Referred to the House Committee on Financial Services.
This resolution uses the Congressional Review Act to overturn a recent agency action. It would nullify the CFPB rule that withdrew an earlier rule about medical-debt collection, so the withdrawal would have no legal effect. If enacted, the agency could not reissue a substantially similar withdrawal without new legislation. The joint resolution must be passed by both chambers and signed by the President to take effect.
The Bureau of Consumer Financial Protection rule published at 90 Fed. Reg. 20084 (May 12, 2025) that would withdraw the 'Debt Collection Practices (Regulation F); Deceptive and Unfair Collection of Medical Debt' rule (89 Fed. Reg. 80715 (Oct. 4, 2024)).
Bureau of Consumer Financial Protection (CFPB)
Under the Congressional Review Act, disapproval resolutions are considered under expedited procedures and are not subject to a Senate filibuster, so they can pass the Senate by a simple majority; as a joint resolution it still must be approved by both chambers and signed by the President (or have a veto overridden) to become law.
This joint resolution (H.J. Res. 167) uses the Congressional Review Act to disapprove a Bureau of Consumer Financial Protection (CFPB) rule that withdrew an earlier CFPB rule on deceptive and unfair collection of medical debt (Regulation F).
If enacted, the resolution states the withdrawal rule "shall have no force or effect," effectively preserving the original October 4, 2024 Regulation F provisions addressing deceptive and unfair medical debt collection.
The measure was introduced by Rep.
Narrow and implementable but ideologically charged and lacking compromise; procedural hurdles and potential executive opposition reduce chances.
Relative to its intended legislative type, this bill is a narrowly targeted Congressional Review Act disapproval resolution that is clear about its target and effect. Its construction is concise and legally specific, appropriately tailored to the simple procedural-substantive action of nullifying a particular agency rule.
Progressives emphasize consumer protections and harm reduction.
These are examples from the analysis, not a ranked list of the most-affected groups.
Progressives emphasize consumer protections and harm reduction.
Likely strongly supportive.
The resolution preserves CFPB protections against unfair or deceptive medical debt collection practices and keeps consumer safeguards intact.
Supporters would view this as protecting low-income patients and curbing abusive collection tactics.
Generally favorable but cautious.
Sees value in consumer protections and regulatory certainty, while worrying about compliance costs for small providers and potential unintended consequences.
Would favor narrowly tailored language or implementation guidance to reduce burdens.
Likely opposed.
Views the resolution as re-imposing federal regulation that burdens medical providers and debt collectors.
Prefers the CFPB withdrawal to reduce regulatory burden and protect market flexibility.
Reached or meaningfully advanced
Reached or meaningfully advanced
Still ahead
Still ahead
Still ahead
Narrow and implementable but ideologically charged and lacking compromise; procedural hurdles and potential executive opposition reduce chances.
The bill has not accumulated any surfaced votes yet.
Progressives emphasize consumer protections and harm reduction.
Narrow and implementable but ideologically charged and lacking compromise; procedural hurdles and potential executive opposition reduce cha…
Relative to its intended legislative type, this bill is a narrowly targeted Congressional Review Act disapproval resolution that is clear about its target and effect. Its construction is concise and legally specific, ap…
Go beyond the headline summary with full stakeholder mapping, legislative design analysis, passage barriers, and lens-by-lens tradeoff breakdowns.