Bill Overview
Title: Fair Lending for All Act
Description: This bill modifies provisions related to prohibited credit discrimination. The bill adds sexual orientation, gender identity, and an applicant's location based on zip code or census tract as classes protected against discrimination with respect to credit transactions. (Currently, discrimination is prohibited on the basis of race, color, religion, national origin, sex, marital status, age, or because an applicant receives public assistance.) The bill establishes criminal penalties for violations of prohibited credit discrimination. The Consumer Financial Protection Bureau is required to review loan applications for compliance with specified consumer laws and to establish an Office of Fair Lending Testing.
Sponsors: Rep. Green, Al [D-TX-9]
Target Audience
Population: Individuals who engage in credit transactions globally
Estimated Size: 200000000
- The bill aims to expand protections against credit discrimination, which will impact a wide range of individuals seeking credit.
- Sexual orientation and gender identity as new protected classes will impact LGBTQ+ individuals.
- Applicants who reside in certain zip codes or census tracts will be affected, likely impacting those in economically disadvantaged or minority-majority areas.
- Approximately 5-10% of the global population identifies as LGBTQ+, thus a portion of these individuals will be directly impacted.
- The global population who apply for credit transactions will be impacted as they will be entitled to the expanded protections.
- Economically disadvantaged communities generally have lower access to credit, so those in protected zip codes or census tracts may experience better access to credit.
Reasoning
- The Fair Lending for All Act is expected to have a widespread yet varied impact across different populations in the U.S. It is especially designed to benefit marginalized communities, including LGBTQ+ individuals and those in economically disadvantaged or minority-majority areas, by preventing lending discrimination.
- The budget constraints suggest a robust but focused implementation strategy. The policy aims to impact approximately 200 million Americans who engage in credit transactions.
- Given the size and scope of the target population, it is crucial to also include perspectives from those not directly impacted to provide a complete understanding of the policy's broader social implications.
Simulated Interviews
Software Engineer (San Francisco, CA)
Age: 34 | Gender: female
Wellbeing Before Policy: 6
Duration of Impact: 10.0 years
Commonness: 3/20
Statement of Opinion:
- I think adding protections for gender identity and sexual orientation in lending is long overdue.
- Financial discrimination has been a real issue for many in the LGBTQ+ community.
- I'm optimistic about this policy creating more equitable lending environments.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 7 | 6 |
| Year 2 | 7 | 6 |
| Year 3 | 8 | 6 |
| Year 5 | 8 | 6 |
| Year 10 | 8 | 5 |
| Year 20 | 7 | 5 |
Auto Worker (Detroit, MI)
Age: 45 | Gender: male
Wellbeing Before Policy: 4
Duration of Impact: 20.0 years
Commonness: 5/20
Statement of Opinion:
- It's about time these discriminatory practices were addressed.
- Access to fair credit could really help improve our community.
- I am hopeful, but I wonder how soon we'll see changes.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 5 | 4 |
| Year 2 | 6 | 4 |
| Year 3 | 7 | 4 |
| Year 5 | 7 | 4 |
| Year 10 | 8 | 4 |
| Year 20 | 8 | 3 |
Freelance Artist (Austin, TX)
Age: 29 | Gender: other
Wellbeing Before Policy: 5
Duration of Impact: 10.0 years
Commonness: 4/20
Statement of Opinion:
- This policy could help me get loans for my art business without discrimination.
- I hope it also educates lenders about non-binary identities.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 6 | 5 |
| Year 2 | 7 | 5 |
| Year 3 | 7 | 5 |
| Year 5 | 7 | 5 |
| Year 10 | 6 | 5 |
| Year 20 | 5 | 4 |
Bank Loan Officer (Raleigh, NC)
Age: 52 | Gender: female
Wellbeing Before Policy: 8
Duration of Impact: 5.0 years
Commonness: 2/20
Statement of Opinion:
- Our bank has always been committed to fair lending practices.
- I'm optimistic this will level the playing field but concerned about the additional compliance workload.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 8 | 8 |
| Year 2 | 8 | 8 |
| Year 3 | 8 | 8 |
| Year 5 | 8 | 8 |
| Year 10 | 8 | 8 |
| Year 20 | 8 | 8 |
Financial Analyst (New York, NY)
Age: 39 | Gender: male
Wellbeing Before Policy: 7
Duration of Impact: 0.0 years
Commonness: 7/20
Statement of Opinion:
- I don't think this policy will impact me directly, but it's important for societal equity.
- It may indirectly affect my work with more diverse portfolio management.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 7 | 7 |
| Year 2 | 7 | 7 |
| Year 3 | 7 | 7 |
| Year 5 | 7 | 7 |
| Year 10 | 7 | 7 |
| Year 20 | 7 | 7 |
Graduate Student (Chicago, IL)
Age: 23 | Gender: female
Wellbeing Before Policy: 5
Duration of Impact: 15.0 years
Commonness: 4/20
Statement of Opinion:
- I worry about getting a fair chance with my student loans and future mortgages.
- This bill might ease some of the anxiety around financial discrimination.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 6 | 5 |
| Year 2 | 7 | 5 |
| Year 3 | 7 | 4 |
| Year 5 | 8 | 4 |
| Year 10 | 7 | 4 |
| Year 20 | 6 | 3 |
Retired (Los Angeles, CA)
Age: 60 | Gender: female
Wellbeing Before Policy: 7
Duration of Impact: 5.0 years
Commonness: 6/20
Statement of Opinion:
- I'm not sure how this will affect me personally, but I support fair treatment for everyone.
- Hopefully, it can help those in my community who aren't as financially stable.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 7 | 7 |
| Year 2 | 7 | 7 |
| Year 3 | 7 | 7 |
| Year 5 | 7 | 7 |
| Year 10 | 7 | 6 |
| Year 20 | 7 | 6 |
Small Business Owner (Denver, CO)
Age: 40 | Gender: other
Wellbeing Before Policy: 6
Duration of Impact: 10.0 years
Commonness: 4/20
Statement of Opinion:
- Access to fair credit has been a hurdle, and I am hopeful this will improve in my sector.
- I'm eager to see if the policy can help expand my business.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 7 | 6 |
| Year 2 | 7 | 6 |
| Year 3 | 7 | 6 |
| Year 5 | 8 | 6 |
| Year 10 | 7 | 6 |
| Year 20 | 7 | 6 |
Chef (New Orleans, LA)
Age: 31 | Gender: male
Wellbeing Before Policy: 5
Duration of Impact: 20.0 years
Commonness: 6/20
Statement of Opinion:
- I think this policy could really help open up opportunities for people in my area.
- There's a lot of skepticism about how soon we'll see change, but it's a positive step.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 6 | 5 |
| Year 2 | 7 | 5 |
| Year 3 | 7 | 5 |
| Year 5 | 7 | 5 |
| Year 10 | 8 | 5 |
| Year 20 | 8 | 4 |
Nurse (Seattle, WA)
Age: 50 | Gender: female
Wellbeing Before Policy: 7
Duration of Impact: 5.0 years
Commonness: 3/20
Statement of Opinion:
- This policy might not change my credit conditions, but I'm in favor of more inclusive credit practices overall.
- Being financially independent after my divorce, I understand the need for fairness.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 7 | 7 |
| Year 2 | 7 | 7 |
| Year 3 | 7 | 7 |
| Year 5 | 7 | 7 |
| Year 10 | 7 | 7 |
| Year 20 | 7 | 7 |
Cost Estimates
Year 1: $250000000 (Low: $200000000, High: $300000000)
Year 2: $230000000 (Low: $180000000, High: $280000000)
Year 3: $220000000 (Low: $170000000, High: $270000000)
Year 5: $210000000 (Low: $160000000, High: $260000000)
Year 10: $200000000 (Low: $150000000, High: $250000000)
Year 100: $100000000 (Low: $50000000, High: $150000000)
Key Considerations
- The establishment of an Office of Fair Lending Testing involves significant initial setup costs but could lead to long-term savings by reducing discriminatory practices.
- The policy might face compliance and enforcement challenges, particularly if credit providers do not adequately integrate new requirements into their systems.
- Implementation will require careful coordination with stakeholders to ensure the effectiveness of the new protections.
- Outcomes depend on effective oversight by the CFPB and successful outreach and education about the new protections.