IT’S BACK: THE POLITICAL STRUGGLE FOR CONTROL OF BANKS’ LOAN TAPS

In its final days, the Trump administration is seeking to disrupt the way progressive activists increasingly impose their will on big business: through banks controlling the loan lifelines to the economy.

A regulation just finalized (update) aims to prevent lenders from blackballing businesses in industries opposed by the left by requiring banks to demonstrate that their loan decisions are “based on quantitative, impartial risk-based standards,” rather than political or reputational concerns.

The proposed Fair Access to Financial Services Rule (FAFSR) is a response to successful pressure campaigns waged by environmental groups and congressional Democrats, which culminated in every major American bank refusing to finance drilling projects in the Arctic National Wildlife Refuge (ANWR), despite such drilling being authorized by President Trump in 2017.

Bryan Hubbard, a spokesman for Office of the Comptroller of the Currency, told RealClearInvestigations that the rule codifies longstanding OCC guidance on banks’ obligation to provide equitable access to their services, and will ensure that banks are not “terminating entire categories of customers.”

The rule has been published in the Federal Register, but it may be short-lived with the end of Trump’s term. Many Democrats oppose the measure and they will have 60 legislative days to disapprove the rule by a simple majority vote, as provided under the Congressional Review Act.

Originally this change was made to stop banks from denying loans to the oil and firearms industry on political bases.

Hubbard of OCC emphasized that banks receive federal deposit insurance and are given “the privilege of a national license to operate,” a license that he claims imposes on banks certain obligations. Banks have a duty, Hubbard said, to provide proportionate access to financial services, even for clients involved in legal but politically controversial industries.

This is key.  Banks should not allow political whims to decide who gets loans and who doesn’t.  This was the foundation of redlining and other discriminatory practices that harmed the black community, where banks considered factors other than financial risk – namely skin color – when making loans.

The Democrats, once again want to return to the era of Jim Crow, where banks are allowed to discriminate, not on the basis of skin color but of political allegiance.

We know that if (when) this is reimplemented, it won’t be just gun companies or small gun stores that can’t get business loans.  At the rate at which the boot is coming down, it will be taken to the personal level.

Did you use a credit card to renew your NRA membership online?  That card is now canceled.

Did you donate to the Trump campaign?  Now you will be declined for a mortgage.

Did you post MAGA on Facebook?  Now your credit score got knocked down a few hundred points.

There are a million-and-one ways that your personal finances can be negatively affected by politicized banks.

This is just another means of unpersoning Conservatives, make them unable to engage in regular finances.

 

Spread the love

By J. Kb

3 thoughts on “Discrimination in banking is good as long as it’s against Conservatives”
  1. What’s more, any attempt to construct institutions outside of these political controls will be ruthlessly stamped out.

    Parler, all over again.

  2. So…

    It is NOT OK for a bank to deny a mortgage to an individual with a 400 credit score, minimal income, and zero savings, because of their plumbing or pigmentation. But, I IS OK to deny a loan to a company that is solvent, has a positive profit margin, employs hundreds/thousands, and is practically 100% assured of repaying the loan plus interest, because they sell something the manager of the bank dislikes?

    Surprised? Not me.

Only one rule: Don't be a dick.

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.