Credit Reform
Credit Card Billing Practices (H.R. 627)
During the Senate consideration of the Credit Cardholders’ Bill of Rights Act of 2009, a bill to prohibit deceptive and predatory credit card billing practices, Rep. Peter Roskam (R-IL) offered a “motion to recommit” the bill to the House Committee on Financial Services with instructions to amend it. Such a motion is often used as a way of amending the bill. In this case, Rep. Roskam’s motion would have delayed the implementation of the law, if enacted, until the Federal Reserve determined that it would not reduce the ability of small businesses to obtain credit.
The Leadership Conference opposed the Roskam motion and supported H.R. 627. The Leadership Conference chose to score the vote on the motion to recommit rather than the vote on final passage, because the vote on the motion was far more sharply divided and thus provides more insight into whether House members truly supported or opposed the underlying bill. In this case, the Roskam motion would have served only to needlessly delay reforms that the Federal Reserve had already indicated are necessary to protect consumers. In fact, the National Small Business Association, the nation’s oldest advocacy group representing the small business interests that Rep. Roskam claimed to be protecting with his motion, also supported the underlying bill.
The motion to recommit failed (164-263). A vote against the motion was counted as a + vote. Roll Call Vote No. 227 (4/30/09).
Criminal Justice
Local Law Enforcement Hate Crimes Prevention Act (H.R. 1913)
In April of 2009, the House passed the Local Law Enforcement Hate Crimes Prevention Act (LLEHCPA). Under the LLEHCPA, federal prosecutors would no longer need to establish that a crime was committed because of the victim’s involvement in a “federallyprotected activity,” such as serving on a jury, attending a public school, or voting. Instead, the LLEHCPA would enhance the federal response to hate crime violence by covering all violent crimes based on race, color, religion, or national origin. In addition, the LLEHCPA would permit federal involvement in the prosecution of biasmotivated crimes based on the victim’s gender, gender identity, sexual orientation, or disability. The measure had the support of more than 300 law enforcement, civil rights, civil and religious organizations.
The Leadership Conference supported H.R. 1913 because hate crimes are serious, well-documented problems that remain inadequately recognized and prosecuted. The Leadership Conference believes that Congress must give law enforcement the tools it needs to combat violent, bias-motivated crimes and to help ensure that every American can live in an environment free of the terror brought on by hate violence.
The House passed the bill (249 to 175). A vote for the bill was counted as a + vote. Roll Call Vote No. 223 (4/29/09).
Economic Recovery
Economic Recovery (H.R. 1)
In January 2009, the House passed the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act of 2009, a comprehensive economic recovery package that included direct spending on education, state budget stabilization, construction and infrastructure, health and nutrition programs, energy efficiency, and other programs with immediate employment and positive social impacts. The Leadership Conference supported the bill because it included targeted assistance to low- and moderate-income people (who are disproportionately people of color and ethnic/linguistic minorities); and provided aid to states and localities to prevent service and job cuts that will deepen the recession, alleviate hardships for those most vulnerable, and in so doing, foster economic growth.
The House passed the bill (244-188). A vote for the bill was counted as a + vote. Roll Call Vote No. 46 (1/28/09).
Education
Student Aid and Fiscal Responsibility Act of 2009 (H.R. 3221)
In September 2009, the House passed the Student Aid and Fiscal Responsibility Act of 2009. The bill restructured federal student loan aid for higher education by converting the federally-guaranteed loan subsidy program into a direct lending program. By ending the subsidies to lenders, the program would save almost $100 billion over ten years that will be used to increase direct grant aid to students and other education programs without costing any additional money. Under the legislation, $40 billion of the savings would be used to invest in Pell grants by increasing the maximum grant amount to $5,550 in 2010 with an annual cost-of-living increase. The rest of the savings would be used to keep interest rates low on federal student loans, bolster college access and completion support programs, and make it easier for families to apply for aid. The legislation would also provide $2.55 billion in support for Historically Black Colleges and Universities and Minority-Serving Institutions. Finally, the legislation would invest some of the savings in early childhood education, community colleges, and school modernization.
The Leadership Conference supported the bill because it would make needed investments throughout the education system, from early childhood through college, making a quality education more accessible for all. The legislation makes these investments responsibly, paying for them completely through savings and even directing $10 billion back to the federal treasury to reduce the deficit.
The House passed the bill (253-171). A vote for the bill was counted as a + vote. Roll Call Vote No. 719 (9/17/09).
Employment
Lilly Ledbetter Fair Pay Act (H.R. 11)
In January 2009, the House passed the Lilly Ledbetter Fair Pay Act, in direct response to the Supreme Court decision handed down in 2007 in Ledbetter v. Goodyear Tire & Rubber. In Ledbetter, the Supreme Court sharply departed from precedent when it held that the 180-day statute of limitations for Title VII pay discrimination cases should be calculated from the day a pay decision is made, rather than from when the employee is subject to that decision or injured by it. The Court’s decision in this case would greatly limit the ability of pay discrimination victims to vindicate their rights. The Lilly Ledbetter Fair Pay Act amends Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, the Age Discrimination in Employment Act of 1967, the Americans with Disabilities Act of 1990, and the Rehabilitation Act of 1973, to clarify that each time an employee receives a discriminatory paycheck, it is an act of discrimination actionable under the relevant statutes. Therefore, employees would be permitted to file charges of pay discrimination within 180 days of the last received paycheck affected by the alleged discriminatory decision.
The Leadership Conference supported H.R. 11 because it is necessary to ensure that victims of workplace discrimination receive effective remedies. This bill makes clear that a pay discrimination claim accrues when a pay decision is made, when an employee is subject to that decision, or at any time the employee is injured by it. The House passed the bill (247 to 171).
A vote for the bill was counted as a + vote. Roll Call Vote No. 9 (1/9/09).
Federal Employee Paid Parental Leave Act (H.R. 626)
In June 2009, the House passed the Federal Employee Paid Parental Leave Act. Under this bill, federal employees would be granted paid leave for four of the twelve weeks of annual parental leave under the Family and Medical Leave Act (FMLA) to care for newborn or newly adopted children. As more mothers have entered the paid labor force, rising from 47 to 72 percent between 1975 and 2006, access to paid parental leave has become increasingly necessary for working families.
The Leadership Conference supports paid parental leave because it assists working people by enabling them to take the time necessary to care for their newborn and newly adopted children, without having to worry about their paychecks.
The House passed the bill (258-154). A vote for the bill was counted as a + vote. Roll Call Vote No. 310 (6/4/09).
Paycheck Fairness Act (H.R. 12)
In January 2009, the House passed the Paycheck Fairness Act. The Paycheck Fairness Act would ensure that women can obtain the same remedies for sex-based pay discrimination as individuals who suffer race or national origin discrimination. It would close loopholes in the Equal Pay Act which, despite its goals, has failed to abolish the wage gap between men and women in the United States. The bill would require employers seeking to justify unequal pay for male and female workers to prove that such disparities are job-related and required by business necessity. It would bar retaliation by employers when employees share salary information with coworkers and would improve data collection.
Compensatory and punitive damages would also be available to workers who brought successful claims. The Leadership Conference supported H.R. 12 because this bill would be an important step toward achieving gender equality in the workplace and assisting the many working families who depend on women’s earning to make ends meet.
The House passed the bill (256-163). A vote for the bill was counted as a + vote. Roll Call Vote No. 8 (1/9/09).
Health Care
Children's Health Insurance Program Reauthorization Act of 2009 (H.R. 2)
In January 2009, the House passed the Children's Health Insurance Program Reauthorization Act, which expanded the federal-state Children’s Health Insurance Program (CHIP) that covers children in low-income families that do not qualify for federal Medicaid coverage. At $60 billion over four-and-a-half years, an increase of approximately $35 billion, the program is expected to cover approximately 6.5 million additional children, two-thirds of whom would not have had access to care through other sources. To offset the cost of the expansion, the bill would increase the tax on cigarettes by 61 cents to $1 per pack and raise taxes on other tobacco products. The bill also ends the five-year prohibition on covering legal immigrant children and pregnant women (making it optional for states). Unfortunately, the bill extends Medicaid’s ill-conceived citizenship documentation requirement to CHIP, but does allow states the option of using Social Security database matching instead of documentation for both CHIP and Medicaid.
The Leadership Conference supported the legislation because it greatly expanded coverage for low-income children and pregnant women and lifted the ban on coverage for legal immigrants.
The House passed the bill (289-139). A vote for the bill was counted as a + vote. Roll Call Vote No. 16 (1/14/09).
Housing/Lending
Allowing Court-Ordered Modification of Troubled Mortgage Loans (H.R. 1106)
In March 2009, the House considered H.R. 1106, the Helping Families Save Their Homes Act of 2009. Its most significant feature was a change to federal bankruptcy laws that would assist homeowners who are caught up in the ongoing mortgage foreclosure crisis. For mortgages that were otherwise destined to end in foreclosure, bankruptcy courts would be able to reduce the loan’s principal and interest payments to affordable, fair-marketvalue levels.
The Leadership Conference supported H.R. 1106. It was a limited proposal that could save hundreds of thousands of borrowers from losing their homes, through a Chapter 13 bankruptcy procedure that can already be used for vacation homes, yachts, farms, and investment properties. Such relief is important because many of the millions of borrowers who are likely to face foreclosure in the next several years were victims of predatory lending practices, involving the use of deceptive and unsustainable loan terms. In addition, foreclosures affect not only individual households, but entire neighborhoods through reduced property values, blight, public safety hazards, and drains on local government resources. H.R. 1106 would prevent many foreclosures, and it would do so without imposing any cost on taxpayers, so it could not be labeled as a “bailout.” Ironically, many of the lenders responsible for the foreclosure crisis have received bankruptcy relief themselves, yet the lending industry lobbied very aggressively against letting borrowers do the same.
The House passed the bill (234-191). A vote for the bill was counted as a + vote. Roll Call Vote No. 104 (3/5/09).
Wall Street Reform and Consumer Protection Act of 2009 (H.R. 4173)
In December, the House considered H.R. 4173, a bill that would impose many long-overdue reforms of our financial services regulatory system. A key provision of H.R. 4173 would create a new Consumer Financial Protection Agency (CFPA) to enforce consumer and fair lending laws, laws that existing regulatory agencies largely ignored. It would also improve procedures for dealing with large failed banks, making taxpayer bailouts less likely in the future; enhance the prosecution of investment fraud; hold credit rating agencies more accountable when they issue reckless ratings on investment products; and improve regulation and transparency in the trade of complicated financial derivatives, such as those that brought down AIG and helped fuel the housing bubble.
The Leadership Conference supported H.R. 4173. While the bill contains troubling loopholes in some areas, including the provisions to govern the trade of derivatives, the overall need for the bill could not be more obvious. Rampant abuses in consumer lending practices, combined with a casino mentality on Wall Street and the willful blindness of federal regulators, have plunged our economy into its worst economic crisis since the Great Depression – and it is clear that after an unprecedented taxpayer bailout, Wall Street has not learned its lessons. The fundamental weaknesses in our financial regulatory system must be addressed.
The House passed the bill (223-202). A vote for it was counted as a + vote. Roll Call Vote No. 968 (12/11/09).
Consumer Financial Protection Agency (H.R. 4173)
A central provision of the Wall Street Reform and Consumer Protection Act of 2009 (H.R. 4173), which the House considered in December, would create a new federal agency that exists solely to enforce most consumer protection and fair lending laws. The failure of existing regulatory agencies to enforce these laws contributed greatly to the ongoing housing and financial crisis. During floor debate on H.R. 4173, however, Rep. Walter Minnick (D-ID) offered an amendment that would replace this proposed new agency with a much smaller consumer protection council that would be run by existing regulators.
The Leadership Conference opposed the Minnick amendment. It would leave consumer protection and civil rights laws in the hands of the very same regulatory agencies that steadfastly refused to enforce them. Most notably, the Federal Reserve has had sweeping authority since 1994 to ban any loan products that are “unfair, deceptive,” or “otherwise not in the interest of the borrower,” but it did not invoke this power over mortgage lending until 2008 – long after the foreclosure crisis had already begun. Because existing regulators are too cozy with the financial institutions they regulate, consumers need a voice in the regulatory system that will exclusively serve them.
The Minnick amendment failed (208-223). A vote against it was counted as a + vote. Roll Call Vote No. 965 (12/11/09).
Predatory Mortgage Lending Reform (H.R. 1728)
In May 2009, the House considered H.R. 1728, the Mortgage Reform and Anti-Predatory Lending Act of 2009, which would institute a number of reforms to the vastly underregulated subprime lending industry. Among its reforms, Title III of H.R. 1728 would expand the definition of “high-cost loans,” which are currently subjected to strict regulation under the Home Ownership and Equity Protection Act of 1994 (HOEPA), so that more loans would fall under the 1994 law’s consumer protections. Rep. Patrick McHenry (R-NC) offered an amendment to strike this provision.
The Leadership Conference opposed the McHenry amendment. While The Leadership Conference had a number of concerns about H.R. 3915, including the bill’s weak enforcement provisions and its preemption of stronger laws in a number of states, Title III of the bill is clearly a significant step forward in reducing abusive lending practices. It is fashioned after consumer protections under North Carolina law, which have been demonstrated to reduce fee-gouging and equity stripping while still preserving access to responsible subprime loans. Eliminating Title III from the bill would leave borrowers – especially racial and ethnic minorities, who are more likely to be steered into high-cost loans – more vulnerable to predatory lending tactics.
The McHenry amendment failed (171-255). A vote against the amendment was counted as a + vote. Roll Call Vote No. 241 (5/7/09).
Telecommunications
Digital Television Transition (S. 328)
This bill would postpone the date, from Feb. 17 to June 12, 2009, by which full-power television stations must cease analog broadcasts. It would extend, from March 31 to July 31, 2009, the period that households could obtain coupons for converter boxes. It also would allow lowpower stations to submit compensation requests for the cost of purchasing conversion devices and require the Federal Communications Commission to extend license terms for the recovered analog spectrum.
The Leadership Conference supported this version of the DTV Delay Act as necessary to ensure that no Americans are left in the dark, and in particular, to fix the federal coupon program created to offset the cost of this transition to consumers.
A motion to suspend the rules and pass the bill was rejected (258-168). A vote for the motion was counted as a + vote. Roll Call Vote No. 41 (1/28/09)
