Referred to the House Committee on Financial Services.
This bill amends the Consumer Financial Protection Act to add language prioritizing fair, transparent, and competitive markets and to direct the CFPB to strengthen private-sector participation without government interference or subsidies. It creates an Office of Economic Analysis to review and assess all proposed and existing CFPB guidance, orders, rules, and regulations, requiring publication of assessments and periodic reviews (1, 2, 5, 10 years).
Progressives see mission shift toward industry; conservatives see needed market focus
Relative to its intended legislative type, this bill is a coherent administrative/operational amendment that clearly inserts new duties and a new Office into the Consumer Financial Protection Act, with concrete reporting and review requirements, but it lacks fiscal and operational scaffolding necessary to fully implement those duties.
This bill amends the Consumer Financial Protection Act to add language prioritizing fair, transparent, and competitive markets and to direct the CFPB to strengthen private-sector participation without government interference or subsidies.
It creates an Office of Economic Analysis to review and assess all proposed and existing CFPB guidance, orders, rules, and regulations, requiring publication of assessments and periodic reviews (1, 2, 5, 10 years).
The Director must consider the Office's assessments, explain disagreements publicly, and identify problems and metrics (including consumer access and cost) for measuring rule success.
Focused agency rewrite with partisan/regulatory implications; could advance in one chamber but unlikely to clear both without bipartisan compromise.
Relative to its intended legislative type, this bill is a coherent administrative/operational amendment that clearly inserts new duties and a new Office into the Consumer Financial Protection Act, with concrete reporting and review requirements, but it lacks fiscal and operational scaffolding necessary to fully implement those duties.
Progressives see mission shift toward industry; conservatives see needed market focus
These are examples from the analysis, not a ranked list of the most-affected groups.
Progressives see mission shift toward industry; conservatives see needed market focus
Likely skeptical.
Supports evidence and retrospective review but views the new mandate language as shifting CFPB priorities toward industry interests.
Worries economic tests could be used to weaken consumer protections or slow enforcement.
Cautiously supportive of evidence-based policymaking.
Values the Office's reviews and published metrics but concerned about potential delays, administrative costs, and politicization of economic analyses.
Would seek procedural guardrails.
Generally favorable.
Sees the bill as reining in regulatory overreach, increasing transparency, and promoting market competition.
Values mandatory economic review and requirements to justify rules by measurable effects on choice, price, and access.
Reached or meaningfully advanced
Reached or meaningfully advanced
Still ahead
Still ahead
Still ahead
Focused agency rewrite with partisan/regulatory implications; could advance in one chamber but unlikely to clear both without bipartisan compromise.
The bill has not accumulated any surfaced votes yet.
Progressives see mission shift toward industry; conservatives see needed market focus
Focused agency rewrite with partisan/regulatory implications; could advance in one chamber but unlikely to clear both without bipartisan co…
Relative to its intended legislative type, this bill is a coherent administrative/operational amendment that clearly inserts new duties and a new Office into the Consumer Financial Protection Act, with concrete reportin…
Go beyond the headline summary with full stakeholder mapping, legislative design analysis, passage barriers, and lens-by-lens tradeoff breakdowns.