The Capitol LedgerEvery move in Congress, on the record
HomeBillsRecordsLedger AI

The Capitol Ledger

Built from the Congressional Record and Congress.gov. Every summary links to its source.

AboutFAQFeedbackTerms of ServicePrivacy Policy
Follow us onlineInstagram

Summaries are AI-generated from primary sources. Verify anything important against the original record.

The Capitol Ledger

Built from the Congressional Record and Congress.gov. Every summary links to its source.

The projectAboutFAQFeedback
LegalTerms of ServicePrivacy Policy
Follow us onlineInstagram

Summaries are AI-generated from primary sources. Verify anything important against the original record.

All bills
S. 4684·119th Congress·Introduced Jun 4, 2026

Protecting American Consumers Act

IntroducedFinance and Financial SectorMajor
View bill text
Sponsor
Sen. Warren, Elizabeth [D-MA]
Committees
Banking, Housing, and Urban Affairs Committee (primary)
Last action
Jun 4, 2026

Bottom line

This bill seeks to guarantee a minimum funding level for the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau by tying it to a historical percentage of Federal Reserve operating expenses, aiming to ensure its operational independence and stability.

What it actually does

This bill amends the Consumer Financial Protection Act of 2010 to establish a new compulsory funding floor for the Bureau of Consumer Financial Protection (CFPB). It mandates that the CFPB receive not less than 12 percent of the total operating expenses of the Federal Reserve System, as reported in the 2009 Annual Report of the Board of Governors, in each fiscal year. This change aims to provide a stable and independent funding source for the agency.

Proponents argue

Proponents argue that this bill strengthens the CFPB's financial independence from political appropriations processes, allowing it to more effectively protect consumers without fear of budget cuts impacting its enforcement and regulatory functions. They contend that a stable, compulsory funding floor is essential for the Bureau to carry out its mission, especially in a dynamic financial landscape where consumer protections are increasingly vital.

Opponents contend

Opponents may argue that establishing a compulsory funding floor, particularly one tied to a historical benchmark, removes appropriate congressional oversight over the CFPB's budget, potentially leading to unchecked spending or a lack of accountability. They might contend that all federal agencies should be subject to the regular appropriations process to ensure democratic control and fiscal responsibility.

The bill text is extremely short and can be read in under a minute, making it highly accessible for public review.

Section 2, amending Section 1017(a)(2) of the Consumer Financial Protection Act of 2010 (12 U.S.C. 5497(a)(2))

Establishment of Compulsory Funding Floor for CFPB

prominently featuredstraightforward

This provision changes how the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau (CFPB) receives its funding. Currently, the CFPB requests funds from the Federal Reserve, up to a certain cap. This bill mandates that the CFPB must receive at least 12 percent of the Federal Reserve System's total operating expenses from its 2009 Annual Report, ensuring a minimum, non-discretionary funding level for the Bureau each fiscal year.

GroupImpactMechanismScale
GroupConsumer Financial Protection Bureau (CFPB)ImpactIncreased financial stability and independenceMechanismGuaranteed minimum funding levelScaleDirect impact on the CFPB's operational budget
GroupConsumers of financial productsImpactPotentially enhanced consumer protectionMechanismA more robustly funded CFPBScaleBroad, indirect impact on all consumers of financial products
GroupFederal Reserve SystemImpactMandated transfer of fundsMechanismStatutory requirement to transfer a specific percentage of historical operating expensesScaleDirect impact on the Federal Reserve's balance sheet and operational transfers
GroupCongress (specifically appropriations committees)ImpactReduced direct budgetary oversightMechanismFunding mechanism bypasses annual appropriationsScaleModerate impact on congressional power over one agency's budget

Supporters argue

Supporters argue that this guaranteed funding floor shields the CFPB from political interference and ensures it has the consistent resources needed to enforce consumer protection laws, supervise financial institutions, and respond to market changes, ultimately benefiting American consumers. They point to the CFPB's unique structure, similar to other financial regulators, as justification for its independent funding.

Critics contend

Critics contend that this provision further insulates the CFPB from democratic accountability by removing its funding from the regular congressional appropriations process. They argue that it grants the agency too much autonomy, potentially leading to overreach or inefficient spending without sufficient oversight from elected representatives.

Tradeoffs

The provision balances the desire for an independent, effective consumer watchdog agency against concerns about congressional oversight and accountability for federal spending. It trades direct annual budgetary control for stability and insulation from political pressures.

About this analysis. AI-Generated from the official bill text and available committee reports. Gaps in available data are noted explicitly. Verify important details with the official Congress.gov record.

On this page

  • Executive summary
  • Key provisions
  • Follow the money
  • Critical analysis
  • Questions to ask
  • Implementation
  • Political analysis
Ask Ledger AI about this