-9999

Floor Speech

BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT

Mr. DURBIN. Mr. President, I want to thank my colleague from Maryland for his excellent presentation.

This is an issue which people with little money in the bank never think about. People who are living paycheck to paycheck don't have a big savings account, don't have anywhere to turn. They are the ones who are penalized by the discussion we are having today and certainly ought to pay attention to this debate.

It is hard to believe that recent polls show that consumer confidence in the economy has dropped to its lowest level in 12 years. This comes after President Trump made campaign promise after campaign promise to lower prices on day one. Remember that? He said: We are going to ``make America affordable again.'' But working families in America have not seen any relief; actually, just the opposite.

A month ago, President Trump, turning to his billionaire buddy--the unelected Elon Musk--tried to, in Musk's description, ``delete'' the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau.

I know a little bit about that Bureau. I was one of the original sponsors of the legislation creating it. The idea was to have one Agency of government on the side of the consumer that was willing to look out for rip-offs and to fight, if necessary, to protect the consumers.

Of course, that is the last thing in the world that Elon Musk and Donald Trump want to see. They are the folks who want to make sure that the big banks and the big corporations are not held accountable, so off they went with their DOGE operation for the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau.

This Agency stood up to Wall Street to protect consumers when they had nowhere else to turn. And, now, today, hard to believe--hard to believe--my Republican colleagues want to go a further step to strip consumers of protections that went to the benefit of the big banks. They want to gut a rule from the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau that would cap overdraft fees.

Currently, consumers are charged on average $35 in overdraft fees per transaction. So you write a check for one of your expenses, and it turns out there is some miscalculation along the way, and you don't have the money in your checking account to cover it. That is an overdraft. Well, the charge for that overdraft is $35 currently, on average. It doesn't matter how big or how small you overdrew your checking account.

If a consumer purchases a product one cent over the amount in their checking account, an extra $35 is tacked on to the transaction in overdraft fees.

According to the Federal Reserve, nearly 40 percent of Americans would have trouble covering an emergency $400 expense. Forty percent of Americans do not have more than $400 in cash available to them. For those households, a $35 overdraft fee would be the difference between just making it or falling behind a little bit that day.

The CFPB's rule would cap these fees at 5 bucks unless the bank can demonstrate that its costs to run overdraft services are actually higher. This would save Americans up to $5 billion a year, from $35 on average to $5 for overdraft fees or $225 for each household that pays overdraft fees.

The rule only applies to banks and credit unions that have more than $10 billion in assets. That is about 130 of the biggest banks. So the community banks--the ones which you probably do a lot of business with--that sponsor the hometown Little League team or help support local charities, this rule would not apply to them. The bank has to have a value of more than $10 billion in assets to be covered by this $5 limitation.

What are some of the banks that are involved? JPMorgan's profits last year were $54 billion--JPMorgan, $54 billion; Bank of America's profits, $25 billion; Wells Fargo's profits, $20 billion. Let me draw a distinction. In 2024, JPMorgan and Wells Fargo both charged more than $1 billion in overdraft fees. However, Bank of America has capped its overdraft fees to 10 bucks. They still made incredible profits to the tune of $25.5 billion. When you crunch the numbers, the big banks' arguments that they absolutely need to charge people these outrageous fees just don't hold up.

That is why I am voting no on this offering to oppose the resolution that would overturn this rule that caps overdraft fees and helps everyday Americans.

I do want to commend the banks that are at least trying to help the consumers. Citigroup and Capital One have ceased overdraft fees, and Bank of America has capped its overdraft fee at $10, underscoring how banks can continue to operate profitably--very profitably--without relying on these fees.

So I am going to oppose this offering by Senator Scott of South Carolina on this overdraft lending fee. I think when it gets right down to it, you have to ask yourself: Is it really costing the banks that much money for an overdraft? If it is, they can charge the consumer. But to automatically penalize them in this way is fundamentally unfair for a lot of people who are struggling. You can talk a lot about the cost of a dozen eggs, but I will tell you what, even a dozen eggs doesn't cost a $35 fee that has been the usual charge in penalty for anyone who overdraws their account. So if you are on the side of the consumers and the families who are struggling with the cost of living, oppose this effort by Senator Scott of South Carolina.

BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT

Source