Referred to the House Committee on Financial Services.
This resolution uses the Congressional Review Act to invalidate a recent CFPB rule that would withdraw an earlier bulletin about medical debt and reporting. It declares that the CFPB action withdrawing Bulletin 2022-01 has no force or effect. Under the CRA, a successful disapproval nullifies the agency rule and also bars the agency from issuing a substantially similar rule unless Congress enacts new law. If both chambers pass this joint resolution and the President signs it, the disapproval becomes effective.
The Bureau of Consumer Financial Protection rule submitting the withdrawal of Bulletin 2022-01: Medical Debt Collection and Consumer Reporting Requirements in Connection with the No Surprises Act (90 Fed. Reg. 20084 (May 12, 2025)).
Bureau of Consumer Financial Protection (CFPB)
CRA disapproval measures are considered under expedited procedures in the Senate and are not subject to a filibuster, so they require only a simple majority there; the resolution must also pass the House and be presented to the President to take effect.
This joint resolution uses the Congressional Review Act (chapter 8, title 5, U.S. Code) to disapprove a rule submitted by the Bureau of Consumer Financial Protection (CFPB) that withdrew Bulletin 2022–01.
If enacted, the resolution would render the CFPB’s withdrawal rule (90 Fed.
Reg. 20084 (May 12, 2025)) void and leave Bulletin 2022–01 (87 Fed.
Narrow administrative target improves clarity, but partisan stakes and Senate procedural barriers make enactment uncertain.
Relative to its intended legislative type, this bill is a narrowly focused Congressional Review Act disapproval that is concise and specific about its immediate legal effect but sparse on fiscal, transitional, and downstream-detailing elements.
Consumer protection vs. regulatory burden on providers
These are examples from the analysis, not a ranked list of the most-affected groups.
Consumer protection vs. regulatory burden on providers
Likely strongly supportive because the resolution preserves CFPB guidance limiting medical-debt reporting and protecting consumers under the No Surprises Act.
Supporters will view nullifying the withdrawal as defending consumer credit scores and enforcement clarity.
They may emphasize the bulletin’s role in preventing unfair billing and collection practices.
Cautiously supportive but pragmatic.
Centrist observers appreciate consumer protections and clarity, yet worry about using the CRA to micromanage agency rulemaking and potential costs to health providers.
They will seek clearer cost-benefit information and narrowly tailored language.
Likely opposed.
Conservatives will view the resolution as preserving an overbroad CFPB guidance that expands federal oversight of medical billing and imposes burdens on providers.
They prefer allowing the CFPB to withdraw the bulletin and favor less federal intervention in private billing practices.
Reached or meaningfully advanced
Reached or meaningfully advanced
Still ahead
Still ahead
Still ahead
Narrow administrative target improves clarity, but partisan stakes and Senate procedural barriers make enactment uncertain.
The bill has not accumulated any surfaced votes yet.
Consumer protection vs. regulatory burden on providers
Narrow administrative target improves clarity, but partisan stakes and Senate procedural barriers make enactment uncertain.
Relative to its intended legislative type, this bill is a narrowly focused Congressional Review Act disapproval that is concise and specific about its immediate legal effect but sparse on fiscal, transitional, and downs…
Go beyond the headline summary with full stakeholder mapping, legislative design analysis, passage barriers, and lens-by-lens tradeoff breakdowns.