[Congressional Record (Bound Edition), Volume 154 (2008), Part 15]
[House]
[Pages 20204-20222]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office, www.gpo.gov]




             CREDIT CARDHOLDERS' BILL OF RIGHTS ACT OF 2008

  Mrs. MALONEY of New York. Madam Speaker, pursuant to House Resolution 
1476, I call up the bill (H.R. 5244) to amend the Truth in Lending Act 
to establish fair and transparent practices relating to the extension 
of credit under an open end consumer credit plan, and for other 
purposes, and ask for its immediate consideration.
  The Clerk read the title of the bill.
  The text of the bill is as follows:

                               H.R. 5244

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

     SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE.

       This Act may be cited as the ``Credit Cardholders' Bill of 
     Rights Act of 2008''.

     SEC. 2. CREDIT CARDS ON TERMS CONSUMERS CAN REPAY.

       (a) Universal Default Eliminated.--Chapter 2 of the Truth 
     in Lending Act (15 U.S.C. 1631 et seq.) is amended by 
     inserting after section 127A the following new section:

     ``Sec. 127B. Additional requirements for credit card accounts 
       under an open end consumer credit plan

       ``(a) Universal Default Eliminated for Credit Already 
     Outstanding.--No creditor may use any adverse information 
     concerning any consumer, including any information in

[[Page 20205]]

     any consumer report (as defined in section 603) or any change 
     in the credit score of the consumer, as the basis for 
     increasing any annual percentage rate of interest applicable 
     to the outstanding balance on a credit card account of the 
     consumer under an open end consumer credit plan at the time 
     of any such increase, other than actions or omissions of the 
     consumer that are directly related to such account.''.
       (b) Any-Time Any-Reason Changes in Terms Eliminated.--
     Section 127B of the Truth in Lending Act is amended by 
     inserting after subsection (a) (as added by subsection (a)) 
     the following new subsection:
       ``(b) Any-Time Any-Reason Changes in Terms Eliminated.--
       ``(1) In general.--No creditor may change any term of the 
     contract or agreement applicable with respect to any credit 
     card account of the consumer under an open end consumer 
     credit plan until renewal of the contract or agreement except 
     for the specific material reasons, and subject to specific 
     limitations, that are contained in the contract or agreement 
     with respect to such term at the time the account is opened.
       ``(2) Exception for increases in credit limit.--Paragraph 
     (1) shall not apply with respect to any increase in the 
     amount of credit authorized to be extended under an account 
     described in such paragraph.''.
       (c) Advance Notice of Credit Card Account Rate Increases 
     and Right to Cancel Account.--Section 127B of the Truth in 
     Lending Act is amended by inserting after subsection (b) (as 
     added by subsection (b)) the following new subsection:
       ``(c) Advance Notice of Credit Card Account Rate Increases 
     and Right To Cancel Account.--
       ``(1) Advance notice of credit card account rate increases 
     required.--In the case of any credit card account under an 
     open end consumer credit plan, no increase in any annual 
     percentage rate of interest, for any reason other than an 
     increase due to the expiration of any introductory percentage 
     rate of interest, or due solely to a change in another rate 
     of interest to which such rate is indexed, may take effect 
     before the end of the 45-day period beginning on the date 
     notice of such increase is sent to the cardholder.
       ``(2) Right to cancel without increase in apr on 
     outstanding balance.--Any consumer who receives a notice from 
     a creditor pursuant to paragraph (1) with respect to a credit 
     card account under an open end consumer credit plan shall 
     have the right--
       ``(A) to cancel the credit card, by mail, telephone, or 
     electronic communication and without penalty or the 
     imposition of any fee with respect to such cancellation, at 
     any time during the period beginning on the date the consumer 
     receives the notice pursuant to paragraph (1) and ending on 
     the date the consumer receives the third periodic statement 
     with respect to such account after the effective date of the 
     increase; and
       ``(B) to pay any outstanding balance on the credit card 
     account that accrued before the effective date of the 
     increase at the annual percentage rate and repayment period 
     in effect before the notice was received.
       ``(3) Notice requirements.--
       ``(A) Initial notice requirement.--The notice required 
     under paragraph (1) with respect to an increase in any annual 
     percentage rate of interest shall--
       ``(i) be made in a clear and conspicuous manner; and
       ``(ii) contain a brief statement of the right of the 
     consumer to cancel the account and pay the balance at the 
     annual percentage rate in effect before the increase in 
     accordance with paragraph (2) and the mailing address, 
     telephone number, and Internet address and Worldwide Web site 
     at which the consumer may make any such cancellation.
       ``(B) Subsequent notices required in periodic statements.--
     Each periodic statement provided to the consumer with respect 
     to the credit card account after a notice is provided under 
     paragraph (1) until the third periodic statement with respect 
     to such account after the effective date of the increase 
     shall also contain the information required in such notice.
       ``(C) Pro forma notices do not meet notice requirement.--A 
     notice that terms may change, or will change, for any or no 
     reason does not constitute a notice for purposes of this 
     subsection.
       ``(4) Payment of post-increase extensions of credit.--If 
     any consumer obtains an extension of credit on a credit card 
     account on or after the effective date of the increase in the 
     annual percentage rate for which a notice was provided in 
     accordance with paragraph (1) and subsequently cancels the 
     account under paragraph (2), the outstanding balance of such 
     credit that was extended on or after the effective date of 
     the increase shall be subject to repayment at the increased 
     rate in effect at the time of the extension of credit.''.
       (d) Clerical Amendment.--The table of sections for chapter 
     2 of the Truth in Lending Act (15 U.S.C. 1631 et seq.) is 
     amended by inserting after the item relating to section 127A 
     the following new item:

``127B. Additional requirements for credit card accounts under an open 
              end consumer credit plan.''.

     SEC. 3. CLEAR EXPLANATION OF ACCOUNT FEATURES, TERMS, AND 
                   PRICING REQUIRED AT RELEVANT TIMES.

       (a) Double Cycle Billing Prohibited.--Section 127B of the 
     Truth in Lending Act is amended by inserting after subsection 
     (c) (as added by section 2(c)) the following new subsection:
       ``(d) Double Cycle Billing Prohibited.--If an open end 
     consumer credit plan provides a time period within which a 
     consumer may repay the credit extended without incurring an 
     interest charge, and the consumer repays all or a portion of 
     such credit that is subject to such time period within the 
     specified time period, the creditor may not impose or collect 
     an interest charge on the portion of the credit that was 
     repaid within such specified time period.''.
       (b) Limitations Relating to Account Balances Attributable 
     Only to Accrued Interest.--Section 127B is amended by 
     inserting after subsection (d) (as added by subsection (a)) 
     the following new subsection:
       ``(e) Limitations Relating to Account Balances Attributable 
     Only to Accrued Interest.--
       ``(1) In general.--If the outstanding balance on a credit 
     card account under an open end consumer credit plan 
     represents an amount attributable only to accrued interest on 
     previously repaid credit extended under the plan--
       ``(A) no fee may be imposed or collected in connection with 
     such balance; and
       ``(B) any failure to make timely repayments of such balance 
     shall not constitute a default on the account.
       ``(2) Rule of construction.--Paragraph (1) shall not be 
     construed as affecting--
       ``(A) the consumer's obligation to pay any accrued interest 
     on a credit card account under an open end consumer credit 
     plan; or
       ``(B) the accrual of interest on the outstanding balance on 
     any such account in accordance with the terms of the account 
     and this title.''.
       (c) Payoff Balance Required on Each Periodic Statement of 
     Account.--Section 127B of the Truth in Lending Act is amended 
     by inserting after subsection (e) (as added by subsection 
     (b)) the following new subsection:
       ``(f) Each Periodic Statement of Account Required To 
     Provide Notice for Obtaining Payoff Balance.--Each periodic 
     statement provided by a creditor to a consumer with respect 
     to a credit card account under an open end consumer credit 
     plan shall contain the telephone number, Internet address, 
     and Worldwide Web site at which the consumer may request the 
     payoff balance on the account.''.
       (d) Consumer Right To Reject Card Before Notice Is Provided 
     of Open Account.--Section 127B of the Truth in Lending Act is 
     amended by inserting after subsection (g) (as added by 
     subsection (c)) the following new subsection:
       ``(g) Consumer Right to Reject Card Before Notice of New 
     Account Is Provided To Consumer Reporting Agency.--A creditor 
     may not furnish any information to a consumer reporting 
     agency (as defined in section 603) concerning a newly opened 
     credit card account under an open end consumer credit plan 
     until the credit card has been used or activated by the 
     consumer.''.
       (e) Use of Terms Clarified.--Section 127B of the Truth in 
     Lending Act is amended by inserting after subsection (g) (as 
     added by subsection (d)) the following new subsection:
       ``(h) Use of Terms.--The following requirements shall apply 
     with respect to the terms of any credit card account under 
     any open end consumer credit plan:
       ``(1) `Fixed' rate.--The term `fixed', when appearing in 
     conjunction with a reference to the annual percentage rate or 
     interest rate applicable with respect to such account, may 
     only be used to refer to an annual percentage rate or 
     interest rate that will not change or vary for any reason 
     over the period clearly and conspicuously specified in the 
     terms of the account.
       ``(2) Prime rate.--The term `prime rate', when appearing in 
     any agreement or contract for any such account, may only be 
     used to refer to the bank prime rate published in the Federal 
     Reserve Statistical Release on selected interest rates (daily 
     or weekly), and commonly referred to as the H.15 release (or 
     any successor publication).
       ``(3) Due date.--
       ``(A) In general.--Each periodic statement for any such 
     account shall contain a date by which the next periodic 
     payment on the account must be made to avoid a late fee or be 
     considered a late payment, and any payment received by 5 
     P.M., Eastern Standard Time, on such date shall be treated as 
     a timely payment for all purposes.
       ``(B) Certain electronic fund transfers.--Any payment with 
     respect to any such account made by a consumer on-line to the 
     Web site of the credit card issuer or by telephone directly 
     to the credit card issuer before 5 P.M., Eastern Standard 
     Time, on any business day shall be credited to the consumer's 
     account that business day.
       ``(C) Presumption of timely payment.--Any evidence provided 
     by a consumer in the form of a receipt from the United States 
     Postal Service or other common carrier indicating that a 
     payment on a credit card account was sent to the issuer not 
     less than 7 days before the due date contained in the 
     periodic statement under subparagraph (A)

[[Page 20206]]

     for such payment shall create a presumption that such payment 
     was made by the due date, which may be rebutted by the 
     creditor for fraud or dishonesty on the part of the consumer 
     with respect to the mailing date.''.
       (f) Pro Rata Payment Allocations.--Section 127B of the 
     Truth in Lending Act is amended by inserting after subsection 
     (h) (as added by subsection (e)) the following new 
     subsection:
       ``(i) Pro Rata Payment Allocations.--
       ``(1) In general.--Except as permitted under paragraph (2), 
     if the outstanding balance on a credit card account under an 
     open end consumer credit plan accrues interest at 2 or more 
     different annual percentage rates, the total amount of each 
     periodic payment made on such account shall be allocated by 
     the creditor between or among the outstanding balances at 
     each such annual percentage rate in the same proportion as 
     each such balance bears to the total outstanding balance on 
     the account.
       ``(2) Allocation to higher rate.--Notwithstanding paragraph 
     (1), a creditor may elect, in any case described in such 
     paragraph, to allocate more than a pro rata share of any 
     payment to a portion of the outstanding balance that bears a 
     higher annual percentage rate than another portion of such 
     outstanding balance.''.
       (g) Timely Provision of Periodic Statements.--Section 127B 
     of the Truth in Lending Act is amended by inserting after 
     subsection (i) (as added by subsection (f)) the following new 
     subsection:
       ``(j) Timely Provision of Periodic Statements.--Each 
     periodic statement with respect to a credit card account 
     under an open end consumer credit plan shall be sent by the 
     creditor to the consumer not less than 25 calendar days 
     before the due date identified in such statement for the next 
     payment on the outstanding balance on such account.''.

     SEC. 4. CONSUMER CHOICE WITH RESPECT TO OVER-THE-LIMIT 
                   TRANSACTIONS.

       Section 127B of the Truth in Lending Act is amended by 
     inserting after subsection (j) (as added by section 3(g)) the 
     following new subsections:
       ``(k) Opt-Out of Creditor Authorization of Over-the-Limit 
     Transactions if Fees Are Imposed.--
       ``(1) In general.--In the case of any credit card account 
     under an open end consumer credit plan under which an over-
     the-limit-fee may be imposed by the creditor for any 
     extension of credit in excess of the amount of credit 
     authorized to be extended under such account, the consumer 
     may elect to prohibit the creditor, with respect to such 
     account, from completing any transaction involving the 
     extension of credit, with respect to such account, in excess 
     of the amount of credit authorized by notifying the creditor 
     of such election in accordance with paragraph (2).
       ``(2) Notification by consumer.--A consumer shall notify a 
     creditor under paragraph (1)--
       ``(A) through the notification system maintained by the 
     creditor under paragraph (4); or
       ``(B) by submitting to the creditor a signed notice of 
     election, by mail or electronic communication, on a form 
     issued by the creditor for purposes of this subparagraph.
       ``(3) Effectiveness of election.--An election by a consumer 
     under paragraph (1) shall be effective beginning 3 business 
     days after the consumer notifies the creditor in accordance 
     with paragraph (2) and shall remain effective until the 
     consumer revokes the election.
       ``(4) Notification system.--Each creditor that maintains 
     credit card accounts under an open end consumer credit plan 
     shall establish and maintain a notification system, including 
     a toll-free telephone number, Internet address, and Worldwide 
     Web site, which permits any consumer whose credit card 
     account is maintained by the creditor to notify the creditor 
     of an election under this subsection in accordance with 
     paragraph (2).
       ``(5) Annual notice to consumers of availability of 
     election.--In the case of any credit card account under an 
     open end consumer credit plan, the creditor shall include a 
     notice, in clear and conspicuous language, of the 
     availability of an election by the consumer under this 
     paragraph as a means of avoiding over-the limit fees and a 
     higher amount of indebtedness, and the method for providing 
     such notice--
       ``(A) in the periodic statement required under subsection 
     (b) with respect to such account at least once each calendar 
     year; and
       ``(B) in any such periodic statement which includes a 
     notice of the imposition of an over-the-limit fee during the 
     period covered by the statement.
       ``(6) No fees if consumer has made an election.--If a 
     consumer has made an election under paragraph (1), no over-
     the-limit fee may be imposed on the account for any reason 
     that has caused the outstanding balance in the account to 
     exceed the credit limit.
       ``(7) Regulations.--
       ``(A) In general.--The Board shall issue regulations 
     allowing for the completion of over-the-limit transactions 
     that for operational reasons exceed the credit limit by a de 
     minimis amount, even where the cardholder has made an 
     election under paragraph (1).
       ``(B) Subject to no fee limitation.--The regulations 
     prescribed under subparagraph (A) shall not allow for the 
     imposition of any fee or any rate increase based on the 
     permitted over-the-limit transactions.
       ``(l) Over-the-Limit Fee Restrictions.--With respect to a 
     credit card account under an open end consumer credit plan, 
     an over-the-limit fee may be imposed only once during a 
     billing cycle if, on the last day of such billing cycle, the 
     credit limit on the account is exceeded, and an over-the-
     limit fee, with respect to such excess credit, may be imposed 
     only once in each of the 2 subsequent billing cycles, unless 
     the consumer has obtained an additional extension of credit 
     in excess of such credit limit during any such subsequent 
     cycle or the consumer reduces the outstanding balance below 
     the credit limit as of the end of such billing cycle.''.

     SEC. 5. STRENGTHEN CREDIT CARD INFORMATION COLLECTION.

       Section 136(b) of the Truth in Lending Act (15 U.S.C. 
     1646(b)) is amended--
       (1) in paragraph (1)--
       (A) by striking ``Collection required.--The Board shall'' 
     and inserting ``Collection required.--
       ``(A) In general.--The Board shall''.
       (B) by adding at the end the following new subparagraph:
       ``(B) Information to be included.--The information under 
     subparagraph (A) shall include, as of a date designated by 
     the Board--
       ``(i) a list of each type of transaction or event for which 
     one or more of the card issuers has imposed a separate 
     interest rate upon a cardholder, including purchases, cash 
     advances, and balance transfers;
       ``(ii) for each type of transaction or event identified 
     under clause (i)--

       ``(I) each distinct interest rate charged by the card 
     issuer to a cardholder, as of the designated date; and
       ``(II) the number of cardholders to whom each such interest 
     rate was applied during the calendar month immediately 
     preceding the designated date, and the total amount of 
     interest charged to such cardholders at each such rate during 
     such month;

       ``(iii) a list of each type of fee that one or more of the 
     card issuers has imposed upon a cardholder as of the 
     designated date, including any fee imposed for obtaining a 
     cash advance, making a late payment, exceeding the credit 
     limit on an account, making a balance transfer, or exchanging 
     United States dollars for foreign currency;
       ``(iv) for each type of fee identified under clause (iii), 
     the number of cardholders upon whom the fee was imposed 
     during the calendar month immediately preceding the 
     designated date, and the total amount of fees imposed upon 
     cardholders during such month;
       ``(v) the total number of cardholders that incurred any 
     interest charge or any fee during the calendar month 
     immediately preceding the designated date; and
       ``(vi) any other information related to interest rates, 
     fees, or other charges that the Board deems of interest.''; 
     and
       (2) by adding at the end the following new paragraph:
       ``(5) Report to congress.--The Board shall, on an annual 
     basis, transmit to Congress and make public a report 
     containing estimates by the Board of the approximate, 
     relative percentage of income derived by the credit card 
     operations of depository institutions from--
       ``(A) the imposition of interest rates on cardholders, 
     including separate estimates for--
       ``(i) interest with an annual percentage rate of less than 
     25 percent; and
       ``(ii) interest with an annual percentage rate equal to or 
     greater than 25 percent;
       ``(B) the imposition of fees on cardholders;
       ``(C) the imposition of fees on merchants; and
       ``(D) any other material source of income, while specifying 
     the nature of that income.''.

     SEC. 6. STANDARDS APPLICABLE TO INITIAL ISSUANCE OF SUBPRIME 
                   OR ``FEE HARVESTER'' CARDS.

       Section 127B of the Truth in Lending Act is amended by 
     inserting after subsection (l) (as added by section 4) the 
     following new subsection:
       ``(m) Standards Applicable to Initial Issuance of Subprime 
     or `Fee Harvester' Cards.--In the case of any credit card 
     account under an open end consumer credit plan the terms of 
     which require the payment of fees (other than late fees or 
     over-the-limit fees) by the consumer in the first year the 
     account is opened in an amount in excess of 25 percent of the 
     total amount of credit authorized under the account, the 
     credit card may not be issued to the consumer and the opening 
     of the account may not be reported to any consumer reporting 
     agency (as defined in section 603) until the creditor 
     receives payment in full of all such fees, and such payment 
     may not be made from the credit made available by the 
     card.''.

     SEC. 7. EFFECTIVE DATE.

       (a) In General.--The amendments made by this Act shall 
     apply to all credit card accounts under open end consumer 
     credit plans as of the end of the 1-year period beginning on 
     the date of the enactment of this Act.
       (b) Regulations.--The Board of Governors of the Federal 
     Reserve System, in consultation with all Federal agencies 
     referred to in any provision of section 108 of the Truth in 
     Lending Act, shall prescribe regulations, in

[[Page 20207]]

     final form, implementing the amendments made by this Act 
     before the end of the 6-month period beginning on the date of 
     the enactment of this Act.

  The SPEAKER pro tempore (Mrs. Tauscher). Pursuant to House Resolution 
1476, the amendment in the nature of a substitute printed in the bill 
is adopted and the bill, as amended, is considered read.
  The text of the bill, as amended, is as follows:

                               H.R. 5244

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

     SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE.

       This Act may be cited as the ``Credit Cardholders' Bill of 
     Rights Act of 2008''.

     SEC. 2. CREDIT CARDS ON TERMS CONSUMERS CAN REPAY.

       (a) Retroactive Rate Increases and Universal Default 
     Limited.--Chapter 2 of the Truth in Lending Act (15 U.S.C. 
     1631 et seq.) is amended by inserting after section 127A the 
     following new section:

     ``Sec. 127B. Additional requirements for credit card accounts 
       under an open end consumer credit plan

       ``(a) Retroactive Rate Increases and Universal Default 
     Limited.--
       ``(1) In general.--Except as provided in subsection (b), no 
     creditor may increase any annual percentage rate of interest 
     applicable to the existing balance on a credit card account 
     of the consumer under an open end consumer credit plan.
       ``(2) Existing balance defined.--For purposes of this 
     subsection and subsections (b) and (c), the term `existing 
     balance' means the amount owed on a consumer credit card 
     account as of the end of the fourteenth day after the 
     creditor provides notice of an increase in the annual 
     percentage rate in accordance with subsection (c).
       ``(3) Treatment of existing balances following rate 
     increase.--If a creditor increases any annual percentage rate 
     of interest applicable to credit card account of a consumer 
     under an open end consumer credit plan and there is an 
     existing balance in the account to which such increase may 
     not apply, the creditor shall allow the consumer to repay the 
     existing balance using a method provided by the creditor 
     which is at least as beneficial to the consumer as 1 of the 
     following methods:
       ``(A) An amortization period for the existing balance of at 
     least 5 years starting from the date on which the increased 
     annual percentage rate went into effect.
       ``(B) The percentage of the existing balance that was 
     included in the required minimum periodic payment before the 
     rate increase cannot be more than doubled.
       ``(4) Limitation on certain fees.--If--
       ``(A) a creditor increases any annual percentage rate of 
     interest applicable on a credit card account of the consumer 
     under an open end consumer credit plan; and
       ``(B) the creditor is prohibited by this section from 
     applying the increased rate to an existing balance,
     the creditor may not assess any fee or charge based solely on 
     the existing balance.''.

       (b) Exceptions to the Amendment Made by Subsection (a).--
     Section 127B of the Truth in Lending Act is amended by 
     inserting after subsection (a) (as added by subsection (a)) 
     the following new subsection:
       ``(b) Exceptions.--
       ``(1) In general.--A creditor may increase any annual 
     percentage rate of interest applicable to the existing 
     balance on a credit card account of the consumer under an 
     open end consumer credit plan only under the following 
     circumstances:
       ``(A) Change in index.--The increase is due solely to the 
     operation of an index that is not under the creditor's 
     control and is available to the general public.
       ``(B) Expiration or loss of promotional rate.--The increase 
     is due solely to--
       ``(i) the expiration of a promotional rate; or
       ``(ii) the loss of a promotional rate for a reason 
     specified in the account agreement (e.g., late payment).
       ``(C) Payment not received during 30-day grace period after 
     due date.--The increase is due solely to the fact that the 
     consumer's minimum payment has not been received within 30 
     days after the due date for such minimum payment.
       ``(2) Limitation on increases due to loss of promotional 
     rate.--Notwithstanding paragraph (1)(B)(ii), the annual 
     percentage rate in effect after the increase permitted under 
     such subsection due to the loss of a promotional rate may not 
     exceed the annual percentage rate that would have applied 
     under the terms of the agreement after the expiration of the 
     promotional rate.''.
       (c) Advance Notice of Rate Increases.--Section 127B of the 
     Truth in Lending Act is amended by inserting after subsection 
     (b) (as added by subsection (b)) the following new 
     subsection:
       ``(c) Advance Notice of Rate Increases.--In the case of any 
     credit card account under an open end consumer credit plan, 
     no increase in any annual percentage rate of interest may 
     take effect unless the creditor provides a written notice to 
     the consumer at least 45 days before the increase takes 
     effect which fully describes the changes in the annual 
     percentage rate, in a complete and conspicuous manner, and 
     the extent to which such increase would apply to an existing 
     balance.''.
       (d) Clerical Amendment.--The table of sections for chapter 
     2 of the Truth in Lending Act (15 U.S.C. 1631 et seq.) is 
     amended by inserting after the item relating to section 127A 
     the following new item:

``127B. Additional requirements for credit card accounts under an open 
              end consumer credit plan.''.

     SEC. 3. ADDITIONAL PROVISIONS REGARDING ACCOUNT FEATURES, 
                   TERMS, AND PRICING.

       (a) Double Cycle Billing Prohibited.--Section 127B of the 
     Truth in Lending Act is amended by inserting after subsection 
     (c) (as added by section 2(c)) the following new subsection:
       ``(d) Double Cycle Billing.--
       ``(1) In general.--No finance charge may be imposed by a 
     creditor with respect to any balance on a credit card account 
     under an open end consumer credit plan that is based on 
     balances for days in billing cycles preceding the most recent 
     billing cycle.
       ``(2) Exceptions.--Paragraph (1) shall not apply so as to 
     prohibit a creditor from--
       ``(A) charging a consumer for deferred interest even though 
     that interest may have accrued over multiple billing cycles; 
     or
       ``(B) adjusting finance charges following resolution of a 
     billing error dispute.''.
       (b) Limitations Relating to Account Balances Attributable 
     Only to Accrued Interest.--Section 127B is amended by 
     inserting after subsection (d) (as added by subsection (a)) 
     the following new subsection:
       ``(e) Limitations Relating to Account Balances Attributable 
     Only to Accrued Interest.--
       ``(1) In general.--If the outstanding balance on a credit 
     card account under an open end consumer credit plan at the 
     end of a billing period represents an amount attributable 
     only to interest accrued during the preceding billing period 
     on an outstanding balance that was fully repaid during the 
     preceding billing period--
       ``(A) no fee may be imposed or collected in connection with 
     such balance attributable only to interest before such end of 
     the billing period; and
       ``(B) any failure to make timely repayments of the balance 
     attributable only to interest before such end of the billing 
     period shall not constitute a default on the account.

     Such balance remains a legally binding debt obligation.
       ``(2) Rule of construction.--Paragraph (1) shall not be 
     construed as affecting--
       ``(A) the consumer's obligation to pay any accrued interest 
     on a credit card account under an open end consumer credit 
     plan; or
       ``(B) the accrual of interest on the outstanding balance on 
     any such account in accordance with the terms of the account 
     and this title.''.
       (c) Access to Payoff Balance Information.--Section 127B of 
     the Truth in Lending Act is amended by inserting after 
     subsection (e) (as added by subsection (b)) the following new 
     subsection:
       ``(f) Payoff Balance Information.--Each periodic statement 
     provided by a creditor to a consumer with respect to a credit 
     card account under an open end consumer credit plan shall 
     contain the telephone number, Internet address, and Worldwide 
     Web site at which the consumer may request the payoff balance 
     on the account.''.
       (d) Consumer Right To Reject Card Before Notice Is Provided 
     of Open Account.--Section 127B of the Truth in Lending Act is 
     amended by inserting after subsection (g) (as added by 
     subsection (c)) the following new subsection:
       ``(g) Consumer Right To Reject Card Before Notice of New 
     Account Is Provided to Consumer Reporting Agency.--
       ``(1) In general.--A creditor may not furnish any 
     information to a consumer reporting agency (as defined in 
     section 603) concerning the establishment of a newly opened 
     credit card account under an open end consumer credit plan 
     until the credit card has been used or activated by the 
     consumer.
       ``(2) Rule of construction.--Paragraph (1) shall not be 
     construed as prohibiting a creditor from furnishing 
     information about any application for credit card account 
     under an open end consumer credit plan or any inquiry about 
     any such account to a consumer reporting agency (as so 
     defined).''.
       (e) Use of Terms Clarified.--Section 127B of the Truth in 
     Lending Act is amended by inserting after subsection (g) (as 
     added by subsection (d)) the following new subsection:
       ``(h) Use of Terms.--The following requirements shall apply 
     with respect to the terms of any credit card account under 
     any open end consumer credit plan:
       ``(1) `Fixed' rate.--The term `fixed', when appearing in 
     conjunction with a reference to the annual percentage rate or 
     interest rate applicable with respect to such account, may 
     only be used to refer to an annual percentage rate or 
     interest rate that will not change or vary for any reason 
     over the period clearly and conspicuously specified in the 
     terms of the account.
       ``(2) Prime rate.--The term `prime rate', when appearing in 
     any agreement or contract for any such account, may only be 
     used to refer to the bank prime rate published in the Federal 
     Reserve Statistical Release on selected interest rates (daily 
     or weekly), and commonly referred to as the H.15 release (or 
     any successor publication).
       ``(3) Due date.--

[[Page 20208]]

       ``(A) In general.--Each periodic statement for any such 
     account shall contain a date by which the next periodic 
     payment on the account must be made to avoid a late fee or be 
     considered a late payment, and any payment received by 5 
     p.m., local time at the location specified by the creditor 
     for the receipt of payment, on such date shall be treated as 
     a timely payment for all purposes.
       ``(B) Certain electronic fund transfers.--Any payment with 
     respect to any such account made by a consumer on-line to the 
     Web site of the credit card issuer or by telephone directly 
     to the credit card issuer before 5 p.m., local time at the 
     location specified by the creditor for the receipt of 
     payment, on any business day shall be credited to the 
     consumer's account that business day.
       ``(C) Presumption of timely payment.--Any evidence provided 
     by a consumer in the form of a receipt from the United States 
     Postal Service or other common carrier indicating that a 
     payment on a credit card account was sent to the issuer not 
     less than 7 days before the due date contained in the 
     periodic statement under subparagraph (A) for such payment 
     shall create a presumption that such payment was made by the 
     due date, which may be rebutted by the creditor for fraud or 
     dishonesty on the part of the consumer with respect to the 
     mailing date.''.
       (f) Pro Rata Payment Allocations.--Section 127B of the 
     Truth in Lending Act is amended by inserting after subsection 
     (h) (as added by subsection (e)) the following new 
     subsection:
       ``(i) Pro Rata Payment Allocations.--
       ``(1) In general.--Except as permitted under paragraph (2), 
     if the outstanding balance on a credit card account under an 
     open end consumer credit plan accrues interest at 2 or more 
     different annual percentage rates, the total amount of each 
     periodic payment made on such account shall be allocated by 
     the creditor between or among the outstanding balances at 
     each such annual percentage rate in the same proportion as 
     each such balance bears to the total outstanding balance on 
     the account.
       ``(2) Allocation to higher rate.--Notwithstanding paragraph 
     (1), a creditor may elect, in any case described in such 
     paragraph, to allocate more than a pro rata share of any 
     payment to a portion of the outstanding balance that bears a 
     higher annual percentage rate than another portion of such 
     outstanding balance.
       ``(3) Special rules for accounts with promotional rate 
     balances or deferred interest balances.--
       ``(A) In general.--Notwithstanding paragraph (1) or (2), in 
     the case of a credit card account under an open end consumer 
     credit plan the current terms of which allow the consumer to 
     receive the benefit of a promotional rate or deferred 
     interest plan, amounts paid in excess of the required minimum 
     payment shall be allocated to the promotional rate balance or 
     the deferred interest balance only if other balances have 
     been fully paid.
       ``(B) Exception for deferred interest balances.--
     Notwithstanding subparagraph (A), a creditor may allocate the 
     entire amount paid by the consumer in excess of the required 
     minimum periodic payment to a balance on which interest is 
     deferred during the 2 billing cycles immediately preceding 
     the expiration of the period during which interest is 
     deferred.
       ``(4) Prohibition on restricted grace periods under certain 
     circumstances.--If, with respect to any credit card account 
     under an open end consumer credit, a creditor offers a time 
     period in which to repay credit extended without incurring 
     finance charges to cardholders who pay the balance in full, 
     the creditor may not deny a consumer who takes advantage of a 
     promotional rate balance or deferred interest rate balance 
     offer with respect to such an account any such time period 
     for repaying credit without incurring finance charges.''.
       (g) Timely Provision of Periodic Statements.--Section 127B 
     of the Truth in Lending Act is amended by inserting after 
     subsection (i) (as added by subsection (f)) the following new 
     subsection:
       ``(j) Timely Provision of Periodic Statements.--Each 
     periodic statement with respect to a credit card account 
     under an open end consumer credit plan shall be sent by the 
     creditor to the consumer not less than 25 calendar days 
     before the due date identified in such statement for the next 
     payment on the outstanding balance on such account, and 
     section 163(a) shall be applied with respect to any such 
     account by substituting `25' for `fourteen'.''.

     SEC. 4. CONSUMER CHOICE WITH RESPECT TO OVER-THE-LIMIT 
                   TRANSACTIONS.

       Section 127B of the Truth in Lending Act is amended by 
     inserting after subsection (j) (as added by section 3(g)) the 
     following new subsections:
       ``(k) Opt-Out of Creditor Authorization of Over-the-Limit 
     Transactions if Fees Are Imposed.--
       ``(1) In general.--In the case of any credit card account 
     under an open end consumer credit plan under which an over-
     the-limit-fee may be imposed by the creditor for any 
     extension of credit in excess of the amount of credit 
     authorized to be extended under such account, the consumer 
     may elect to prohibit the creditor, with respect to such 
     account, from completing any transaction involving the 
     extension of credit, with respect to such account, in excess 
     of the amount of credit authorized by notifying the creditor 
     of such election in accordance with paragraph (2).
       ``(2) Notification by consumer.--A consumer shall notify a 
     creditor under paragraph (1)--
       ``(A) through the notification system maintained by the 
     creditor under paragraph (4); or
       ``(B) by submitting to the creditor a signed notice of 
     election, by mail or electronic communication, on a form 
     issued by the creditor for purposes of this subparagraph.
       ``(3) Effectiveness of election.--An election by a consumer 
     under paragraph (1) shall be effective beginning 3 business 
     days after the creditor receives notice from the consumer in 
     accordance with paragraph (2) and shall remain effective 
     until the consumer revokes the election.
       ``(4) Notification system.--Each creditor that maintains 
     credit card accounts under an open end consumer credit plan 
     shall establish and maintain a notification system, including 
     a toll-free telephone number, Internet address, and Worldwide 
     Web site, which permits any consumer whose credit card 
     account is maintained by the creditor to notify the creditor 
     of an election under this subsection in accordance with 
     paragraph (2).
       ``(5) Annual notice to consumers of availability of 
     election.--In the case of any credit card account under an 
     open end consumer credit plan, the creditor shall include a 
     notice, in clear and conspicuous language, of the 
     availability of an election by the consumer under this 
     paragraph as a means of avoiding over-the limit fees and a 
     higher amount of indebtedness, and the method for providing 
     such notice--
       ``(A) in the periodic statement required under subsection 
     (b) with respect to such account at least once each calendar 
     year; and
       ``(B) in any such periodic statement which includes a 
     notice of the imposition of an over-the-limit fee during the 
     period covered by the statement.
       ``(6) No fees if consumer has made an election.--If a 
     consumer has made an election under paragraph (1), no over-
     the-limit fee may be imposed on the account for any reason 
     that has caused the outstanding balance in the account to 
     exceed the credit limit.
       ``(7) Regulations.--
       ``(A) In general.--The Board shall issue regulations 
     allowing for the completion of over-the-limit transactions 
     that for operational reasons exceed the credit limit by a de 
     minimis amount, even where the cardholder has made an 
     election under paragraph (1).
       ``(B) Subject to no fee limitation.--The regulations 
     prescribed under subparagraph (A) shall not allow for the 
     imposition of any fee or any rate increase based on the 
     permitted over-the-limit transactions.
       ``(l) Over-the-Limit Fee Restrictions.--With respect to a 
     credit card account under an open end consumer credit plan, 
     an over-the-limit fee may be imposed only once during a 
     billing cycle if, on the last day of such billing cycle, the 
     credit limit on the account is exceeded, and an over-the-
     limit fee, with respect to such excess credit, may be imposed 
     only once in each of the 2 subsequent billing cycles, unless 
     the consumer has obtained an additional extension of credit 
     in excess of such credit limit during any such subsequent 
     cycle or the consumer reduces the outstanding balance below 
     the credit limit as of the end of such billing cycle.
       ``(m) Over-the-Limit Fees Prohibited in Conjunction With 
     Certain Credit Holds.--Notwithstanding subsection (l), an 
     over-the-limit fee may not be imposed if the credit limit was 
     exceeded due to a hold unless the actual amount of the 
     transaction for which the hold was placed would have resulted 
     in the consumer exceeding the credit limit.''.

     SEC. 5. STRENGTHEN CREDIT CARD INFORMATION COLLECTION.

       Section 136(b) of the Truth in Lending Act (15 U.S.C. 
     1646(b)) is amended--
       (1) in paragraph (1)--
       (A) by striking ``Collection required.--The Board shall'' 
     and inserting ``Collection required.--
       ``(A) In general.--The Board shall''.
       (B) by adding at the end the following new subparagraph:
       ``(B) Information to be included.--The information under 
     subparagraph (A) shall include, for the relevant semiannual 
     period, the following information with respect each creditor 
     in connection with any consumer credit card account:
       ``(i) A list of each type of transaction or event during 
     the semiannual period for which 1 or more creditors has 
     imposed a separate interest rate upon a consumer credit card 
     accountholder, including purchases, cash advances, and 
     balance transfers.
       ``(ii) For each type of transaction or event identified 
     under clause (i)--

       ``(I) each distinct interest rate charged by the card 
     issuer to a consumer credit card accountholder during the 
     semiannual period; and
       ``(II) the number of cardholders to whom each such interest 
     rate was applied during the last calendar month of the 
     semiannual period, and the total amount of interest charged 
     to such accountholders at each such rate during such month.

       ``(iii) A list of each type of fee that 1 or more of the 
     creditors has imposed upon a consumer credit card 
     accountholder during the semiannual period, including any fee 
     imposed for obtaining a cash advance, making a late payment, 
     exceeding the credit limit on an account, making a balance 
     transfer, or exchanging United States dollars for foreign 
     currency.
       ``(iv) For each type of fee identified under clause (iii), 
     the number of accountholders upon whom the fee was imposed 
     during each calendar month of the semiannual period, and the 
     total amount of fees imposed upon cardholders during such 
     month.

[[Page 20209]]

       ``(v) The total number of consumer credit card 
     accountholders that incurred any finance charge or any other 
     fee during the semiannual period.
       ``(vi) The total number of consumer credit card accounts 
     maintained by each creditor as of the end of the semiannual 
     period.
       ``(vii) The total number and value of cash advances made 
     during the semiannual period under a consumer credit card 
     account.
       ``(viii) The total number and value of purchases involving 
     or constituting consumer credit card transactions during the 
     semiannual period.
       ``(ix) The total number and amount of repayments on 
     outstanding balances on consumer credit card accounts in each 
     month of the semiannual period.
       ``(x) The percentage of all consumer credit card 
     accountholders (with respect to any creditor) who--

       ``(I) incurred a finance charge in each month of the 
     semiannual period on any portion of an outstanding balance on 
     which a finance charge had not previously been incurred; and
       ``(II) incurred any such finance charge at any time during 
     the semiannual period.

       ``(xi) The total number and amount of balances accruing 
     finance charges during the semiannual period.
       ``(xii) The total number and amount of the outstanding 
     balances on consumer credit card accounts as of the end of 
     such semiannual period.
       ``(xiii) Total credit limits in effect on consumer credit 
     card accounts as of the end of such semiannual period and the 
     amount by which such credit limits exceed the credit limits 
     in effect as of the beginning of such period.
       ``(xiv) Any other information related to interest rates, 
     fees, or other charges that the Board deems of interest.''; 
     and
       (2) by adding at the end the following new paragraph:
       ``(5) Report to congress.--The Board shall, on an annual 
     basis, transmit to Congress and make public a report 
     containing estimates by the Board of the approximate, 
     relative percentage of income derived by the credit card 
     operations of depository institutions from--
       ``(A) the imposition of interest rates on cardholders, 
     including separate estimates for--
       ``(i) interest with an annual percentage rate of less than 
     25 percent; and
       ``(ii) interest with an annual percentage rate equal to or 
     greater than 25 percent;
       ``(B) the imposition of fees on cardholders;
       ``(C) the imposition of fees on merchants; and
       ``(D) any other material source of income, while specifying 
     the nature of that income.''.

     SEC. 6. STANDARDS APPLICABLE TO INITIAL ISSUANCE OF SUBPRIME 
                   OR ``FEE HARVESTER'' CARDS.

       Section 127B of the Truth in Lending Act is amended by 
     inserting after subsection (m) (as added by section 4) the 
     following new subsection:
       ``(n) Standards Applicable to Initial Issuance of Subprime 
     or `Fee Harvester' Cards.--
       ``(1) In general.--In the case of any credit card account 
     under an open end consumer credit plan the terms of which 
     require the payment of fees (other than late fees or over-
     the-limit fees) by the consumer in the first year the account 
     is opened in an amount in excess of 25 percent of the total 
     amount of credit authorized under the account, no payment of 
     any fees (other than late fees or over-the-limit fees) may be 
     made from the credit made available by the card.
       ``(2) Rule of construction.--No provision of this 
     subsection may be construed as authorizing any imposition or 
     payment of advance fees otherwise prohibited by any provision 
     of law.''.

     SEC. 7. EXTENSIONS OF CREDIT TO UNDERAGE CONSUMERS.

       Section 127(c) of the Truth in Lending Act (15 U.S.C. 
     1637(c)) is amended by adding at the end the following new 
     paragraph:
       ``(8) Extensions of credit to underage consumers.--
       ``(A) In general.--No credit card may be knowingly issued 
     to, or open end credit plan established on behalf of, a 
     consumer who has not attained the age of 18, unless the 
     consumer is emancipated under applicable State law.
       ``(B) Rule of construction.--For the purposes of 
     determining the age of an applicant, the submission of a 
     signed application by a consumer stating that the consumer is 
     over 18 shall be considered sufficient proof of age.''.

     SEC. 8. EFFECTIVE DATE.

       (a) In General.--The amendments made by this Act shall 
     apply to all credit card accounts under open end consumer 
     credit plans as of the end of the 1-year period beginning on 
     the date of the enactment of this Act.
       (b) Regulations.--The Board of Governors of the Federal 
     Reserve System, in consultation with the Comptroller of the 
     Currency, the Director of the Office of Thrift Supervision, 
     the Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation, the National 
     Credit Union Administration Board, and the Federal Trade 
     Commission, shall prescribe regulations, in final form, 
     implementing the amendments made by this Act before the end 
     of the 6-month period beginning on the date of the enactment 
     of this Act, except that it is the sense of the Congress that 
     no provision of this Act should impede the promulgation of 
     regulations in final form under laws in effect on the day 
     before such date of enactment and that such regulations 
     should be prescribed in final form on or before December 31, 
     2008, and should apply to credit card transactions under any 
     open end consumer credit plan after the end of the 30-day 
     period beginning on the date such regulations are prescribed 
     in final form.

  The SPEAKER pro tempore. The gentlewoman from New York (Mrs. Maloney) 
and the gentleman from California (Mr. Campbell) each will control 30 
minutes.
  The Chair recognizes the gentlewoman from New York.


                             General Leave

  Mrs. MALONEY of New York. Madam Speaker, I ask unanimous consent that 
all Members may have 5 legislative days within which to revise and 
extend their remarks on H.R. 5244 and to insert extraneous material 
thereon.
  The SPEAKER pro tempore. Is there objection to the request of the 
gentlewoman from New York?
  There was no objection.
  Mrs. MALONEY of New York. Madam Speaker, I yield myself such time as 
I may consume.
  Madam Speaker, I rise in support of H.R. 5244, the Credit 
Cardholders' Bill of Rights. I introduced this bill, together with 
Chairman Frank. This important legislation has 155 cosponsors. A dozen 
national consumer groups have not only endorsed this legislation, but 
have made it one of their top priorities. The AFL-CIO and especially 
the SEIU have strongly supported the bill. Major civil rights groups 
saw this bill as necessary to stop abuses to their constituents.
  Over 50 newspapers from all over the Nation published editorials and 
op-eds in support of credit card reform, from California to Florida and 
even my own hometown paper, the New York Times.
  The Federal Reserve, whose first priority is protecting the safety 
and soundness of our financial institutions and our economy, has called 
the credit card practices addressed in this bill ``anticompetitive for 
markets and unfair and deceptive to consumers.'' Some 56,000 Americans 
wrote in in support of the proposed Federal rule, more than any in the 
history of the Fed, commenting in support of this bill.
  Rarely do we get an opportunity to vote for legislation with such 
deep and widespread support. In the midst of the financial turmoil in 
our markets, Congress has been asked to provide $700 billion for Wall 
Street. Now we have a chance with this bill to do something for Main 
Street.
  Credit cards are an essential part of our economy, but for too long 
card issuers have been allowed to do whatever they want, any time, for 
any reason. A deal is a deal, but what sort of a deal is it when one 
side gets to make all the decisions? This bill will get credit card 
practices back to basic principles of contractual fairness.

                              {time}  1215

  No other industry is allowed to raise the price of a product after 
the consumer has bought it.
  Also, the credit card bill of rights bans ``any time any reason'' 
rate increases on existing card balances. It bans double cycle billing 
which charges interest on debt already paid.
  It gives consumers 45 days notice of any rate increases so 
cardholders can decide whether to pay off their balances and shop for 
another card. The bill makes sure that consumers who borrow high rate 
balances such as emergency cash advances can pay them off by requiring 
issuers to credit some part of the payments to the high rate balances.
  The bill stops due date gimmicks that trick cardholders into paying 
late and racking up unjustified fees. It prevents subprime cards from 
trapping the most vulnerable cardholders in a cycle of debt, and it 
prohibits issuing cards to vulnerable minors.
  The bill will demonstrate, once and for all, that Congress is 
protecting working Americans, as well as large institutions, from the 
current financial storm. Unfair credit card debt is as toxic to 
ordinary citizens as subprime debt obligations are to investment banks.
  This is an issue that cuts across social and economic groups. 
Everyone has a credit card, and too many have a credit card story of 
getting hit with an unfair or deceptive practice.
  I expect opponents of reform will argue that we should wait for the 
Federal Reserve to act or, as they put it, Congress should defer to the 
Fed; but

[[Page 20210]]

this Congress and this majority cannot abdicate our responsibilities. 
This country cannot afford to wait for this administration and its 
regulators any longer. We need to take action now on this critical 
issue.
  I urge my colleagues to support this bill. Enough is enough. It is 
time to help consumers.
  Madam Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.
  Mr. CAMPBELL of California. Madam Speaker, I yield myself such time 
as I may consume.
  There is already existing law on this subject. This is clearly a 
critical subject. There has been discussion about unfair and deceptive 
practices, and I don't think there is any disagreement that unfair and 
deceptive practices exist in the credit card industry. The question is, 
how do we deal with it and what do we do with it?
  Right now there is existing law. The existing law says that the 
Federal Reserve is supposed to crack down through regulation on 
``unfair and deceptive acts or practices.''
  To that end, the Federal Reserve in May issued proposed regulations 
to do exactly that, to try to stop those things that they determined 
were, at that time, unfair and deceptive. As the lady from New York 
correctly pointed out, there have been tens of thousands of responses 
and input to the Federal Reserve on their proposed regulations. The 
Federal Reserve has said that they will make those regulations final 
prior to the end of the year, which by the way, is more likely to be 
sooner than this legislation could possibly pass both Houses and 
perhaps be signed by the President.
  I don't know why at this point we would want to interfere with this 
process, which appears to be working well. Clearly it is working well 
because the proposed bill is pretty much identical to the proposed 
regulations that the Fed put out in May.
  Now the Fed may make some changes to those regulations based on the 
tens of thousands of responses that they got, which is how that process 
works. For us to come in and intercede in that process and overrule 
that process is, first of all, wrong; and, second of all, sets a bad 
precedent.
  The reason that we often, in this situation and other situations in 
Congress, allow the definitions of these sorts of things to be done by 
regulators is that things change quickly. Congress doesn't act quickly.
  Next year, there could be new deceptive practices. There could be 
some things out there this year that are in the proposed regulations 
that have been determined to actually not be deceptive or perhaps to 
interfere with the marketplace. By doing this, we are stepping in, and 
we are defining what these things are, and that is not something I 
believe we should be doing when the existing law is in process and 
appears to be functioning correctly.
  Second of all, it is well known the major issue that we will be 
dealing with this week is the financial crisis in which the country 
finds itself gripped. This is clearly a very, very serious financial 
crisis and a very serious issue.
  What are the ramifications? What are the manifestations of this 
financial crisis? Right now, credit is contracting. Currently, it is 
happening in the corporate and business markets, but it is also already 
extending, and has been, to home loans, car loans and, yes, credit 
cards.
  We are in a financial crisis in which the availability of credit to 
Americans everywhere, in all forms, is becoming more difficult to get 
and more expensive. Clearly, the solutions to this crisis go way beyond 
the scope of this bill that we have before us today. But one thing we 
don't want to do is to further constrict credit markets that are 
already constricting and further increase the interest rates to 
consumers that are already going up.
  This bill, by stepping in directly in this way and interfering with 
the process that the Federal Reserve has in place, has the potential to 
do that. I would say that before people vote on this bill, I think they 
need to consider carefully that if it becomes more difficult for people 
to get credit in the future, if in the next weeks or months it becomes 
harder to even get a credit card or the interest rates thereon go up, 
do you want to be a part of pushing that credit out and pushing those 
rates up, or do you want to be a part of looking at the solution to 
those issues?
  Let's remember that many of the credit card issuing companies are 
those companies that are on Wall Street and that are in trouble. They 
are not making any money right now.
  Now we are not here, and the purpose of credit cards is not to ensure 
that they make money through their credit cards, that is not where I am 
going. That is the market at work. That is their problem; that is their 
issue. But the fact is that when companies don't make money on 
something, they do less of it or they charge more for it, and that is 
where we appear to be headed now.
  I strongly urge my colleagues to oppose this bill and suggest that 
you consider that if this bill does not pass, that still unfair and 
deceptive practices will be reined in by the Federal Reserve's 
regulations before the end of the year in a rational manner and 
hopefully we will then proceed to deal with, later this week, the issue 
of trying to make sure that credit and credit cards will be available.
  Madam Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.
  Mrs. MALONEY of New York. I would say to my good friend on the other 
side of the aisle, doing nothing and hoping that the Fed will act is an 
abdication of our responsibility, and that is not the way of this 
Congress. The Fed has called it unfair and deceptive practices, they 
have called it anticompetitive, and we should act to correct these 
abuses.
  Madam Speaker, I yield 2 minutes to my friend and colleague, Keith 
Ellison, the gentleman from Minnesota, who is cochair of the Consumer 
Justice Caucus and has had a leadership role in passing this bill.
  Mr. ELLISON. Let me thank the gentlelady from New York, who has done 
absolutely heroic work on this bill, and let me echo her words: no more 
abdication from Congress. We are a coequal branch of Congress, and it 
is time for us to do our job.
  Americans all over this country want to know what does the Congress 
care about the debt that they are drowning in because of these credit 
card practices. If the Fed says they are deceptive practices, who are 
we to just let them go on and step back and say, well, somebody else 
will do it.
  No, it is time for the Congress to do something about it now. To do 
otherwise is to abdicate our responsibility. Nobody at the Fed holds an 
election certificate. All of us do. It is time to take this thing by 
the charge.
  The fact is, about $8,000 worth of credit card debt is what Americans 
are holding on average for people who have a revolving balance. That is 
a burden that people cannot sustain. The fact is, we would not be in 
this situation if we had the active regulation that Americans expect 
from their government.
  We have seen now nearly 30 years of stagnating wages. Americans have 
had flat wages, on average, if you look at folks who are working hard 
every day to put food on the table. Because the wages have been flat, 
we haven't had the savings to buy the things that we need.
  What has been happening is people have gone to their credit cards, 
and as we have gone to the credit cards, the credit card companies, 
some of them, have been using unfair, deceptive practices that have got 
to be brought to a stop now. If the Fed says they are wrong, they are 
wrong.
  We shouldn't have to wait on them to tell us what to do. We should do 
our job.
  I just want to thank Chairwoman Maloney and Chairman Frank for 
bringing this bill to the floor now. I hope this bill can be wrapped 
into the rescue that is being contemplated for the financial meltdown 
that is going on now.
  This is what we should be doing, and it needs to go into effect now. 
We need to deal with the credit crisis now, and credit cards must be a 
part of it.
  Mr. CAMPBELL of California. Madam Speaker, I yield myself 30 seconds. 
I would say, if the Fed is so unable to deal with this problem, then

[[Page 20211]]

why does this bill basically parrot exactly what the Fed did in May?
  Madam Speaker, I would like to yield 4 minutes to my friend and 
colleague, and a member of the Financial Services Committee, the 
gentleman from Delaware (Mr. Castle).
  Mr. CASTLE. I thank the gentleman from California for yielding.
  Let me first pay a compliment to the sponsor of the legislation. I 
worked with her through a number of the hearings on this situation with 
credit card companies. I think she heightened the awareness to do 
something about this. Maybe that's, in part, why the Federal Reserve 
has started to move forward. I think she deserves a great deal of 
credit for that.
  Madam Speaker, I do not, however, support this legislation at this 
time for a lot of the reasons that have already been stated.
  The Federal Reserve, as we all know, regulates in this area. This is 
not one of those unregulated banking areas. They have issued a rule on 
unfair and deceptive practices. They have received, as the gentlewoman 
has properly pointed out, over 50,000 comments concerning that. Those 
comments have come both in opposition to their rule and in support of 
it, and they are now going through all of that.
  We anticipate that by the end of the year they will issue their 
final, what is known as UDAP, rules on this particular subject, dealing 
with these deceptive practices, which will guide the consumers, which 
will guide the credit card companies, in which a great deal of 
expertise and time has been put in. I am certain that a number of 
provisions that are in this legislation will be included in whatever 
the Fed people issue, but there also may be different ways of looking 
at problems, there may be different nuances. Frankly, I trust their 
expertise to be able to do that.
  Plus, we have the ability as Congress, or at least the next Congress 
does, to come back and incorporate into law anything we feel should 
happen. I think by doing what we are doing now by trying to pass 
legislation at this point, regardless of whether it could pass in the 
Senate or not in the next few days, we are, indeed, taking the 
responsibility of doing something that the Fed is well prepared to 
handle. I think we should leave it to them to do that.
  For that reason, I believe that this legislation should not have come 
up. I prefer not to oppose it, but in the circumstances that we are 
dealing with, I feel that we need to oppose it.
  There are a few points here. There is a lot of competition out there 
and people can go from one credit card company to another. I do not 
necessarily think that we are abrogating our responsibility, as has 
been stated on the floor here, by not supporting this legislation at 
this time. As a matter of fact, I think we are doing the right thing as 
far as consumers, credit card companies and the economy is concerned.
  I am also concerned about who is going to pay all of this. If some of 
these steps are taken and all of a sudden there are losses as far as 
the credit card industry is concerned, does that mean fees go up? Other 
people who were paying lower interest rates are going to pay higher 
interest rates? Will they charge more at the beginning? Various steps 
that I don't know if I have the economic sophistication to explain, but 
I have a gut reaction that the bottom line is that somebody is going to 
pay for it. They always do in some way or another, and that could be 
many consumers who are presently being responsible in terms of how they 
are handling their debt circumstances.

                              {time}  1230

  So for all of these reasons, it is my judgment that this is 
legislation better not done at this time. Could it come back in the 
spring in the form of incorporating what the Fed has done or 
incorporating and polishing what the Federal Reserve issues in their 
rules, yes, that would be something that we should do. I think we all 
agree there should be steps taken in this situation.
  But I trust those who have received all of these comments and looked 
at all of this and have all of the expertise to make the decisions. I 
would hope that Members of Congress would withhold voting for this at 
this time and see what the Federal Reserve is going to issue.
  I would just add, the statement was made by the sponsor, I believe, 
that hoping that the Fed will act is an abrogation of our 
responsibility. The Fed has acted. They have issued a rule. They are 
getting comments. They are going to issue a final rule. I don't think 
there is any doubt in anyone's mind that the Fed has acted in this 
circumstance, so I urge defeat of this legislation if it is going to 
move forward.
  Mrs. MALONEY of New York. I yield such time as he may consume to the 
Chair of the Committee on Financial Services, Barney Frank, and 
congratulate him on his hard work on this piece of legislation and so 
many other areas.
  Mr. FRANK of Massachusetts. I thank the gentlewoman who has been the 
spark plug here. I think it is an important day, that we are dealing in 
a rational way with credit card legislation.
  I appreciate the reasonable tone of my friend from Delaware. We 
disagree some. I don't think anyone could reasonably characterize this 
as some assault on the free enterprise system. It understands the 
importance of credit cards and tries to work within that framework.
  It is important to note that what this bill does is essentially 
protect consumers against retroactive unfairness. When it comes to rate 
setting, this bill, to the disappointment of some, doesn't limit future 
rates. As far as the future is concerned, if proper notice is given, 
this bill is not restrictive. It does deal essentially with 
retroactivity and with honoring the consumers' wishes.
  The thing I want to address is one thing which seems to be a little 
upside down, and that is we should defer to the Federal Reserve. I want 
to say to some of my Republican friends, that sounds a little odd to me 
after hearing for years that the people must be allowed to decide, that 
we shouldn't defer to unelected bureaucrats. The notion that we, the 
elected Representatives, should defer to the Federal Reserve not on 
monetary policy but on a public policy matter involving what institutes 
fairness with credit cards, it is not an argument that I have often 
heard on that side.
  Now I understand there is nothing in the Constitution or the rules of 
the House that requires consistency, but I would hope we would at least 
note there is an element of convenience in the invocation of this 
argument at this point, let's defer to the Federal Reserve. No, let's 
exercise the powers given to us under the Constitution. And there has 
been a lot of talk about the Federal Reserve doing too much. Well, I 
think sometimes they have to act because we don't. But here we are 
willing to do it.
  But again, I want to stress the reasonableness of these proposals. 
They deal with retroactivity and unfair billing practices. If a credit 
card company follows the rules set here, they are not prohibited or 
restricted going forward with setting whatever conditions they think 
ought to be set. That, I think, is the essence of fairness, and I hope 
the bill is passed. I again congratulate the gentlewoman from New York 
for taking the lead.
  Mr. CAMPBELL of California. How much time remains?
  The SPEAKER pro tempore. The gentleman from California has 19 minutes 
and the gentlewoman from New York has 20 minutes.
  Mr. CAMPBELL of California. Madam Speaker, I yield myself 2 minutes 
to respond to the chairman of the Financial Services Committee.
  I would argue that this bill already defers to the Federal Reserve 
because it basically parroted the proposed regulations that the Federal 
Reserve put out in May. So this bill basically says okay, we are going 
to take what you guys proposed and we are going to make it law, not 
regulation which can be changed, not making any changes based on the 
50,000 or 40,000, we are going to make it law.
  Second, on this side we are not deferring to the Federal Reserve; we 
are deferring to existing law. And the will of the people based on 
existing law was that it is best that these sorts of determinations and 
definitions, which is

[[Page 20212]]

what is unfair and what is deceptive, be handled on a regulatory basis, 
than that it is that Congress come back every year or 2 years or 6 
years or whatever and try and determine what is new out there in the 
marketplace that is now determined to be unfair.
  I reserve the balance of my time.
  Mrs. MALONEY of New York. Madam Speaker, I thank the gentleman for 
his comments, but I introduced my bill in February after many 
legislative hearings and meetings that involved Members on the other 
side of the aisle, stakeholders, consumers, and everyone concerned 
about this problem. We drafted and put in our bill in February. In May, 
the Federal Reserve came back with recommendations that mirrored our 
bill almost completely.
  I would like to point out to him that the Federal Reserve is not in 
the Constitution, and we didn't leave it up to the regulators in the 
foreclosure crisis. We passed a bill to help homeowners stay in their 
homes. As we have seen Wall Street under attack, we are not leaving 
things up to the regulators. We passed legislation giving new direction 
to the Treasury to help the GSEs, investment banks, and insurers. So 
you are very selective on your comments that we should step back and 
let the Fed do everything.
  I now recognize an outstanding member of our committee, the gentleman 
from Texas (Mr. Hinojosa) who is co-chair of the Literacy Caucus on the 
Financial Services Committee.
  Mr. HINOJOSA. Madam Speaker, I rise in strong support of H.R. 5422. I 
want to commend Chairwoman Maloney for introducing H.R. 5422, the 
Credit Cardholders' Bill of Rights Act. I am proud to be a cosponsor of 
this legislation which is supported by many organizations, including 
the National Council of La Raza, LULAC, MALDEF, and many others.
  As chairman of the Subcommittee on Higher Education, I am concerned 
that thousands of students each year do not enroll in higher education 
institutions because of financial barriers. I am equally concerned 
about the amount of debt that students are incurring while attending 
institutions of higher education.
  I have been working diligently with our Democratic leaders to make 
college more affordable and accessible. We are tackling that issue as 
well as trying to ensure that students graduate with the least amount 
of debt possible.
  I am interested in the relationship between institutions of higher 
education and credit card companies. Many receive revenue from credit 
card deals. I want to know the nature of the deals, how much the credit 
card companies make from those deals, how they market those credit 
cards to students, and whether the institutions approach the credit 
card companies or vice versa. We need to address this issue and find 
out how widespread the practice is and whether it is national in scope.
  This legislation will eliminate unfair and arbitrary interest rate 
increases, end unfair penalties to cardholders who pay on time, and 
require the fair allocation of consumer payments. Moreover, it will 
help college students reduce their debt.
  Madam Speaker, I want to take this opportunity to again thank 
Chairwoman Maloney for introducing the Credit Cardholders' Bill of 
Rights legislation, and I support it.
  Mr. CAMPBELL of California. Madam Speaker, I reserve the balance of 
my time.
  Mrs. MALONEY of New York. Madam Speaker, I recognize the gentleman 
from North Carolina, Walter Jones, for 1 minute, an outstanding member 
of the Committee on Financial Services.
  Mr. JONES. Mrs. Maloney, thank you for your hard work on this 
important legislation.
  I stand here with great pride and respect that I support this 
legislation. Approximately 145 million Americans, about half the 
population, own credit cards. Americans in the year 2001 paid $50 
billion in finance charges; $50 billion.
  A GAO study on credit cards found there are many new types of fees, 
new types of fees on cards, and they have risen much faster than 
inflation. The GAO also found that fees and penalties are buried in 
statements making it hard to understand when they will be levied on 
cardholders.
  Madam Speaker, I don't know how anyone could be opposed to the 
American people fully understanding the charges on their credit card 
bills, and that is exactly why I stand here today in strong support and 
I ask my colleagues on the Republican side to join in supporting this 
bill.
  Mr. CAMPBELL of California. Madam Speaker, I continue to reserve the 
balance of my time.
  Mrs. MALONEY of New York. Madam Speaker, I recognize the gentleman 
from North Carolina (Mr. Price) for 3 minutes.
  Mr. PRICE of North Carolina. Madam Speaker, I rise to engage in a 
colloquy with the Chair of the subcommittee. I thank her for bringing 
this bill to the floor and her hard work in protecting the interests of 
credit card holders.
  As the House considers this bill, I want to make this body aware of a 
related bill I have introduced, along with a number of cosponsors, the 
Credit Card Repayment Act, H.R. 1510, which would require lenders to 
give cardholders more information on their monthly statements. For 
example, how long would it take the consumer to pay off their entire 
balance making only the minimum monthly payment, and how much would 
they pay over that time, including principal and interest?
  The bill has been endorsed by the Center for Responsible Lending, the 
Consumer Federation of America, Consumer Action, and the National 
Council of La Raza. The bill is not part of the legislation we are 
considering today, but these kinds of disclosure requirements 
complement the bill currently on the floor, and they can be a valuable 
part of our efforts to help protect consumers. I ask the chairwoman to 
work with me to incorporate these provisions into the legislation as it 
moves forward.
  I would appreciate the chairwoman's response, but I first yield to 
the gentlewoman from New York (Mrs. Lowey).
  Mrs. LOWEY. And I want to thank the gentlewoman from New York and the 
gentleman from North Carolina. While most credit card holders know it 
is difficult to pay off the balance while only making the minimum 
payment, they do not know the actual cost. Consumers have a right to 
know the true cost of making minimum payments, and I look forward to 
working with my colleagues to implement these important changes.
  Mr. PRICE of North Carolina. I am happy to yield to the gentleman 
from Virginia (Mr. Moran).
  Mr. MORAN of Virginia. I thank my friend, the gentleman from North 
Carolina. I am embarrassed to admit that I have been periodically 
suggesting this provision since I was on the Banking Committee 18 years 
ago. It is a deceptive billing practice, and all we are asking is that 
the consumer know how much they will wind up paying and how long it 
will take them to pay it. And if they knew they would be paying much 
more than the original purchase, and they will be paying it for the 
rest of their lives, they might do the right thing. It would be the 
right thing for the committee to pass this kind of legislation at the 
next opportunity.
  Mr. PRICE of North Carolina. I yield to the chairwoman of the 
subcommittee.
  Mrs. MALONEY of New York. I thank the gentleman for his comments. I 
have been a supporter of transparency and fairness for consumers in the 
financial services area since I came to Congress. I believe consumers 
should have complete information so they can decide how to manage their 
money more efficiently and better.
  I commend the gentleman from North Carolina for his efforts to 
provide consumers with robust information, and I would be happy to work 
with him on including these provisions.
  Mr. PRICE of North Carolina. I thank the gentlewoman.
  Mr. CAMPBELL of California. Madam Speaker, I yield myself 2 minutes 
just for a brief response.
  In listening to the arguments on the other side, it sounds as though 
they are debating for changing certain things in credit cards as though 
we are debating against that. We are not.

[[Page 20213]]

  What we are here saying is simply that this kind of thing is better 
done by regulation than it is by proscriptive statute, which is what 
this bill would do. And actually, it would be more effective in 
protecting the consumers if there is a regular regulatory process and 
review and so forth, not just this year but ongoing forward, than if 
Congress keeps stepping in and interfering with and, in fact, probably 
slowing down that particular regulatory review and process.
  That is what we are talking about here, in addition to the fact that 
the other very important thing to keep in mind is that we have the 
availability of this credit going forward given the current crisis in 
which we find ourselves.
  I reserve the balance of my time.
  Mrs. MALONEY of New York. Madam Speaker, in response to my good 
friend's comments, the bill is very close to the rule, and opponents of 
the bill also oppose the rule. Industry opposes my bill and has filed 
arguments opposing the rule. The OCC opposes the bill and also opposes 
the Fed rule. The Federal Reserve and two other regulators support the 
substance of the bill. The administration opposes provisions of my bill 
that are identical to the Fed rule.
  So it would be one thing if you supported the regulations you so 
passionately argue we should be waiting for; it is another thing to 
argue that we should wait for something that those who oppose 
protecting consumers, giving them information and providing fairness in 
the contractual agreement between credit card issuers and consumers.
  I now yield 2 minutes to my good friend from the great State of 
Colorado, Mark Udall, who has been a leader in this debate and has had 
constituents who have come before the committee to testify. We thank 
him for his leadership.

                              {time}  1245

  Mr. UDALL of Colorado. I thank the chairwoman for yielding me time, 
and I rise in strong support of this legislation. The bill's purpose is 
to require more fair play for people with credit cards.
  For many Americans, consumer credit is more than a convenience. They 
rely on it for everyday needs. And for them it's a necessity. But they 
aren't always treated fairly by the companies that issue the credit 
cards that they use.
  As the chairwoman pointed out, I've heard from many people in my 
State of Colorado asking me to help level the playing field. They work 
to do the right thing and pay their bills on time, and they deserve to 
be treated in good faith by the credit card companies.
  That's the reason I've been working to make some commonsense changes 
in the rules for credit cards over these last two Congresses. I 
introduced a bill in 2006, and then reintroduced it again this year. 
And I'm proud that it won the support of an array of consumer groups, 
as well as 39 cosponsors from congressional districts across the 
country.
  Most of the provisions in my bill have been included in this bill, 
H.R. 5244, the Credit Cardholders Bill of Rights. This is a good, solid 
bill that will bring real reform without arbitrary rate caps or price 
controls that could backfire and make credit less available.
  Now later this week we'll be debating on how to respond to the 
problems in the credit markets. This debate will focus on a financial 
market crisis that's brought on, in part, by the reckless practices of 
lenders who thought the use of complicated financial engineering would 
make risky loans safe.
  Across the country, people worry that we will be too concerned about 
rescuing the reckless and not concerned enough about fairness for hard 
working Americans who may be called upon to pay the tab. So it's 
appropriate, as we prepare for that debate, that we start by acting and 
bringing greater fairness to the millions of Americans who need and use 
credit cards.
  I urge passage of the bill. I thank the chairwoman again for her 
leadership on this important measure.
  Madam Speaker, as a proud cosponsor of this legislation, I rise in 
strong support of it as a way to add some common-sense rules to the 
laws governing issuance of credit cards.
  Later this week, we will be debating how to respond to problems in 
the credit markets. As we all know, that debate will focus on a 
financial-market crisis brought on, in large part, by reckless 
practices of lenders who thought the use of complicated financial 
``engineering'' would make risky loans safe.
  Understandably, many in Colorado and across the country are concerned 
that Congress may be too concerned about rescuing those who took 
excessive risks and not concerned enough about fairness for hard-
working American taxpayers who will be called on to pay the tab.
  So it is appropriate, as we prepare for that debate, that we start by 
acting to bring greater fairness to the millions of Americans who need 
and use credit cards. I have heard from constituents across Colorado, 
asking me to help even the playing field on this issue.
  They benefit from the widespread availability of consumer credit, and 
their use of that credit has been important to our economy. In fact, 
for many Americans, consumer credit is more than a convenience. It is 
something that many people need to use to pay for their everyday needs. 
For them, it is a necessity.
  Of course, another word for credit is debt--and credit card debt has 
increased considerably in recent years. Overall, during the last 
decade, total credit-card debt rose by about 70 percent, and this 
clearly has an effect on consumers.
  Some polls have reported that about 70 percent of surveyed families 
said the quality of their lives is adversely affected by the extent of 
their debts, and young people are more worried about going deeply into 
debt than about a terrorist attack.
  Some have argued that much of this debt was caused by recklessness 
and an erosion of financial responsibility. That was one of the main 
arguments advanced in support of the recent changes in the bankruptcy 
laws.
  But while there was something to that argument, it was not the whole 
story and it put too much emphasis on borrowers alone. Instead of just 
focusing on borrowers, Congress should also do more to promote 
responsibility by those who provide the credit--and one place to start 
is with credit card companies.
  That's the reason I have been working to make some common-sense 
changes in the rules for credit card companies.
  I first introduced a bill to do that back in 2006, and reintroduced 
it again last year with our colleague, the gentleman from Missouri, Mr. 
Cleaver. I'm proud it won the support of an array of consumer groups as 
well as 39 cosponsors from Congressional Districts across the country.
  Now, I have joined as an original cosponsor of H.R. 5244, the Credit 
Cardholders' Bill of Rights, which includes many provisions based on my 
bill.
  It includes protection against arbitrary interest rate increases. It 
will prevent cardholders who pay on time from being unfairly penalized. 
It will bar excessive fees and will require more fairness in the way 
payments are handled. And it would prohibit the use of ``universal 
default'' clauses--provisions that allow card issuers to impose a new, 
higher interest rate on a credit card account if there has been any 
change for the worse in the cardholder's credit score--even if the 
change is unrelated to the credit card account.
  In short, H.R. 5244 is a good, solid bill that will bring real reform 
without arbitrary rate caps or price controls that could backfire and 
make credit less available.
  It deserves passage today and prompt enactment into law.
  Mr. CAMPBELL of California. I reserve the balance of my time.
  Mrs. MALONEY of New York. Madam Speaker, I yield 2 minutes to Loretta 
Sanchez, who has been involved in the drafting and the movement of this 
bill. I congratulate her on her leadership.
  Ms. LORETTA SANCHEZ of California. Madam Speaker, I want to thank 
Mrs. Maloney of New York for coming up with this, for working with so 
many of us, because we have heard from so many of the people we 
represent asking for just some better and fairer types of practices for 
credit cards. I rise today as a cosponsor of this bill.
  While the economic crisis on Wall Street is on the front page of 
every newspaper, many American families are actually dealing with their 
own crisis at home, and that is this crisis of how they get credit and 
how they manage credit.
  Credit card debt in the United States has reached a record high, 
nearly $1 trillion, and unfortunately, many

[[Page 20214]]

Americans are subjected to these excessive credit card fees and unfair 
interest rate increases with no warning, among other misleading and 
questionable tactics.
  This legislation today would end practices that would require credit 
card companies to provide 45 days' notice before interest rate 
increases, and mailing billing statements 25 calendar days before the 
due date, instead of only 14.
  In addition, this bill would prohibit double cycling billing so that 
companies cannot charge consumers interest on debt that they actually 
have already paid on time.
  This legislation provides consumers with needed protections, while 
allowing credit card companies to balance the financial risk of the 
consumers they lend to. I think that's what's important, that the 
credit card companies also have to take responsibility for the type of 
credit risk that they're taking on.
  We're talking so much today about credit risks. Well, this is one of 
the areas that is incredibly important. This has been going on for too 
long. Credit card companies just give credit to anybody, and they're 
really not taking the responsibility of what type of risk is there.
  We have to protect the access to credit, but we also have to take 
into account and protect Americans against some of these bad practices.
  Mr. CAMPBELL of California. I continue to reserve the balance of my 
time.
  Mrs. MALONEY of New York. May I inquire as to how much time remains.
  The SPEAKER pro tempore. The gentlewoman from New York has 8 minutes 
remaining. The gentleman from California has 15\1/2\ minutes remaining.
  Mrs. MALONEY of New York. I yield 1 minute to Keith Ellison, 
Congressman Ellison from Minnesota.
  Mr. ELLISON. Madam Speaker, the gentleman from California has made 
the point that if this bill passes, that interest rates will go up and 
that credit availability will decline. Is the Congressman saying that 
credit card companies will retaliate against consumers with higher 
rates if Congress proscribes practices that even the Fed considers 
deceptive?
  Mr. CAMPBELL of California. Will the gentleman yield?
  Mr. ELLISON. I yield to the gentleman from California.
  Mr. CAMPBELL of California. Yes. What I said was that they may. And 
it would not be a retaliatory basis. It would be because the credit 
markets are currently in great turmoil. And because they are in great 
turmoil already, credit is restricting and the rates are going up. That 
is happening not just with credit card debt, but with car loan debt.
  Mr. ELLISON. Reclaiming my time, so for practices the Fed says are 
deceptive, if they are proscribed, you believe that is something that 
the credit card companies will react with interest rate increases on 
consumers for?
  Mr. CAMPBELL of California. No. What I am saying is that we should, 
as I've said----
  The SPEAKER pro tempore. The time of the gentleman has expired.
  Mr. CAMPBELL of California. Madam Speaker, I yield myself a minute 
just to respond to that, that what we have here is that the unfair and 
deceptive practices should stop. The Federal Reserve is probably going 
to do that. But by stepping in now, they will be considering all of the 
responses they got, and by the way, the lady from New York mentioned 
about the credit card companies are against the Federal Reserve 
proposal. I'm sure they are. But the Federal Reserve will make the 
decision they believe is right based on the statute which says they are 
supposed to crack down on those unfair and deceptive practices. And 
they will do that.
  But what we don't want to do is send more messages to the marketplace 
now that we are stepping in to do things that may include some things 
that aren't unfair and deceptive, or that may mess with the financial 
markets because they are very, very fragile at the moment.
  I reserve the balance of my time.
  Mrs. MALONEY of New York. In response to my good friend and 
colleague, there is no evidence to support that claim. The argument 
that this will raise the cost of credit and restrict access to credit 
is an assertion that has absolutely no basis in fact. We asked the 
industry, at our six hearings, for some evidence to support this claim, 
and they had none.
  The Federal Reserve and the General Accounting Office have said in 
reports that there is no evidence to support the argument that these 
abuses have lowered rates or increased access to credit. And these 
reports are on my Web site and also on the industry's Web site.
  Getting rid of anticompetitive practices will increase access to 
credit. The Federal Reserve has called these practices anticompetitive. 
Getting rid of them will not hurt the market. Getting rid of these 
practices will help competition and increase, not decrease, access to 
credit.
  As I mentioned earlier, we had a roundtable where many of the issuers 
participated, and some of them voluntarily started following the 
proposals, voluntarily. And they tried to move to the higher goal 
standards, and they were turning their backs on these unfair and 
deceptive practices. But they found that they were losing profit and 
market share. So we need to level the playing field not only for 
consumers, but for the industry itself.
  I would now like to yield 2 minutes to my distinguished colleague 
from Connecticut, Christopher Shays, who is a member of the Financial 
Services Committee.
  Mr. SHAYS. Thank you, Madam Speaker, and to my colleague, Carolyn 
Maloney, for introducing this bill and encouraging me to cosponsor it. 
I'm grateful I did, and I'm here to encourage its passage.
  I rise in support of the Credit Cardholders Bill of Rights.
  Loose mortgage underwriting standards and interest rate resets have 
helped cause the housing market to deteriorate. This could have been 
avoided had we acted earlier by establishing reasonable safeguards.
  With this legislation, we are acting responsibly, in my judgment, to 
address a credit problem. In an effort to make credit easily available, 
credit has been overextended, and many consumers can't afford 
significant interest rate increases.
  Consumers need fair, accurate, and transparent information to make 
informed choices regarding their credit card company or bank. This 
legislation gives consumers several long overdue protections, which 
include preventing sudden interest rate increases on existing loans, 
stopping the practice of universal default, and ensuring consumers have 
time to pay their bills.
  I hope we synchronize our efforts with the Federal Reserve to set 
some reasonable limits on consumer credit to protect our economy.
  Mr. CAMPBELL of California. I reserve the balance of my time.
  Mrs. MALONEY of New York. I yield 1 minute to my colleague, 
Congressman Ellison.
  Mr. ELLISON. Madam Speaker, thank you again for allowing me to 
address this final point.
  This issue that I put to our colleague and friend, Mr. Campbell, 
regarding whether or not deceptive practices, practices that have been 
deemed to be deceptive by the Fed and that are proscribed in this 
legislation today, whether these things will result in rate increases 
or lack of availability.
  In fact, they will do the opposite, Madam Speaker. They will provide 
transparency, they'll provide fair rules, and most importantly, they 
will help to keep good lenders good.
  If you have a good lender, a good credit card company who is playing 
fair and acting ethically, and yet their competitors are allowed to 
engage in universal default and things like this, the net result will 
be that they will be at a competitive disadvantage when they don't do 
these unethical practices, things that the Fed has deemed to be unfair. 
So it's very important that we keep a nice level playing field and 
maintain the high standards in the industry.
  This is actually a bill that will help the credit card industry 
because it will send a signal that the rules are fair, even, and ethics 
are the priority.

[[Page 20215]]


  Mr. CAMPBELL of California. Madam Speaker, I would like to point out 
that Fed Governor Randy Kroszner, in testimony, said that he did 
believe that the regulations promulgated by the Fed would, in fact, 
raise interest rates for some and restrict credit for some, talking 
about his own proposed regulations. So there is at least some 
authoritative belief that that will happen.
  I would now like to yield 4 minutes to a member of the Financial 
Services Committee, the gentlewoman from Minnesota (Mrs. Bachmann).
  Mrs. BACHMANN. I thank the gentleman from California for his 
leadership, for what he's doing on this bill. He's a remarkable talent, 
and we're well served by Mr. Campbell.
  Madam Speaker, I rise in opposition to this bill that's before this 
body. Given the current instability in our credit markets and, Madam 
Speaker, given the pressing need for this United States Congress to 
focus on the financial services bailout that is now before us, this 
bill is simply not what the United States Congress should be debating 
today. In fact, this bill is just another example of how this Congress 
far too often charges ahead without full contemplation of the 
consequences of its actions.
  In today's global marketplace, Madam Speaker, consumers are paying 
for products and services more and more with credit and debit cards, 
rather than with cash payments. It's a completely different way today 
that we have of doing business. In fact, electronic payments now 
account for more than half of all consumer purchases here in the United 
States.
  With the increasing role that credit cards play in the everyday lives 
of most Americans, it's both timely, and appropriate that we update and 
improve standards to protect those American consumers from unfair and 
deceptive credit card practices.
  I also believe, Madam Speaker, that it's imperative that we improve 
access to useful, understandable and complete disclosure about the 
terms and conditions that govern credit card use here in our country.

                              {time}  1300

  The Federal Reserve Board has made a proposal. They proposed a rule 
known as Regulation Z which prescribes uniform methods for computing 
the cost of credit for disclosing credit terms and for resolving errors 
on certain types of credit accounts. This proposed rule is virtually 
identical to H.R. 5244, the Credit Card Holder's Bill of Rights Act of 
2008.
  While both Regulation Z and this bill are offered with the best of 
intentions, both could have very serious unintended consequences, and 
they could pose potentially significant, unnecessary costs on consumers 
and the United States economy. Goodness knows we don't need that right 
now.
  Madam Speaker, Congress should absolutely allow the Federal Reserve 
Board's rulemaking process to play out before we rush to codify this 
proposed rule into law. The public comment periods, the public notice 
both serve a very important role that I think we all agree that will 
ensure that this government carefully considers every angle before we 
jump to regulatory change.
  I'm very actually sorry to see the House Financial Service Committee 
hastily move to implement H.R. 5244 before the rulemaking process even 
had time to play out. It seems like that's the game now in Washington, 
DC: rush to judgment. Quick, hasty moves before the public even has 
time to weigh in. That's not democracy at its best, Madam Speaker, 
because this action shut out the comments of consumers. It shut out 
nonprofit organizations. It shut out industry representatives. It's 
certainly not in the best interests of credit card holders.
  We all know that when Congress moves too quickly and bypasses 
important parts of the process, that it often does more harm than good. 
Take a look at this week. Take a look at what we're about to do: put 
the American consumer on the hook for almost another trillion dollars 
in bad debt.
  This Congress has a responsibility to the people that we serve and to 
businesses to analyze this proposal's overall effectiveness and the 
effect on the cost of credit and market liquidity. Let's remember, the 
underlying, underpinning of this current crisis is the lack of 
liquidity. In other words, money into the marketplace. And that's very 
true today.
  Ironically, the premise of this new $700 billion bailout is to 
restore that form of liquidity.
  The SPEAKER pro tempore. The time of the gentlewoman has expired.
  Mr. CAMPBELL of California. I would like to yield the lady 1 more 
minute.
  Mrs. BACHMANN. Why would Congress dismiss outside input from the 
experts? Are we so smart that we don't need that outside input? I think 
experience proves otherwise, Madam Speaker. Should we not hear from 
those who are impacted most from these stressful times? We are 
imprudent, to say the least, if we do not allow for that comment.
  I could not support this bill, Madam Speaker, when it moved out of 
committee because it was imprudent to jump ahead; and given this new 
instability that's broke out in the last 2 weeks, I absolutely in good 
conscience cannot support this measure now. Congress should exercise 
prudence--wouldn't that be a novel idea?--and allow the Federal Reserve 
Board to finalize this proposal before we codify it with a vote of 
Congress.
  I want to thank you, Madam Speaker. I want to thank the gentleman for 
his absolutely supreme work that he's doing on this bill.
  Mrs. MALONEY of New York. In response to my good friend on the other 
side of the aisle, this has not been a rush to judgment. Democrats have 
been working on this bill for well over 2 years. My subcommittee has 
held 6 hearings, numerous meetings, roundtable discussions with 
consumers and issuers. The gentlelady claims that Reg Z is the bill. 
Reg Z is not at all the same as this bill. Reg Z from the Federal 
Reserve deals just with disclosure, and the Federal Reserve has said 
disclosure is not enough. They have called the practices unfair, 
deceptive, and anti-competitive, and have come forward with 
recommendations that, in many ways, resemble the bill that is before us 
today.
  I reserve the balance of my time.
  Mr. CAMPBELL of California. Madam Speaker, may I inquire as to how 
much time is remaining on both sides?
  The SPEAKER pro tempore. The gentleman from California has 10 minutes 
remaining. The gentlewoman from New York has 2 minutes remaining.
  Mr. CAMPBELL of California. Madam Speaker, I would like to yield 5 
minutes to the gentleman from Texas (Mr. Hensarling), also a member of 
the Financial Services Committee.
  Mr. HENSARLING. I thank the gentleman for yielding. I thank him for 
his leadership.
  I certainly understand the intent and the purpose of the gentlelady's 
bill, and her intent is good. Unfortunately, I believe the policy is 
bad.
  It is entitled the Credit Card Bill of Rights Act. I fear, if 
enacted, it will prove to be a ``credit card bill of wrongs'' for 
credit card holders all over America. I view it as a most decisively 
anti-consumer piece of legislation.
  Madam Speaker, I believe that this piece of legislation helps turn 
back the clock to a different era in America where there is little 
competition for credit cards, where a third fewer Americans had access 
to credit cards which so many now view as a necessity of everyday 
economic life. Those people in this previous era who did have credit 
cards universally paid a high, high interest rate.
  I believe this bill also represents another assault on our personal 
economic freedoms and will exacerbate the credit crunch that we see 
today. Why would we want to bring a bill to the floor that could make 
credit even less accessible and more expensive at a time when Americans 
are struggling to pay their bills?
  This bill ultimately would limit the ability in some instances to 
charge interest; it would limit the ability in some respects to change 
terms; limit the ability to impose certain late fees;

[[Page 20216]]

limit the ability to impose over-the-limit fees. Essentially, it erodes 
what we call risk-based pricing.
  And what has risk-based pricing and competition brought us? Number 
one, what we have seen is where interest rates used to be in the 20 
percent range, they have now fallen below the 15 percent range. We have 
seen a virtual disappearance in our entire economy of the dreaded 
annual fees, which typically most cards had charged anywhere from $20 
to $50. We have seen a flowering, a myriad of benefits that are now 
available from product protection to free plane tickets because of the 
competition, and an unprecedented surge in credit card use from under 
300 million a day to almost 700.
  Credit cards are just an absolutely vital tool for the small business 
in America, which is the job engine in our Nation. Madam Speaker, I 
hear from a lot of hardworking small business people in my district, 
the Fifth Congressional District of Texas that I am proud to represent. 
I hear from the Mayhall family that runs a small business in Athens, 
Texas. They write, ``Dear Congressman. I run a small business, and I do 
not have very good credit. I have four credit cards which have very low 
limits. I try not to use them very often, but sometimes the cash flow 
isn't there, and I have to have something for my business. Without 
access to this credit, I would not be able to purchase the items for my 
business when I need it.
  ``Please do not make it more difficult for me to run my business. I 
have enough problems.''
  I don't want to tell the Mayhall family of Athens, Texas, that maybe 
their small business just won't have access to one of those credit 
cards any more. I don't want to have to tell them that they may have to 
pay more. That simply isn't right.
  Now I don't come here today to defend credit card companies and all 
of their practices. There is one certain credit card company that my 
wife and I just refuse to do business with. We don't like them. We've 
changed our main credit cards several times because we didn't like some 
of the provisions. But we had that choice, Madam Speaker. We had that 
choice in a competitive economy.
  We should also mention a phrase that is rarely used in the Halls of 
Congress, and that is ``individual responsibility.'' We all bear some 
individual responsibility for knowing what is in our credit card bills.
  Now listen. If we don't know what the terms are, either, one, we've 
been misled by a credit card company--and, Madam Speaker, it happens. 
There are some misleading and fraudulent practices, and they need to be 
cracked down on. That's why we have the Truth in Lending Act, that's 
why we have the Unfair and Deceptive Practices Act, that's why we have 
the Fair Debt Collections Practices Act, the Fair Credit Billing Act, 
and others.
  Another reason that we don't know the terms, Madam Speaker, is 
because we didn't read them, in which case we have ourselves to blame. 
Another reason that people don't know their terms is because they're 
incomprehensible. We can't understand them because of too many crazy 
government mandates that give us voluminous disclosure written in 
legalese as opposed to effective disclosure written in English.
  The SPEAKER pro tempore. The time of the gentleman has expired.
  Mr. CAMPBELL of California. I yield the gentleman 1 more minute.
  Mr. HENSARLING. Madam Speaker, again, don't take my word for it, but 
the nonpartisan Congressional Research Service has written that if 
restrictive proposals like these were to become law, ``credit card 
issuers could also respond in a variety of ways. They may increase loan 
rates across the board on all borrowers, making it more expensive for 
both good and delinquent borrowers to use revolving credit. Issuers may 
also increase minimum monthly payments, reduce credit limits, or reduce 
the number of credit cards issued to people with impaired credit.''
  Madam Speaker, we have seen a similar piece of legislation across the 
pond in the U.K. Britain decided that credit card default fees were too 
high. They ordered credit card issuers to cut them or face legal 
action, and guess what happened? Two of the three biggest issuers 
imposed annual fees on their credit card holders, 19 have raised 
interest rates, and we have seen studies that 60 percent of new credit 
applicants are being rejected. I don't want to repeat that experience 
in the United States of America in the midst of a credit crunch.
  We should reject this legislation.
  Mrs. MALONEY of New York. Madam Speaker, I have no further speakers. 
Does the gentleman from California have any further speakers?
  Mr. CAMPBELL of California. I have one more speaker, a repeat 
speaker, and then I am prepared to close after that.
  I would like to yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from Delaware (Mr. 
Castle).
  Mr. CASTLE. I again thank the gentleman from California for yielding.
  I would like to take up a couple of points that the sponsor of the 
bill raised.
  One is the credit card companies in general oppose what is happening 
at the Federal Reserve and thereby also oppose her legislation which is 
here. That may be accurate to a degree, but there are a couple of 
factors in this. One is that many of the better credit card companies--
``better'' being the ones that are paying attention to the practices--
have already made a number of the changes proposed both by the Federal 
Reserve and what is in this legislation.
  Secondly, I certainly support the concepts of this legislation as 
well as support what has been recommended in the unfair and deceptive 
practices rule which hopefully will get even better with the 50,000-
plus comments that will come out here again in the fall. I think that's 
a matter of good consumer adjustment that needed to be made.
  I also hope that consumers in general will understand the 
significance of understanding what they're dealing with. What bothers 
me sometimes is people don't understand all of their practices, but we 
need to make sure it's clear before them. And so I, and I think many 
others on this side and even some of the better credit card companies, 
would be very supportive of a lot of these changes which are being 
made.
  The other thing that concerns me somewhat is the statement that there 
is no evidence that this legislation may raise the cost of credit. That 
may be a correct statement. But I think it is also correct to say there 
is no evidence that it will not raise the cost of credit. I think 
that's a logical conclusion. If you take away money in one way or 
another, they're going to have to make up for it, and they're probably 
going to do that by looking at fees charged, interest rates, or 
whatever it may be.
  My bottom line is you are probably going to see increases if indeed 
the changes as proposed in this legislation are made.
  Again, I would urge the bill to be withdrawn. I don't expect it 
today, but I would urge the bill to be withdrawn so we can allow the 
Federal Reserve to make its opinions known and then proceed from there.
  The SPEAKER pro tempore. The time of the gentleman has expired.
  The gentleman from California is recognized for 2 minutes.
  Mr. CAMPBELL of California. Madam Speaker, for the reasons we have 
articulated, this is not the way to do this, nor is it the time to do 
it. This bill is very well intentioned, and I applaud my colleague from 
New York for her commitment to this issue and, frankly, for her 
tenacity with this issue.
  But this bill, make no mistake, will not help consumers. It will hurt 
consumers. Unfair and deceptive practices will be dealt with on a 
regulatory basis as they should be by the Federal Reserve. And then 
hopefully this Congress will act this week in a bipartisan and reasoned 
manner to try and deal with the financial crisis so that credit 
availability for people is continued and assured. And then we can deal 
with this continuing issue, and it will be a continuing issue without 
the current environment of the potential shutdown of credit to 
availability. It is not the way. It is not the time to do this.

[[Page 20217]]

  I urge a ``no'' vote.
  I yield back the balance of my time.
  The SPEAKER pro tempore. The gentlewoman from New York is recognized 
for 2 minutes.

                              {time}  1315

  Mrs. MALONEY of New York. Madam Speaker, I would like to respond to 
my good friend and colleague on the other side of the aisle, Mr. 
Castle, for whom I have great respect, and we have worked together 
productively in many ways. If you support these reforms, as you have so 
stated, then you should vote for them, and you should not vote for 
delay and weakening by waiting for some action that may happen in the 
future. If you support these reforms that have been called unfair and 
deceptive, then I hope you will join us in a bipartisan effort to 
correct the system.
  Now many of my colleagues on the other side of the aisle have said 
that we should not act. But how in the world can we not act now? We are 
providing a $700 billion rescue for banks. How can we not provide basic 
fairness to consumers and some help and rescue to Main Street?
  These practices have been called by the Fed unfair and deceptive and 
anticompetitive. We are helping consumers and the market by getting rid 
of them. The current situation makes it more urgent that we do so, not 
less.
  Many, many people worked long and hard on this bill, and I would like 
to first and foremost thank the chairman of this committee, Barney 
Frank, for his consistent support and input; the 155 cosponsors of this 
legislation; other members of the Financial Services Committee that 
took a leadership role, Keith Ellison, Emanuel Cleaver, Lincoln Davis; 
also Mark Udall, Peter Welch, and Louise Slaughter for their leadership 
on the issue; Walter Jones and Chris Shays who were supportive from the 
beginning; the many consumer groups without whom we could not have 
gotten the broad base of support for this legislation; the labor 
unions, the AFL-CIO, especially the SCIU, which made this a top 
priority, civil rights groups; and certainly, the staff: my own staff, 
Eleni Constantine and Edward Mills, who have poured their heart and 
intelligence into this effort for 2 years; and the staff of the full 
committee, Michael Beresik, Patience Singleton, Charles Yi and Rick 
Maurano. Thank you for your efforts.
  I urge very, very strong support for this long overdue reform.
  Mr. LANGEVIN. Madam Speaker, I rise in strong support of H.R. 5244, 
the Credit Cardholders' Bill of Rights Act. As a cosponsor of this 
legislation, I believe it is a sensible approach to reforming major 
credit card abuses and improving consumer protections for cardholders.
  Credit cards have become an integral part of the American economy, 
offering consumers instant access to a convenient, flexible source of 
financing. Unfortunately, more and more Americans are turning to their 
credit cards to help pay medical and utility bills, buy groceries, and 
make ends meet in this troubled economy. Credit card debt now consumes 
a sizeable portion of the average family's income. To make matters 
worse, the playing field between card companies and consumers has 
become very one-sided in recent years. A credit card agreement is a 
contract between a card company and a cardholder, but these companies 
have taken advantage of their customers with deceptive billing 
practices and hidden fees. Meanwhile, money that families are forced to 
devote to these unfair rates and charges is money that is not being 
spent on goods and services that could help bolster our struggling 
economy.
  Cardholders deserve more bargaining power, and the Credit 
Cardholders' Bill of Rights Act helps level the playing field. 
Cardholders are entitled to accurate information and the right to make 
decisions about their own credit. This bill will ban interest rate 
increases on an existing balance unless the borrower is 30 days overdue 
and require card companies to give cardholders notification 45 days 
before any interest rate increase. This legislation also protects 
vulnerable consumers from fee-heavy subprime cards and prohibits 
issuing cards to minors. H.R. 5244 would also ban ``universal 
default'', where a card company raises the interest rate on one card if 
the cardholder misses a payment on a separate credit card or their 
credit score lowers. All of the provisions in this bill are the result 
of careful study and analysis over the past year, and I believe this 
deliberative approach has produced a very balanced and moderate bill.
  Madam Speaker, instead of looking the other way while Americans fall 
deeper into debt, Congress must protect their financial interests and 
put an end to the tricks and traps made by credit card companies that 
undermine a competitive market. The balanced reforms in the Credit 
Cardholders' Bill of Rights will help do just that, while also helping 
to foster fair competition and the values of the free market. I 
encourage all my colleagues to vote for H.R. 5244.
  Mr. DINGELL. Madam Speaker, I am proud to be an original cosponsor of 
the Credit Cardholders' Bill of Rights Act of 2008, which will ban some 
of the worst credit card industry practices, provide important 
protections for consumers, and implement important reforms that will 
benefit working families.
  The events of the past week have highlighted the problems caused by a 
lack of transparency and regulatory oversight in the financial 
industry. The same problems that have caused the current crisis on Wall 
Street also plague the credit card industry. Millions of Americans are 
struggling with the increased costs of groceries, gasoline, healthcare 
expenses, and other essential goods and services, while at the same 
time the average American worker has actually experienced a decline in 
real wages since President Bush took office. Many of these families are 
stretched thin, and have had to use credit cards to finance unforeseen 
expenses such as car repairs, or emergency room bills. Far too often 
these families are being forced to pay unfair late fees and arbitrary 
rate increases, or are being taken advantage of by high-fee subprime 
lenders.
  The legislation before us today requires nothing more from the credit 
card companies than to treat customers who pay their bills on time 
fairly. Sadly, the credit card industry has increasingly resorted to 
unfair practices to exact late fees and higher interest charges from 
credit cardholders. In fact penalties have increased by more than 50 
percent during the Bush Administration, and now make up more than half 
of the industry's $40 billion profits.
  For example, this legislation will end the practice known as 
``universal default,'' where a credit card company uses information 
about a cardholder's financial status, such as a change in his or her 
credit rating, to raise the cardholder's interest rate even though the 
cardholder has not defaulted or made any late payments to the credit 
card company. The bill will also ban what is known as ``double cycle 
billing,'' which is the collection of interest on amounts already paid. 
H.R. 5244 will also offer cardholders the right to cancel a card when 
faced with a rate increase so long as he or she agrees to pay off the 
existing balance at the rate they agreed to when they borrowed it.
  This legislation is an important step towards reining in some of the 
worst excesses of the Bush administration's hands-off approach to the 
financial industry. I encourage my colleagues to support H.R. 5244, and 
protect consumers from further abuse against the most unscrupulous 
credit card industry practices.
  Mr. BLUMENAUER. Madam Speaker, I opposed the 2005 Bankruptcy Act in 
part because of its egregious support for abusive credit card 
practices. H.R. 5244 works to knock down some of those supports. This 
bill represents one step toward fixing some of the worst aspects of 
that bankruptcy bill and one step towards resolving the challenges 
facing our nation's consumers and I support it.
  It is outrageous that as the financial crisis has spread, credit card 
companies have imposed higher delinquency fees. Double-cycle billing, 
unfair penalties, and arbitrary rate increases likely are also part of 
the credit card industry's response.
  This bill would put a stop to many of the most egregious practices by 
credit card companies. This bill ends ``double-cycle billing,'' where 
consumers pay interest and fees even where they have paid their 
obligation fully and on time. This bill also requires that cards 
allocate consumer payments proportionally to debt carrying different 
interest rates--rather than allocating the payment to the debt carrying 
the lowest interest rate.
  In short, I support this bill because it provides added protections 
for consumers, and I will continue to work to end abusive credit card 
and bankruptcy practices.
  Ms. HERSETH SANDLIN. Madam Speaker, the House is considering today 
the Credit Cardholders' Bill of Rights. I believe it is critically 
important to ensure fairness and transparency for consumers engaged in 
credit card transactions, and I support many of the commonsense 
provisions included in this bill designed to prevent unfair and 
deceptive practices.
  However, while ensuring basic consumer protections, we should also 
consider the full

[[Page 20218]]

implications of potential new regulation for consumers. I have joined 
with the other members of the South Dakota delegation in expressing our 
concerns on this subject to the regulatory agencies that are already 
fully engaged in crafting new credit card regulations addressing many 
of the same issues addressed in this legislation.
  We are concerned that, if enacted, this legislation would prohibit 
issuers of nonprime credit cards from charging deposits or fees to the 
card for the issuance of credit. Although well intentioned, this 
provision could have the unintended consequence of unnecessarily 
limiting credit for many of the more than 70 million consumers who are 
considered nonprime, and for whom subprime credit cards may be the only 
available source of credit. In a time of economic instability and 
decreasing credit availability, it is essential to consider the full 
potential impact of limiting access to credit.
  Furthermore, the Federal Reserve Board of Governors and other 
agencies with significant expertise in this area are already working to 
implement new credit card regulations targeting many of the same 
practices this legislation seeks to address. These regulations are 
expected to be finalized before the end of this year and will reflect 
over 50,000 comment letters received by these agencies from consumers 
and representatives of the financial service industry. It should also 
be recognized that many issuers of credit cards have already initiated 
good faith steps to impose greater fairness, transparency and consumer 
protections in their industry.
  For these reasons, while I fully support the goal of ensuring 
fairness in the credit card industry and protecting consumers from 
unfair and deceptive practices, I cannot support today's bill, which I 
believe should be improved before being passed by the House. As the 
legislative and regulatory processes progress, I will continue to work 
to ensure Congress fully considers the potential effect of these 
provisions on millions of consumers.
  Mr. BACA. Madam Speaker, I rise as a proud cosponsor of the H.R. 
5244, Credit Card Holder's Bill of Rights.
  Access to fair and affordable credit cards is important for families 
entering the financial market for the first time, as well as those that 
rely on cards in times of financial emergency.
  Credit card reform is vital to the Latino community.
  Like most Americans, Latino families rely on credit to help them 
manage their monthly finances and purchase assets that will move them 
firmly into the middle-class.
  Currently, 22 percent of Latinos do not have enough credit 
information available to generate a credit score, and more than one-
third do not maintain traditional banking or savings accounts.
  Because creditors generally rely on automated data mining, the fact 
that Latinos and immigrants are less likely to have robust credit files 
leaves them at a disadvantage.
  As a result, issuers do not solicit our communities with their best 
priced credit cards. Instead, they offer high fee cards, with higher 
rates, and engage in other practices that regularly trap families in 
cycles of debt.
  The Latino community is often targeted by ``affinity'' cards, cards 
that claim to be looking out for Latinos, but end up taking their money 
as an advanced loan scam, leaving consumers with no credit history and 
more fees than the card is worth.
  Shopping for safe credit cards has become impossible, with mail 
solicitation rates rising 30 percent since 2006.
  According to a Federal Trade Commission survey, 14.3 percent of 
Hispanics are victims of credit fraud, compared to 6.4 percent of non-
Hispanic Whites.
  Therefore, Latinos are hard hit by unfair credit card industry 
practices. Hispanic credit card users are more likely to be struggling 
to manage their debt, and are more susceptible to adverse industry 
practices.
  Common abusive practices such as universal default, retroactive fees, 
no advance notice of changes in terms, and double-cycle billing make it 
hard for families playing by the rules to get ahead.
  The Credit Card Holder's Bill of Rights, H.R. 5244, is important to 
Latinos and families across America for many reasons.
  H.R. 5244 stops credit cards from changing their terms arbitrarily--
instead, the bill requires up-front disclosures of all reasons for an 
increase in fees or changes in contract terms.
  H.R. 5244 requires card companies to apply consumer payments to the 
highest interest balances first, making payments proportional and fair. 
Currently, many credit card companies apply payments first to lower-
rate balances, preventing consumers from paying-off higher interest 
rate balances until the lowest rates are paid-off. This practice 
creates a situation where fees and finance charges accrue on the 
higher-cost balances, beginning a cycle of debt for many families.
  H.R. 5244 stops universal default. Universal default is an unfair 
practice of many card companies, in which a consumer's rates can 
retroactively increase on a card that they have a perfect payment 
record with, if they have a decline in their credit score, or issues 
with an unrelated credit card. Minimum monthly payments can skyrocket, 
affecting a family's ability to successfully manage their debt and 
maintain financial stability.
  H.R. 5244 ends unfair late fees on payments that were received on-
time. Clearly outlined due dates that can not arbitrarily change will 
be made explicit to the consumer and companies must mail bills 25 days 
before their due dates.
  The complaints of over 30,000 Americans have flooded the Federal 
Reserve Board in the last 2 months, urging the Board to make their 
recent credit card proposals permanent. H.R. 5244 will codify the 
Board's recent proposals so that they cannot be weakened. Congress can 
send a strong message of approval to the Board, encouraging them not to 
weaken their proposed protections for the American consumer.
  I urge my colleagues to support this bill.
  Mr. VAN HOLLEN. Madam Speaker, I am proud to stand, as an original 
sponsor, in strong support of the Credit Cardholders' Bill of Rights 
Act of 2008, a bill to prohibit creditors from using adverse 
information about a consumer or his credit as the basis for increasing 
his interest rate or fees.
  Even in the best economic times, unexpected credit card fees can make 
it difficult for many strapped consumers to stay afloat. In the worst 
of times, these fees can push them over the edge into bankruptcy. For 
Americans struggling to keep pace with rising food costs and falling 
home values, this legislation equips consumers with significant new 
powers to help protect them from punitive credit card rate charges and 
fees.
  The bill requires advance notice of credit card account rate 
increases and prohibits companies from imposing interest on credit 
repaid within the interest-free repayment time period.
  The bill authorizes a consumer who receives a notice about a rate 
change to cancel the credit card without penalty or the imposition of 
any fee and allows consumers to pay any outstanding balance that 
accrued before the effective date of the rate increase.
  The bill also authorizes a consumer to opt-out of over-the-limit fee 
programs and imposes restrictions on the frequency of over-the-limit 
fees.
  Madam Speaker, this important bill comes before this House at an 
important time for American consumers. Our constituents need these 
protections. I urge my colleagues to join me in support of this bill.
  Ms. JACKSON-LEE of Texas. Madam Speaker, I rise today in strong 
support of H.R. 5244, the Credit Cardholders' Bill of Rights Act. This 
legislation is timely and necessary, and importantly, it should 
alleviate the economic woes that consumers are experiencing during 
these tough economic times. The purpose of this bill is to provide 
crucial protections against unfair, but unfortunately common, credit 
card practices.
  While the Federal Reserve will likely issue regulations on this same 
topic, it is important that we as legislators do not abdicate our 
responsibility to the Administration. As members of Congress, we must 
do all that we can to ensure that the credit interests of the American 
people are well taken care of. Any regulation passed by the Federal 
Reserve will likely be the subject of judicial challenge. Thus, 
legislation will be needed.
  H.R. 5244, ends unfair, arbitrary interest rate increases by 
preventing card companies from unfairly increasing interest rates on 
existing card balances. The bill makes clear that retroactive increases 
are permitted only if a cardholder is more than 30 days late, if a pre-
agreed promotional rate expires, or if the rate adjusts as part of a 
variable rate. Under this bill, a credit card company has to give 45 
days notice of all interest rate increases so consumers can pay off 
their balances and shop for a better deal elsewhere.
  This bill is the first of its kind to stop excessive ``over-the-
limit'' fees and it ends unfair penalties for cardholders who pay their 
balances in full on time. H.R. 5244 also protects cardholders from due 
date gimmicks and prevents companies from using misleading terms and 
damaging consumers' credit ratings. Perhaps, most important is that the 
bill protects vulnerable consumers from high-fee subprime credit cards 
and it bars issuing credit cards to minors. This bill should help 
Americans and will require credit companies to employ fair credit card 
practices.
  I recognize that the credit card industry and other members of the 
financial services community may oppose this bill. They argue that

[[Page 20219]]

the limits this legislation would place on the competitive market come 
with unintended consequences, such as higher costs for consumers and 
reduced access to credit. The legislation would also result in the 
elimination of policies that benefit consumers, and disregards efforts 
by Federal regulators to complete and promulgate new credit card 
regulations.
  Opponents of H.R. 5244 claim that the bill includes a number of 
prescriptive mandates that will increase costs and/or limit options 
that consumers have today. For example, the cost associated with 
requirements that dictate how a customer's payment can be attributed to 
their outstanding balance will likely result in the end of promotional 
rate offers. Importantly, these opponents do not indicate that the 
consumers will be provided with more disclosure and fair and accurate 
information on rates that will not likely be changed by the credit card 
companies.
  It is immaterial that the Federal Reserve will be issuing regulations 
that govern credit card practices. It is the purview of this Congress 
to legislate and it is by legislative authority that agencies 
promulgate regulations. I do not find the arguments in opposition to 
this bill to be persuasive.
  The credit card market is highly competitive. Although we are 
experiencing tough economic times and the credit card companies are 
feeling economic pressure, so too, are the American consumers. The 
consumers are merely working-class people. If the credit card companies 
think they are squeezed, imagine the plight of the American people. 
Something must be done.
  H.R. 5244 is balanced and is a step in the right direction. I support 
the bill and I look forward to working with the credit card industry 
and the consumers on this very important issue.
  I urge my colleagues to support this bill.
  Mr. ETHERIDGE. Madam Speaker, I rise in support of H.R. 5244, Credit 
Cardholders' Bill of Rights Act of 2008.
  With wages stagnating and turmoil afflicting our entire financial 
industry, this bill will help the many Americans who are falling deeper 
into debt. Over the last several years the average American household's 
credit card debt has risen dramatically, from $2,966 in 1990 to $9,840 
in 2007. Americans must focus more on responsible spending and long-
term saving, but their efforts are undermined by unfair and predatory 
practices that seek to exploit families.
  H.R. 5244 would give credit card holders the power to combat 
exploding interest rates, excessive credit card fees, and the changing 
and misleading agreements from credit-card companies. This bill would 
require a 30 day notice before rate increases, as well as restrict rate 
increases on existing balances to the case of late payments in order to 
protect consumers from arbitrary and unfair rate hikes. The Credit 
Cardholders' Bill of Rights Act of 2008 also stops excessive fees by 
allowing consumers to set their own fixed credit limit, and limit the 
number of over-the-limit fees companies can charge for the same 
transaction. H.R. 5244 would end unfair penalties such as ``double 
cycle billing'', or the charging of interest on debt that consumers 
have already paid off. Finally, this bill would also define the terms 
``fixed rate'' and ``prime rate'' so that they cannot be misrepresented 
by card issuers, and bars issuing credit cards to vulnerable minors.
  The Federal Reserve has recognized these practices as abusive and is 
issuing new regulations to prohibit them. I am pleased that H.R. 5244 
will strengthen the Federal Reserve's regulations, ensure they have 
legislative standing, and further protect millions of Americans from 
these practices.
  While H.R. 5244 would end these abusive practices, it still allows 
credit card companies the flexibility to account for the financial risk 
of their customers by setting initial interest rates and allowing rate 
increases if cardholders fall more than 30 days behind payment.
  Ms. LEE. Madam Speaker. I rise in strong support of H.R. 5244, the 
Credit Card Holder Bill of Rights.
  I want to applaud Congresswoman Maloney for introducing this timely 
and commonsense legislation that will help our constituents and will 
protect hard working families. It is critical that during this time of 
financial crisis in America, that we do more to help households who are 
increasingly burdened by rising gas prices, falling home values and 
rising credit card interest rates and fees.
  As we discuss a massive $700 billion bailout of lenders and banks, I 
believe that taking this small step to protect credit card consumers is 
the least that we can do.
  This bill seeks to protect consumers by putting very reasonable and 
fair limits on some of the most unfair practices of the credit card 
industry. It will require a fair notice to consumers before an interest 
rate can be arbitrarily raised. It doesn't stop them from raising their 
rates, it just requires that consumers be notified in advance.
  It will stop the unfair practice of billing customers for interest 
and fees on balances that they have already paid. It will require that 
payments be split fairly between higher rate balances and any lower 
rate balances so that families have some chance to reduce their debt's 
principal instead of companies reducing only the debts that carry the 
lowest interest rates first.
  Frankly, I wish that this bill were even stronger and that we were 
talking about requiring just the opposite. We should be requiring that 
all payments are applied to the highest interest rate balances first, 
but this is a strong step in the right direction.
  I urge my colleagues to support protecting minors from predatory 
credit card companies, I urge my colleagues to limit so called sub 
prime credit cards with huge annual fees tacked automatically onto the 
debt on the cards, I urge my colleagues to vote yes on H.R. 5244.
  Mr. GREEN of Texas. Madam Speaker, I rise in strong support of H.R. 
5244, the Credit Card Holders' Bill of Rights Act.
  It is all too common for hard-working Americans to be in debt because 
of credit cards. Many of my constituents struggle from paycheck to 
paycheck to make ends meet. Because of this they use credit cards as a 
means of acquiring the necessities of life, such as buying food for 
their family or paying utility or medical bills.
  For most Americans, the language credit card companies use is 
difficult to understand, so most do not know what they are getting 
themselves into when they sign up to receive a credit card.
  That is why I am pleased that my colleagues are considering H.R. 
5244--the Credit Card Holders' Bill of Rights Act--of which I am a 
proud cosponsor.
  This legislation gives rights back to the consumer, such as 
protecting them from arbitrary interest rate increases, early pre-
payment penalties, and excessive fees.
  This bill will help those Americans by requiring credit card 
companies to mail bills twenty-five days in advance before the bill is 
due and to notify the cardholders forty-five days in advance of any 
interest rate increase.
  Today is a victory for the consumers as we have finally leveled the 
playing field between cardholders and the credit card companies.
  Mr. HOLT. Madam Speaker, I rise today in support of H.R. 5244, the 
Credit Cardholders' Bill of Rights Act of 2008, which seeks to reform 
the way in which major credit card companies do business and strengthen 
consumer protections. This bill, which has the support of a wide range 
of civic and consumer groups, would restore fairness to the credit card 
industry, which has been severely undermined by the abusive and 
predatory practices of some lending institutions.
  H.R. 5244 would protect cardholders from arbitrary increases in their 
interest rates, by requiring companies to give 45 days notice before a 
rate increase. The bill would also prohibit credit card companies from 
engaging in the practice of ``universal default'' rate increases, in 
which companies increase interest rates on an existing balance for late 
payments to a different lending institution. Also, the bill would give 
cardholders more time to pay their bills and would forbid card 
companies from using misleading terms in advertisements.
  Consumers deserve fair and decent practices in their financial 
dealings. Credit card companies should not be allowed unfairly to 
manipulate rates and fees to the consumer's detriment.
  The events of the past week remind us of the danger of failing to 
regulate financial markets and institutions. The Credit Cardholders' 
Bill of Rights Act would establish clear and fair guidelines for credit 
card companies, and would help Americans suffering from ever-increasing 
debt. I urge my colleagues to join me in supporting this important 
bill.
  Mr. TIAHRT. Madam Speaker, over the past week, our Nation's financial 
flame has begun to smolder under the reckless decisions of several 
large investment banking firms whose assets were tied into mortgaged-
back securities. The result--there is a credit squeeze and depending 
upon what this Congress decides to do in the coming weeks, credit could 
become scarce and thousands of Americans who rely on credit as a bridge 
over life's troubled waters could be left out in the cold.
  I am concerned about unfair and deceptive credit card practices and 
support efforts to protect consumers. I don't think a bill that will 
result in higher interest rates for consumers is a good idea, however.
  In 2005, I voted for, and Congress passed, the ``Bankruptcy Abuse 
Prevention Act'' to

[[Page 20220]]

help consumers get control of their debt. This bill also stipulated 
that open-end credit plans, such as credit cards, are required to 
include a minimum payment warning on the billing statement, indicating 
the length of time it can take to pay off a given balance. The warning 
includes a toll-free number the account holder can call to receive an 
estimate of the time it would take to repay his/her balance if only 
minimum payments were to be made. These common sense reforms, which 
President Bush signed into law, are already helping consumers improve 
their financial standing.
  Furthermore, the Federal Reserve, Office of Thrift Supervision, and 
National Credit Union Administration are currently finalizing 
regulations to prohibit unfair and deceptive credit card practices and 
make disclosures more transparent. The proposed regulations, which are 
expected to be finalized in December, address a number of goals of this 
current bill. Those proposed regulations eliminate universal default, 
prohibit double-cycle billing, require advance notice of rate 
increases, and rein in over-the-limit fees. Regulations are better 
suited to addressing these problems than legislation because they can 
be adapted more readily to changes in market conditions. The proposed 
regulations are the result of extensive research and consumer input, 
have received extensive public comment, and should be finalized without 
legislation.
  As drafted, the bill will increase costs and reduce access to credit 
for millions of Americans while eliminating low-rate credit options 
that will hurt individuals and small businesses alike. It does so by, 
among other things, limiting the ability of card companies to manage 
risk, as well as by dictating the terms under which credit card loans 
must be repaid. These requirements will force card companies to 
increase the cost of credit to all consumers to compensate for the 
added risk, and to eliminate attractive low-cost offers because they 
will no longer be able to generate a reasonable rate of return.
  The result, Americans will be paying more for their credit cards and 
have less access to low-cost alternatives, such as zero percent balance 
transfer offers. Millions of small businesses that rely on personal 
credit cards to assist in their operations will likewise be hurt.
  For these reasons, I cannot support this bill and instead vote in 
favor of our Nation's consumers.
  Ms. SOLIS. Madam Speaker, I rise today in strong support of H.R. 
5244, the Credit Cardholder's Bill of Rights. I am proud to be an 
original cosponsor of this legislation, which protects families across 
America from the confusing, deceptive, and unfair credit card 
practices. I believe that passage of this legislation is long overdue.
  Unfortunately, the increased usage of credit cards among Latinos has 
resulted in more Latinos with credit card debt. Between 1992 and 2001, 
the share of Latino families with credit cards grew from 43 percent to 
53 percent and the average credit card debt among Latinos increased by 
nearly 20 percent to $3,700. Even worse, credit card issuers have 
profited by taking advantage of Latino families' need to rely on credit 
for everyday expenses. Credit card companies imposed an astounding 
$18.1 billion in penalty fees on families carrying credit card 
balances. Seventy-seven percent of Latinos carry a balance on their 
credit cards, which makes them especially susceptible to credit card 
industry's unethical tricks and penalties.
  Inequities in access to mainstream credit cards mean that Latinos are 
targeted by unscrupulous companies and are more likely than Whites to 
have credit cards with high interest rates. Because credit card 
companies can increase interest rates at any moment and can charge 
interest on debt that consumers have already paid on time, they have 
trapped vulnerable low-income Latino families in a never-ending cycle 
of debt.
  Madam Speaker, I urge my colleagues to vote in support of H.R. 5244, 
the Credit Cardholder's Bill of Rights. We need to end unfair and 
arbitrary interest rate increases and protect vulnerable consumers from 
high-fee subprime credit cards. I look forward to working with my 
colleagues to protecting the financial security of consumers across our 
country.
  The SPEAKER pro tempore. All time for debate has expired.
  Pursuant to House Resolution 1476, the previous question is ordered 
on the bill, as amended.
  The question is on the engrossment and third reading of the bill.
  The bill was ordered to be engrossed and read a third time, and was 
read the third time.


                           Motion to Recommit

  Mr. CASTLE. Madam Speaker, I have a motion to recommit at the desk.
  The SPEAKER pro tempore. Is the gentleman opposed to the bill?
  Mr. CASTLE. Yes, in its current form, I am.
  The SPEAKER pro tempore. The Clerk will report the motion to 
recommit.
  The Clerk read as follows:

       Mr. Castle moves to recommit the bill H.R. 5244 to the 
     Committee on Financial Services with instructions to report 
     the same back to the House promptly with the following 
     instructions:
       Page 26, after line 9, insert the following new section:

     SEC. 9. TRIGGER FOR ENACTMENT.

       No provision of the Act shall take effect until a study to 
     be completed by the Board of Governors of the Federal Reserve 
     System makes a determination that the provisions of the Act 
     will not result in a reduction in the availability of credit 
     covered by this Act to small businesses, veterans, or 
     minorities.

  The SPEAKER pro tempore. Pursuant to the rule, the gentleman from 
Delaware is recognized for 5 minutes in support of his motion.
  Mr. CASTLE. Madam Speaker, I hope that we listened to the motion 
carefully. It pertains to the issue that's been raised a couple times 
in the discussion, the matter of credit.
  And what we are simply trying to do in this is to make sure that 
there is not a reduction in the availability of credit covered by this 
act to certain groups, small businesses, veterans or minorities. There 
is a concern that as you start to make some of these shifts that you 
could have a credit increase, and even though the committee held 
several hearings on the bill before us today, not a single witness 
could reassure the committee that this bill would not result in a 
reduction of credit.
  Given the current state of our financial system with available credit 
staying locked up on the sidelines, credit cards are becoming 
increasingly important to make ends meet for seniors, small businesses, 
and average Americans.
  Should this bill be signed into law without an appropriate effort to 
evaluate the impacts, Congress will have been an accomplice to the 
reduction in credit.
  This motion to recommit simply asks the Federal Reserve to study the 
effects of the bill, and if the conclusion is that this will damage our 
economy and reduce credit, then we would not enact these sweeping 
provisions.
  There are more than 4 million minority-owned small businesses in 
America. SBA data shows that some 15 percent of the capital used to 
open a minority-owned small business comes from the use of credit 
cards. There are nearly 10.4 million firms owned by women employing 
12.8 million people. However, these women-owned businesses had to make 
an average of four attempts to obtain bank loans or lines of credit and 
22 attempts to obtain equity capital. So clearly the need is there.
  Eleven percent of the capital for women-owned businesses comes from 
the use of credit cards. What if that number is reduced or eliminated 
due to a provision in the bill? The economy obviously would take a 
direct hit.
  I would also point out in closing, Madam Speaker, that this hopefully 
is a motion to recommit that could be supported by everybody, even 
those in favor of the legislation, on the basis that we need to 
establish whether or not there's going to be a credit hit with respect 
to all this before such legislation would go into place.
  I would encourage support from all the Members of the House for the 
motion to recommit.
  I yield back the balance of my time.
  Mrs. MALONEY of New York. Madam Speaker, I rise in opposition to the 
motion.
  The SPEAKER pro tempore. The gentlewoman is recognized for 5 minutes.
  Mrs. MALONEY of New York. Madam Speaker, I would like to ask the 
gentleman on the other side of the aisle if he would be open to a UC 
change to change the term ``promptly'' in the bill to ``forthwith.'' If 
this UC is agreed to, I would support it and accept the motion.
  I yield to the gentleman from Delaware.
  Mr. CASTLE. At this time, we will not accept the suggestion. I 
appreciate the kind offer, however, of the sponsor.
  Mrs. MALONEY of New York. Then regretfully I oppose your motion to 
recommit because it would effectively

[[Page 20221]]

kill the bill because we are in the last week of session, and it is yet 
another delay tactic. If this was a serious concern, you would have 
raised this in the committee, and it is obviously just another effort 
to kill the bill.
  We are being called upon to help Wall Street. We should also help 
Main Street, and I would urge my colleagues to understand that this 
bill has been supported not only by 155 of their colleagues but over 52 
major publications across this country in editorials or op-eds, every 
single consumer organization in this country, and three of the 
regulators, including the Federal Reserve.
  Rarely are my colleagues on the other side of the aisle given an 
opportunity to vote against stopping unfair, deceptive, and 
anticompetitive practices that have been endorsed and called upon by 
many in this country to stop.
  I urge a ``no'' vote on this motion to recommit. It is an effort to 
kill the bill. It is an effort not to help consumers, and it is an 
effort that would roll us backwards. They say they're for it. Well, 
we're giving them an opportunity to vote for consumers with this bill.
  I urge a ``no'' vote on the motion to recommit. It kills the bill.
  I yield back the balance of my time.
  The SPEAKER pro tempore. Without objection, the previous question is 
ordered on the motion to recommit.
  There was no objection.
  The SPEAKER pro tempore. The question is on the motion to recommit.
  The question was taken; and the Speaker pro tempore announced that 
the noes appeared to have it.
  Mr. CASTLE. Madam Speaker, on that I demand the yeas and nays.
  The yeas and nays were ordered.
  The SPEAKER pro tempore. Pursuant to clause 8 and clause 9 of rule 
XX, this 15-minute vote on the motion to recommit will be followed by 
5-minute votes on passage of the bill, if ordered, and the motion to 
suspend on H.R. 6897.
  The vote was taken by electronic device, and there were--yeas 198, 
nays 219, not voting 16, as follows:

                             [Roll No. 622]

                               YEAS--198

     Aderholt
     Akin
     Alexander
     Altmire
     Bachus
     Barrett (SC)
     Bartlett (MD)
     Barton (TX)
     Biggert
     Bilbray
     Bilirakis
     Bishop (UT)
     Blackburn
     Blunt
     Boehner
     Bonner
     Bono Mack
     Boozman
     Boustany
     Brady (TX)
     Broun (GA)
     Brown (SC)
     Brown-Waite, Ginny
     Buchanan
     Burgess
     Burton (IN)
     Buyer
     Calvert
     Camp (MI)
     Campbell (CA)
     Cannon
     Cantor
     Capito
     Carter
     Castle
     Chabot
     Childers
     Coble
     Cole (OK)
     Conaway
     Crenshaw
     Culberson
     Davis (KY)
     Davis, David
     Davis, Tom
     Deal (GA)
     Dent
     Diaz-Balart, L.
     Diaz-Balart, M.
     Doolittle
     Drake
     Dreier
     Duncan
     Ehlers
     Emerson
     English (PA)
     Everett
     Fallin
     Ferguson
     Flake
     Forbes
     Fortenberry
     Fossella
     Foxx
     Franks (AZ)
     Frelinghuysen
     Gallegly
     Garrett (NJ)
     Gerlach
     Giffords
     Gilchrest
     Gingrey
     Gohmert
     Goode
     Goodlatte
     Granger
     Graves
     Hall (TX)
     Hastings (WA)
     Hayes
     Heller
     Hensarling
     Herger
     Hobson
     Hoekstra
     Inglis (SC)
     Issa
     Johnson (IL)
     Jones (NC)
     Jordan
     Keller
     King (IA)
     King (NY)
     Kingston
     Kirk
     Kline (MN)
     Knollenberg
     Kuhl (NY)
     LaHood
     Lamborn
     Lampson
     Latham
     LaTourette
     Latta
     Lewis (CA)
     Lewis (KY)
     Linder
     LoBiondo
     Lucas
     Lungren, Daniel E.
     Mack
     Manzullo
     Marchant
     Marshall
     McCarthy (CA)
     McCaul (TX)
     McCotter
     McCrery
     McHenry
     McHugh
     McIntyre
     McKeon
     McMorris Rodgers
     McNerney
     Mica
     Miller (FL)
     Miller (MI)
     Miller, Gary
     Mitchell
     Moran (KS)
     Murphy, Tim
     Myrick
     Nunes
     Paul
     Pearce
     Pence
     Peterson (PA)
     Petri
     Pickering
     Pitts
     Platts
     Poe
     Porter
     Price (GA)
     Putnam
     Radanovich
     Ramstad
     Regula
     Rehberg
     Reichert
     Renzi
     Reynolds
     Rogers (AL)
     Rogers (KY)
     Rogers (MI)
     Rohrabacher
     Ros-Lehtinen
     Roskam
     Royce
     Ryan (WI)
     Sali
     Saxton
     Scalise
     Schmidt
     Sensenbrenner
     Sessions
     Shadegg
     Shays
     Shimkus
     Shuler
     Shuster
     Simpson
     Smith (NE)
     Smith (NJ)
     Smith (TX)
     Souder
     Stearns
     Sullivan
     Tancredo
     Terry
     Thornberry
     Tiahrt
     Tiberi
     Turner
     Upton
     Walberg
     Walden (OR)
     Walsh (NY)
     Wamp
     Weldon (FL)
     Westmoreland
     Whitfield (KY)
     Wilson (NM)
     Wilson (SC)
     Wittman (VA)
     Wolf
     Young (AK)
     Young (FL)

                               NAYS--219

     Abercrombie
     Ackerman
     Allen
     Andrews
     Arcuri
     Baca
     Baird
     Baldwin
     Barrow
     Bean
     Becerra
     Berkley
     Berman
     Berry
     Bishop (GA)
     Bishop (NY)
     Blumenauer
     Boren
     Boswell
     Boucher
     Boyd (FL)
     Boyda (KS)
     Brady (PA)
     Brown, Corrine
     Butterfield
     Capps
     Capuano
     Cardoza
     Carnahan
     Carney
     Carson
     Castor
     Cazayoux
     Chandler
     Clarke
     Clay
     Cleaver
     Clyburn
     Cohen
     Conyers
     Costa
     Costello
     Courtney
     Cramer
     Crowley
     Cuellar
     Cummings
     Davis (AL)
     Davis (CA)
     Davis (IL)
     DeFazio
     DeGette
     Delahunt
     DeLauro
     Dicks
     Dingell
     Doggett
     Donnelly
     Doyle
     Edwards (MD)
     Edwards (TX)
     Ellison
     Ellsworth
     Emanuel
     Engel
     Eshoo
     Etheridge
     Farr
     Fattah
     Filner
     Foster
     Frank (MA)
     Gillibrand
     Gonzalez
     Green, Al
     Green, Gene
     Grijalva
     Gutierrez
     Hall (NY)
     Hare
     Harman
     Hastings (FL)
     Herseth Sandlin
     Higgins
     Hill
     Hinchey
     Hinojosa
     Hirono
     Hodes
     Holden
     Holt
     Honda
     Hooley
     Hoyer
     Inslee
     Israel
     Jackson (IL)
     Jackson-Lee (TX)
     Jefferson
     Johnson, E. B.
     Kagen
     Kanjorski
     Kaptur
     Kennedy
     Kildee
     Kilpatrick
     Kind
     Klein (FL)
     Kucinich
     Langevin
     Larsen (WA)
     Larson (CT)
     Lee
     Levin
     Lewis (GA)
     Lipinski
     Loebsack
     Lofgren, Zoe
     Lowey
     Lynch
     Mahoney (FL)
     Maloney (NY)
     Markey
     Matheson
     Matsui
     McCarthy (NY)
     McCollum (MN)
     McDermott
     McGovern
     McNulty
     Meek (FL)
     Meeks (NY)
     Melancon
     Michaud
     Miller (NC)
     Miller, George
     Mollohan
     Moore (KS)
     Moore (WI)
     Moran (VA)
     Murphy (CT)
     Murphy, Patrick
     Murtha
     Nadler
     Napolitano
     Neal (MA)
     Oberstar
     Obey
     Olver
     Ortiz
     Pallone
     Pascrell
     Pastor
     Payne
     Perlmutter
     Peterson (MN)
     Pomeroy
     Price (NC)
     Rahall
     Rangel
     Richardson
     Rodriguez
     Ross
     Rothman
     Roybal-Allard
     Ruppersberger
     Rush
     Ryan (OH)
     Salazar
     Sanchez, Linda T.
     Sanchez, Loretta
     Sarbanes
     Schakowsky
     Schiff
     Schwartz
     Scott (GA)
     Scott (VA)
     Serrano
     Sestak
     Shea-Porter
     Sherman
     Sires
     Skelton
     Slaughter
     Smith (WA)
     Snyder
     Solis
     Space
     Speier
     Spratt
     Stark
     Stupak
     Sutton
     Tanner
     Tauscher
     Taylor
     Thompson (CA)
     Thompson (MS)
     Tierney
     Towns
     Tsongas
     Udall (CO)
     Udall (NM)
     Van Hollen
     Velazquez
     Visclosky
     Walz (MN)
     Wasserman Schultz
     Waters
     Watson
     Watt
     Waxman
     Weiner
     Welch (VT)
     Wexler
     Wilson (OH)
     Woolsey
     Wu
     Yarmuth

                             NOT VOTING--16

     Bachmann
     Braley (IA)
     Cooper
     Cubin
     Davis, Lincoln
     Feeney
     Gordon
     Hulshof
     Hunter
     Johnson (GA)
     Johnson, Sam
     Musgrave
     Neugebauer
     Pryce (OH)
     Reyes
     Weller

                              {time}  1345

  Messrs. ACKERMAN and DOYLE and Ms. SLAUGHTER changed their vote from 
``yea'' to ``nay.''
  Messrs. GALLEGLY, BURTON of Indiana, WELDON of Florida, FLAKE, 
CANNON, MILLER of Florida, KING of New York, YOUNG of Alaska and Mrs. 
DRAKE changed their vote from ``nay'' to ``yea.''
  So the motion to recommit was rejected.
  The result of the vote was announced as above recorded.
  Stated for:
  Mr. WELLER of Illinois. Madam Speaker, on rollcall No. 622, I was 
inadvertently detained. Had I been present, I would have voted ``yea.''
  The SPEAKER pro tempore. The question is on the passage of the bill.
  The question was taken; and the Speaker pro tempore announced that 
the ayes appeared to have it.


                             Recorded Vote

  Mrs. MALONEY of New York. Madam Speaker, I demand a recorded vote.
  A recorded vote was ordered.
  The SPEAKER pro tempore. This is a 5-minute vote.
  The vote was taken by electronic device, and there were--ayes 312, 
noes 112, not voting 9, as follows:

                             [Roll No. 623]

                               AYES--312

     Abercrombie
     Ackerman
     Aderholt
     Allen
     Altmire
     Andrews
     Arcuri
     Baca
     Baird
     Baldwin
     Barrow
     Bartlett (MD)
     Barton (TX)
     Bean
     Becerra
     Berkley
     Berman
     Berry
     Biggert
     Bilirakis
     Bishop (GA)
     Bishop (NY)
     Blumenauer
     Bono Mack
     Boozman
     Boren
     Boswell
     Boucher
     Boustany
     Boyd (FL)
     Boyda (KS)
     Brady (PA)
     Brown (SC)
     Brown, Corrine
     Brown-Waite, Ginny
     Buchanan
     Burgess
     Butterfield
     Buyer
     Camp (MI)
     Capito

[[Page 20222]]


     Capps
     Capuano
     Cardoza
     Carnahan
     Carney
     Carson
     Castor
     Cazayoux
     Chandler
     Childers
     Clarke
     Clay
     Cleaver
     Clyburn
     Cohen
     Conyers
     Costa
     Costello
     Courtney
     Cramer
     Crenshaw
     Crowley
     Cuellar
     Culberson
     Cummings
     Davis (AL)
     Davis (CA)
     Davis (IL)
     Davis, David
     DeFazio
     DeGette
     Delahunt
     DeLauro
     Dent
     Diaz-Balart, L.
     Diaz-Balart, M.
     Dicks
     Dingell
     Doggett
     Donnelly
     Doyle
     Drake
     Duncan
     Edwards (MD)
     Edwards (TX)
     Ehlers
     Ellison
     Ellsworth
     Emanuel
     Emerson
     Engel
     English (PA)
     Eshoo
     Etheridge
     Farr
     Fattah
     Filner
     Forbes
     Foster
     Frank (MA)
     Gallegly
     Gerlach
     Giffords
     Gilchrest
     Gillibrand
     Gonzalez
     Goode
     Graves
     Green, Al
     Green, Gene
     Grijalva
     Gutierrez
     Hall (NY)
     Hall (TX)
     Hare
     Harman
     Hastings (FL)
     Hayes
     Higgins
     Hill
     Hinchey
     Hinojosa
     Hirono
     Hodes
     Holden
     Holt
     Honda
     Hooley
     Hoyer
     Hunter
     Inslee
     Israel
     Jackson (IL)
     Jackson-Lee (TX)
     Jefferson
     Johnson (GA)
     Johnson (IL)
     Johnson, E. B.
     Jones (NC)
     Kagen
     Kanjorski
     Kaptur
     Keller
     Kennedy
     Kildee
     Kilpatrick
     Kind
     Kirk
     Klein (FL)
     Knollenberg
     Kucinich
     LaHood
     Lampson
     Langevin
     Larsen (WA)
     Larson (CT)
     LaTourette
     Lee
     Levin
     Lewis (GA)
     Lewis (KY)
     Lipinski
     LoBiondo
     Loebsack
     Lofgren, Zoe
     Lowey
     Lynch
     Mahoney (FL)
     Maloney (NY)
     Markey
     Marshall
     Matheson
     Matsui
     McCarthy (NY)
     McCaul (TX)
     McCollum (MN)
     McCotter
     McCrery
     McDermott
     McGovern
     McHugh
     McIntyre
     McNerney
     McNulty
     Meek (FL)
     Meeks (NY)
     Melancon
     Mica
     Michaud
     Miller (MI)
     Miller (NC)
     Miller, George
     Mitchell
     Mollohan
     Moore (KS)
     Moore (WI)
     Moran (VA)
     Murphy (CT)
     Murphy, Patrick
     Murphy, Tim
     Murtha
     Nadler
     Napolitano
     Neal (MA)
     Oberstar
     Obey
     Olver
     Ortiz
     Pallone
     Pascrell
     Pastor
     Payne
     Perlmutter
     Peterson (MN)
     Peterson (PA)
     Petri
     Pickering
     Platts
     Pomeroy
     Porter
     Price (NC)
     Radanovich
     Rahall
     Ramstad
     Rangel
     Regula
     Rehberg
     Reichert
     Renzi
     Richardson
     Rodriguez
     Rogers (AL)
     Rogers (KY)
     Rogers (MI)
     Ros-Lehtinen
     Ross
     Rothman
     Roybal-Allard
     Ruppersberger
     Rush
     Ryan (OH)
     Salazar
     Sanchez, Linda T.
     Sanchez, Loretta
     Sarbanes
     Saxton
     Schakowsky
     Schiff
     Schwartz
     Scott (GA)
     Scott (VA)
     Serrano
     Sestak
     Shays
     Shea-Porter
     Sherman
     Shimkus
     Shuler
     Simpson
     Sires
     Skelton
     Slaughter
     Smith (NJ)
     Smith (WA)
     Snyder
     Solis
     Space
     Speier
     Spratt
     Stark
     Stearns
     Stupak
     Sutton
     Tanner
     Tauscher
     Taylor
     Thompson (CA)
     Thompson (MS)
     Tierney
     Towns
     Tsongas
     Turner
     Udall (CO)
     Udall (NM)
     Upton
     Van Hollen
     Velazquez
     Visclosky
     Walden (OR)
     Walsh (NY)
     Walz (MN)
     Wamp
     Wasserman Schultz
     Waters
     Watson
     Watt
     Waxman
     Weiner
     Welch (VT)
     Weller
     Wexler
     Whitfield (KY)
     Wilson (NM)
     Wilson (OH)
     Wittman (VA)
     Wolf
     Woolsey
     Wu
     Yarmuth
     Young (AK)
     Young (FL)

                               NOES--112

     Akin
     Alexander
     Bachmann
     Bachus
     Barrett (SC)
     Bilbray
     Bishop (UT)
     Blackburn
     Blunt
     Boehner
     Bonner
     Brady (TX)
     Broun (GA)
     Burton (IN)
     Calvert
     Campbell (CA)
     Cannon
     Cantor
     Carter
     Castle
     Chabot
     Coble
     Cole (OK)
     Conaway
     Davis (KY)
     Davis, Tom
     Deal (GA)
     Doolittle
     Dreier
     Everett
     Fallin
     Feeney
     Ferguson
     Flake
     Fortenberry
     Fossella
     Foxx
     Franks (AZ)
     Frelinghuysen
     Garrett (NJ)
     Gingrey
     Gohmert
     Goodlatte
     Granger
     Hastings (WA)
     Heller
     Hensarling
     Herger
     Herseth Sandlin
     Hobson
     Hoekstra
     Inglis (SC)
     Issa
     Johnson, Sam
     Jordan
     King (IA)
     King (NY)
     Kingston
     Kline (MN)
     Kuhl (NY)
     Lamborn
     Latham
     Latta
     Lewis (CA)
     Linder
     Lucas
     Lungren, Daniel E.
     Mack
     Manzullo
     Marchant
     McCarthy (CA)
     McHenry
     McKeon
     McMorris Rodgers
     Miller (FL)
     Miller, Gary
     Moran (KS)
     Musgrave
     Myrick
     Nunes
     Paul
     Pearce
     Pence
     Pitts
     Poe
     Price (GA)
     Putnam
     Reynolds
     Rohrabacher
     Roskam
     Royce
     Ryan (WI)
     Sali
     Scalise
     Schmidt
     Sensenbrenner
     Sessions
     Shadegg
     Shuster
     Smith (NE)
     Smith (TX)
     Souder
     Sullivan
     Tancredo
     Terry
     Thornberry
     Tiahrt
     Tiberi
     Walberg
     Weldon (FL)
     Westmoreland
     Wilson (SC)

                             NOT VOTING--9

     Braley (IA)
     Cooper
     Cubin
     Davis, Lincoln
     Gordon
     Hulshof
     Neugebauer
     Pryce (OH)
     Reyes


                Announcement by the Speaker Pro Tempore

  The SPEAKER pro tempore (during the vote). There are 2 minutes 
remaining on this vote.

                              {time}  1358

  Messrs. BOOZMAN, McCAUL of Texas, and PICKERING changed their vote 
from ``no'' to ``aye.''
  So the bill was passed.
  The result of the vote was announced as above recorded.
  A motion to reconsider was laid on the table.

                          ____________________