Consumers First Act

Floor Speech

BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT

Mr. GREEN of Texas. Madam Chair, I thank the chair of the full committee. I am honored to have this opportunity to speak in support of this bill.

This bill addresses a concern that many of us on the Financial Services Committee have had to deal with for some time now, and it is the question of whether the committee is going to allow the CFPB to protect consumers from unscrupulous behavior or to protect Big Business. I am a person who believes that we should protect the consumer.

This legislation will allow the persons who receive student loans to avoid being placed into costly repayment plans that will cause them to pay more money and possibly default. It will cause consumers looking to open a new checking account to have the opportunity to do so with a bank that has the least amount of overdraft fees. It will allow persons who are seeking credit cards to have the right to seek relief through the courts, not through some boilerplate language that they might find in a contract that will not benefit them.

This is the opportunity that we must take advantage of to protect consumers. It is the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau, not the financial institutions protection bureau.

So with this said, I wholeheartedly endorse what the chairperson has brought to the attention of this Congress. These are remedies that are absolutely necessary, and I plan to vote and encourage my colleagues to vote in support of this legislation.

BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT

Mr. GREEN of Texas. Madam Chair, I am honored to present amendment No. 17, which deals with consumer choice. It deals with whether consumers will be forced into arbitration or whether they will have the choice of having arbitration or litigation.

With litigation, the consumer can have the choice of having the case presented as one person or as part of a group.

This amendment is one that the Dodd-Frank Wall Street Reform Act called to our attention by way of a study that was required.

After performing the study, the CFPB issued a final rule to regulate the use of mandatory arbitration clauses. In so doing, it was something that we believed would have been beneficial to consumers. Yet, before the rule could take effect, it was rescinded by Congress in November 2017.

My amendment offers a direct, straightforward solution. It simply reinstates the CFPB final rule, a rule that was the product of a careful study. It was analyzed properly. It was done by way of stakeholder consensus.

My belief is that this rule will reinstate a law that will give consumers choice as opposed to forced administration.

Madam Chair, I yield 1 minute to the gentleman from Pennsylvania (Mr. Cartwright).

BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT

Mr. GREEN of Texas. Madam Chair, I yield myself such time as I may consume.

Madam Chair, this is a consumer's dream come true because it gives the consumer choice.

It does not deny the business owner, the credit card company, or the bank the opportunity to have arbitration. What it does is it allows the consumer to have the choice to either elect to have arbitration or to go to litigation, and when litigating, the consumer can litigate as an individual.

When I was a judge of a small claims court, I had many persons who were litigating their cases before me. I also understand that there are times when people believe that they should have lawyers to represent them. It is not unusual for businesses to have lawyers to represent them. In fact, businesses have lawyers on call to represent them 24 hours a day.

Why can consumers not have the same opportunity to litigate that businesses have to litigate? That is what this is all about. My colleague, on the other side, would simply have consumers have no choice, go to arbitration only, and then, possibly, gain some emolument.

My belief is that consumers ought to have choice. That is what this amendment is about.

Madam Chair, this is part of the reason why consumers are so angry with this Congress. We deny them their constitutional rights, the right to a trial and the right to make a determination for themselves as to whether or not they will engage in arbitration or litigation.

Consumers should have choices. Businesses have choices. Consumers should have no less than what businesses have.

Madam Chair, I yield back the balance of my time.

BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT

Source