H.J. Res. 175 (119th)Bill Overview

Providing for congressional disapproval under chapter 8 of title 5, United States Code, of the rule submitted by the Bureau of Consumer Financial Protection relating to the withdrawal of the rule…

domestic policy
Cosponsors
Support
Democratic
Introduced
May 4, 2026
Discussions
Bill Text
Current stageCommittee

Referred to the House Committee on Financial Services.

Introduced
Committee
Floor
President
Law
Congressional Activities
01 · The brief

This joint resolution disapproves a Bureau of Consumer Financial Protection (CFPB) rule that would withdraw Consumer Financial Protection Circular 2024–02, which addresses deceptive marketing about the speed or cost of remittance transfers.

If enacted, the resolution would nullify the CFPB’s withdrawal rule (90 Fed.

Reg. 20084 (May 12, 2025)), leaving Circular 2024–02 (89 Fed.

Passage35/100

Narrow, low‑cost measure increases odds in the originating chamber but faces significant Senate procedural and political obstacles and potential executive veto.

CredibilityAligned

Relative to its intended legislative type, this bill is a narrowly focused Congressional Review Act disapproval resolution that is clear and legally precise about what is being disapproved and the immediate legal effect.

Contention72/100

Consumer protection versus regulatory burden and business flexibility

02 · What it does

Who stands to gain, and who may push back.

Who this appears to help vs burden50% / 50%
ConsumersTargeted stakeholders
Likely helped
  • ConsumersPreserves consumer protections against deceptive claims about remittance speed or cost.
  • Targeted stakeholdersMaintains CFPB enforcement tools addressing misleading remittance marketing.
  • ConsumersProvides regulatory certainty for consumer advocates and enforcement agencies.
Likely burdened
  • Targeted stakeholdersIncreases compliance costs for remittance providers and fintech firms.
  • Targeted stakeholdersCould lead to higher remittance prices or reduced service offerings.
  • Targeted stakeholdersConstrains CFPB's future rulemaking by Congressional Review Act limitations.
03 · Why people split

Why the argument around this bill splits.

Consumer protection versus regulatory burden and business flexibility
Progressive90%

Likely supportive because the resolution preserves a consumer-protection circular targeting deceptive remittance marketing.

Views this as preventing an industry-friendly rollback of guidance that helps vulnerable consumers.

Leans supportive
Centrist60%

Cautiously favorable but pragmatic.

Supports consumer-protection goals while concerned about process, costs, and use of the Congressional Review Act to micromanage agency rulemaking.

Split reaction
Conservative20%

Likely opposed.

Sees the resolution as preserving an unnecessarily prescriptive CFPB circular, reducing business flexibility, and expanding regulatory burdens through congressional intervention.

Likely resistant
04 · Can it pass?

The path through Congress.

Introduced

Reached or meaningfully advanced

Committee

Reached or meaningfully advanced

Floor

Still ahead

President

Still ahead

Law

Still ahead

Passage likelihood35/100

Narrow, low‑cost measure increases odds in the originating chamber but faces significant Senate procedural and political obstacles and potential executive veto.

Scope and complexity
24%
Scopenarrow
24%
Complexitylow
Why this could stall
  • Which coalitions form around regulatory enforcement vs rollback
  • Whether the CRA consideration window remains open
05 · Recent votes

Recent votes on the bill.

No vote history yet

The bill has not accumulated any surfaced votes yet.

06 · Go deeper

Go deeper than the headline read.

Included on this page

Consumer protection versus regulatory burden and business flexibility

Narrow, low‑cost measure increases odds in the originating chamber but faces significant Senate procedural and political obstacles and pote…

Unlocked analysis

Relative to its intended legislative type, this bill is a narrowly focused Congressional Review Act disapproval resolution that is clear and legally precise about what is being disapproved and the immediate legal effect.

Go beyond the headline summary with full stakeholder mapping, legislative design analysis, passage barriers, and lens-by-lens tradeoff breakdowns.

Perspective breakdownsPassage barriersLegislative design reviewStakeholder impact map
Open full analysis