The bill
Homebuyers Privacy Protection Act
S. 1467, 119th Congress — read as touching Commercial Banks.
Sponsored by
Sen. Reed, Jack [D-RI]
ID: R000122
Follow the money
The bill
S. 1467, 119th Congress — read as touching Commercial Banks.
The sponsor
Every bill has someone who introduced it. That name is where the paper trail starts.
The money
20 itemised contributions to this sponsor, pulled from FEC filings.
The alignment
This bill's text tracks the "Introduction" section, p. 869-871 of the Mandate for Leadership.
Track this bill's progress through the legislative process
Latest Action
Held at the desk.
June 16, 2025
📍 Current Status
Next: The bill will be reviewed by relevant committees who will debate, amend, and vote on it.
1. Introduction: A member of Congress introduces a bill in either the House or Senate.
2. Committee Review: The bill is sent to relevant committees for study, hearings, and revisions.
3. Floor Action: If approved by committee, the bill goes to the full chamber for debate and voting.
4. Other Chamber: If passed, the bill moves to the other chamber (House or Senate) for the same process.
5. Conference: If both chambers pass different versions, a conference committee reconciles the differences.
6. Presidential Action: The President can sign the bill into law, veto it, or take no action.
7. Became Law: If signed (or if Congress overrides a veto), the bill becomes law!
Another brilliant example of congressional incompetence masquerading as "consumer protection." The Homebuyers Privacy Protection Act, S 1467, is a masterclass in legislative doublespeak and special interest pandering.
**Main Purpose & Objectives:** The bill's stated purpose is to prevent consumer reporting agencies from furnishing consumer reports under certain circumstances. In reality, it's a thinly veiled attempt to restrict access to credit information for non-lenders, while allowing favored industries (banks, credit unions) to maintain their stranglehold on the market.
**Key Provisions & Changes to Existing Law:** The bill amends Section 604(c) of the Fair Credit Reporting Act by adding new definitions and limitations on consumer report requests. In essence, it creates a tiered system where only select entities (lenders, servicers, insured depository institutions, and credit unions) can access consumer reports for residential mortgage loans. Everyone else is left out in the cold.
**Affected Parties & Stakeholders:** The bill's proponents claim to be protecting homebuyers' privacy, but the real beneficiaries are the financial institutions that lobbied for this legislation. Non-lenders, such as credit counselors and financial advisors, will face significant barriers in accessing necessary information to help their clients. Homebuyers themselves? They'll just get more confusing fine print and reduced access to competitive loan offers.
**Potential Impact & Implications:** This bill is a textbook example of regulatory capture, where special interests hijack the legislative process to serve their own agendas. By limiting access to credit information, this bill will:
* Reduce competition in the mortgage market * Increase costs for homebuyers * Stifle innovation in financial services * Perpetuate the dominance of entrenched financial institutions
In short, S 1467 is a cynical exercise in protecting the interests of powerful lobbies at the expense of consumers. It's a legislative disease, and I'm here to diagnose it: "Acute Regulatory Capture Syndrome" with symptoms of crony capitalism, bureaucratic sclerosis, and a healthy dose of congressional incompetence.
Now, if you'll excuse me, I have better things to do than dissect this legislative abomination further. Next patient, please!
Sen. Reed, Jack [D-RI]
Congress 119 • 2024 Election Cycle
No PAC contributions found
No organization contributions found
No committee contributions found
This bill has 10 cosponsors. Below are their top campaign contributors.
ID: H000601
Top Contributors
10
ID: V000128
Top Contributors
10
ID: T000476
Top Contributors
10
ID: C001113
Top Contributors
10
ID: C001096
Top Contributors
10
ID: S001203
Top Contributors
10
ID: B001319
Top Contributors
10
ID: G000574
Top Contributors
10
ID: R000618
Top Contributors
10
ID: A000382
Top Contributors
10
Hub layout: Politicians in center, donors arranged by type in rings around them.
Showing 53 nodes and 35 connections (41 secondary connections hidden)
Total contributions: $114,410
Showing top 17 donors by contribution amount
Which industries are materially affected by specific provisions in this bill. 2 harmed.
Section 2 amends FCRA to restrict furnishing of consumer reports for prescreening requests related to residential mortgage loans unless certain conditions are met, limiting banks' ability to use credit reports for marketing mortgage products, imposing a compliance cost.
Section 2 limits furnishing of consumer reports in connection with residential mortgage loan transactions, which could reduce the effectiveness of prescreened mortgage offers, impacting real estate agents and lenders reliant on such marketing.
This bill shows semantic similarity to the following sections of the Project 2025 policy document.
— 837 — Financial Regulatory Agencies l Require the SEC and the CFTC to publish a detailed annual report on SRO supervision. AUTHOR’S NOTE: The preparation of this chapter was a collective enterprise of individuals involved in the 2025 Presidential Transition Project. All contributors to this chapter are listed at the front of this volume, but Paul Atkins, C. Wallace DeWitt, Christopher Iacovella, Brian Knight, Chelsea Pizzola, and Andrew Vollmer deserve special mention. The author alone assumes responsibility for the content of this chapter, and no views expressed herein should be attributed to any other individual. CONSUMER FINANCIAL PROTECTION BUREAU Robert Bowes The Consumer Financial Protection Bureau (CFPB) was authorized in 2010 by the Dodd–Frank Act.32 Since the Bureau’s inception, its status as an “inde- pendent” agency with no congressional oversight has been questioned in multiple court cases, and the agency has been assailed by critics33 as a shakedown mecha- nism to provide unaccountable funding to leftist nonprofits politically aligned with those who spearheaded its creation. In 2015, for example, Investor’s Business Daily accused the CFPB of “diverting potentially millions of dollars in settlement payments for alleged victims of lending bias to a slush fund for poverty groups tied to the Democratic Party” and plan- ning “to create a so-called Civil Penalty Fund from its own shakedown operations targeting financial institutions” that would use “ramped-up (and trumped-up) anti-discrimination lawsuits and investigations” to “bankroll some 60 liberal non- profits, many of whom are radical Acorn-style pressure groups.”34 The CFPB has a fiscal year (FY) 2023 budget of $653.2 million35 and 1,635 full- time equivalent (FTE) employees.36 From FY 2012 through FY 2020, it imposed approximately $1.25 billion in civil money penalties;37 in FY 2022, it imposed approximately $172.5 million in civil money penalties.38 These penalties are imposed by the CFPB Civil Penalty Fund, described as “a victims relief fund, into which the CFPB deposits civil penalties it collects in judicial and administrative actions under Federal consumer financial laws.”39 The CFPB is headed by a single Director who is appointed by the President to a five-year term.40 Its organizational structure includes five divisions: Operations; Consumer Education and External Affairs; Legal; Supervision, Enforcement and Fair Lending; and Research, Monitoring and Regulations.41 Each of these divisions reports to the Office of the Director, except for the Operations Division, which reports to the Deputy Director. Passage of Title X of Dodd–Frank was a bid to placate concern over a series of regulatory failures identified in the wake of the 2008 financial crisis. The law imported a new superstructure of federal regulation over consumer finance and — 838 — Mandate for Leadership: The Conservative Promise mortgage lending and servicing industries traditionally regulated by state bank- ing regulators. Consumer protection responsibilities previously handled by the Office of the Comptroller of the Currency, Office of Thrift Supervision, Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation, Federal Reserve, National Credit Union Admin- istration, and Federal Trade Commission were transferred to and consolidated in the CFPB, which issues rules, orders, and guidance to implement federal consumer financial law. The CFPB collects fines from the private sector that are put into the Civil Pen- alty Fund.42 The fund serves two ostensible purposes: to compensate the victims whom the CFPB perceives to be harmed and to underwrite “consumer education” and “financial literacy” programs.43 How the Civil Penalty Fund is spent is at the discretion of the CFPB Director. The CFPB has been unclear as to how it decides what “consumer education” or “financial literacy programs” to fund.44 As noted, critics have charged that money from the Civil Penalty Fund has ended up in the pockets of leftist activist organizations. In Seila Law LLC v. Consumer Financial Protection Bureau,45 the Supreme Court of the United States held that the CFPB’s leadership by a single individual remov- able only for inefficiency, neglect, or malfeasance violated constitutional separation of powers requirements because “[t]he Constitution requires that such officials remain dependent on the President, who in turn is accountable to the people.”46 The CFPB Director is thus subject to removal by the President. The CFPB is not subject to congressional oversight, and its funding is not determined by elected lawmakers in Congress as part of the typical congressional appropriations process. It receives its funding from the Federal Reserve, which is itself funded outside the appropriations process through bank assessments. CFPB funding represents 12 percent of the total operating expenses of the Fed- eral Reserve and is disbursed by the unelected Board of Governors of the Federal Reserve System.47 This is not the case with respect to any other federal agency. On October 19, 2022, in Community Financial Services Association of America v. Consumer Financial Protection Bureau, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit held that the CFPB’s “perpetual insulation from Congress’s appropriations power, including the express exemption from congressional review of its funding, renders the Bureau ‘no longer dependent and, as a result, no longer accountable’ to Congress and, ultimately, to the people”48 and that “[b]y abandoning its ‘most complete and effectual’ check on ‘the overgrown prerogatives of the other branches of the government’—indeed, by enabling them in the Bureau’s case—Congress ran afoul of the separation of powers embodied in the Appropriations Clause.”49 The Court further remarked that the CFPB’s “capacious portfolio of authority acts ‘as a mini legislature, prosecutor, and court, responsible for creating substantive rules for a wide swath of industries, prosecuting violations, and levying knee-buckling penalties against private citizens.’”50
Policy matches are calculated using semantic similarity between bill summaries and Project 2025 policy text. A score of 60% or higher indicates meaningful thematic overlap. This does not imply direct causation or intent, but highlights areas where legislation aligns with Project 2025 policy objectives.
Providing for consideration of the joint resolution (S.J. Res. 18) disapproving the rule submitted by the Bureau of Consumer Financial Protection relating to "Overdraft Lending: Very Large Financial Institutions''; providing for consideration of the joint resolution (S.J. Res. 28) disapproving the rule submitted by the Bureau of Consumer Financial Protection relating to ''Defining Larger Participants of a Market for General-Use Digital Consumer Payment Applications''; providing for consideration of the bill (H.R. 1526) to amend title 28, United States Code, to limit the authority of district courts to provide injunctive relief, and for other purposes; providing for consideration of the bill (H.R. 22) to amend the National Voter Registration Act of 1993 to require proof of United States citizenship to register an individual to vote in elections for Federal office, and for other purposes; and for other purposes.
MY DATA Act of 2025
A bill to improve the safety and security of Members of Congress, immediate family members of Members of Congress, and congressional staff.