Hello! My name is _______, and I am a constituent of Representative _________’s in ____________, California. I'm calling to urge him to oppose HR 10, the so-called "Financial Choice Act." The bill would undermine safeguards that have stabilized our financial system and protected consumers effectively. It would destroy the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau, which is desperately needed. Banks must not be allowed to charge excessive fees for no reason, put our money at risk with no accountability, or take away our rights as shareholders in a company. The congressperson should oppose any bill that would reduce much-needed regulation on Wall Street and financial firms. Thank you!
The House is scheduled to vote later this week on the Financial CHOICE Act (H.R. 10), which would dismantle the 2010 Wall Street reform legislation, known as the Dodd-Frank Act. It would eliminate the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau, an agency committed to protecting consumers and making sure that banks, lenders, and other financial institutions treat us fairly. In under 6 years, the CFPB has returned $12 billion to 29 million consumers. It also would weaken regulatory powers that pre-date Dodd-Frank, and eliminate long-standing rights of shareholders to hold companies accountable for corporate misbehavior that harms consumers, workers and the environment.
The CHOICE Act would tie the hands of bank regulators and make it easier for banks to take risks that endanger the economy. It would repeal the Volcker Rule, which prohibits banks from gambling with customer money; the fiduciary rule which requires retirement investment advisors to act in the best interest of clients; and repeal the Durbin Amendment, which would allow big banks to rake in higher fees while doing nothing for community banks that are not covered by the provision. The legislation sharply limits the ability of regulators to ensure that banks are managed in a safe and sound manner, and have adequate funds available to absorb potential losses without turning to the taxpayer for a bailout. It would make it easy for Wall Street lobbyists to overturn rules, and make it harder for regulators to enforce the rules that remain.