[Congressional Record Volume 166, Number 204 (Thursday, December 3, 2020)]
[House]
[Pages H6054-H6055]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
OCC FAIR ACCESS RULE
The SPEAKER pro tempore. The Chair recognizes the gentleman from
Kentucky (Mr. Barr) for 5 minutes.
Mr. BARR. Mr. Speaker, I rise today in support of the Office of the
Comptroller of the Currency's recently proposed rule to ensure fair
access to banking services.
The fair access rule is a welcomed development in a time when
political correctness and public relations pressure are driving the
Nation's largest banks' lending decisions rather than risk metrics
associated with an underlying loan.
Banks are deciding to cut off access to capital, divest their
holdings, or otherwise limit financing to legally operating businesses
just because those businesses are politically unpopular with outspoken
critics on the far extreme left. Politicizing access to capital needs
to end, and the Fair Access rule is a step in the right direction.
Mr. Speaker, the proposed rulemaking codifies longstanding principles
and OCC guidance that banks should provide access to capital and credit
based on the assessment of an individual borrower's risk as opposed to
making broad-based decisions impacting entire industries. It is guided
by fundamental principles of nondiscrimination and would ensure that
banks can't pick winners and losers in the marketplace. This rule will
have meaningful impacts on some of America's strongest industries and
the Americans they serve.
The prohibition against redlining based on race, ethnicity, or
neighborhood, regardless of an individual's qualifications and
creditworthiness, is a well-established principle in Federal law. That
prohibition and that principle should be extended to lawful
creditworthy businesses as well.
Mr. Speaker, over the last several years, we have witnessed many
cases of banks publicly committing not to do business with certain
legal companies. Some banks refuse to finance new coal-fired plants;
others have refused to provide credit for legally permissible drilling
operations; others boycotted firearms manufacturers.
But these decisions were not based on the creditworthiness of the
borrowers; they were based purely on politics.
Coal keeps the lights on. Oil and gas heat our homes and fuel our
vehicles.
Should coal or oil or gas companies be subjected to a different
lending standard just because of their public perception by a select
few? Of course not.
These industries should not be penalized simply because of the nature
of their business and private lenders' desire to placate the far left.
In fact, these are companies that provide the most affordable and
reliable forms of energy to the American people. They are being
punished only because they are politically unpopular.
Under the rule, banks can no longer make these qualitative decisions
to redline entire industries. Industries that play crucial roles in the
everyday lives of Americans deserve fair access to America's financial
system and should not be demonized as pawns in the politics of the day.
Banks are in the business of assessing, measuring, and managing
risks. Banks should be making lending decisions based on quantifiable
risks associated with a loan. If a legally operating business is a
sound credit risk by objective standards, banks should not be permitted
to cut off financing simply because the business isn't in the good
graces of certain politicians.
Many of the rule's detractors say it is an overreach by the OCC or
somehow motivated by partisan goals; but, in reality, the rule simply
implements directives under Dodd-Frank to promote fair access to
financial services and
[[Page H6055]]
fair treatment of customers. It codifies in regulation statements and
guidance from financial regulators under President Obama.
In 2014, then-Comptroller Tom Curry said to regulated banks:
You shouldn't feel that you can't bank a customer just
because they fall into a category that, on its face, appears
to carry an elevated level of risk. Higher risk categories of
customers call for stronger risk management and controls, not
a strategy of total avoidance.
Now, some critics of the OCC's rule have made the argument that it
would compromise financial stability to force lenders to extend credit
to dying industries, such as the fossil energy industry, that have no
future under leftwing policies like the Green New Deal.
Has it ever occurred to these politicians that the reason why these
fossil energy companies might face a challenging future is because of
their own policies and because of their unrelenting desire to deny them
the credit that they need to continue to operate.
Mr. Speaker, the debanking of certain legally operating industries is
one in a series of examples of corporate leaders succumbing to the
pressure of activists and far-left politicians. They have ceded the
primacy of shareholders and are now letting politics drive their
financing decisions.
Mr. Speaker, I commend Acting Comptroller Brooks on proposing this
thoughtful and timely rule of nondiscrimination. This rule will ensure
that all legal American companies have full access to the robust U.S.
financial system and the economic freedom they deserve, and it will put
an end to the misguided practice of banks playing politics with
American jobs.
____________________