get ready 
access. We know food deserts in urban areas, and if you can't get 
access to fresh food, you can't have a healthy diet.

                              {time}  1630

  That is a huge issue. It is a huge issue in rural areas, it is a huge 
issue in urban areas.
  So we have banking deserts now, and this rule prioritizes those 
banking deserts that don't have a branch or don't have many branches. 
And those underserved places under this rule are distressed areas, 
economically distressed areas, Tribal lands, folks that have been hit 
by natural disasters, regardless of where they get deposits or if they 
get deposits from those areas. I think there are some laudable changes.
  Now communities without bank branches that were essentially invisible 
under the current framework will be able to receive CRA investment. 
This is a huge improvement.
  Finally, the rule introduces objective metrics and transparent 
evaluations. I think that is a really good thing for regulation. 
Instead of a highly subjective exam and a 1,000-page evaluation, 
examiners will be able to deliver more consistent, useful, and timely 
CRA evaluations; ``timely'' meaning more frequent and more readily 
available.
  Clearer metrics and better reporting will enable banks, regulators, 
and the public to have a better understanding of the CRA activities of 
individual banks and of cross-sections of the industry. Consumers will 
be able to see that and understand the type of institution they are 
banking with as well.
  I would also note that this final rule is a culmination of a 
multiyear process. It reflects more than a decade of dialogue about how 
to make the CRA work better, it builds on recommendations that Federal 
banking agencies submitted to Congress in 2017 and recommendations 
released by the Treasury Department in April of 2018 and more than 75 
hard comments submitted during the rulemaking process that updated and 
changed and made better the regulations that the administration put 
forward.
  Republicans and Democrats agree the Community Reinvestment Act is 
extremely important, it is an important law. And because it is 
important, the regulations need to keep pace with how Americans bank 
today.
  I believe this rule is a huge improvement over the status quo.
  Madam Speaker, I urge my colleagues to vote against this resolution 
and support the underlying rule.
  Madam Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.
  Ms. WATERS. Madam Speaker, I yield 3 minutes to the gentleman from 
New York (Mr. Meeks), who is the chairman of the Subcommittee on 
Consumer Protection and Financial Institutions and the coauthor of this 
bill.
  Mr. MEEKS. Madam Speaker, I rise in support of H.J. Res. 90, and I am 
proud to have joined Chairwoman Waters in introducing it.
  This resolution provides for congressional disapproval of the rule 
submitted by the Office of the Comptroller of the Currency relating to 
the Community Reinvestment Act.
  The Community Reinvestment Act was enacted into law, as indicated, in 
1977 as a direct response to the long, painful legacy of structural 
discrimination, financial exclusion, redlining, and

[[Page H2573]]

economic suppression of racial minorities in America, a legacy of 
prejudice and economic exclusion that we are seeing all-too-clearly 
still echoes to this day, which is why many of the individuals you see 
in the streets today want to correct this structural problem that we 
have in our Nation.
  At its core, the Community Reinvestment Act is a civil rights bill. 
It was the fourth in a series of banking bills passed to address 
systemic discrimination in banking, including the Fair Housing Act of 
1968, the Equal Credit Opportunity Act of 1974, and the Home Mortgage 
Disclosure Act of 1975.
  These bills built on the findings of the 1961 report from the U.S. 
Commission on Civil Rights, and community-led civil action in Chicago 
to hold banks accountable for rampant discrimination in lending in 
Black and Hispanic communities.
  Any efforts at reforms and modernization must remain true to this 
legacy, particularly given the overwhelming evidence of continued 
discrimination in banking and access to finance.
  We must make sure that when we look at the CRA, the CRA is creating 
an opportunity for minority businesses to thrive and strive and 
investing further in its communities; that affordable housing is 
something that is there, not something where we are investing and 
driving people out so they can't have the benefits in the community. It 
must be relevant to the community and keeping the people in the 
community so that they can see a better life.
  Under Comptroller Otting's leadership, the OCC's work on CRA 
modernization has systematically failed to remain true to the law's 
civil rights roots. In fact, the very way in which the rule was 
finalized and published by the OCC was symptomatic of the agency's 
failed approach from the start. It was rushed, unfinished, unsupported 
by data, and not done in coordination with the other prudential 
regulators.
  And to cap it all off, Comptroller Otting abandoned his post within 
the very same week of publishing this rule, in the middle of a 
pandemic, economic crisis, and a looming banking crisis, leaving 
everyone else to hold the bag.
  The SPEAKER pro tempore. The time of the gentleman has expired.
  Ms. WATERS. Madam Speaker, I yield an additional 30 seconds to the 
gentleman.
  Mr. MEEKS. Madam Speaker, the fact is, there is room to modernize CRA 
and to update it to the realities of modern-day banking. The Fed and 
community advocacy groups have put forward some thoughtful ideas on 
just how to do that.
  Let us pass this bill, let us stop this ill-fated rule that the OCC 
put out, and let us do some real CRA to help people in these 
communities who have been deprived for far too long.
  Mr. McHENRY. Madam Speaker, I yield 3 minutes to the gentleman from 
Colorado (Mr. Tipton), a great member from the Financial Services 
Committee who also is the vice chair of the Western Caucus.

  Mr. TIPTON. Madam Speaker, I thank the gentleman for yielding.
  I rise in opposition to the resolution on the floor today.
  We agree that the Community Reinvestment Act is an important historic 
piece of legislation; however, my friends across the aisle have 
mischaracterized the OCC's rule and the modernization of the CRA.
  First, the OCC's rulemaking process has been thorough, inclusive, and 
thoughtful. CRA regulations haven't been meaningfully updated since 
1995, making this a much-needed effort to ensure that regulations match 
the modern state of the banking industry.
  The OCC's processes included input from the Federal Reserve, the 
FDIC, the Federal Financial Institutions Examination Council, and the 
Treasury Department.
  The OCC has also provided ample opportunities for regulated banks and 
consumer groups to weigh in.
  What is more, 94 percent of the participants in the OCC's advance 
notice of proposed rulemaking agreed that the current CRA rules lack 
objectivity, transparency, and fairness. These are the central themes 
to the OCC's modernization effort.
  Second, this update to the CRA is needed now more than ever. One 
large bank's CEO recently noted that due to COVID-19, the bank has seen 
somewhere between a 17 and 35 percent increase in online banking 
activity that normally would have been conducted in the branch. 
Americans are turning to online banking resources now more than ever.
  The OCC's rule takes steps to be able to ensure that CRA dollars go 
into low-to-moderate income communities where banks draw their 
deposits, not only where they have bank branches. This change is 
forward-looking and should mark significant new opportunities to be 
able to invest in underserved communities.
  Third, the OCC regularly and meaningfully engaged with critics in the 
rulemaking process. The OCC met with community, consumer, and academic 
groups to listen to their concerns about the proposal.
  These meetings resulted in real changes to the OCC's final rule, 
including a raised exemption threshold for community banks, changes to 
the treatment of mortgage origination and sale on the secondary market 
for purposes of the CRA, and raising the bar for a passing grade in CRA 
examinations.
  This rule creates greater accountability between banks and the 
communities they invest in under the CRA. It adds transparency in what 
activity counts towards CRA credit, creates fairer and more timely 
examinations, and allows CRA performances to be measured assessment 
over assessment and against other banks. It also allows banks to reach 
new constituencies with their CRA dollars, most notably disabled, 
Tribal, rural, and farm populations.
  By increasing regulatory certainty and reducing subjectivity, the OCC 
CRA modernization rule can equal greater lending and investment in 
underserved communities.
  Madam Speaker, I urge my colleagues to vote ``no'' on the measure.
  Ms. WATERS. Madam Speaker, I yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from 
Texas (Mr. Green), the chairman of the Subcommittee on Oversight and 
Investigations.
  Mr. GREEN of Texas. Madam Speaker, it is an honor to serve in the 
Congress of the United States of America under Chairwoman Waters' 
leadership.
  Madam Speaker, Ms. Waters and I both know that the CRA was not born 
to create luxury homes in opportunity zones. The CRA was not birthed to 
provide opportunities in what are being called banking deserts that may 
not be LMI communities.
  The CRA was born to correct the harm that the government had done in 
the 1930s.
  At that time, the government, by and through the FHA, decided that it 
would craft maps, and these maps had red lines on them. These red lines 
became communities that were undesirable, but more appropriately, they 
were deemed unsafe, and as a result, lending institutions would not 
lend in these redlined areas.
  The CRA was born to end the discrimination, the redlining, but this 
bill takes a step back to the 1930s.
  This bill will not undo the harm that was done; it will increase the 
harm. I cannot support it.
  The CRA was created to help LMI, low-to-moderate income, communities 
have banking privileges that they were denied under the law.
  This bill doesn't help us with the LMIs. It is going to give those 
big guys an opportunity to acquire these funds. I stand against it.
  Madam Speaker, I support the chair of the committee and I stand for 
justice for the LMI communities.
  Mr. McHENRY. Madam Speaker, I yield 3 minutes to the gentleman from 
Michigan (Mr. Huizenga), my friend and the ranking member of the 
Subcommittee on Investor Protection, Entrepreneurship, and Capital 
Markets.
  Mr. HUIZENGA. Madam Speaker, I rise today in opposition to H.J. Res. 
90, which is an effort to overturn a long-overdue regulatory update of 
the Community Reinvestment Act.
  Frankly, it is ludicrous to compare this modernization effort to 
bringing us back to 1930s banking policy. I don't understand how my 
colleagues on the other side can possibly equate that.
  So we all agree the fundamental purpose of the Community Reinvestment 
Act is to combat unacceptable, discriminatory redlining, and demand 
that banks meet the credit needs of

[[Page H2574]]

their communities. There is no disagreement on that. My friend from New 
York laid out that history very, very well. It is the reason why we 
support the CRA and modernizing it.
  However, the regulations promulgated to implement the CRA haven't 
been meaningfully updated since 1995. Now, earlier we were talking 
about credit reporting, and the chair cited the fact that we had not 
addressed this in 17 years, as to why we needed to pass the bill that 
was on the floor. Well, we haven't addressed the CRA in any meaningful 
way for 25 years. We have 8 years on that on this particular issue.
  So in May of this year, the Office of the Comptroller of the Currency 
issued a final rule that modernizes the Community Reinvestment Act 
regulations for the 21st century.
  The final rule provides clarity to banks on what activities count for 
a Community Reinvestment Credit, updated the geographic definitions of 
a bank's community, as well as accounts for the technological 
transformation of banking services that we have seen. This will ensure 
that banks' reinvestment will be in those communities that need it 
most.
  The final rule establishes new performance standards and metrics that 
will allow OCC bank examiners to measure performance objectively and 
produce more consistent, useful, and timely Community Reinvestment Act 
evaluations to provide more clarity to banks.
  Now, I understand that some of my colleagues want to have this 
``let's move the target to my pet project'' kind of a way of evaluating 
where a bank is going, but that is not what it is intended to do.
  Lastly, this modernization introduces objective reporting measures 
that will allow comparison over time and between banks, which has never 
been possible in the history of the CRA. What is a good project in one 
neighborhood should be viewed as a good project in an adjacent 
neighborhood, and that isn't the case today.

                              {time}  1645

  As we work to ensure a strong economic recovery for all Americans--
all Americans--it is critical that we encourage financial institutions 
to continue to provide services to those most in need.
  I have the poorest county in the State of Michigan. I have urban and 
suburban areas. These are issues that affect all of America.
  The OCC's rule will play an important role in this recovery effort by 
encouraging more capital, investment, and lending services in the 
communities hardest hit by COVID-19.
  The SPEAKER pro tempore. The time of the gentleman has expired.
  Mr. McHENRY. Madam Speaker, I yield the gentleman from Michigan an 
additional 1 minute.
  Mr. HUIZENGA. Madam Speaker, I appreciate the ranking member doing 
that. Let me just wrap up.
  By using the Congressional Review Act to overturn this critical final 
rule, my colleagues on the other side of the aisle will only delay 
progress and harm the very communities that I know they want to 
protect. Those are the same communities that I serve as well.
  I urge all of my colleagues to vote against this partisan attempt to 
overturn much-needed reform and modernization of the Community 
Reinvestment Act, and I am hopeful that we are going to be able to come 
together and work on true, meaningful, actual reform in the long run.
  Ms. WATERS. Madam Speaker, I yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from 
Washington (Mr. Heck), a senior member of the Financial Services 
Committee.
  Mr. HECK. Madam Speaker, I thank the chairwoman for introducing this 
important measure, of which I am a proud cosponsor.
  This resolution is especially timely as we reckon with the legacy of 
discrimination in our country. In that process, we must consider how 
housing policy has contributed to systemic inequality.
  For decades in this country, we allowed a Federal agency to 
legitimize racial discrimination by creating those color-coded maps 
indicating where investments would be profitable, ``greenlined,'' or 
where it would not be, ``redlined.''
  We built institutional obstacles for Black families trying to 
purchase a home, and that resulted in devastating, intergenerational 
financial disadvantages.
  Redlining prevented access to the single most important wealth-
building tool an American has access to, that is, owning a home. The 
result? Black families have a median net worth of $17,000, compared to 
$171,000 for White families. In fact, homeownership by Black families 
is 44 percent, and by White families, 74 percent.
  We have a responsibility to do everything we can to correct this. 
After all, we created it.
  Yet, in the middle of a pandemic that has made racial disparities all 
the more pronounced, the OCC rushed out a final rule that undermined 
the legislation that made redlining illegal, and they even did it 
without the support of the Federal Reserve or FDIC.
  The OCC's vague definitions and overly simplistic metrics do not do 
justice to what a crucial role homeownership and housing policy have 
played in racial inequality.
  Their approach takes us backward. If you don't want to go backward, 
vote ``yes'' on this measure. If you believe homeownership should be 
available to all Americans, regardless of skin color, vote ``yes'' on 
this matter. If you oppose redlining, vote ``yes'' on this measure. If 
you want to stand for racial justice, vote ``yes'' on this measure.
  Mr. McHENRY. Madam Speaker, I would just note for the Record that the 
FDIC approved just this week this rule, the CRA, so that is, in fact, 
they actually support this underlying rule.
  Madam Speaker, I yield 4 minutes to the gentleman from Little Rock, 
Arkansas (Mr. Hill), my colleague and friend, the ranking member of the 
National Security, International Development and Monetary Policy 
Subcommittee.
  Mr. HILL of Arkansas. Madam Speaker, I thank the ranking member for 
the time.
  Madam Speaker, I rise today in opposition to H.J. Res. 90, but I rise 
in support of the Community Reinvestment Act. And I rise in support of 
the goal of CRA, for a fair and more equitable treatment of financial 
investment, particularly in low- and moderate-income areas of our 
communities.
  This resolution overturns the updated Community Reinvestment Act 
regulation before it has even had a chance to take effect.
  Speaking purely from a procedural standpoint, this resolution, in my 
view, Madam Speaker, is not necessary. We could be spending time on the 
House floor today in a much more productive way to advance the economy.
  The Office of the Comptroller of the Currency has gone through a 
rigorous Administrative Procedure Act process. I think our constituents 
should know they have conducted outreach since 2017, 3 years, and have 
taken all that into consideration, the Federal Reserve data, Treasury 
recommendations, and have conducted both advanced notice for proposed 
rulemaking and a notice of proposed rulemaking, and received 7,500 
comments.
  The final rule ended up incorporating much of this serious and 
constructive criticism received from all stakeholders, notably, our 
community groups.
  Banks have been complying with the Community Reinvestment Act for 
years. This is not a new rule, Madam Speaker. This rule is simply being 
updated to reflect the current economic and banking conditions in our 
country. The last time that was updated was 1995.
  Working for a publicly traded bank in Arkansas then, I was involved 
in the training and the implementation at that bank for those 1995 
revisions.
  Madam Speaker, as one of the few Members of Congress who has actually 
gone through multiple CRA examinations, I can assure my colleagues that 
this rule could benefit from a thoughtful update.
  The final rule clarifies what counts for CRA credit. It updates what 
bank activity counts for CRA credit. It evaluates the CRA performance 
of our financial institutions in a much more fair, open manner. It 
makes CRA reporting more transparent and faster. It reflects the 
fintech community of digital banking in our country today. And it 
enhances CRA for rural areas and Tribal areas in our country.

  In short, the bank branch issue that the ranking member mentioned is 
serious. We have had a shrinking number

[[Page H2575]]

of banks since the original rule was proposed in 1977, and the CRA rule 
was connected to those bank branches. That is another reason for 
modernizing the rule.
  Since we created this bank branch closure system by our economy 
contracting the number of banks, due to regulation and the like, it is 
a double whammy, so let's make sure that our banks can get credit for 
doing a good job on accessing of all of our communities, particularly 
our minority, low-to-moderate income, and rural areas served by those 
institutions.
  Let's fix this problem by having the certainty that we have an 
effective CRA rule, that it is implemented properly, and that we can 
all see our constituencies benefited by that.
  Let's let the Comptroller of the Currency do their job. They are the 
banking experts. They are the ones who have been managing this work. 
Congress should not be undermining it.
  Madam Speaker, I thank the chairman for the time, and I urge my 
colleagues to vote ``no'' on the resolution but support the work of the 
Community Reinvestment Act.
  Ms. WATERS. Madam Speaker, I yield 2 minutes to the gentlewoman from 
Massachusetts (Ms. Pressley), a member of the Financial Services 
Committee.
  Ms. PRESSLEY. Madam Speaker, I rise today in support of this critical 
resolution reversing a rule tainted by conflicts of interest and 
callous disregard for the communities most affected.
  As hundreds of thousands take to the streets, as the cries for a 
reckoning with this Nation's past and present grow louder, this 
administration believes that the future is further deregulation.
  Today, we reject the administration's position that it is banks that 
are deserving of our time and sympathy as further relief funding is 
denied to millions of struggling families.
  There is no separating the history of banking from the history of 
racism in this country. Wall Street, our Nation's financial capital, is 
named after a structure erected by enslaved people and then served as a 
site where they were bought and sold.
  Today, we have predatory lenders set up in Black communities, where 
systems of oppression ensure a steady stream of customers, communities 
that banks have decided are simply not worth their time or their 
business.
  The Community Reinvestment Act reflects, and is a direct response to 
this history, and aims to reverse course.
  I urge all of my colleagues to acknowledge the decades of divestment 
from our communities and to support this crucial civil rights 
legislation.
  Mr. McHENRY. Madam Speaker, I yield 4 minutes to the gentleman from 
Janesville, Wisconsin (Mr. Steil).
  Mr. STEIL. Madam Speaker, I rise today in opposition to the 
resolution of disapproval.
  The Community Reinvestment Act is an important law that encourages 
investments in places like Racine, Kenosha, and Janesville, and 
communities in need across this country. But the rulings governing the 
CRA haven't been updated since 1995.
  In the last 25 years, the banking industry has undergone significant 
changes. Small and medium-sized banks have consolidated and closed. 
Branches have disappeared from some rural and low-income areas. 
Technology has drastically affected the way millions of Americans are 
conducting their banking.
  The CRA needs to be updated to fit the banking system we have today 
and to meet the needs of the communities in 2020. That is exactly what 
the OCC is trying to do with the new rule.
  The new CRA rule provides financial institutions with greater clarity 
about which activities count for CRA credit and where that activity 
needs to take place. It also takes into account the reality that many 
banking activities are conducted online by giving banks that are 
largely digital credit for investing in areas where they take deposits.
  By implementing consistent, objective metrics, the new CRA rule also 
makes it easier for examiners to measure the performance and to compare 
institutions. This resolution of disapproval would block all that 
progress, to the detriment of communities in need.
  I urge my colleagues to vote ``no'' on this resolution.
  Ms. WATERS. Madam Speaker, I yield 2 minutes to the gentlewoman from 
New York (Ms. Ocasio-Cortez), who is also a member of the Financial 
Services Committee.
  Ms. OCASIO-CORTEZ. Madam Speaker, I thank Chairwoman Waters for her 
continued leadership on the Community Reinvestment Act.
  Over the last several weeks, our Nation has been gripped by the 
uprisings against anti-Black racism and systemic racial injustice 
across the United States. But there is a difference between saying that 
we believe in the inherent dignity, equality, and value of our Black 
brothers and sisters and actually committing to it. The Community 
Reinvestment Act is one such commitment.
  Our Nation has an unconscionable racial wealth gap that is directly 
rooted in the racist financial practice of redlining, whereby Black 
communities had red lines drawn around them on a map and were 
systematically denied banking, housing, and economic opportunities.
  As a result, generations of White communities were given a head start 
at homeownership, which was the foundation of generational wealth, 
while Black communities were denied.
  This fuels a runaway generational wealth gap that haunts the United 
States today. It is a practice that continues, with over 60 metro 
areas, in this very moment, having banks that deny Black applicants at 
significantly higher rates than they do White applicants.
  Now, the CRA is an antiracist, antipoverty policy that seeks to 
remedy some of the damage done.

  Yet, while this administration and the Republican Party paid lip 
service to Black and Brown communities with toothless policing 
legislation, behind everyone's back, the OCC made moves to gut rules 
around the CRA and advance the continued economic oppression of Black 
people in the United States. In fact, these rule changes advance 
gentrification and value luxury housing over investment in Black lives.
  Well, to that move, we have four words: Not on our watch. That is 
because, in this House, in the 116th House, under the leadership of 
Chairwoman Waters, we will value Black lives.
  Mr. McHENRY. Madam Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.
  Ms. WATERS. Madam Speaker, I yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from 
Illinois (Mr. Garcia), a member of the Financial Services Committee.

                              {time}  1700

  Mr. GARCIA of Illinois. Madam Speaker, I thank Chairwoman Waters for 
this opportunity.
  I rise in support of this resolution and join my colleagues in 
opposition to the Trump administration's new rule that weakens 
implementation of the Community Reinvestment Act.
  It is an outrage that the Trump administration's OCC issued this rule 
that guts a historic law in the midst of an unprecedented pandemic.
  To add insult to injury, former Chairman Otting resigned his post 
immediately after issuing the rule so that he will avoid cleaning up 
the fallout from this mess. It is up to Congress to clean it up, and 
that is what we are seeking to do.
  The Community Reinvestment Act was enacted more than 40 years ago and 
has been one of our most powerful tools against redlining and the 
perpetration of systemic racism and poverty.
  Like so much of our country's history, the story of the CRA runs 
through Chicago, where a local community organizer in the Austin 
neighborhood, Gale Cincotta, led the fight against discriminatory 
housing injustice and earned the nickname ``Mother of the CRA.'' 
Through her work with her neighborhood association and National 
People's Action, Cincotta fought against redlining and disinvestment 
from our communities using some of the innovative and confrontational 
tactics that we recognize in today's protest movements.
  My district is a working-class immigrant district, and Gale Cincotta 
and organizers like her across the country fought to pass the CRA so 
that communities like mine would not be left behind by financial 
institutions.
  The OCC's rule allows lenders to count activities that have nothing 
to

[[Page H2576]]

do with improving our neighborhoods toward their requirements to serve 
low- and moderate-income communities, decrease transparency, and make 
it even harder to hold these institutions accountable. That is why we 
oppose it.
  Mr. McHENRY. Madam Speaker, I am prepared to close.
  May I inquire if there are further speakers on the majority side.
  Ms. WATERS. Madam Speaker, I have additional speakers.
  Mr. McHENRY. Madam Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.
  Ms. WATERS. Madam Speaker, I yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from 
Florida (Mr. Crist), who is a member of the Appropriations Committee.
  Mr. CRIST. Madam Speaker, I would like to take this opportunity to 
thank Chairwoman Waters for promoting access to capital for minority 
borrowers.
  Since the murder of George Floyd, our Nation has embarked on a true, 
broad-based push to defeat institutional racism. America is coming to 
realize that racism did not end with emancipation, and it did not end 
with civil rights. It is still very much with us all today.
  So, as we commit ourselves to Black Lives Matter, we need to also 
ensure Black communities matter, Black homeownership matters, Black 
wealth matters, and Black businesses matter.
  My hometown of south St. Petersburg, Florida, is blessed by a large 
and vibrant Black community where, despite their strength, pride, 
character, and entrepreneurial spirit, we are still working to overcome 
institutional racism. Underinvestment in the community, food deserts, 
and redlining exist.
  This past weekend, I witnessed the unveiling of the Black Lives 
Matter mural in front of the Dr. Carter G. Woodson African American 
Museum. It is right near one of my favorite restaurants on the south 
side, Chief's Creole Cafe.
  While the art moved me beyond words, reality quickly set in. The 
owners of Chief's Creole, the Brayboys, were told by their bank that 
they couldn't get a PPP loan, not because they didn't qualify, but 
because the big banks are leaving behind the smallest businesses, 
businesses overrepresented by Black, women, and veteran owners.
  If the banks aren't making PPP loans to Black-owned businesses when 
they don't have skin in the game, how can we trust them to do the right 
thing when it is their own money at risk?
  That is why the Community Reinvestment Act is so vitally important. 
That is why we need it to work for the communities it was actually 
designed to serve.
  The OCC got it wrong. Vote ``yes'' to repeal the rule.
  Mr. McHENRY. Madam Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.
  Ms. WATERS. Madam Speaker, if Mr. McHenry has no more speakers, I am 
prepared to close.
  Mr. McHENRY. Madam Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may 
consume.
  So, in closing, the Community Reinvestment Act, we agree, is an 
important law that is intended to support underserved communities 
across America. Maintaining the status quo also ignores the innovation 
and the needs of our community.
  The innovations taking place to financial services and to banking 
over the last 25 years need to be addressed, but also the fact that we 
are not actually meeting the needs desperately needed in communities 
around our district, both the urban and rural.
  The new regulations will increase investment and capital in 
communities and provide more clarity and transparency to all parties 
involved in the process. That is why it is a good update.
  As we work to ensure a strong economic recovery for all Americans, it 
is critical we encourage financial institutions to continue to provide 
services for those most in need. The OCC's final rule will play an 
important role in this recovery effort by encouraging more capital, 
investment, and lending services in the communities hardest hid by 
COVID-19. That is good.
  The OCC took a very thoughtful approach, embracing input from other 
agencies and stakeholders over the course of several years. The final 
rule builds in nearly all of the constructive criticism the agency has 
received through the open comment process. In fact, this shows the 
agency is willing to compromise but not willing to settle for the 
status quo.
  The OCC's modernization of the CRA regulation is a long overdue 
update that will help our communities come into the 21st century 
stronger and healthier. The last time these regulations were revised 
was in 1995, when banking received most of their deposits through 
branches, and as such, the old regulations that are on the books still 
rely heavily on branch locations.

  Quite frankly, what we have seen over the last 100 days in America is 
that branches are less vital than they were in previous generations, 
because most of these branches have been shut down in our States 
because our States are trying to do the right thing to address this 
health crisis. That is why we are wearing masks, that is why we are 
social distancing, and that is why we are trying to be responsible to 
one another and be thoughtful in our approach to one another.
  But, unfortunately, this bill before us is a very straightforward up-
and-down. I will say let's not support the status quo. Let's support 
innovation and an update to our regulation to meet the needs of our 
communities and to meet the needs that are so desperately needed both 
in the rural communities and the urban communities in America.
  Vote against this resolution and support the underlying rule.
  Madam Speaker, I yield back the balance of my time.
  Ms. WATERS. Madam Speaker, may I inquire as to how much time is 
remaining.
  The SPEAKER pro tempore. The gentlewoman from California has 8\1/2\ 
minutes remaining.
  Ms. WATERS. Madam Speaker, before I move into my closing, I would 
like to correct Mr. McHenry, who said the FDIC approved the OCC CRA 
rule this week. That is not correct. My staff just called the FDIC to 
confirm that they did not approve the rule.
  Mr. McHENRY. Will the gentlewoman yield?
  Ms. WATERS. I yield to the gentleman from North Carolina.
  Mr. McHENRY. I misspoke. I said they supported the CRA.
  Ms. WATERS. Madam Speaker, I yield myself the balance of my time.
  Madam Speaker, I include in the Record multiple letters from dozens 
of consumers, community and civil rights groups in support of H.J. Res. 
90.
         Chief Counsel's Office, Office of the Comptroller of the 
           Currency,
                                                   Washington, DC.
     Attention: Comment Processing

       We are writing to oppose the Federal Deposit Insurance 
     Corporation (FDIC) and the Office of Comptroller of the 
     Currency's (OCC) proposed changes that would seriously weaken 
     the Community Reinvestment Act (CRA) The U.S. Conference of 
     Mayors has strong policy supporting the CRA. The law was 
     passed in 1977 to end redlining, and to meet the credit needs 
     of communities where banks do business. Discrimination in 
     lending still exists.
       But the FDIC and OCC proposed changes would make the banks 
     less accountable to their communities through complex and 
     confusing performance measures on CRA exams while 
     oversimplifying how bank's performances to local needs are 
     measured. Moreover, public input into the process will be 
     difficult and limited. This will result in significantly 
     fewer loans, investments and services to communities most in 
     need of more credit and capital.
       The CRA has been of enormous benefit to low- and -moderate 
     income Americans. For example, since 1996, CRA-covered banks 
     issued more than 27 million small business loans in low-and 
     moderate-income tracts, totaling $1.093 trillion, and $1.076 
     trillion in community development loans that support 
     affordable housing and economic development projects 
     benefitting low-and moderate-income communities.
       While such results are very good, the proposed rule will 
     make it all but impossible to continue such impressive 
     results. Moreover, much more can be achieved by regulations 
     that modernize the CRA to take into account changes in the 
     banking industry and the economy. For example, independent 
     mortgage companies not covered by CRA make more than 50 
     percent of the home mortgages in our nation. If anything, the 
     CRA should be strengthened to reflect changing demographics 
     and changes in the financial industry, and not weaken the CRA 
     as the proposed rule would do. We strongly encourage you to 
     reconsider a proposed rule, and look to modernizing CRA that 
     will truly benefit low and moderate income citizens.
           Sincerely,
       Justin Wilson, Alexandria, VA; Satya Rhodes-Conway, 
     Madison, WI; Alan L. Nagy, Newark, CA; Alan Webber, Santa Fe, 
     NM; Sam Weaver, Boulder, CO; Carlo DeMaria Jr., Everett, MA; 
     Robert Garcia, Long Beach, CA; Steve Benjamin, Columbia, SC; 
     Jerome A. Prince, Gary, IN; Brian C. Wahler, Piscataway, NJ; 
     Gregory J. Oravec, Port St.

[[Page H2577]]

     Lucie, FL; Steve Adler, Austin, TX; Robert Donchez, 
     Bethlehem, PA; Jack W. Bradley, Lorain, OH; David J. Berger, 
     Lima, OH; Scott Conger, Jackson, TN; Joe Coviello, Cape 
     Coral, FL; Denny Doyle, Beaverton, OR; Hillary Schieve, Reno, 
     NV; Trey Mendez, Brownsville, TX; Patrick J. Furey, Torrance, 
     CA; Marcia A. Leclerc, East Hartford, CT; Jesse Arreguin, 
     Berkeley, CA; Jim Kenney, Philadelphia, PA; Nan Whaley, 
     Dayton, OH; Christopher L. Cabaldon, West Sacramento, CA; 
     Martin J. Walsh, Boston, MA; Allan Ekberg, Tukwila, WA; Jorge 
     O. Elorza, Providence, RI; Juan Carlos Bermudez, Doral, FL; 
     Frank C. Ortis, Pembroke Pines, FL; Bryan K. Barnett, 
     Rochester Hills, MI; Jacob Frey, Minneapolis, MN; Ron 
     Nirenberg, San Antonio, TX; Joy Cooper, Hallandale Beach, FL; 
     Lyda Krewson, St. Louis, MO; Steve Schewel, Durham, NC; John 
     Giles, Mesa, AZ; James B. Hovland, Edina, MN; Nathan 
     Blackwell, St. Cloud, FL; Hazelle Rogers, Lauderdale Lakes, 
     FL; Eric Johnson, Dallas, TX; Mark W. Mitchell, Tempe, AZ; 
     Tom Dailly, Schaumburg, IL; Andy Berke, Chattanooga, TN; 
     Pauline Russo Cutter, San Leandro, CA; Steve Gawron, 
     Muskegon, MI; William Peduto, Pittsburgh, PA; Lioneld Jordan, 
     Fayetteville, AR; Muriel Bowser, Washington, DC; Regina 
     Romero, Tucson, AZ; Geoff Kors, Palm Springs, CA; Acquanetta 
     Warren, Fontana, CA; Michael B. Hancock, Denver, CO; Mike 
     Duggan, Detroit, MI; Leirion Gaylor Baird, Lincoln, NE; 
     Keisha Lance Bottoms, Atlanta, GA; Greg Fischer, Louisville, 
     KY; Victoria Woodards, Tacoma, WA; Tim Keller, Albuquerque, 
     NM; Patrick L. Wojahn, College Park, MD; Louis `Woody' L. 
     Brown, Largo, FL; Ted Wheeler, Portland, OR; Erin J. 
     Mendenhall, Salt Lake City, UT; Daniel J. Stermer, Weston, 
     FL; John Cranley, Cincinnati, OH; Lori E. Lightfoot, Chicago, 
     IL; Carolyn G. Goodman, Las Vegas, NV; Christina Muryn, 
     Findlay, OH; James Allen Joines, Winston-Salem, NC; Sam 
     Liccardo, San Jose, CA; Jon Mitchell, New Bedford, MA; Robert 
     Restaino, Niagara Falls, NY; Chris Koos, Normal, IL; Lily 
     Mei, Fremont, CA; Bridget Donnell Newton, Rockville, MD; 
     Jeffrey Z. Slavin, Somerset, MD; Bernard `Jack' C. Young, 
     Baltimore, MD; Kenneth D. Miyagishima, Las Cruces, NM; Carol 
     Dutra-Vernaci, Union City, CA; Mary Casillas Salas, Chula 
     Vista, CA; Lucy K. Vinis, Eugene, OR; Thomas `Tom' C. Henry, 
     Fort Wayne, IN; Debra March, Henderson, NV; Andrew J. 
     Ginther, Columbus, OH; Kevin McKeown, Santa Monica, CA; Anne 
     McEnerny-Ogle, Vancouver, WA; Michael Vandersteen, Sheboygan, 
     WI; David Anderson, Kalamazoo, MI; Melvin Carter, St. Paul, 
     MN; Ashira Mohammed, Pembroke Park, FL; Amy Bublak, Turlock, 
     CA; Daniel Rivera; Lawrence, MA; William `Bill' Edwards, 
     South Fulton, GA; Richard C. David, Binghamton, NY; Katrina 
     Foley, Costa Mesa, CA; Shari Cantor, West Hartford, CT; Rex 
     Hardin, Pompano Beach, FL; Tracy Johnson, Lockington, OH.
                                  ____



                            California Reinvestment Coalition,

                                                    June 23, 2020.


                 CRC and CA Groups Support H.J. Res. 90

       Dear Speaker Pelosi, The California Reinvestment Coalition 
     (CRC) and our member organizations and allies write in strong 
     support of H.J. Res. 90, the Congressional Review Act 
     Resolution to reverse the harmful rule recently finalized by 
     the Office of the Comptroller of the Currency (OCC) which 
     would gut the Community Reinvestment Act (CRA). Please find 
     following a letter from over sixty (60) California based and 
     California servicing organizations in support of the 
     Resolution.
       The California Reinvestment Coalition builds an inclusive 
     and fair economy that meets the needs of communities of color 
     and low-income communities by ensuring that banks and other 
     corporations invest and conduct business in our communities 
     in a just and equitable manner.
       The CRA is a critical piece of civil rights legislation 
     that has worked to fight historic and continuing redlining 
     practices, and to bring much needed lending and investment 
     into low-income communities of color. The CRA encourages 
     banks to help meet local community credit needs by creating 
     opportunities for homeownership, small business ownership, 
     job creation, financial capability, and affordable housing 
     and community development in neighborhoods that have been 
     otherwise excluded from the financial mainstream and the 
     American dream.
       The OCC's harmful rule will reverse these gains by 
     substantially lowering the bar and enabling banks to get 
     passing grades through activities that are further and 
     further removed from low-income communities, homeowners, 
     tenants and small businesses. The OCC takes this damaging 
     action during a pandemic that has had a disproportionate 
     impact on the very communities meant to benefit from CRA.
       We urge all members of Congress to co-sponsor and vote in 
     favor of this important resolution. Defending civil rights 
     and protecting communities ravaged by redlining and systemic 
     racism has never been more important.
       Thank you for your concern regarding these issues and your 
     consideration of our views.
           Very Truly Yours,
                                                      Kevin Stein,
                                                  Deputy Director.
       Abundant Housing LA, AnewAmerica Community Corporation, 
     Asian Pacific Islander Small Business Program, ASIAN, Inc., 
     CAARMA Consumer Advocates Against Reverse Mortgage Abuse, 
     Cabrillo Economic Development Corporation, California Capital 
     Financial Development Corporation, California Coalition for 
     Rural Housing, California Housing Partnership, California 
     Reinvestment Coalition, California Resources and Training, 
     CAMEO--California Association for Micro Enterprise 
     Opportunity, CCEDA, CDC Small Business Finance, Center for 
     Responsible Lending, CHOC, City Heights Community Development 
     Corp, City of Livingston, Coachella Valley Housing Coalition, 
     Coalition for Economic Survival (CES), Community Housing 
     Development Corporation, Community Economics, Consumers for 
     Auto Reliability and Safety, East Bay Asian Local Development 
     Corporation, East Bay Housing Organizations (EBHO), Fair 
     Housing Advocates of Northern California, Faith and Community 
     Empowerment (formerly KCCD), Family Financial Well-Being 
     Collaborative--Ventura County CA, Fresno CDFI dba Access Plus 
     Capital, Home Preservation and Prevention Inc DBA HPP Cares, 
     Housing Rights Center, LA Forward, Law Foundation of Silicon 
     Valley, Los Angeles LDC, Main Street Launch, Merritt 
     Community Capital Corporation, Mission Asset Fund (MAF), 
     Mission Economic Development Agency (MEDA), Multicultural 
     Real Estate Alliance for Urban Change, MyPath, Neighborhood 
     Housing Services of Los Angeles County, NeighborWorks Orange 
     County, Non-Profit Housing Association of Northern California 
     (NPH), Opportunity Fund, Oxnard Housing Authority, Pahali 
     Community Land Trust, Public Counsel, Public Good Law Center, 
     Public Law Center, Reinvent South Stockton Coalition, 
     Renaissance Entrepreneurship Center, Sacramento Housing 
     Alliance, Sacramento Housing and Redevelopment Agency, Self-
     Help Federal Credit Union, Spanish Speaking Unity Council of 
     Alameda County, Inc., Strategic Actions for a Just Economy 
     (SAJE), Tenderloin Neighborhood Development Co, The Fair 
     Housing Council of San Diego, The Public Interest Law 
     Project, Ventura County Community Development Corporation, 
     Western Center on Law & Poverty, Women's Economic Ventures, 
     Working Solutions, Maria Benjamin (Deputy Dir, San Francisco 
     Mayor's Office of Housing and Community Development), Nick 
     Cortez (Chair, California Progressive Alliance), Mark Moulton 
     (Vice Chair, EPA CAN DO).
                                  ____

         The Leadership Conference and National Community 
           Reinvestment Coalition,
                                                    June 23, 2020.
     Hon. Nancy Pelosi,
     Speaker of the House, House of Representatives, Washington, 
         DC.
       Dear Speaker Pelosi: We, the undersigned organizations, 
     write to express our strong support for H.J. Res. 90, a 
     Congressional Review Act resolution of disapproval that will 
     nullify a rulemaking by the Office of the Comptroller of the 
     Currency (OCC) that, if allowed to stand, would drastically 
     undermine one of our nation's most important civil rights 
     laws, the Community Reinvestment Act of 1977 (the CRA).
       Enacted in 1977, the Community Reinvestment Act (CRA) has 
     been vital in fighting redlining, a practice that 
     systematically--and for decades, as a matter of federal 
     policy--shut neighborhoods of color and lower-income 
     communities out from home loans and other essential financial 
     services. The CRA requires banks to undertake reasonable 
     efforts to lend to and invest in all of the neighborhoods in 
     areas where they do business. The law has helped to spur 
     increased investments in formerly-redlined communities. It 
     did not, however, prevent non-bank lenders (who are not 
     subject to the CRA) from flooding communities of color with 
     toxic subprime mortgages in the years before the 2008 crisis; 
     and research shows that racial disparities in lending--which 
     cannot be explained away by differences in credit scores--
     persist to this day.
       It is clear that the CRA needs to be modernized and 
     strengthened in order to fulfill its original purpose. But in 
     January, the OCC and the Federal Deposit Insurance 
     Corporation (FDIC) published a Notice of Proposed Rulemaking 
     (NPRM) that would instead significantly weaken the CRA. The 
     agencies proposed new overly simplistic metrics system that 
     would make it far easier for banks to pass their CRA exams by 
     making large investments in communities where they can reap 
     the largest rewards, rather than carefully-targeted, smaller 
     investments in underserved consumers and neighborhoods.
       Even before the NPRM was published, a wide range of 
     stakeholders weighed in with both the OCC and FDIC to raise 
     concerns and to ask for more data justifying the changes. 
     Those concerns were not addressed, and the data was never 
     released. By the time the NPRM was published, the United 
     States and the world were just beginning to learn about the 
     growing threat posed by a dangerous new respiratory virus. In 
     the coming weeks, it became clear that the virus had not been 
     contained, and it spread rapidly to multiple countries 
     including the United States. As stakeholders and the public 
     began devoting more and more resources and attention to the 
     health, social, and economic fallout of the growing pandemic, 
     and many urged the OCC and FDIC to temporarily suspend 
     rulemaking not related to COVID-19, the agencies continued 
     plowing ahead, only agreeing to a one-month extension for 
     comments.
       In the days before the deadline for comments on the rule, 
     it had become clear that COVID-19 was proving fatal to 
     communities

[[Page H2578]]

     of color--the very communities the CRA was intended to help--
     at a rate several times higher than the population at large; 
     the U.S. Surgeon General warned the public to prepare for 
     ``our 9/11 moment,'' and models predicted 100,000 or more 
     deaths in the United States alone. Only 41 days after the 
     comment period ended, and even though only a minority of 
     commenters voiced support for the new framework, the OCC 
     rushed through a final rule that left it largely intact. The 
     FDIC, to its credit, declined to finalize its version of the 
     rule at this time.
       In the weeks since the OCC finalized its rule, our nation 
     has been facing a long-overdue reckoning with our troubled 
     legacy of racial and ethnic discrimination. While much of the 
     conversation has rightly been focused on police brutality and 
     the impact of over-policing in communities of color, this 
     conversation is inexorably tied to the lasting economic, 
     social, and legal legacy of redlining and other forms of 
     racial discrimination.
       We will not succeed in addressing issues surrounding law 
     enforcement in communities of color without also addressing 
     decades of underinvestment in housing, employment, education, 
     health care, transportation, and other factors that, to this 
     day, have contributed to the longstanding disparities that 
     are once again coming to light. Now is certainly not the time 
     to weaken the most important civil rights laws we have at our 
     disposal to correct those disparities.
       As such, we urge Congress to support H.J. Res. 90, to 
     overturn the OCC's regulatory attack on the Community 
     Reinvestment Act. Thank you for your consideration.
           Sincerely
       Alianza Nacional de Campesinas, Americans for Financial 
     Reform, Color of Change, Consortium for Citizens with 
     Disabilities Housing Task Force, Consumer Action, Equality 
     California, Impact Fund, The Leadership Conference on Civil 
     and Human Rights, Matthew Shepard Foundation, National 
     Association for Latino Community Asset Builders (NALCAB), 
     National Association of Consumer Advocates, National 
     Community Reinvestment Coalition, National Community 
     Stabilization Trust, The National Council of Asian Pacific 
     Americans (NCAPA), National LGBTQ Task Force Action Fund, 
     National Urban League, Prosperity Now, Woodstock Institute.
                                  ____

                                                    June 23, 2020.


                                     House of Representatives,

     U.S. Capitol,
     Washington, DC.
       Dear Representative: The Center for Responsible Lending 
     writes to express our strong support for H.J. Res. 90, a 
     Congressional Review Act resolution of disapproval that will 
     invalidate the Office of the Comptroller of the Currency 
     (OCC) final rule on the Community Reinvestment Act.
       The Community Reinvestment Act of 1977 (CRA) was one in a 
     series of landmark civil rights legislation and is a critical 
     tool to help our nation work toward overcoming the legacy of 
     redlining. Today's racial wealth gap and lending disparities 
     are in large part the result of decades of government 
     policies and practices that enabled the redlining of 
     communities of color for most of the 20th century. In the 
     post-Depression era, federal policies that created housing 
     opportunities for returning veterans and their families 
     explicitly excluded people of color from the benefits of 
     government-supported housing programs. Among these programs 
     were public housing, the Home Owners' Loan Corporation 
     (HOLC), and mortgage insurance through the Federal Housing 
     Administration (FHA). Not only did this redlining segregate 
     residential neighborhoods across the United States, but it 
     granted whites the ability to build wealth through 
     homeownership while denying equal opportunities for families 
     of color to build similar home equity over the same period. 
     The inequities that result from these discriminatory programs 
     are part of the injustices that today's people led protests 
     are demanding are addressed.
       The CRA imposes continuing and affirmative obligations on 
     banks to help meet the credit needs of the local communities 
     in which they are chartered and continues to be an important 
     tool for fostering access to credit for these communities 
     today. The law has urged banks to more actively lend in LMI 
     areas; it has also played a key role in ensuring bank 
     participation in community revitalization efforts across the 
     country.
       Despite the importance of CRA and the community investment 
     it has spurred, CRA rules must be strengthened. The CRA as 
     applied has not done nearly enough to revitalize previously 
     redlined areas and has not made a substantial dent in the 
     lagging homeownership rate for people of color. The white 
     homeownership rate is 73.7% while the rate is 44% and 48.9% 
     for Black and Latino borrowers respectively. Additionally, 
     bank lending in LMI communities and communities of color has 
     declined dramatically since the Great Recession. And existing 
     disparities will be further perpetuated in the face of the 
     COVID-19 global public health and economic crisis.
       Unfortunately, the OCC decided to act unilaterally--without 
     the Federal Reserve and Federal Deposit Insurance 
     Corporation--to issue a structurally flawed final rule that 
     weakens the CRA and will harm low- and moderate-communities 
     and communities of color. Rather than postpone rulemaking to 
     focus on the devastating economic crisis caused by the COVID-
     19 health pandemic, the OCC issued the rule a mere six weeks 
     after the closing of the comment period on its proposed rule 
     despite broad requests for delay from community groups, civil 
     rights and consumer organizations, and industry. The OCC 
     acknowledged in the preamble to the final rule that most of 
     the comments disagreed with the proposal's approach. Yet, the 
     OCC decided to side with the minority of comments in support 
     of the proposed rule. The OCC's rule will harm the 
     communities most adversely affected by the current crisis, 
     including many families that were hardest hit by the Great 
     Recession and have yet to recover.
       The final rule imposes an overly simplistic evaluation 
     measure that fails to ensure that local banking needs are 
     met, and sanctions bank redlining. The rule overvalues the 
     dollar amount of CRA activities in comparison to the quality 
     of such activities and allows banks to earn more credit for 
     easier and larger investments in communities from which they 
     can get the highest return. Indeed, the rule permits banks to 
     ignore 20% of their assessment areas and still pass, 
     resulting in unchecked neighborhood disinvestment and 
     redlining. The rule also disincentives investment in LMI 
     neighborhoods and communities of color. It incentivizes 
     activities and investments that do not ``primarily'' benefit 
     LMI communities, such as large-scale infrastructure projects. 
     Estimating such projects' impact on LMI neighborhoods is 
     difficult and thus will likely divest funds away from smaller 
     scale, yet impactful community development activities. 
     Furthermore, the rule reduces the importance of retail 
     lending and retail services, resulting in less lending and 
     investments in communities that are already credit starved. 
     The rule is opposite to the CRA's statutory mission and will 
     cause deep harm to communities.
       We urge support for H.J. Res. 90 to reverse the OCC's 
     regulatory attack on the Community Reinvestment Act. Thank 
     you for your consideration.
           Sincerely,
                                   Center for Responsible Lending.
  Ms. WATERS. Madam Speaker, I would like to close by thanking 
Representative Meeks for his leadership on this issue. I appreciate the 
support we have received from our colleagues in this effort.
  Make no mistake, unchecked, the OCC's final rule will harm low- 
income and minority communities that are disproportionately suffering 
during this COVID-19 crisis, and it will turn the Community 
Reinvestment Act into the community disinvestment act.
  In passing this Congressional Review Act resolution, we are not only 
nullifying the OCC rule, but we are sending two clear messages: 
regulators should be focused on protecting the economy from the 
pandemic and not on removing safeguards, and that after the pandemic, 
the OCC should go back to the drawing board and work with the Federal 
Reserve and FDIC to jointly issue a new rule that strengthens the 
Community Reinvestment Act and helps low-and moderate-income 
communities, including communities of color.
  For over a month now, by the thousands, Americans have been marching 
in the streets for justice. They are standing up against racism and 
fighting for justice for all. Just yesterday, this House passed 
historic legislation to reform our Nation's police forces and the 
unfair treatment so many people of color have experienced at the hands 
of those meant to serve and protect.
  As we unite to fight against discrimination in our criminal justice 
system, we must also fight against discrimination, disinvestment, and 
injustice in our financial system and economic injustice in our 
communities. The OCC's rule would encourage disinvestment in 
communities of color and lead to redlining on a massive scale. We must 
stand up against this blatant effort to economically disenfranchise 
hundreds of low-income and minority communities nationwide.
  So I want to say to my Members on the opposite side of the aisle: I 
have heard this theme that you support the Community Reinvestment Act 
but you don't support my bill.
  I would say to the Members: You can't have it both ways.
  Madam Speaker, I ask for an ``aye'' vote on H.J. Res. 90, and I yield 
back the balance of my time.
  Mr. GREEN of Texas. Madam Speaker, I submit the following letters to 
be included in the debate on H.J. Res. 90. The following letters 
express support for H.J. Res. 90.
                                                National Community


                                       Reinvestment Coalition,

                                                    June 23, 2020.
     House of Representatives,
     U.S. Capitol,
     Washington, DC.
       Dear Representative: On behalf of the undersigned 
     organizations, we are writing to urge you to cosponsor and 
     support H.J. Res.

[[Page H2579]]

     90, a disapproval resolution that would overturn a poorly 
     constructed rule change on the Community Reinvestment Act 
     (CRA) hastily finalized in May, days before Comptroller 
     Otting's resignation from the agency, and published this 
     month.
       At the outset, it is critical to note that the Trump 
     Administration is split on the CRA final rule. With a lack of 
     interagency coordination among the nation's bank regulators, 
     different banks will be held to different reinvestment 
     standards depending on their regulator--an outcome that both 
     banks and advocates have cautioned against. Federal Reserve 
     Chairman Jerome Powell testified just last week that he 
     expects the agency to move forward with CRA updates intended 
     to garner ``broad support among the community of intended 
     beneficiaries'' something he considers to be ``one non-
     negotiable condition for it.'' The OCC's final rule achieved 
     no such support or consensus. The vast majority of public 
     comments--about 90 percent--opposed the CRA evaluation 
     measure and presumptive ratings framework that remains at the 
     heart of the final rule, but the OCC adopted it anyway.
       The OCC's final rule makes a series of changes to the CRA 
     regulatory framework that reduce incentives for banks to lend 
     to low-and-moderate income (LMI) families and invest and 
     serve LMI communities: home buyers and homeowners, small 
     businesses, community development projects that primarily 
     benefit and serve LMI people. It also expands the number of 
     banks that will have no review of how they open and close 
     bank branches and provide key bank services in LMI and 
     underserved neighborhoods.
       These harmful changes could not come at a worse time. The 
     ongoing COVID-19 pandemic and widespread social unrest that 
     is gripping the nation has hit LMI and communities of color 
     the hardest and brought gapping disparities to the forefront. 
     The changes to the CRA being pushed through by the OCC would 
     do little to address the pressing national priorities of 
     reducing the racial wealth gap, of better serving those 
     traditionally underserved by the nation's financial system or 
     stimulating an economic recovery from COVID-19 that is 
     equitable. While the OCC claims its aim is to increase CRA 
     activity, the lack of interagency agreement among this 
     Administration's regulators should serve as a dire warning 
     about that claim. We do not yet know the full impact of 
     COVID-19 on local mortgage markets, small business 
     resiliency, or how LMI households, neighborhoods, local jobs, 
     and key sectors will recover. Weakening CRA at this moment is 
     a blueprint for a crisis after the crisis.
       For all these reasons and more, we urge you to cosponsor 
     H.J. Res. 90 and support it when it is considered on the 
     House floor.
           Sincerely,


                            National Groups

       National Community Reinvestment Coalition (NCRC): AFL-CIO, 
     Americans for Financial Reform, Center for Community 
     Progress, Consumer Action, Local Initiatives Support 
     Corporation (LISC), NACEDA, National Association for Latino 
     Community Asset Builders (NALCAB), National Housing Resource 
     Center, National Housing Trust, National NeighborWorks 
     Association, National Urban League, Prosperity Now, The 
     Leadership Conference on Civil and Human Rights, UnidosUS.


                                Alabama

       Titusville Development Corporation.


                                Arizona

       Arizona Housing Coalition, Local First Arizona, Local First 
     Arizona Foundation.


                               California

       California Coalition for Rural Housing; California 
     Reinvestment Coalition; California Resources and Training; 
     CDC Small Business Finance; EAH Housing; Grounded Solutions 
     Network; High Impact Financial Analysis, LLC; Peoples' Self-
     Help Housing; The Greenlining Institute; VEDC.


                                Colorado

       Urban Land Conservancy.


                              Connecticut

       Neighborhood Housing Services of Waterbury.


                          District of Columbia

       Africa Diaspora Directorate.


                                Delaware

       Delaware Community Reinvestment Action Council, Inc.; 
     Edgemoor Revitalization Cooperative, Inc.; The Ministry of 
     Caring Inc.


                                Florida

       Affordable Homeownership Foundation, Inc.; Community 
     Reinvestment Alliance of South Florida; Goldenrule Housing & 
     Community Development Corp Inc; Metro North Community 
     Development Corp.; Solita's House.


                                 Hawaii

       Hawai`i Alliance for Community-Based Economic Development.


                                Illinois

       Accion Serving Illinois & Indiana; Chicago Community Loan 
     Fund; Chicago Rehab Network; Housing Action Illinois; NW 
     HomeStart, Inc.; Woodstock Institute.


                                Indiana

       Continuum of Care Network NWI, Inc.; HomesteadCS; Legacy 
     Foundation; Prosperity Indiana.


                                Kentucky

       River City Housing.


                               Louisiana

       Multi-Cultural Development Center.


                             Massachusetts

       Greater Boston Legal Services, Massachusetts Affordable 
     Housing Alliance.


                                Maryland

       African American Chamber of Commerce of Montgomery County, 
     Maryland Consumer Rights Coalition, Maryland Consumer Rights 
     Coalition, Rebirth Inc., Residential Housing Counseling 
     Agency.


                                 Maine

       Coastal Enterprises, Inc.


                                Michigan

       Fair Housing Center of Metropolitan Detroit, GenesisHOPE, 
     Habitat for Humanity of Michigan, Southwest Economic 
     Solutions.


                                Missouri

       Metropolitan St. Louis Equal Housing and Opportunity 
     Council.


                              Mississippi

       Hope Enterprise Corporation, Montgomery Citizens United for 
     Prosperity (MCUP).


                                Montana

       Montana Fair Housing, Inc.


                             North Carolina

       Reinvestment Partners.


                               New Jersey

       NCRC Housing Rehab Fund, LLC; New Jersey Association on 
     Correction; New Jersey Citizen Action; New Jersey Community 
     Capital.


                               New Mexico

       Southwest Neighborhood Housing Services.


                                New York

       Association for Neighborhood and Housing Development 
     (ANHD); Banana Kelly Community Improvement Association; 
     Beaulac Associates LLC; BOC Capital Corp. CDFI; Business 
     Outreach Center Network; Center for NYC Neighborhoods; Chhaya 
     Community Development Corporation; Community Capital New 
     York; Community Development Venture Capital Alliance; CNY 
     Fair Housing, Inc.; Community Loan Fund of the Capital 
     Region, Inc.; Fair Finance Watch; Fidelis Federal Credit 
     Union; Fifth Avenue Committee; Genesee Co-op FCU; Greater 
     Jamaica Development Corporation; Habitat for Humanity New 
     York City; Habitat NYC Community Fund; La Fuerza CDC; 
     Neighbors Helping Neighbors; NYS CDFI Coalition; Oswego 
     County Federal Credit Union; PathStone Enterprise Center, 
     Inc.; Renaissance Economic Development Corp.; The Knowledge 
     House; Three Jewels Outreach Center; University Neighborhood 
     Housing Program.


                                  Ohio

       Cleveland Neighborhood Progress; Columbus Compact dba 
     Columbus Empowerment Corp.; County Corp.; Homes on the Hill, 
     CDC; Ohio CDC Association; The Fair Housing Center for Rights 
     & Research; Working In Neighborhoods.


                                 Oregon

       Housing Oregon.


                              Pennsylvania

       Amani Christian Community Development; Beltzhoover 
     Consensus Group; Berks Latino Workforce Development 
     Corporation (BLWDC); Bloomfield-Garfield Corporation; Chester 
     Community Improvement Project; Fair Housing Rights Center in 
     Southeastern Pennsylvania; Good Bricks Ventures LLC; Hilltop 
     Alliance; Housing Committee; Jave Jive Coffee LLC; Mount 
     Washington Community Development Corporation; Northside 
     Leadership Conference; PHDA Pittsburgh Housing Development 
     Association, Inc.; Philadelphia Association of Community 
     Development Corporations; Pittsburgh Community Reinvestment 
     Group; Rising Tide Partners; Southwest CDC; The Enterprise 
     Center; Tube City Renaissance; Wilkinsburg Community 
     Development Corporation.


                              Rhode Island

       HousingWorks RI.


                                 Texas

       Our Casas Resident Council INC., Recon Foundation, Southern 
     Dallas Progress Community Development Corporation.


                                  Utah

       Rocky Mountain Community Reinvestment Corporation.


                               Washington

       Low Income Housing Institute.


                               Wisconsin

       Citizen Action of Wisconsin; Disability Justice; 
     Metropolitan Milwaukee Fair Housing Council; Movin' Out, 
     Inc.; United Community Center; Urban Economic Development 
     Association of Wisconsin (UEDA); Washington Park Housing 
     Comm; YWCA Southeast Wisconsin; Revitalize Milwaukee.
                                  ____



                                  National Housing Conference,

                                    Washington, DC, June 22, 2020.
     Hon. Nancy Pelosi,
     Speaker, House of Representatives,
     Washington, DC.
       Dear Speaker Pelosi: I am writing on behalf of the National 
     Housing Conference (NHC) to express our strong support for 
     H.J. Res. 90, the Congressional Review Act resolution of 
     disapproval of the Community Reinvestment Act (CRA) final 
     rule.
       The Office of the Comptroller of the Currency (OCC) has 
     issued its final CRA rule just six weeks after the end of the 
     comment period on the Notice of Proposed Rulemaking (NPR) and 
     amid the worst health and economic crisis of our lifetimes. 
     Implementation of this rule poses a material

[[Page H2580]]

     threat to our recovery from the COVID-19 recession and 
     undercuts the purpose and intent of CRA, harming underserved 
     communities throughout the nation.
       As NHC stated in its formal comment letter on the CRA NPR 
     on April 8, we have no idea how severely the pandemic will 
     impact our economy, the financial system and communities 
     throughout the nation. Committing resources to regulatory 
     initiatives that do not directly support our national 
     response to the COVID-19 pandemic is a dangerous distraction: 
     On April 27, NHC joined 14 other major national 
     organizations, including the National Association of REALTORS 
     and the National League of Cities, to urge regulators to 
     refrain from committing resources to regulatory initiatives 
     that do not directly support our national response to the 
     COVID-19 pandemic.
       Notably, the Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation (FDIC) 
     and the Federal Reserve Board refused to join the OCC on this 
     ill-timed decision. As FDIC Chairman Jelena McWilliams noted 
     in her March 19, 2020 letter to the Financial Accounting 
     Standards Board, financial institutions ``will face unique 
     difficulties over the coming weeks and months to adequately 
     staff customer-facing functions; ensure that deposit, loan, 
     and IT systems operate normally; help borrowers that are 
     experiencing unanticipated cash flow difficulties; and 
     address the earnings and capital implications of near zero 
     percent interest rates and a potential surge in borrowers who 
     are unable to meet contractual payment terms.'' We could not 
     agree more.
       CRA modernization is a once-in-a-generation opportunity. 
     There is much to improve, as the law and most recent 
     regulations were written before the proliferation of 
     interstate banking, internet banking and the revitalization 
     of America's cities; the latter being the opposite trend of 
     one of the two major reasons for CRA's adoption--urban 
     disinvestment--as well as the stubborn persistence of 
     redlining and its legacy impact. Instead, the OCC has pursued 
     an entirely new system that will gut CRA's effectiveness for 
     years and undercut broader efforts to address the very issues 
     that Congress attempted to solve in 1977, and still struggles 
     with today.
       The OCC's rule has received nearly universal condemnation. 
     Using its ratio-driven approach, banks will be powerfully 
     incented to make only the largest investments in communities 
     that need it the least, and may also fuel the displacement of 
     those people who need it the most. This rule eliminates the 
     fundamental value of CRA, which at its best, levels the 
     playing field between large, highly profitable investments, 
     and the harder and smaller but still profitable deals that 
     often have disproportionately positive impact on communities; 
     and are by their nature, harder to get an allocation of 
     capital from a bank that we want to be governed by a culture 
     that focuses on a risk-weighted return.
       CRA modernization is long overdue and needs to be done so 
     banks and communities get the clarity and flexibility they 
     need to ensure it has the maximum positive impact. But no 
     modernization effort is worth gutting the central purpose of 
     CRA--constructive reinvestment in the communities that need 
     it most. Consequently, the National Housing Conference 
     strongly supports H.J. Res. 90 and hope that once this 
     unprecedented national crisis is behind us, we can all work 
     together to fully realize the purpose and intent of CRA.
           Sincerely,
                                                 David M. Dworkin,
     President and CEO.
                                  ____



                                                         Hope,

                                                    June 23, 2020.
     Hon. Nancy Pelosi,
     Speaker of the House,
     House of Representatives.


                        Support for H.J. Res. 90

       HOPE (Hope Enterprise Corporation/Hope Credit Union/Hope 
     Policy Institute) supposes H.J Res. 90, providing for 
     congressional disapproval of the Office of the Comptroller of 
     the Currency's (OCC) final rule overhauling the Community 
     Reinvestment Act.
       HOPE is a Black-led, women-owned community development 
     financial institution, credit union, and policy institute in 
     Jackson, Mississippi. HOPE was established 25 years ago to 
     ensure that all people regardless of where they live, their 
     gender, race or place of birth have the opportunity to 
     support their families and realize the American Dream. HOPE 
     has generated over $2.5 billion in financing that has 
     benefitted more than 1.5 million people throughout Alabama, 
     Arkansas, Louisiana, Mississippi and Tennessee.
       The Community Reinvestment Act (CRA) has been a critical 
     tool for HOPE to leverage the resources it needs to serve 
     low-income communities, rural communities, and communities of 
     color in the Deep South. Unfortunately, the OCC's final rule 
     moves the CRA--and economic opportunity for our communities--
     further out of reach in three ways:
       Incenting larger, easier activities, potentially reducing 
     the smaller, more intensive investments that Deep South 
     communities so often need,
       Deprioritizing meaningful CRA activities in the country's 
     most distressed communities, and
       Diverting investments to activities far from the CRA's 
     original intent of redressing redlining.
       As just one example, the OCC's failure to prioritize bank 
     branches in low-income and rural areas will be acutely felt 
     in the Deep South, where already much of the region is 
     already in a banking desert and includes areas with the 
     highest percentage of persons who are unbanked in the United 
     States. Mississippi and Louisiana, with over 15% of unbanked 
     residents, have the highest percentage among all states. The 
     rate of unbanked Black households is even higher, at 28% both 
     states. As made plain during COVID-19, these disparities in 
     access to banking relationships lay the foundation for 
     broader disparities in access to capital for small businesses 
     and individuals.
       Ultimately, the OCC's final rule widens the wealth gap and 
     further inhibits economic opportunity in already hard-pressed 
     areas of the country, particularly here in the Deep South.
                                  ____

         National Alliance of Community Economic Development 
           Associations,
                                                    June 23, 2020.
     Representative Maxine Waters,
     Chairwoman, House Financial Services Committee, Washington, 
         DC.
       Dear Chairwoman Waters: Thank you for leading and actively 
     supporting H.J. Res. 90, a disapproval resolution to overturn 
     the Community Reinvestment Act rule change finalized by the 
     Office of the Comptroller of the Currency (OCC) in May 2020. 
     The National Alliance of Community Economic Development 
     Associations (NACEDA) and our members find the OCC's final 
     rule deeply problematic for low and moderate-income 
     communities for the reasons outlined in our public comment 
     letter dated April, 8, 2020.
       The final rule addresses very few of the concerns we 
     expressed in our April letter. The final rule is deeply 
     problematic and fundamentally flawed.
       To paraphrase FDIC Board Member Martin Gruenberg's 
     statement on December 12, 2019, in opposition to the proposed 
     rule, the proposed rule severely undermines what has been a 
     core strength of CRA for 40 years--the encouragement of bank 
     engagement and dialogue with stakeholders in local 
     communities, including community-based organizations, 
     community development corporations, and others, to understand 
     and better serve historically underserved areas. For this 
     reason and more, we support your committee's Congressional 
     Review Act resolution to overturn the rule change.
           Sincerely,
     Frank Woodruff,
       Executive Director, National Alliance of Community Economic 
     Development Associations.

  The SPEAKER pro tempore. All time for debate has expired.
  Pursuant to House Resolution 1017, the previous question is ordered.
  The question is on the engrossment and third reading of the joint 
resolution.
  The joint resolution was ordered to be engrossed and read a third 
time, and was read the third time.
  The SPEAKER pro tempore. The question is on the passage of the joint 
resolution.
  The question was taken; and the Speaker pro tempore announced that 
the ayes appeared to have it.
  Ms. WATERS. Madam Speaker, on that I demand the yeas and nays.
  The SPEAKER pro tempore. Pursuant to section 3 of House Resolution 
965, the yeas and nays are ordered.
  Pursuant to clause 8 of rule XX, further proceedings on this question 
will be postponed.

                          ____________________