[Congressional Record Volume 172, Number 81 (Wednesday, May 13, 2026)]
[Senate]
[Page S2271]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]




  PROVIDING FOR CONGRESSIONAL DISAPPROVAL UNDER CHAPTER 8 OF TITLE 5, 
  UNITED STATES CODE, OF THE RULE SUBMITTED BY THE BUREAU OF CONSUMER 
FINANCIAL PROTECTION RELATING TO THE WITHDRAWAL OF THE RULE RELATING TO 
 ``THE FAIR CREDIT REPORTING ACT'S LIMITED PREEMPTION OF STATE LAWS''--
                           Motion to Proceed

  Ms. CORTEZ MASTO. Mr. President, I move to proceed to Calendar No. 
385, S.J. Res. 129.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The clerk will report the motion.
  The senior assistant legislative clerk read as follows:

       Motion to proceed to Calendar No. 385, S.J. Res. 129, a 
     joint resolution providing for congressional disapproval 
     under chapter 8 of title 5, United States Code, of the rule 
     submitted by the Bureau of Consumer Financial Protection 
     relating to the withdrawal of the rule relating to ``The Fair 
     Credit Reporting Act's Limited Preemption of State Laws''.

  Ms. CORTEZ MASTO. Mr. President, I am encouraging my colleagues to 
support S.J. Res. 129, which is my amendment to restore the Consumer 
Financial Protection Bureau's rule that gives States more power to 
protect their consumers.
  In 2022, the Consumer Bureau issued an interpretive rule declaring 
that the Fair Credit Reporting Act, which is the Federal law that 
regulates the collection, dissemination, and use of consumer credit 
information, can mostly be overridden by State law. That means States 
are allowed to regulate credit reporting without the Federal Government 
stepping in to say that they can't.
  For example, 15 States have laws on the books banning medical debt 
from counting toward credit reports, and several States have limits on 
which eviction records are included in credit reports, easing the 
burden on tenants who are having trouble renting.
  Under the Consumer Bureau's 2022 rule, these laws would stand, but 
now, the Trump administration is trying to replace the Consumer 
Bureau's rule with one that does the exact opposite. This new rule 
would make Federal law preempt State law, so States can no longer take 
action to ensure that consumers get a fair shake when trying to buy a 
house or get a loan. That is rich coming from an administration that 
supports States' rights.
  So as a former attorney general, I believe strongly that States need 
the ability to protect Americans from financial exploitation. The Trump 
administration is working to gut the CFPB Bureau, and that leaves 
consumers in every State open to abuse. It is just unacceptable.
  In the absence of a Federal Government that wants to protect 
Americans, individual States are stepping up and passing their own laws 
to support their residents.
  If the Trump administration isn't going to support a strong Bureau, 
then they should let the States do what they refuse to do, but instead, 
this administration is trying to stop States from stepping in entirely. 
That is why I filed this joint resolution of disapproval, and I would 
ask my colleagues to support it.


                       Vote on Motion to Proceed

  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The question is on agreeing to the motion to 
proceed.
  In the opinion of the Chair, the noes have it.
  The motion was rejected.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Democratic whip.

                          ____________________