2020: Schweikert Voted Against Provisions To Credit Reporting Standards To Protect Consumers. In January 2020, Schweikert voted against a bill that would, according to Congressional Quarterly, "make a number of modifications to credit reporting standards and consumer protections. Among other provisions, it would limit the information that consumer reporting agencies may include on an individual's credit report." The vote was on passage. The House passed the bill by a vote of 221-189. [House Vote 31, 1/29/20; Congressional Quarterly, 1/29/20; Congressional Actions, H.R.3621]
Congressional Quarterly: The Bill Forced Credit Reporting Companies To "Cut Consumers Some Slack" By Shortening The Time That Adverse Credit Events Can Hurt. According to Congressional Quarterly, "Most of the provisions would force credit reporting companies to cut consumers some slack by requiring the firms reduce the time that certain adverse credit events can hurt. [The] bill would direct credit reporting companies to remove a delinquency or default designation from a private education loan if a borrower subsequently made nine on-time monthly payments. A similar provision [...] would shorten the time that adverse credit information stays on a report from seven years to four, and bankruptcies from 10 years to seven." [Congressional Quarterly, 1/27/19]
The Bill Required Credit Reporting Companies To Provide Free Copies Of Credit Scores And Credit Reports. According to Congressional Quarterly, "Another credit reporting measure [...] would require the companies to provide consumers free copies of credit scores along with the credit reports they can now get free annually or after their credit data might have been compromised. The bill also would require credit reporting companies to maintain a consumer's credit score history for two years and delete credit scores older than two years." [Congressional Quarterly, 1/27/19]
The Bill Strengthened Restrictions On Credit Checks For Employment. According to The Hill, "legislation also includes provisions that would strengthen restrictions on credit checks for employment decisions unless necessary for positions that require background checks 'by a federal, state or local law, or for a national security clearance' and would shorten the time negative credit information stays on a report down to four years and make changes to the credit report dispute process." [The Hill, 1/29/20]
The Hill: Democrats Argued That The Bill Was Necessary To "Fight Back Against Abusive Or Predatory Practices." According to The Hill, "Proponents of the bill argued it is a necessary step to fight back against abusive or predatory practices and provide borrowers with options to gain financial stability." [The Hill, 1/29/20]
The Hill: Republicans Believed The Bill Would Make "Dramatic Changes That Could Have Negative Repercussions On Consumers." According to The Hill, "critics of the legislation allege the bill would make dramatic changes that could have negative repercussions on consumers, with top Republicans arguing they should work to find a bipartisan solution on reforms to the Fair Credit Reporting Act." [The Hill, 1/29/20]