Main Street Capital Access Act

The House debated H.R. 6955, the Main Street Capital Access Act, which would ease a range of banking regulations, including capital requirements for new banks, rules for rural community banks, bank merger reviews, and asset thresholds that exempt some banks and financial companies from certain requirements and oversight. Republicans said the bill would help community banks and credit unions lend to local families and small businesses, make it easier to start new banks, and let small banks compete with or buy failing local banks rather than large ones taking them over. Democrats, led by Rep. Waters, said the bill goes beyond helping community banks and rolls back rules and oversight that apply to the largest banks, weakening consumer protections and increasing the risk of another financial crisis; they raised points citing past enforcement actions against large banks and opposition letters from labor, consumer, and civil rights groups, and Rep. Garcia offered a motion to recommit the bill to committee. Much of the debate consisted of members on each side making these points, with some Republicans describing the role of community banks in their own districts and communities, including Guam.Written by AI from the debate. Updated .

Official text (opens in a new tab)

24 statements

J. French Hill, AR

Republican
“I am asking the House to take up this bill now.”
Official Congressional Record

Mr. Speaker, pursuant to House Resolution 1438, I call up the bill (H.R. 6955) and ask for its immediate consideration by the House. The Clerk read the title of the bill. The SPEAKER pro tempore (Mr. Bost). Pursuant to House Resolution 1438, in lieu of the amendment in the nature of a substitute recommended by the Committee on Financial Services, printed in the bill, an amendment in the nature of a substitute consisting of the text of Rules Committee Print 119-35 is adopted and the bill, as amended, is considered read. The text of the bill, as amended, is as follows: Sec. 1. Short title; table of contents. Sec. 101. Promoting New Bank Formation. Sec. 102. New Bank Application Numbers Knowledge. Sec. 103. CDFI Fund Transparency. Sec. 104. CDFI Bond Guarantee Improvement. Sec. 201. Taking Account of Institutions with Low Operation Risk. Sec. 202. Small Bank Holding Company Relief. Sec. 203. Tailoring and Indexing Enhanced Regulations. Sec. 204. Community Bank Regulatory Tailoring. Sec. 301. Halting Uncertain Methods and Practices in Supervision. Sec. 302. Fair Audits and Inspections for Regulators’ Exams. Sec. 303. Supervisory Modifications for Appropriate Risk-based Testing. Sec. 304. Financial Integrity and Regulation Management. Sec. 401. FDIC Board Accountability. Sec. 402. Stop Agency Fiat Enforcement of Guidance. Sec. 403. Regulatory Efficiency, Verification, Itemization, and Sec. 501. Bringing the Discount Window into the 21st Century. Sec. 502. Keeping Deposits Local. Sec. 601. Bank Competition Modernization. Sec. 602. Merger Agreement Approvals Clarity and Predictability. Sec. 603. Merger Process Review. Sec. 604. Bank Failure Prevention. Sec. 701. Least Cost Exception. Sec. 702. Enhancing Bank Resolution Participation. Sec. 703. Failing Bank Acquisition Fairness. Sec. 801. Merchant Banking Modernization. Sec. 802. Bank-Fintech Partnership Enhancement. Sec. 803. Discretionary surplus fund. ``Sec. 114A. Guarantees for bonds and notes issued for community or ``Sec. 177. Periodic adjustments to thresholds. ``Sec. 178. Periodic adjustments to thresholds established by rule.’’.

J. French Hill, AR

Republican
“I want the House to pass this bill. It cuts regulations for community banks so they can lend more money to local families and small businesses.”
Official Congressional Record

Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume. Mr. Speaker, I rise today in strong support of the Main Street Capital Access Act. As a former community bank founder and CEO in my hometown of Little Rock, Arkansas, I have seen firsthand the important role that our community banks and credit unions play to drive the economic engine of America and help Main Street grow and thrive. During the financial crisis, they were there. During the COVID pandemic, they were there, staying up all night to close emergency paycheck protection loans. Every Member of this body knows this and knows it well. They have their own story from their own town about how that local financial institution was there for a customer, for a family, to help a startup, to help a business or restaurant cope with the pandemic. Community banks and hometown credit unions know their customers. They understand the needs of their communities, and they keep capital flowing where it is needed most. When a family is trying to buy their first home, they often walk into the offices of a community bank where that lender knows them, recognizes their goals, and is invested in their success. Mr. Speaker, as I have said on this House floor many times this year, our banks under $10 billion make 6 out of 10 home construction loans. When a local farmer or entrepreneur needs the capital to expand or initiate their crop for the year, they need someone who understands their particular business and is committed to seeing them succeed and, thereby, their communities succeed. I loved my role as a hometown Main Street community banker and investor. Even to this day, almost three decades later, I smile driving by that restaurant location that I helped grow or driving by a building or a shopping center or a doctor’s practice that our small bank helped finance--finance its construction, finance its future, finance its home for those employees. Community banks make that possible, and this bipartisan Main Street Capital Access Act gives them the tools they need to keep capital flowing where it is needed most up and down our main streets in our beautiful country. For decades, Washington has made it harder for community banks to thrive and operate efficiently. The Dodd-Frank Act, passed in the heat and horror of the global financial crisis, took the approach that many community and midsize banks across our Nation were faced with the same rules and the same level of scrutiny of the largest, most systemically important institutions. It was just too much, Mr. Speaker. That approach, that overkill, has stifled local lending, constrained economic growth, accelerated industry consolidation--something I hear about from Members on both sides of the aisle all the time--and pushed important financing activity for both families and businesses out of the regulated financial sector. Again, I don’t believe that was a goal by the proponents of Dodd-Frank after the financial crisis. Our local lenders, Mr. Speaker, too often now spend more time on check-the-box compliance requirements rather than serving their communities. When I made my presentation to our party here in the House to chair our Committee on Financial Services, I said that the impact of Dodd- Frank and other rules had focused Main Street bank presidents staying up all night worrying, not about their loan pipeline, not about where to get their next lending officer. Instead, they are up all night wondering how they can afford another compliance officer to try to meet this standard that is, in my judgment, unreasonable for a small, straightforward, local bank. Our committee Republicans, with their great leadership from our subcommittee chair, Andy Barr of Kentucky, have worked mightily over the years to find a bipartisan set of solutions to exactly the problem I outline today. Recently, the 21st Century ROAD to Housing Act, which became law, contained nine community banking provisions that provided this sort of thematic, clear, needed relief to America’s local lenders and expanded financing for both residential mortgages and housing construction and development. These measures that we are debating today in the Main Street Capital Access Act were in that same philosophy of what we just overwhelmingly passed in both Chambers just a few days ago. Mr. Speaker, I say today that we are building on the success of our 21st Century ROAD to Housing Act with Main Street Capital Access Act. We are expanding access to capital, supporting American businesses, and ensuring our financial system remains the most dynamic and diverse in the world. This bill delivers on those goals. It spurs formation of new banks. It brings this commonsense tailoring back to regulation. It restores fairness and transparency in bank supervision. It helps banks attract, retain, and diversify important funding sources from sources of deposits, and it removes unnecessary barriers that have limited lending in communities across this country. Mr. Speaker, with all of this effort, we have seen solid bipartisan support, input, and leadership in developing this bill. Expanding access to capital strengthens our local economies. It gives entrepreneurs the confidence to invest, businesses the ability to grow, and families the opportunity to build long-term wealth through that most abundant of American dreams: owning their own home. When Main Street banks succeed, our communities thrive. I thank my colleague again, my friend, the chairman of our Subcommittee on Financial Institutions, the gentleman from Kentucky (Mr. Barr), for his tireless efforts in developing this bill and his commitment to strengthening community banking, not only in Kentucky but across our Nation. Mr. Speaker, I also thank his hardworking colleague who has spent hours tirelessly thinking through the best approach to these provisions, and that is the gentleman from Illinois (Mr. Foster) of Chicago. Their collaboration will benefit our country, and I hope that we see a strong, bipartisan vote on this bill in this Chamber today. Mr. Speaker, I urge my colleagues to support this bill, and I reserve the balance of my time.

Maxine Waters, CA

Democrat

Linked statement

“I oppose this bill. It claims to help community banks, but it actually removes rules and oversight for the biggest banks on Wall Street. Weakening these safeguards will put our economy at risk of another financial crisis and make it harder to protect consumers from fraud.”
Official Congressional Record

Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume. Mr. Speaker, let me start by saying that we all care about community banks and credit unions. For that reason, I was pleased to work with Chair Hill on a package of community bank provisions included in our landmark housing bill, the 21st Century ROAD to Housing Act. Now, even though Trump refused to sign it, that legislation has become the law of the land. That law not only will get America back in the business of building housing, but it will help community lenders provide mortgages and other types of financing to support the American Dream of homeownership. Importantly, that bill did not have handouts. It did not have handouts for megabanks, Big Tech, payday lenders, debt collectors, or credit bureaus. That is not the case for the bill that is before us today. H.R. 6955 is Wall Street deregulation--that is what it is--hiding as a community bank bill. This package is made up of 24 Republican bills with just two Democratic bills. Today, we mark the 16th anniversary of the Dodd-Frank Wall Street Reform and Consumer Protection Act being signed into law. That is the law that bears the name of the late great and former Chairman Barney Frank. Unlike President Trump, President Obama knew when to sign a good bill when he saw it. That law was passed in response to the 2008 financial crisis when, in case my Republican colleagues have forgotten, millions of Americans lost their jobs, their homes, and their life savings. Yet, H.R. 6955 ignores these lessons and rolls back a long list of safeguards and oversight of the largest banks. Importantly, the Nation is grappling with an affordability crisis and surge in financial scams and fraud, costing consumers tens of billions of dollars. This was all made worse when Trump shut down the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau. Voting for H.R. 6955 would add insult to injury by thwarting a future CFPB from issuing rules, such as fixing credit reporting or reining in debt collectors or abusive medical debt practices. Maybe that is the point. Interestingly, Rules Committee Chairwoman Foxx said the quiet part out loud yesterday. She confessed that Republicans love deregulation. That is what this bill is all about. It is not affordability and not protecting consumers. It is about deregulation for Wall Street’s megabanks. Mr. Speaker, what is more is that this bill ignores lessons from the failures of Silicon Valley Bank and other regional banks just 3 years ago. Those large regional banks failed after Congress rolled back capital, liquidity, and other rules specifically for those banks. Nevertheless, this bill allows even more of these large banks to escape critical safeguards, which risks even more failures and harm to Americans and small businesses. If H.R. 6955 were to become law, it would be the most sweeping deregulation of Wall Street since the 2008 financial crisis. Two sections of the bill, sections 203 and 204, amend 15 different banking and consumer protection laws and would increase more than 40 different regulatory thresholds. There are so many laws being rolled back. The committee report for this bill is over 600 pages long, mostly to show how all these different laws are amended. In fact, the sponsors of this bill were so zealous to raise thresholds that they increased two thresholds that will aid bad actors who commit fraud against a bank or a large financial institution. You can’t make this up. There is a provision that will increase the amount that individuals can defraud a bank or future AIG by and then get government money to buy those failed assets for their own benefit. The largest labor union in the U.S., the AFL-CIO, and consumer advocates like Americans for Financial Reform and others wrote a letter saying that taken together, these changes would be more damaging than the sum of their parts, leaving the financial system dramatically weaker and more vulnerable to instability and crisis. Now, Republicans made some technical changes at the request of Trump regulators, but let me give you another example of what they didn’t fix. Wells Fargo, which many of you may remember created millions of fake consumer accounts and has been the subject of countless enforcement actions for consumer harm, like discrimination and anti-money- laundering deficiency, would have a new tool to delay future enforcement actions when consumers have been harmed. Mr. Speaker, instead of letting Wall Street put Americans and our economy at risk again, we should be addressing the affordability crisis caused by Trump’s failed economic policies and endless war with Iran. Mr. Speaker, I urge Members to oppose this bill, and I reserve the balance of my time.

J. French Hill, AR

Republican
“I support these bills because they will help local banks and credit unions grow, serve customers, and help local economies.”
Official Congressional Record

Mr. Speaker, our next speaker has worked tirelessly to assemble this package of bills that will help our Main Street banks and credit unions thrive, grow, better serve their customers, and, in turn, be able to see their local economies benefit. Mr. Speaker, I yield 5 minutes to the gentleman from Kentucky (Mr. Barr), the chairman of the Subcommittee on Financial Institutions.

Andy Barr, KY

Republican
“I want the House to pass this bill. It cuts regulations for small community banks so they can lend more money to local businesses and families. The government should not treat small hometown banks the same as huge global banks.”
  • Speech on a bill

    Reasoning 100 of 100

    This statement drew 6 conclusions and gave a reason for each one.

    See full analysis
Official Congressional Record

Mr. Speaker, I want to start by applauding my good friend from Arkansas, Chairman French Hill, for his leadership on this critical legislation. Great job working across the aisle for bipartisan support for this legislation that will help strengthen Main Street America. The Main Street Capital Access Act is exactly the kind of reform needed to advance this committee’s goal of making community banking great again. Over the past 18 months, we have worked hard to develop over two dozen banking reform bills--many of them with strong bipartisan support--and combined them into one multifaceted package designed to strengthen our community financial institutions, not big banks, like the ranking member is referring to, community banks, Main Street banks, midsize banks. If we want to help hold big banks accountable, then what we need is competition. Competition and choice are good for America, good for consumers, and good for financial stability. Mr. Speaker, I include in the Record a link to 14 letters of support from the Consumer Bankers Association, the American Bankers Association, the Bank Policy Institute, the Independent Community Bankers of America, the National Association of Home Builders, and others: https://acrobat.adobe.com/id/urn:aaid:sc:US:4c869bbb-74d2-4d1e- befb-1b3aba1a0be3 Community banks and credit unions are the financial backbone of this country. They finance farms, factories, first-time home buyers, and the local entrepreneurs who create jobs in every corner of America. These institutions don’t just serve communities. They are part of the community. Here is the hard truth: Community banks have suffered under a regulatory framework that forgot who the system should serve. For too long, Washington has been writing rules as if every bank and credit union in America is a trillion-dollar global institution. They are not. They are our hometown banks and community financial institutions. These guardrails that the ranking member talks about rolling back, we are not rolling back guardrails for big, multitrillion-dollar banks. We are talking about small community financial institutions. The goal is simple: Regulation should follow the risk, not the ZIP Code or the political fashion. A $500 million community bank in rural Kentucky, rural Arkansas, or rural Michigan should not be regulated under the same framework built for a trillion-dollar institution operating around the globe. That means higher costs, fewer loans, more forced consolidation. This hurts everyday Americans by reducing both access to credit and opportunities for small business growth. The Main Street Capital Access Act is about changing that. It is about rightsizing this regulatory framework to ensure that community lenders get back to what they do best: serving their customers and their communities. Main Street opens the door for new bank formation, improving transparency in the chartering process, making applications more predictable, and ensuring rural and underserved communities can once again see new institutions formed instead of watching their local banks disappear. You want to hold big banks accountable? Allow new banks to form. It also restores proportionality to regulation, updating capital leverage and enhanced prudential standards to actually reflect a bank’s risk profile, not just an arbitrary static asset threshold. That means less money spent on regulatory gymnastics and more money available for loans in your communities. We are also bringing fairness and due process back to the supervision process. Banks and credit unions should not be governed by opaque examiner preferences. They should be governed by clear risk-based and transparent standards that focus on core financial performance rather than foot faults and check-the-box compliance. Main Street also addresses the structural problems that are driving consolidation. This legislation requires regulators to ensure clarity and predictability in the merger process so that healthy banks can grow and troubled banks can find partners before they fail. It ensures that when banks do fail, like Silicon Valley Bank, community banks aren’t shut out of the resolution process by design. Finally, this legislation recognizes reality: Innovation is happening. The question is whether it happens inside the banking system, where it is supervised and safe, or outside, where it isn’t. This bill lets banks partner, modernize, and compete. Community banks, Mr. Speaker, are the financial infrastructure of America--rural America, suburban America, urban America. When they thrive, small towns thrive. When they are regulated out of existence, capital dries up and opportunity for local ownership disappears. The Main Street Capital Access Act is a critical step toward restoring the financial backbone of this country. Mr. Speaker, I urge all my colleagues to support this legislation.

Nydia M. Velazquez, NY

Democrat
“I oppose this bill. It removes too many bank rules, weakens consumer protections, and makes another public bank bailout more likely.”
Official Congressional Record

Mr. Speaker, I rise in opposition to H.R. 6955. Community banks and credit unions are the foundations of our financial system. As ranking member of the House Small Business Committee, I understand better than most the role they play in our communities, offering small business loans, farm loans, and mortgages. They are critical lifelines to our rural and underserved communities that have been left behind by our biggest banks. While I believe in sensible tailoring to help community banks and credit unions do what they do best--deliver personalized products to meet the needs of their customers--this bill moves far beyond sensible tailoring. Instead of focusing on modest improvements, this package represents the largest amount of bank deregulation since before the financial crisis. It includes sweeping reforms that will not only significantly roll back necessary safeguards and weaken oversight, but it will also undermine consumer protection and antidiscrimination measures and hamper the CFPB’s ability to issue new rules. This deregulation package will push risk into the shadows and make the next publicly financed bailout more likely. This is especially concerning at a time when financial regulatory agencies are under political attack, pursuing industry-friendly agendas, and are starved of resources. That is why more than 25 labor, consumer, housing, economic justice, and public interest organizations are opposing this bill.

J. French Hill, AR

Republican
“I am giving my time to the gentleman from Michigan. He knows from his business background how local banks help our economy grow.”
Official Congressional Record

Mr. Speaker, our next speaker has worked in this House for over a decade, speaking on behalf of Main Street Michigan. From that real estate community, from his own background, his own business entrepreneurship and that of his family, he knows the value of how our local financial institutions help grow an economy and have more opportunities. Mr. Speaker, I yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from Michigan (Mr. Huizenga), the vice chairman of the House Committee on Financial Services.

Bill Huizenga, MI

Republican
“I want the House to pass this bill. It cuts regulations for small and midsize banks so they can lend more money to families and local businesses. It also makes it easier to start new banks and protects competition.”
Official Congressional Record

Mr. Speaker, as a small business owner, I have seen it. I have lived it. When community banks disappear, families and small businesses lose the local lenders who know their communities and their customers best. Less competition means fewer financing options, higher borrowing costs, and less investment on Main Street, not Wall Street, as some of my colleagues are trying to assert. This bill lowers unnecessary regulatory costs for community and midsize banks, not those big business center banks on Wall Street and in New York and around the world. In fact, this ends debanking. Mr. Speaker, it restores the flexibility these institutions need to better serve you and your family. I am also pleased that this bill includes two of my bills: the FDIC Board Accountability Act, which strengthens governance of the FDIC board on behalf of smaller institutions, and the Enhancing Bank Resolution Participation Act, which simply seeks to bring more qualified bidders into failed-bank resolutions when disaster strikes. Better oversight and broader participation can protect depositors. It is going to promote competition. It reduces further concentration in the banking system, and I would think, Mr. Speaker, we would want that. However, it appears that some on the other side do not. This package makes it easier to form new banks, strengthens local funding and liquidity, and helps community lenders put more deposits to work financing homes, small businesses, and entrepreneurial dreams. At a time when Americans are struggling with everyday expenses, Washington should not make credit more expensive through needless red tape. H.R. 6955, the Main Street Act, will promote competition. It will expand access to capital and help make life more affordable for American families. I thank the chairman both of the full committee as well as our subcommittee, and I urge passage.

Maxine Waters, CA

Democrat
“I want the House to vote against this bill. It rolls back bank rules and helps the biggest banks buy up smaller ones. It will hurt local community banks.”
  • Speech on a bill

    Signal 44 of 100

    Much of this statement went to praise, blame, greetings, routine procedure or general stories rather than reasons, requests or specific points.

    See full analysis
Official Congressional Record

Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume. Let me be clear: Dodd-Frank has not led to bank consolidation. That trend began when Congress repealed Glass-Steagall almost 30 years ago. What Dodd-Frank has done is ensure the longest stretch of economic growth in a generation. The threat to community banks is not Dodd- Frank, but it is to repeal it and return to their needless days, reckless days that led to the 2008 financial crisis. Just last week, we passed my bill as part of the 21st Century ROAD to Housing Act. My bill eased the requirements on new banks. H.R. 6955, however, would set new banks up for failure. In fact, the bill undermines much of what we were trying to accomplish when we worked together in a bipartisan way. What we have to do at this point in time is understand a provision of the housing bill that was carefully negotiated. Mr. Speaker, I thought we all were supposed to be in support of the housing bill. Everybody raved about the greatness of it. Now, 10 days after it became law, now some on the opposite side of the aisle are already trying to undo the bill. Now, this bill will actually make it easier for more, not less consolidation. The bill is bad for new banks but great for megabanks. Let me just say this: We all talk about loving community banks. I want you to know it is not the talk about loving community banks, it is action and what we do for or against them. I want you to know the big megabanks don’t even want them in their doors. They don’t even want to have those working behind the counter serving us. They have you serving from outside the bank. When you can get in touch with them, I want you to know, you have got to go through a hell of a menu to try to talk with someone that maybe in a community bank you can talk to. Do you know why we love community banks? It is because they understand the community. They know the people in the community. They work with you when you have a problem. The megabanks don’t know you, don’t care about you, don’t do anything to assist you, and hope you can’t get through their menus in order to speak with anybody. I say, it is not a lot of talk about loving community banks. It is action and what you do. Now, then you come in here talking about how much you love the community banks, yet you know that you can’t get the deregulation that you are doing unless you hid behind the community banks. If you love the community banks, all you have got to do is work with us to separate the regulations in a way that it does not undermine the community banks. If you want to be fair, charge all your big friends and all the big banks everything they should be charged with regulation. This is about whether or not you are going to use your power to literally undo what we have worked so hard to do to give the average person a decent chance with a bank, and that is community banks. Mr. Speaker, I am asking for a ``no’’ vote on this bill because, in the final analysis, I know that if you get away with these deregulations, we are going to have consolidation. It will only be five banks, almost only five big banks in the country that control everything. I am asking for a ``no’’ vote, and I reserve the balance of my time.

J. French Hill, AR

Republican
“I support this bill because it helps community banks compete with big Wall Street banks. It cuts rules and costs for well-run local banks. It also gives them more capital and lets them buy failing local banks instead of letting mega-banks take them over.”
Official Congressional Record

Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume. Mr. Speaker, let me address that comment that the ranking member has articulated, which is that somehow this bill reduces the power of community banks to compete with the big, globally systemic banks that she described. I would really argue just the contrast. This bill tailors the regulatory compliance so that a bank with a straightforward, simple business plan that is well managed, that is well capitalized can have a lower tailored compliance cost compared to the one-size-fits-all approach that was a part of Dodd-Frank aimed at those big, Wall Street globally systemic banks. Secondly, if you don’t want them to grow, then you want community banks to have access to more capital. That is offered in this bill. You want them to be more successful. That is offered in this bill. You want them to be able to buy a failing bank on their own or with partners to compete with the biggest banks in the country who are just simply given banks that need resolution at the FDIC. If a small bank fails in some State, they just let the big banks bid on them. This bill creates competition. Chairman Barr walked through that. This actually increases the chance for entrepreneurs to acquire, unfortunately at the demise of a local bank, so that it is not sold to some big Wall Street lender. I could go on with all the benefits of this bill that is tailored and focused on the growth and success of our Main Street institutions, but I can think of no better person to help me make that case than the next speaker. Mr. Speaker, I yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from Georgia (Mr. Loudermilk), the vice chairman of our Financial Institutions Subcommittee.

Barry Loudermilk, GA

Republican
“I want the House to pass this bill. It makes banking rules fit the size of each bank instead of treating small banks like giant ones. It also makes regulators share reports on applications for new banks.”
  • Speech on a bill

    Reasoning 100 of 100

    This statement drew 3 conclusions and gave a reason for each one.

    See full analysis
Official Congressional Record

Mr. Speaker, I thank the chairman of the Committee for his hard work on this and for including several of my provisions in this bill that is designed for the small guy. I obviously rise in support of H.R. 6955 not only because it is a good bill, but also because I recognize the need to rightsize Federal regulations and gain more transparency into the financial regulatory process. For too long, Federal financial regulators have taken this one-size- fits-all approach. If we applied that same status to ourselves, then let’s just issue every Member of Congress one suit of clothes so that we all wear the same suit of clothes. Now, we wouldn’t accept that because we would only have clothes to fit the largest Member of Congress. What we are saying is that is what we have in the financial services industry right now. We need to tailor the regulations to fit the business model of the business, especially the small business. That is why I am proud that my TAILOR Act has been included in this package. I can’t stress enough the importance of the TAILOR Act because it is for the little guy. It is important because it requires all future regulations to be tailored to the risk of the regulated institution. It rewards institutions that adopt sound risk management practices with fewer regulations and punishes those who take an unhealthy amount of risk. I also wish to highlight my New BANK Act, which requires Federal financial regulators to publish annual reports on applications received for creating new financial institutions. These reports will help give critical insights to the current de novo chartering process and how Congress can reduce complexities and redundancies in the system. To conclude, Mr. Speaker, I believe this legislative package with my bills included is much more aligned with the goal of a safe and sound financial system that works for all the American people, and I urge my colleagues to support this bill.

Sylvia R. Garcia, TX

Democrat
“I oppose this bill. It removes rules on banks, weakens protections against discrimination, and hurts consumer watchdogs instead of helping regular people. I want to send this bill back to committee. If allowed, I would change it so these rule rollbacks do not help giant banks.”
Official Congressional Record

Mr. Speaker, I rise against H.R. 6955. Instead of the Main Street Act, this bill, Mr. Speaker, should be called the Wall Street wins Main Street loses act. It does not help end the affordability crisis, feed hardworking Americans, or keep a roof over their heads. Instead, this bill sneaks in deregulatory measures, further weakens the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau, and weakens community reinvestment and anti- discrimination safeguards. For this reason, at the appropriate time, I will offer a motion to recommit this bill back to committee. If the House rules had permitted it, I would have offered the motion with an important amendment to this bill. My amendment would limit the provisions of this bill from applying to any globally systemically important bank holding companies. Simply put, it ensures that the bill’s deregulatory provisions do not apply to megabanks. Mr. Speaker, I ask unanimous consent to insert the text of my amendment into the Record immediately prior to the motion to recommit.

Sylvia R. Garcia, TX

Democrat
“I want to send this bill back to committee. We need to make sure it helps local community banks instead of big Wall Street banks.”
Official Congressional Record

Mr. Speaker, I hope my colleagues will join me in voting for the motion to recommit. Let’s send this back to Committee so that we can make sure that it truly works for our community banks and that it does not give Wall Street another big win.

J. French Hill, AR

Republican
“I support this bill because it helps new, local banks get started. These start-up banks can better serve fast-growing communities and compete with the biggest financial companies.”
Official Congressional Record

Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume. Mr. Speaker, I thank Mr. Loudermilk who spoke a moment ago. The vice chairman of our Subcommittee on Financial Institutions made a very good point also about how this bill strengthens competition. Chairman Andy Barr of Kentucky, Ranking Member Waters of California, and Mr. Loudermilk all mentioned the importance of encouraging de novo banks, meaning start-up banks, particularly in our fast-growing communities that have seen disproportionate business and population growth, like south Florida or other places across the Nation. All three of those Members have something in common, which is they support greater de novo provisions. We had Ms. Waters in the housing bill, and we have two in this bill that encourage start-up banks and encourage the regulators to work and have a better strategy for start- up financial institutions because that means that they can meet the growth. What does that do, Mr. Speaker? It increases competition for the biggest companies because they are close to customers, they have a business strategy, and they are unique to the marketplace. That is another example of how this bill is, in fact, counter to the assertion that it is only geared towards Wall Street institutions. Mr. Speaker, I yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from Pennsylvania (Mr. Meuser), who understands finance from both the point of view of one of our biggest and most industrial States, Pennsylvania, having been a statewide officer as well as a highly successful manufacturer and entrepreneur. Mr. Meuser is the chair of our Oversight and Investigations Subcommittee.

Daniel Meuser, PA

Republican
“I want the House to pass this bill. It cuts regulations on community banks so they can offer more home and small business loans. It also stops regulators from cutting off legal businesses from bank services.”
Official Congressional Record

Mr. Speaker, I commend our chairman, French Hill, for his excellent leadership. I do rise in support of the very appropriately named Main Street Capital Access Act introduced by Chairman Hill and Subcommittee Chairman Barr. The legislation does exactly what it says. It supports access to capital for Main Street. At the start of this Congress, Chairman Hill said one of our Committee’s priorities was to make community banking great again. Since then, we have advanced the package of bills before us that is the largest community bank deregulatory reform effort since the 1990s. Mr. Speaker, 20 years ago, community banks financed 65 percent of home loans in this country. Today, it is less than 30 percent. This bill helps reverse that trend. It lowers capital hurdles so new community banks can form, and it tailors bank regulations so small and midsize banks are regulated fairly. These changes allow banks to extend more mortgages, be more competitive on small business loans, and improve access to credit for all Americans. This is a housing bill, a small business bill, an affordability bill, and an access to capital bill. Importantly, the bill also includes legislation to codify President Trump’s executive order preventing debanking, such as my bill, the SAFE Guidance Act, which affirms guidance does not have the effect of law. Both guidance and reputational risk were weaponized under previous administrations to debank legitimate, legal businesses. This bill corrects those wrongs. This legislation supports community banks, protects Main Street across the country, and I urge support.

Maxine Waters, CA

Democrat
“I oppose this bill. It removes rules on big banks and lets them take over smaller ones. These giant banks ignore regular people who need small home loans, break the law, and treat fines as just the cost of doing business. This bill hurts community banks instead of helping them.”
Official Congressional Record

Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume. Mr. Speaker, I will mention again one of the atrocities that I have been able to experience working on these issues. Again, Wells Fargo was fined $3.7 billion just a few years ago for widespread mismanagement of automobile loans and mortgages. Their actions included unlawful fees and even repossession of cars. Now, someone would say, $3.7 billion, well, I want you to know they make so much money that is just a cost of doing business. They will keep doing it if we keep allowing them to get away with what they are trying to get away with today. If my friend wants a guarantee that this bill helps Wells Fargo, then he should support Ms. Garcia’s amendment that says that megabanks can’t benefit from this bill, but I guess he won’t. After all, my friend knows that today is Dodd-Frank’s birthday, and he is the skunk at the party. There is so much that we could point out that the average citizen knows in dealing with their banks. The average citizen is tired of being treated in the way that they are treated by their banks. I tell my friend that he is correct in the support that he did for the big bill that Mr. Hill and I worked so hard on. We have a lot in that bill. But let me point out one of the things in that bill that gives us cause to be concerned. Right now, Mr. Speaker, if you find a residence that you would like to buy, particularly if you are in a rural community, or you may be a low-income community, but you work every day and you can afford a house for maybe $90,000 to $100,000, the bank doesn’t want to be bothered with you. The bank wants the big loans. The bank wants the million-dollar loans. They want the half-billion-dollar mortgages. They don’t want the small mortgages. Guess what, Mr. Speaker. They don’t do them. As a matter of fact, many communities where there are residents who could afford the houses in their community are sold out to private equity firms and others who come and buy these houses for pennies on the dollar, but they won’t sell them to you, Mr. Speaker, because you don’t look like a big profitmaker for them. I am so pleased I worked with Mr. Hill, and we have done something to change that to encourage the banks to pay attention to those who can afford that $90,000 house, that $100,000 house, that $150,000 house, that $200,000 house. They are working every day. They can afford it, but the banks are not interested. My friend tells me that we should not be concerned about deregulation that puts these banks in a position where they are not only moving toward consolidation, but they are taking over banking in ways that will help them to get richer and richer. Guess what, Mr. Speaker. They will keep paying the fines, the big banks will, because that is the cost of doing business, and they still make money. This is outrageous. This is ridiculous. No more deregulation. No more looking at how you can frame it in such a way, Mr. Speaker, that you are saving the community banks. Mr. Speaker, you are not saving the community banks. As a matter of fact, you are putting them out of business. Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.

James C. Moylan, GU

Republican
“I support this bill. It cuts regulations for small, rural, and new banks so they can better help local businesses in places like Guam.”
Official Congressional Record

Mr. Speaker, I rise today in support of H.R. 6955, the Main Street Capital Access Act. When the people of Guam set out to enterprise new business ventures, we turn to our community banks to raise capital. However, much of America’s financial system is not designed with small businesses in mind. While big banks have the resources to cut through red tape, small community ventures often struggle to comply with a regulatory regime that never had them in mind. The Main Street Capital Access Act makes commonsense reform, tailoring regulations so small lenders can comply, while opening more resources to the new banks, small banks, and rural banks which serve communities like Guam. This bill will give the Guam business community a fair chance, and I thank the Financial Services Committee for their work on this legislation.

Maxine Waters, CA

Democrat
“I oppose this bill. Supporters say it helps small community banks, but it actually helps giant banks avoid government oversight.”
Official Congressional Record

Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume. Mr. Speaker, proponents say this bill is just for community banks, but here we have another example of the Big Banks sneaking in their rollbacks. I have four postings from the Bank Policy Institute, which represents all of the largest banks, like Wells Fargo. These postings advocate for indexing regulatory thresholds to nominal GDP instead of inflation. Why? It allows more and more banks to escape regulatory scrutiny. This bill will give Trump’s regulators--and only Trump’s regulators-- the opportunity to index 40 different thresholds to let large banks off the hook. Wall Street is making record profits while they are helping them. Mr. Speaker, for those of us who really care about community banks, we want to keep them because they service their communities in a more profound way. Again, I will repeat: They know and understand when you have a problem, you can call a big bank and you will find nobody. You will go through different menus that they have, but you will not be able to walk into the bank and talk to somebody sitting at a desk who will help you with your problem. Do I have to say more? Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.

Brad Knott, NC

Republican
“I want the House to pass this bill. Too many federal banking rules are hurting small local banks and forcing them to close or merge with big banks. This bill cuts back on those rules so small banks can stay open and lend money to everyday Americans.”
  • Speech on a bill

    Reasoning 17 of 100

    This statement drew 3 conclusions, but gave no reasons for 2 of them.

    See full analysis
Official Congressional Record

Mr. Speaker, I rise today in strong support of H.R. 6955, the Main Street Capital Access Act. For the vast majority of our Nation’s history, community banks were the primary artery into progress for all Americans. That reality is being threatened today by sloppy and ineffective policies that originate right here in Washington, D.C. Whether it is the Dodd-Frank regulatory structure or the millions of rules and regulations that are in existence today, community banks have been choked out by these all-encompassing regulations. With administrative costs rising every year, local banks simply cannot afford to operate. We can see this most clearly in 1980 where there were more than 14,000 community banks in the United States. Now because of the regulatory structure of the current market, there are roughly 4,000 community banks. This stifles lending, reduces competition, and makes it harder for Americans, especially in rural communities, to access capital. Put plainly, the current regulatory climate punishes community banks, and it benefits larger international banks. My home State of North Carolina has long had a proud history of vibrant community banks. Today, there are very few exceptions to this, but there are really only two choices for community banks in today’s market if they want to survive. That is to grow large enough to be acquired or to merge with another institution. Whether it was Wachovia, First Citizens, BB&T, or Bank of America, each of these began in North Carolina as a local community bank before growing and becoming a key player in our economy through a merge or an acquisition. It is time to restore a market that welcomes and protects community banks, a market that encourages competition, and most importantly, one that serves the American citizen. H.R. 6955 does just that. Mr. Speaker, I thank Chairman Hill for his important work on this legislation, and I strongly urge my colleagues to support this bill today.

Maxine Waters, CA

Democrat
“I want the House to vote against this bill. Many civil rights, labor, and consumer groups across the country oppose it. It weakens rules that stop banks from discriminating and makes it harder to hold banks accountable.”
Official Congressional Record

Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume. Mr. Speaker, a wide variety of labor, consumer, and civil rights groups are strongly opposed to this bill. Let me read from one of the letters we received: ``The National Community Reinvestment Coalition (NCRC) and our network of 700+ community organizations urge Members to oppose H.R. 6955, the Main Street Capital Access Act and vote no on the House floor.’’ That is what we are being urged to do by our supporters. ``H.R. 6955 is a broad bank deregulation package that would weaken fair lending transparency, community accountability, bank supervision, and merger review. The bill would reduce the tools regulators and communities rely on to detect redlining, monitor access to credit, evaluate bank mergers, prevent harmful consolidation, and hold financial institutions accountable to the people they serve.’’ The signers of the letters don’t just come from blue States but from all over the United States of America. This includes Build WyCo from the great State of Kansas. We also have Building Neighborhoods Together in Pennsylvania, Fair Housing Center of Northern Alabama, and Freedom Equity in Ohio. More signers include Georgia Advancing Communities Together, the Neighborhood Recovery Community Development Corporation in Texas, and the United States Broadway Corporation in New Mexico. I could go on and on, but there is no time for that. Mr. Speaker, I include in the Record the letter from NCRC.

Discussion

No comments yet

See the full discussion

Comment rules

More from issue 119

  1. House of Representatives High Cost of War 3 statements
  2. House of Representatives The Wonderful Mccourt Family 2 statements
  3. House of Representatives Recognizing University at Buffalo President Satish Tripathi 2 statements
  4. House of Representatives Recognizing Robert Bentley 3 statements
  5. House of Representatives Recognizing Pamela Irvine 3 statements
  6. House of Representatives Remembering Wes Anderson 3 statements
  7. House of Representatives Legacy of American Liberty 3 statements
  8. House of Representatives Honoring James Robert Yaroszeufski 4 statements
  9. House of Representatives Recognizing Colorado Army National Guard Aviators 5 statements
  10. House of Representatives No Data Centers 2 statements
  11. House of Representatives Recognizing Final Flight of A-10 at Davis-Monthan Air Force Base 2 statements
  12. House of Representatives Recognizing Vance Taylor on His Retirement 5 statements
  13. House of Representatives Providing for Consideration of H.R. 8800, National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2027; Providing for Consideration of H.R. 8884, Removing Barriers to Work for Disabled Americans Act... 15 statements
  14. House of Representatives Main Street Capital Access Act 24 statements
  15. House of Representatives Continuing Appropriations Act, 2027 7 statements
  16. House of Representatives National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2027 23 statements
  17. House of Representatives National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2027 29 statements
  18. Senate Unanimous Consent Request--S. Res. 807 (Executive Calendar) 2 statements
  19. Senate Unanimous Consent Request--S. Res. 808 (Executive Calendar) 4 statements
  20. Senate Unanimous Consent Request--S. Res. 557 (Executive Calendar) 3 statements
  21. Senate Artificial Intelligence (Executive Calendar) 2 statements
  22. Senate Authority for Committees to Meet 2 statements
  23. Senate Affordable Prescriptions for Patients Act 2 statements