The Consumer Financial Protection Bureau (CFPB), a sorry remnant of the Biden era, has made an unexpected move. Agreeing with two trade associations – the Consumer Data Industry Association and the Cornerstone Credit Union League – they’ve lodged a plea to repeal an absurd rule about medical debt on credit reports. This rule was a last desperate act of the Biden administration, intending to ban the acknowledgment of medical debt on credit records and prohibit financial institutions from considering a person’s medical debt when making lending choices.
This poorly thought-through regulation was supposed to come into effect in March. The two trade groups, fortunately, sued the CFPB, pushing for the rule to be discontinued. An Eastern District of Texas federal court judge saw reason and issued a 90-day stay, postponing the rule’s initiation until June 15.
Unusually, the CFPB didn’t muster up a defense. Instead, they sided with the trade groups, asking the United States District Court Judge to abolish the questionable medical debt rule. The reason they cited for this action? The rule oversteps the bureau’s statutory authority which is an ironic admission, considering their usual overreach.
Consumer bodies, ever predictable, have launched an attempt to step in and shield this misguided rule. They are facing resistance not only from the trade groups and CFPB but also from the legal challenge that the employees of the CFPB have put forward. The employees seek to shut down the agency entirely which could potentially save consumers from the flawed policies of this kind in the future.
Consumer advocates fret over the possibility of the medical debt rule being discarded – a move which they perceive as stripping away an essential layer of consumer protection. It’s worth noting, however, that many consumers worry more about reasonable economic regulations than about protection from theoretical threats.
Celebrations were in order by the Consumer Data Industry Association, which stands for the rights of credit bureaus. They recognized, as most do, the importance of not glossing over medical debt while making lending decisions and hence supported the routes taken to eliminate the medical debt rule.
Interestingly, the rule aimed to prevent lenders from viewing complete and accurate data when deciding on loan applications. It is baffling how an administration could champion inaccurate reporting. Medical bills, moreover, make up over half of all debt collection actions against consumers. Surely, this information would be critical when considering a consumer’s financial circumstances and lending options.
The three most prominent credit reporting companies have already taken a more sophisticated approach to the issue of medical debt. They have removed several types of medical debt from credit reports: paid medical debts, medical debts less than a year old that remain unpaid, and any medical debt amounting to less than $500. This more nuanced policy provides consumer protection without imposing an unfair burden on lenders.
Even if this biased rule does not survive the scrutiny of the court challenge, there is bipartisan backing for shielding consumers from credit repercussions due to old-fashioned medical bills. It’s slightly comical to note that a seemingly non-partisan issue like medical debt has been politicized to this extent.
Medical debt, regardless of the politicization attempts, remains an impartial issue. It’s a widespread concern across all classes, but disproportionately impacts middle-income Americans, who are burdened with higher out-of-pocket costs. The looming question is – will policymakers address this matter honestly or continue to coat it with layers of partisan strategy?
Potential solutions to this issue could rely on implementing nuanced policies, similar to those of leading credit reporting companies. By considering the nature and age of medical debt instead of dismissing it outright, lenders could uphold fair practices while consumers enjoy specific protections.
Lessons should be learned from this botched initiative. Policymakers need to ensure any proposed regulations on this matter don’t repeat these pitfalls. Transparency and accuracy should take precedence over political gamesmanship when it comes to such critical financial matters.
One can hope that the CFPB, following their somewhat self-aware stance on this proposed rule, will rethink any future initiatives more carefully. Clearly, the process falls under scrutiny when the agency charged with protecting consumer finance doesn’t defend its own legislation.
While it’s unfortunate that this rule was ever proposed, its potential overthrow could shed light on a critical issue. It could also lead to a more thoughtful, careful approach to policy-making in the future. However, as always, only time will tell.
The post Biden’s Medical Debt Plan Abandoned: A Tragic Relief appeared first on Real News Now.
About Author
