Referred to the House Committee on Financial Services.
The bill abolishes the Federal Insurance Office (FIO) and the FIO Director by striking section 313 of Title 31, and makes conforming amendments to Dodd‑Frank and the Economic Growth, Regulatory Relief, and Consumer Protection Act to remove statutory references to the FIO. It states that elimination of the FIO does not limit the Secretary of the Treasury’s authorities relating to insurance, but does not specify detailed reassignment of FIO functions or staff.
Progressives emphasize consumer protection and climate risk loss
Relative to its intended legislative type, this bill is a clearly targeted statutory repeal with high textual specificity but limited implementation, fiscal, and oversight detail.
The bill abolishes the Federal Insurance Office (FIO) and the FIO Director by striking section 313 of Title 31, and makes conforming amendments to Dodd‑Frank and the Economic Growth, Regulatory Relief, and Consumer Protection Act to remove statutory references to the FIO.
It states that elimination of the FIO does not limit the Secretary of the Treasury’s authorities relating to insurance, but does not specify detailed reassignment of FIO functions or staff.
A narrow, ideologically-tinged administrative cut with modest fiscal savings; could pass in a favorable legislative environment but is unlikely under strong bipartisan consent requirements.
Relative to its intended legislative type, this bill is a clearly targeted statutory repeal with high textual specificity but limited implementation, fiscal, and oversight detail.
Progressives emphasize consumer protection and climate risk loss
These are examples from the analysis, not a ranked list of the most-affected groups.
Progressives emphasize consumer protection and climate risk loss
Likely opposed.
The FIO is seen as a federal unit that monitors insurance markets, consumer protection, climate and systemic insurance risks, and coordinates internationally; elimination could reduce federal oversight and protections.
Concerns focus on lost data collection, diminished attention to climate-related insurance risk, and weaker consumer advocacy.
Mixed or cautious.
Agreeing that states play a primary role but worried about practical gaps from abolishing a federal office.
Emphasis will be on ensuring functions, data, and international coordination either transfer to Treasury or are codified elsewhere before elimination.
Likely supportive.
Views FIO as federal overreach and duplicative of state insurance regulators; elimination restores state control and reduces federal bureaucracy.
The bill’s clause preserving Treasury authority is acceptable to ensure necessary federal involvement without a dedicated office.
Reached or meaningfully advanced
Reached or meaningfully advanced
Still ahead
Still ahead
Still ahead
A narrow, ideologically-tinged administrative cut with modest fiscal savings; could pass in a favorable legislative environment but is unlikely under strong bipartisan consent requirements.
The bill has not accumulated any surfaced votes yet.
Progressives emphasize consumer protection and climate risk loss
A narrow, ideologically-tinged administrative cut with modest fiscal savings; could pass in a favorable legislative environment but is unli…
Relative to its intended legislative type, this bill is a clearly targeted statutory repeal with high textual specificity but limited implementation, fiscal, and oversight detail.
Go beyond the headline summary with full stakeholder mapping, legislative design analysis, passage barriers, and lens-by-lens tradeoff breakdowns.