

SUBSCRIBE TO OUR FREE NEWSLETTER
Daily news & progressive opinion—funded by the people, not the corporations—delivered straight to your inbox.
5
#000000
#FFFFFF
To donate by check, phone, or other method, see our More Ways to Give page.


Daily news & progressive opinion—funded by the people, not the corporations—delivered straight to your inbox.
"Susan Collins cares far more about protecting bank executives’ millions than protecting the rest of us from BS overdraft fees," said Platner's campaign manager.
Graham Platner's campaign is accusing Sen. Susan Collins of siding with banking interests after she joined Senate Republicans in blocking a Democratic measure to protect consumers from unexpected overdraft fees.
On Wednesday, the GOP voted largely along party lines against a set of Democratic resolutions aiming to restore Consumer Financial Protection Bureau (CFPB) policies killed by the Trump administration.
In what its acting director, Russell Vought, has described as an effort to effectively dismantle the bureau, which has been credited with delivering more than $21 billion in consumer relief since its creation, he has rescinded 67 policies that protected Americans from junk fees, medical debt, lending discrimination, and other financial abuses.
One resolution voted down Wednesday would have restored a scrapped CFPB guidance against debt collectors hounding consumers over false or inflated medical debts. Another would have reaffirmed that the bureau can scrutinize financial companies for predatory credit practices aimed at military families.
These Democratic resolutions were not expected to pass in a Republican-controlled Senate, but were instead meant to force Republicans to put themselves on the record as standing against consumer interests.
As President Donald Trump takes a beating from voters on the economy, the votes will serve as ammunition as Democrats run with the message that the GOP has "abandoned consumers and is making life more expensive for them," as the CFPB's architect, Sen. Elizabeth Warren (D-Mass), said on Wednesday.
Platner is already deploying that ammunition in one of November's marquee races, hammering Collins (R-Maine) for voting with the GOP against restoring a guidance enacted by the Biden administration that required banks to obtain customers' consent before charging overdraft fees for ATM and one-time debit card transactions.
"Last night, Susan Collins voted once again to make it easier for big banks to hit Maine families with predatory overdraft fees," his campaign said in an email on Thursday. "Her vote to block even a debate on restoring basic consumer protections was just the latest reminder of where Collins' real loyalties lie."
"There is no legitimate policy rationale for voting against basic consumer protections on overdraft fees,” said Platner's campaign manager, Ben Chin. “But Susan Collins cares far more about protecting bank executives’ millions than protecting the rest of us from BS overdraft fees. This vote is yet another example of this deeply unfortunate reality.”
According to data from OpenSecrets, Collins has received nearly $1.8 million this cycle in contributions from the financial sector, including more than $570,000 from private equity and investment firms, which the Platner campaign said were "among the most predatory actors in the American economy."
She's also received more than $44,000 from commercial banks and holding companies that have a particular interest in her stance on overdraft fees.
The Pine Tree Results PAC, which has thrown about $12.7 million behind Collins, likewise got nearly a third of its funding from figures in the financial sector, particularly in private equity and hedge funds with a broader interest in neutering the CFPB.
A new analysis shows that over 40% of all US adults are unable to fully pay off their credit cards each month, leaving them trapped in "cycles of persistent debt."
US President Donald Trump promised repeatedly during his 2024 campaign to temporarily cap credit card interest rates at 10%, but—in the face of Wall Street opposition—he has done nothing concrete to fulfill that pledge since returning to the White House.
That failure, according to an analysis released Tuesday, has so far cost Americans $134.5 billion in interest payments. Every day, The Century Foundation (TCF) and Protect Borrowers estimate, US credit card holders are accruing $368 million more in interest than they would have if rates were capped at 10%. The average interest rate for credit cards in the US is currently around 25%, according to a Forbes measure.
In January, Trump called on Congress to approve a 10% cap on credit card interest rates for one year, and bipartisan legislation has been introduced in both the House and the Senate. But the president has not pressured bank-friendly Republicans to back the measure, and he vowed earlier this month to refuse to sign any legislation that reaches his desk unless lawmakers approve a massive voter suppression bill that is likely dead in the Senate.
“Trump could work with Congress to deliver on his promise to cap credit card interest rates at 10%—saving the average American with credit card debt about $900 a year," Sen. Elizabeth Warren (D-Mass.) said Tuesday. "But he is too busy siding with Wall Street.”
The new analysis by TCF and Protect Borrowers shows that over 40% of adults in the US are "unable to pay off their credit card bills each month, trapping them in cycles of persistent debt that balloons ever-higher due to record-high, industry-inflated interest rates and predatory fees."
Collectively, around 111 million Americans carry more than $1 trillion in credit card debt month to month, according to the analysis, and more than 27 million Americans can't afford more than the minimum monthly payment on their cards.
"Americans’ monthly credit card payments have grown by nearly 40% since 2018, a trend that is continuing unabated under President Trump," TCF and Protect Borrowers found. "From 2018 to 2025, the average monthly credit card payment rose by $553, or 38% (from $1,441 to $1,994). This growth far outstrips inflation."
"Since Trump’s inauguration alone, the average annual amount that Americans pay in credit card bills grew by an additional $1,177 (from $22,756 to $23,933)," the groups added. "The pace of this growth suggests that, in large part due to soaring interest rates, families today devote more income to credit card payments than at any point in history."
The nation's worsening credit card debt crisis comes amid a broader affordability crisis in an economy that Trump has hailed as the "greatest" in history, despite all the glaring evidence to the contrary.
A West Health-Gallup Center on Healthcare in America survey published last week found that roughly a third of respondents—equivalent to more than 80 million Americans—said they have had to skip a meal, borrow money, cut back on utilities, or make other painful trade-offs to afford healthcare expenses over the last 12 months as prices continue to rise across the economy.
“Grocery, utility, and healthcare bills are piling up, and Americans are increasingly turning to credit cards—some carrying interest rates exceeding 22%—just to make ends meet,” Jennifer Zhang, policy, research, and data Analyst at Protect Borrowers and co-author of the new analysis, said Tuesday.
“President Trump promised to tackle crushing credit card interest rates by January 20 of this year," Zhang added, "but that deadline has come and gone."
"While Trump claims he wants a credit card interest rate cap, his own regulators are helping out those very same Wall Street banks that are ripping off Americans."
Sen. Elizabeth Warren on Monday slammed President Donald Trump for breaking his promise to cap credit card interest rates.
In an op-ed published by Fox News, Warren noted that Trump last month gave the major US credit card companies a deadline of January 20 to set their interest rates at a maximum of 10% over the next year, or face some form of consequences.
However, that deadline has long since passed and Trump still hasn't done anything to punish the credit card firms for keeping their interest rates high.
What's more, Warren wrote, Trump and his administration have continued gutting the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau (CFPB), which could be used to launch an investigation into credit card billing practices.
"While Trump claims he wants a credit card interest rate cap," Warren argued, "his own regulators are helping out those very same Wall Street banks that are ripping off Americans and blocking states from protecting their citizens from sky-high loans."
The Massachusetts senator also slammed major financial institutions for claiming that capping credit card interest rates would lead to economic disaster.
"Give me a break," she said. "These are the most profitable financial institutions in the history of the world. There is no reason for them to demand 25% or 30% interest rates when smaller banks and credit unions are offering much lower credit card interest rates and are still making solid profits."
Warren revealed that she had a conversation recently with White House Chief of Staff Susie Wiles in which she made a case that it would be politically beneficial to pursue legislation on the issue, but so far the senator has not heard back about any follow-up plans.
"After six weeks, there’s no deal to help the American people," explained Warren. "We don’t need more speeches. We need an agreement on legislation and a commitment from the president to actually fight for it."
Trump's inaction on credit card interest rates came under fire last month from Mike Pierce, executive director of advocacy organization Protect Borrowers, who said that the president would need to lean harder on his congressional allies to make his promises a reality.
"Banks are charging the highest rates ever recorded—raking in windfall profits because both American life and Americans’ debts are more expensive," Pierce said. "If the president is serious about helping families, he needs his Republican allies in Congress to make this a top priority and stand up to the executives and lobbyists trying to protect banks’ bottom lines."
Matthew Stoller, senior researcher at the American Economic Liberties Project, was not surprised that Trump failed to live up to his credit card interest rate pledge.
"Shocker," he wrote in a social media post. "Trump was lying about his 10% credit card interest rate cap."
"Working families continue to struggle with unprecedented credit card debt and deserve to see Congress take legislative action to address this growing crisis."
As polling continues to show US consumers are pessimistic about an economy in which they face rising costs for everything from groceries to healthcare and housing under President Donald Trump, a "historic and diverse coalition" this week called on Congress to pass a bipartisan bill that would cap credit card interest rates at 10%.
The current average credit card interest rate is nearly double that, at 19.61%, according to Bankrate. It was even higher, over 20%, when US Sens. Bernie Sanders (I-Vt.) and Josh Hawley (R-Mo.) introduced the bill a year ago. Reps. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez (D-NY) and Anna Paulina Luna (R-Fla.) lead the legislation in the House of Representatives.
Their push came in response to an unfulfilled pledge from Trump, whose campaign said in September 2024 that he "has promised to cap interest rates at 10% to provide temporary and immediate relief for hardworking Americans who are struggling to make ends meet and cannot afford hefty interest payments on top of the skyrocketing costs of mortgages, rent, groceries, and gas."
The Thursday letter to congressional leaders—signed by dozens of civil rights, consumer protection, labor, veteran, and other groups—points to that promise, as well as Trump's January social media post calling for a one-year 10% cap. It also notes that "in response to widespread Wall Street opposition to the president's recent announcement, Trump officials have begun to backtrack—instead promoting 'Trump Cards' that banks could voluntarily offer with temporary 10% interest rates."
"While the Trump administration appears to be twisting itself into knots to appease Wall Street bankers, working families continue to struggle with unprecedented credit card debt and deserve to see Congress take legislative action to address this growing crisis," the coalition stressed. "We urge your offices/committees to advance these bipartisan bills immediately and make this policy a reality."
Illustrating the need for the policy, the letter states that "Americans owe $1.21 trillion in aggregate credit card debt," "groceries now make up the majority of credit card purchases for most Americans," and "older Americans are charging everyday purchases like gas, food, healthcare expenses, and even utilities on their credit cards."
"Not only are more Americans having to lean on their credit cards to make ends meet, but more are falling behind. Today, more than 12% of credit card debt is 90 days or more past due," the letter continues. "As Americans find themselves deeper in debt, credit card companies have been raking in record profits."
The federal bill would "save families $100 billion per year and provide interest savings of $899 per person on average per year," but also "not restrict most Americans' access to credit—directly refuting common banking lobbyist talking points," the coalition explained, citing research from Vanderbilt University. "Instead, banks would absorb the rate cut through a combinationof reduced profits, reduced advertising expenses, and reduced rewards to customers with lower credit scores (who would benefit more from the rate cuts)."
It also cites a recent analysis by the letter's lead group, Protect Borrowers, showing that "credit card delinquency rates in states that President Trump won are nearly 5 percentage points higher than in other states—with states like Mississippi, Louisiana, Alabama, Arkansas and South Carolina having the highest credit card delinquency rates."
When big banks charge 24% or 30% interest on credit cards, they are not engaged in the business of "making credit available." They are involved in extortion and loan sharking.Yes, we need to cap credit card interest rates at 10% and stop Wall Street from ripping off Americans.
[image or embed]
— Senator Bernie Sanders (@sanders.senate.gov) February 2, 2026 at 4:36 PM
"By providing billions of dollars in economic relief to working families, this legislation directly responds to the promises that candidate Donald Trump made to the American people last year," the groups wrote. "Recent polling has found that it is also incredibly popular by a jaw-dropping 8-to-1 margin among American voters across all political parties, spanning age, gender, race, and education level."
"It is clear: the American people support policymakers taking action to address the growing credit card crisis that is drowning millions of American families across the country in debt," the coalition concluded. "We stand ready to work with your offices to ensure that this bill becomes law and that working families get the economic relief they were promised and deserve."
Sanders and Hawley have similarly highlighted Trump's calls for the 10% rate cap in Fox News op-eds pushing for their legislation. In a Monday piece, Sanders wrote that "when Wall Street's greed and recklessness brought the economy to the verge of collapse in 2008, causing millions of Americans to lose their homes, jobs, and life savings, the taxpayers came to the rescue."
"The Federal Reserve gave these huge banks trillions of dollars in emergency loans at virtually zero interest. We bailed out the banks," he added. "Now it's time for Congress to stand with working families, end Wall Street greed, and pass legislation that caps credit card interest rates at 10%."
"This decision will inflict serious harm on consumers and merchants, especially low-income consumers and small businesses," wrote Democratic Sen. Elizabeth Warren and Rep. Maxine Waters.
Democratic Sen. Elizabeth Warren of Massachusetts and Democratic Rep. Maxine Waters of California are urging the Federal Reserve to reconsider its approval of an impending merger between Capital One Financial Corporation and Discover Financial Services, a tie-up that critics have warned could harm consumers.
In a letter sent last week, Warren and Waters wrote that the decision to approve the merger by the Federal Reserve "was inconsistent with the legal requirements" under the Bank Holding Company Act. They also argued that it did not include a number of relevant assessments, including how the the merger would impact the "convenience and needs of the community" or the "competitive effects on the credit card market."
"This decision will inflict serious harm on consumers and merchants, especially low-income consumers and small businesses, and threaten the stability of the U.S. financial system," states the letter, which was addressed to Secretary of the Board Ann Misback and dated May 1.
Warren is the ranking member on the U.S. Senate Committee on Banking, Housing, and Urban Affairs and Waters is the ranking member on the U.S. House Committee on Financial Services.
The deal was announced in February 2024 and is valued at $35 billion. A report from the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau (CFPB) released right before the acquisition was announced found that the largest credit card firms charge much higher interest rates than smaller banks and credit unions.
The deal initially received some scrutiny around possible impacts to competition, but in April 2025 overcame a major obstacle when the U.S. Department of Justice (DOJ), now under the Trump administration, decided not to challenge the merger.
The Federal Reserve and the Office of the Comptroller of the Currency gave the deal the green light last month.
In response to the DOJ's decision not to challenge the merger, Morgan Harper, the director of policy and advocacy at the American Economic Liberties Project, wrote that "if the Trump administration green-lights the Capital One-Discover merger, it will be a betrayal of working-class Americans and small businesses." The American Economic Liberties Project is an anti-monopoly research and advocacy group.
"If the deal goes through, Capital One will become the largest credit card lender in the country, the first major issuer in decades to control its own payments network, and entrench its striking dominance in subprime credit card lending," Harper continued.
One noteworthy aspect of the merger, which is expected to be finalized mid-May, is that Capital One is set to acquire Discover's card network. This means the combined firm would be akin to a larger version of American Express, "a stand-alone integrated system that could use its millions of customers to push higher fees onto merchants," according to The American Prospect.
Capitol One currently uses Visa and Mastercard credit card networks, which operate an effective duopoly of global payment processing, but has said it would transition to the Discover card network, according the outlet CNET.
This aspect of the merger is without clear precedent and raises concerns about competition, according to Jesse Van Tol, the chief executive of the National Community Reinvestment Coalition, a group that is opposed to the deal, who spoke to The New York Times in April.
"The market power it gives them, and the opportunity it gives them to set pricing in ways that captures a lot of value for the company at the expense of the consumer, is significant," Van Tol told the Times.
In their letter, Warren and Waters alleged that the Federal Reserve failed to adequately scrutinize the competitive effect of this aspect of the deal.
"The board argued that given 'the significant, larger competitors that would remain,' and that Capital One doesn't currently own a network, there aren't any competitive concerns. The board completely missed the fact that the merger would provide Capital One with significant market power to increase interchange fees charged to merchants and reduce rewards and other benefits for consumers. It didn't grapple with the implications of vertical integration and network effects," the two wrote.
When considering the conveniences and needs of the community, Warren and Waters said in their letter that the Federal Reserve did not perform the prospective analysis required by law, and instead "focused on each bank's past performance under the Community Reinvestment Act (CRA)," even though "the convenience and needs of the community is a distinct legal factor, separate and apart from banks' past performance under the CRA."
The two also said that the Federal Reserve appears to not have taken into consideration relevant findings from the CFPB, the Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation, and the DOJ.
Bloomberg reported last week that the Federal Reserve received the letter and plans to response, per a spokesperson.
"When large financial institutions charge over 25% interest on credit cards, they are not engaged in the business of making credit available," said Sen. Bernie Sanders. "They are engaged in extortion and loan sharking."
In an effort to hold U.S. President Donald Trump to a promise he made on the campaign trail, Sen. Bernie Sanders on Tuesday introduced legislation alongside Republican Sen. Josh Hawley that would cap credit card interest rates at 10% for five years, targeting a major cash cow for Visa, Mastercard, and other corporate giants.
"During the campaign, President Trump pledged to cap credit card interest rates at 10%," Sanders (I-Vt.) said in a statement Tuesday. "I am proud to be introducing bipartisan legislation with Senator Hawley to do just that. When large financial institutions charge over 25% interest on credit cards, they are not engaged in the business of making credit available. They are engaged in extortion and loan sharking."
"We cannot continue to allow big banks to make huge profits ripping off the American people," the Vermont senator added. "This legislation will provide working families struggling to pay their bills with desperately needed financial relief."
During his 2024 White House bid, Trump said he would support a "temporary cap" on credit card interest rates "at around 10%," declaring, "We can't let them make 25% and 30%."
One recent estimate put the average credit card interest rate in the U.S. at close to 27%, and an analysis released last year by the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau (CFPB) found that credit card interest rates have surged over the past decade—a boon for card issuers and a disaster for Americans falling deeper into debt.
"Working Americans are drowning in record credit card debt while the biggest credit card issuers get richer and richer by hiking their interest rates to the moon. It's not just wrong, it's exploitative. And it needs to end," Hawley (R-Mo.) said Tuesday. "Capping credit card interest rates at 10%, just like President Trump campaigned on, is a simple way to provide meaningful relief to working people. Let's do it."
It's not clear whether Sanders and Hawley's bill stands a chance in a Congress fully controlled by Republicans, many of whom have shown a willingness to play defense for the predatory banks and credit card firms that help fund their campaigns.
The Trump White House did not respond to media requests for comment on whether the administration would throw its support behind the Sanders-Hawley proposal, which is sure to face Wall Street opposition.
During a Senate confirmation hearing last month, Sanders asked billionaire U.S. Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent whether he supports Trump's call for a 10% cap on credit card interest rates.
Bessent replied that he would "follow what President Trump wants to do" on the issue.
During Trump's first term in the White House, Sanders and Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez (D-N.Y.) introduced legislation that would have capped credit card interest rates at 15%.
Just nine Democrats in the House and one in the Senate co-sponsored the bill, which received zero Republican support.
"The U.S. Chamber got its way for now—ensuring families get price-gouged a little longer with credit card late fees as high as $41," one advocate said of the ruling.
A Trump-appointed judge on Friday delivered a win for big banks when he granted the U.S. Chamber of Commerce a temporary injunction halting a Biden administration rule that would cap credit card fees at $8.
The Consumer Financial Protection Bureau (CFPB) rule, which would have gone into effect May 14, could save U.S. consumers more than $10 billion each year. The decision to pause its implementation, issued by U.S. District of the Northern District of Texas Judge Mark Pittman, will cost ordinary Americans around $27 million each day it is in effect.
"In their latest in a stack of lawsuits designed to pad record corporate profits at the expense of everyone else, the U.S. Chamber got its way for now—ensuring families get price-gouged a little longer with credit card late fees as high as $41," Liz Zelnick, the director of the Economic Security and Corporate Power Program at Accountable.US, said in a statement.
"It's time the U.S. Chamber stops clogging the courts with baseless lawsuits designed to enrich corporate CEOs on the backs of working families—and it's time the judiciary stops legitimizing venue shopping from big industry."
The CFPB issued the rule on March 5 as part of the Biden administration's commitment to crack down on "junk fees." However, the Chamber of Commerce and other banking trade associations—including the American Bankers Association and the Consumer Bankers Association—quickly sued to block it. The executives of Bank of America, Capital One, Citibank, and JPMorgan Chase sit on the boards of the groups behind the suit, according to The Washington Post.
"Banks make billions in profits charging excessive late fees," Sen. Elizabeth Warren (D-Mass.) wrote on social media Saturday in response to the ruling. "Now a single Trump-appointed judge sided with bank lobbyists to block the Biden administration's new rule capping these junk fees."
Accountable.US also criticized the fact that the suit was before Pittman at all, arguing that the U.S. Chamber of Commerce filed the suit in Texas federal court so that it would end up under the jurisdiction of the 5th Circuit Court of Appeals, which has 19 Republican-appointed justices out of a total of 26. The chamber has filed nearly two-thirds of its lawsuits since 2017 with courts covered by the 5th Circuit.
"The U.S. Chamber and the big banks they represent have corrupted our judicial system by venue shopping in courtrooms of least resistance, going out of their way to avoid having their lawsuit heard by a fair and neutral federal judge," Zelnick said. "It's time the U.S. Chamber stops clogging the courts with baseless lawsuits designed to enrich corporate CEOs on the backs of working families—and it's time the judiciary stops legitimizing venue shopping from big industry."
The 5th Circuit's treatment of the case has also come under fire, as Trump-appointed Judge Don Willett has not recused himself despite the fact that he owns tens of thousands of dollars in Citigroup shares. While Willett has argued that Citigroup is not a party to the case, it belongs to trade groups that are, and any ruling on credit card fees would significantly impact the bank. Collectively, all the judges on the 5th Circuit have invested as much as $745,000 in credit card or credit issuing companies, according to the most recent publicly available information.
Donald Sherman, Gabe Lezra, and Linnaea Honl-Stuenkel of Citizens for Ethics in Washington wrote: "Judge Willett's refusal to recuse, and the lack of transparency about the rationale, reinforces the need for more judicial ethics reform to ensure that everyday Americans and government agencies have a level playing field when they go into court against corporate interests."
"An industry that employs hundreds of thousands of people, provides billions in economic benefits, and promotes safer alternatives to pharmaceuticals and commonplace vices continues to be treated like a pariah," said one cannabis entrepreneur.
Cannabis reform advocates on Friday said a new decision by credit card company Mastercard illustrates why the substance must be decriminalized at the federal level to ensure that legal U.S. dispensaries are able to operate safely and securely.
The company announced this week that it has instructed U.S. financial institutions to stop allowing customers to use its debit cards to purchase marijuana products at cannabis stores, which now operate legally in 38 states for medicinal use and 23 states for recreational use, as well as in the District of Columbia.
Mastercard said it made the decision because marijuana remains criminalized at the federal level, despite major progress in recent years as the Marijuana Opportunity Reinvestment and Expungement (MORE) Act was passed by the U.S. House last year.
Darren Weiss, president of multistate cannabis operator Verano Holdings, said Mastercard's decision shows how the industry is still treated as a "pariah" despite its annual national sales projected to reach $57 billion by 2030, or as much as $72 billion including several states where cannabis is expected to be legalized.
A number of advocates including Sen. Jeff Merkley (D-Ore.) said Mastercard's move demonstrates the need for the Secure and Fair Enforcement (SAFE) Banking Act, which would protect banks and credit unions for being penalized by federal regulators for working with legal cannabis stores.
"I will not stop pushing to get SAFE Banking passed so legal cannabis businesses can access necessary financial services," said Merkley. "Cannabis businesses are still in dire need, and the majority of the country with state-legalized recreational cannabis can't wait."
While expressing appreciation for the SAFE Banking Act and its advocates in Congress, Weiss pointed out that the legislation would not address the fact that marijuana is criminalized at the federal level, which was the objection Mastercard said it has to working with cannabis dispensaries.
"SAFE Banking as drafted won't fix the credit card issue, and Mastercard's position won't change as a result," said Weiss. "We need comprehensive cannabis reform, and we need it yesterday."
The "awful news," said Columbia University fellow Raúl Carrillo, "shows the pitfalls of trying to reform cannabis finance without decriminalizing and legalizing weed on the federal level."
One advocate said the proposal "proves that the bullying behavior of companies who abuse Americans for their own profit will not stand from the CFPB."
The Biden administration on Wednesday was widely praised for unveiling proposed regulatory changes that could save American families up to $9 billion a year by cracking down on unfair credit card late fees from U.S. banks.
"Over a decade ago, Congress banned excessive credit card late fees, but companies have exploited a regulatory loophole that has allowed them to escape scrutiny for charging an otherwise illegal junk fee," said Consumer Financial Protection Bureau (CFPB) Director Rohit Chopra. "Today's proposed rule seeks to save families billions of dollars and ensure the credit card market is fair and competitive."
The CFPB proposed amending regulations related to the Credit Card Accountability Responsibility and Disclosure (CARD) Act to ensure that late fees—now as high as $41—are "reasonable and proportional" to the costs incurred by companies. The rule would limit most late fees to $8, ban fees greater than 25% of the required payment, and end automatic annual inflation adjustments.
"Regulations seldom deliver such concrete benefits to consumers as the plan that the CFPB has set in motion today."
Like Chopra, Liz Zelnick, director of economic security and corporate power at Accountable.US, highlighted that "despite Congress' ban on excessive late fees, the Federal Reserve's loophole has allowed greedy credit card companies to collect exorbitant charges that were designed to profit from consumers living paycheck-to-paycheck."
"The CFPB's crackdown on these exploitative charges will redirect billions from the pockets of big banks to consumers' wallets and our economy," she said. "Today's rule proposal proves that the bullying behavior of companies who abuse Americans for their own profit will not stand from the CFPB."
Elyse Hicks, consumer policy counsel at Americans for Financial Reform, pointed out that "regulations seldom deliver such concrete benefits to consumers as the plan that the CFPB has set in motion today."
"This agenda, created after the financial crisis in 2008, is as relevant as ever, looking out for Americans' financial interests, and keeping an eye on the big banks and predatory lenders who would rip them off," Hicks added.
The proposal comes as the Fed on Wednesday is expected to yet again raise the interest rate for interbank lending, despite repeated warnings from progressive economists and advocates about the negative impacts for working people. The U.S. central bank's federal funds rate influences the interest rates used by credit card companies.
The CFBP's announcement also coincided with a Presidential Competition Council meeting. National Economic Council Director Brian Deese told reporters Tuesday that Biden would use the Wednesday meeting to urge Congress to pass legislation targeting "junk" fees from airlines, online event ticketing services, resorts, and internet, phone, and television providers.
"These fees can be incredibly frustrating for typical Americans who have to travel or who are seeking to just engage in practical ways in our economy, like accessing internet services—they cost consumers billions of dollars a year, they make it harder for people to comparison shop," Deese said during a press call, according to CNN. "But they also reduce competition and make it more difficult for innovators and new businesses to break into markets and offer better services at lower prices."
Applauding Biden's moves, Sen. John Fetterman (D-Pa.) said Wednesday that "the hidden fees attached to airline, concert, hotel, and telephone or internet bills are obscene... It's time for companies to stop hiding their real prices, and start being honest with their consumers."
Sen. Elizabeth Warren (D-Mass.) similarly praised the administration's "efforts to protect consumers," declaring that "Congress should follow President Biden's lead and crack down on junk fees on tickets, airfare, internet, hotels, and more."
Warren also celebrated the credit card fee proposal from the CFPB—her brainchild—calling the rule "terrific news."
"Banks have identified medical credit cards as a lucrative opportunity to profit off of the worsening crisis of patients who are unable to afford their medical care," warned Sens. Elizabeth Warren, Ed Markey, Bernie Sanders, and others.
A group of progressive senators raised alarm this week over a pernicious outgrowth of the United States' for-profit healthcare system: medical credit cards.
In a letter to the chief executives of Wells Fargo and Synchrony Financial—two large issuers of medical credit cards—Sens. Elizabeth Warren (D-Mass.), Ed Markey (D-Mass.), Bernie Sanders (I-Vt.), Chris Murphy (D-Conn.), and Sherrod Brown (D-Ohio) expressed concern that "given the circumstances in which these cards are used, medical credit cards could be predatory to patients seeking medical care and leave patients stuck paying higher costs with 'hefty, high-interest debt.'"
"The concern here is the current structure of our healthcare system often requires that patients enter into medical debt in order to access services they need," reads the letter, which was made public this week. "Within that context, patients—often under duress because of concerns about their medical care—are being pushed into and then locked into medical credit cards despite the availability of alternative payment options that might be more beneficial and offer lower interest rates."
By contrast, medical credit cards often come with high interest rates following so-called "no interest" periods that banks deceptively use to lure in customers who are desperate to pay for costly medical treatments. In 2013, the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau (CFPB) ordered CareCredit—Synchrony Financial's medical credit business—to refund up to $34.1 million to "consumers who were victims of deceptive credit card enrollment tactics."
Last month, the CFPB hit Wells Fargo—which offers a medical credit card named Health Advantage—with $3.7 billion in penalties for a slew of abuses and called the institution "one of the most problematic repeat offenders of the banks and credit unions."
Crain's Chicago Business recently reported that "as healthcare costs and insurance deductibles rise, more hospitals in Chicago and around the country are teaming up with banks to market medical credit cards and other loans to patients who lack the insurance or funds to pay for care."
"Hospitals that convince patients to take medical credit cards get paid upfront by banks at a time when unpaid bills are straining their budgets. Lenders, for their part, see an opportunity to capitalize on the growing gap between the cost of medical care and what many Americans can afford," the newspaper continued. "Patients who take the card get money to pay for care, solving a short-term dilemma. But a quick decision made in a high-stress situation can create long-term financial problems. Patients who can't drum up the cash to pay off the initial balance within an introductory period end up with hefty credit card debt that carries some of the highest interest rates in the industry."
More than 100 million people are saddled with medical debt in the United States, collectively owing upwards of $200 billion.
Last year, Kaiser Health News spotlighted the story of Cheyenne Dantona, whose situation is appalling but increasingly common in the United States, where obtaining lifesaving treatment often entails financial ruin:
Dantona, 31, was diagnosed with blood cancer while in college. The cancer went into remission, but when Dantona changed health plans, she was hit with thousands of dollars of medical bills because one of her primary providers was out of network.
She enrolled in a medical credit card, only to get stuck paying even more in interest. Other bills went to collections, dragging down her credit score. Dantona still dreams of working with injured and orphaned wild animals, but she's been forced to move back in with her mother outside Minneapolis.
"She's been trapped," said Dantona's sister, Desiree. "Her life is on pause."
"The cards may also adversely impact consumers' credit reports because of the way they are treated by credit reporting agencies: the agencies recently agreed to remove 70% of medical debt from credit reports, but these changes will not benefit medical credit card holders because their debt is considered credit card debt and as such is 'viewed less favorably by the bureaus,'" the lawmakers wrote.
"Banks have identified medical credit cards as a lucrative opportunity to profit off of the worsening crisis of patients who are unable to afford their medical care," the lawmakers continued, demanding that the bank executives provide information about their medical credit card businesses such as how many accounts are in collections and how many healthcare providers they have partnered with.
"As we work to reform our healthcare system so no individual faces medical debt," the senators added, "we remain concerned about circumstances that serve only to exacerbate financial harm of unaffordable healthcare."
Sanders, a letter signatory and the incoming chair of the Senate Health, Education, Labor, and Pensions Committee, has decried the "very concept" of medical debt, arguing it "should not exist."
During his 2020 presidential campaign, Sanders offered a proposal to wipe out existing medical debt in the United States.
"In the wealthiest country in the history of the world," the senator said at the time, "one illness or disease should not ruin a family's financial life and future."