“When we talk about the [North Carolina] bathroom bills of 2016 and 2017 compared to now, my first response is, well, they haven’t felt that the public pressure that they would be feeling to do something is worth more than the financial benefit they have from doing nothing,” said Mandla Deskins, an advocacy manager for Take on Wall Street, an activist coalition that pushes for financial reform. “That is the calculation that I would assume banks are always making,” Deskins added, “because it’s not like they have some long-standing position against hate.”
Save The Date: Join AFR Ed Fund At Its ‘Big Bank Regulation Under The Trump Administration’ Conference
Join us on May 21st for an analysis and discussion of the important developments in the regulation and supervision on big banks, and their effects on financial security and economic stability. View the details here, or below.
Letters to Congress: AFR Urges Opposition to HR 4296—A Bill Tying Regulators Hands in Setting Operational Risk Capital
AFR sent a letter urging House members to vote “No” on H.R. 4296—a bill that would tie regulators hands in setting operational risk capital.
Letter to Congress: AFR Opposes A Dozen Deregulatory Bills Under Consideration at a House Financial Services Committee Markup
AFR sent a letter to the House Financial Services Committee opposing a dozen bills that would deregulate banks and strip away consumer and investor protections.
“…The essence of SoFi’s application is a request to seek the benefits of federal deposit insurance without subjecting SoFi itself or its private equity owners to the well-founded requirements for bank holding companies. The FDIC should not approve the application to facilitate this regulatory arbitrage. …If its application is granted, SoFi will be the first new ILC to secure deposit insurance in over a decade. That will send a clear signal to the marketplace that the FDIC intends once again to approve ILC deposit insurance applications. FDIC should not grant SoFi’s application and allow the ILC loophole to be revived.”
“Americans for Financial Reform (AFR) appreciates the opportunity to provide this statement for the record of this Financial Institutions and Consumer Credit Subcommittee hearing, which considers several bills that would significantly undermine consumer financial protection and the safety and soundness of the financial system. Although the hearing is entitled “Examining Legislative Proposals to Provide Targeted Regulatory Relief to Community Financial Institutions,” the bills under consideration are not focused principally on community financial institutions. The most sweeping provisions of these bills apply to all institutions, many of which would radically decrease oversight of the nation’s largest banks and increase the risk of harm to the public.”
The slide presentation linked below documents AFR’s findings on the 2017 CCAR stress tests. AFR Assessing the 2017 Stress Tests A Medium blog post is also available here: https://medium.com/@RealBankReform/stress-tests-less-stressful-than-ever-fbe68b8e161a
During the 2015-16 election cycle, Wall Street banks and financial interests spent more than $2 billion to influence decision-making in Washington, according to a report released today by Americans for Financial Reform. That total, derived from an exclusive data set, works out to more than $2.7 million a day.
The chairman’s opening move in this year’s budget debate might delight Wall Street, but it would make life harder and more dangerous for the rest of us. His plans would make it easier for big banks and predatory lenders to rip off their customers, and easier for Wall Street billionaires to crash the economy — again.
Joint Statement: 104 Organizations Respond to Sen. Carper’s interest in exploring changes to CFPB structure
“With a single director at its head the CFPB is doing exactly what it is supposed to do. It has recovered $12 billion for over 29 million people. The only plausible reason to change it, after nearly 6 years of good work, is to stop that good work from happening. The banks and predatory lenders who are pushing this want to be able to abuse consumers with impunity. There is no good reason to enable them.”