Like Causes?

Install the App
TRY NOW
Countable Is Officially Causes.com

senate Bill S. Joint Res. 47

A joint resolution providing for congressional disapproval under chapter 8 of title 5, United States Code, of the rule submitted by Bureau of Consumer Financial Protection relating to "Arbitration Agreements".

Bill Details

Official information provided by the Congressional Research Service. Learn more or make a suggestion.
The Congressional Research Service writes summaries for most legislation. These summaries are listed here. Causes will update some legislation with a revised summary, title or other key elements.

Suggest an update to this bill using our form.

Official Title

A joint resolution providing for congressional disapproval under chapter 8 of title 5, United States Code, of the rule submitted by Bureau of Consumer Financial Protection relating to "Arbitration Agreements".

Summary

This joint resolution nullifies a rule submitted by the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau (CFPB) regarding arbitration agreements. (The rule regulates the use of arbitration agreements in contracts for specific consumer financial products and services. It prohibits the use of a predispute arbitration agreement to prevent a consumer from filing or participating in certain class action suits. The rule also requires consumer financial product and service providers to furnish the CFPB with particular information regarding arbitrations.)

joint resolution Progress

  • Not enacted
    The President has not signed this bill
  • The house has not voted
  • The senate has not voted
      senate Committees
      Committee on Banking, Housing, and Urban Affairs
    IntroducedJuly 20th, 2017
    Sam's Opinion Against
    ···
    10/10/2017
    If many people were wronged by the improper conduct of a company, then they should have the freedom to join in a lawsuit. Many times the company can outlast any individual person in a drawn out lawsuit, and this is why we as the public need this rule to remain in place. Without it, it severely inhibits our right to justice.
    Like (1)
    Follow
    Share
    Jazmen's Opinion Against
    ···
    10/11/2017
    I see this policy as discouraging for people who seek justice and accountability from large businesses which is difficult enough already. This is a move in a direction that implies to businesses that there will be no consequence for bad business or malpractice.
    Like (1)
    Follow
    Share
    Alejandro's Opinion Against
    ···
    10/09/2017
    Equifax needs to be punished not protected.
    Like
    Follow
    Share
    Andrew's Opinion Against
    ···
    10/10/2017
    Don’t gift those who gamed and gained this countries people, exploiting your people. The people you serve. Don’t forget elected officials are in service to those they elect, to game/bank off this shit is betrayal, a form of oppression, oppression is the one objective evil globally, do not oppress your people by aligning with a “King”(Corp.) who does wrong yet has the power to take responsibility and those also in power to demand compliance, to take away that responsibility(?) this is disgust’.
    Like
    Follow
    Share