[{"_1":2,"_135":-5,"_136":-5},"loaderData",{"_3":4,"_26":27},"root",{"_5":6,"_17":10,"_18":19,"_20":21,"_22":10,"_23":-5,"_24":-5,"_25":10},"user",{"_7":8,"_9":10,"_11":10,"_12":-5,"_13":-5,"_14":15,"_16":-5},"roles",[],"isAuthenticated",false,"isPremium","planName","subscriptionStatus","featureFlags",{},"insightsBudget","isDevelopmentHost","userPreferences",{},"recaptchaSiteKey","6LcvOJcUAAAAAHsB-gPGfGktcRlKpH7OTIU_dMTD","isImpersonating","impersonation","affiliateStatus","isFreedomPortal","routes/v2/article/layout",{"_28":29,"_30":31},"notFound",true,"relatedArticles",[32,75,87,99,111,123],{"_33":34,"_35":36,"_37":38,"_39":40,"_41":42,"_43":44,"_45":46,"_47":48,"_49":50,"_51":52,"_53":54,"_55":56,"_57":58,"_59":60,"_61":62,"_63":64,"_65":66,"_67":68,"_69":70,"_71":72,"_73":72,"_74":72},"mediaId",6545758,"mediaKeyId","3428708-a69486b4c6c1f2b454cd17b95bff90bb","parentId",3428708,"title","House committee backs bill to make CAMELS ratings more objective","audioSeconds",13711,"startMs",6449000,"endMs",20160000,"viewUrl","/Search/View?dp=1&key=3428708-a69486b4c6c1f2b454cd17b95bff90bb&start=6449&end=20160","thumbnailUrl","https://assets.pipeline.soar.com/3428708-a69486b4c6c1f2b454cd17b95bff90bb/thumbnail_6449000.jpg","articleUrl","/articles/6545758/House-committee-backs-bill-to-make-CAMELS-ratings-more-objective","mediaUrl","https://secure.pipeline.soar.com/6545758-29dee75882978ab8002367391597ae33/orig.mp4?Expires=1771121336&Signature=JO83ThyUBvmyqVBxn1i9MKIDGyvjS-49c04CIXhDVrUrFPgPP6aKN1RNZSALZUq~MoOSArtQZgSwIOODaSWI165oecUVqTk3FptcZ-OSoiDBQ5ygjfNGIK1evpMpankRvSJJcWrbEgaGGcLTf5GaglYwRZU9Ald-F9I-fjk8BJtGkjLjN8hTLusiL93TyhTsM7LujQ5av5MgRiPxe6V3TdTpHYvMFJD0TDcJtnXhBjktaBpUBvctSPCJZwR1X2u-ulnMt8GDvzecT07uDLsV2L3L8rL~8N-rT32TQrr3El5GjyQaxTKJKFwNWSjb~tyj36aUW4JgjTKpVou5Fh8OWQ__&Key-Pair-Id=KUT5TJCACFTXG","author","U.S. House Committee on Financial Services","date","2025-05-21T20:00:18Z","article","Halting Uncertain Methods and Practices in Supervision (HUMPS) Act aims to make CAMELS ratings less subjective.

Representative Mike Fitzgerald introduced HR 33 79, the Halting Uncertain Methods and Practices in Supervision (HUMPS) Act, calling for objective, measurable criteria for each CAMELS component and for the Federal Financial Institutions Examination Council to implement changes through notice-and-comment rulemaking within 12 months.

Fitzgerald said the proposal targets subjectivity especially in the management component, which he said is often used inconsistently across regions and examiners. Supporters argued standardized metrics would make supervision more predictable for smaller, less-resourced institutions.

Ranking Member Maxine Waters opposed the bill, saying she “strongly oppose[d] HR 33 79,” arguing the management component captures governance and ethics issues that can presage failures and that removing or weakening it could limit regulators’ ability to act on mismanagement—citing Silicon Valley Bank as an example where management failures mattered.

Committee members debated whether objective criteria can fully capture management quality. The subcommittee adopted the substitute and ordered the bill favorably reported to the House; the committee later recorded the vote on ordering HR 33 79 as amended as 29 ayes and 23 nays.","mediaType","Video","parentTitle","Markup of Various Measures - Part 2 (EventID=118290)","oneSentenceSummary","Representative Mike Fitzgerald said HR 33 79, the HUMPS Act, would require objective, measurable criteria for CAMELS ratings to reduce subjectivity in bank examinations.","taxTitle","Financial Services: House Committee, Standing Committees - House & Senate, Congressional Hearings Compilation, Legislative, Federal","taxId",1981,"location","","headline","shortSummary",{"_33":76,"_35":36,"_37":38,"_39":77,"_41":78,"_43":79,"_45":80,"_47":81,"_49":82,"_51":83,"_53":84,"_55":56,"_57":58,"_59":85,"_61":62,"_63":64,"_65":86,"_67":68,"_69":70,"_71":72,"_73":72,"_74":72},6545773,"House Financial Services Subcommittee advances bill to set deadlines for bank merger reviews",17742,2056000,19798000,"/Search/View?dp=1&key=3428708-a69486b4c6c1f2b454cd17b95bff90bb&start=2056&end=19798","https://assets.pipeline.soar.com/3428708-a69486b4c6c1f2b454cd17b95bff90bb/thumbnail_2056000.jpg","/articles/6545773/House-Financial-Services-Subcommittee-advances-bill-to-set-deadlines-for-bank-merger-reviews","https://secure.pipeline.soar.com/6545773-0eb0a9f145b87fba6a966d0b9a4abc2b/orig.mp4?Expires=1771121336&Signature=c1Qdd~cTkgW1p6C5QK3Kj5y-Sbx14bSaZdKnnMht~we~cVVZb3Xaq-YEZvHRBvwewZo0JOx1K61tVVq5L7YVOkWN3MsxzJSZUGkiXdXd2y8qPtcVh3qMA3sFsrXJMrJZLC90xJgiZJ4kAGEuWM-9VW0b80qf~2GYXNRbsIn7VkikHj8OwW6aFHFsSSM66hUIOs5coR9X3TMAn6QRoq8dya3xxMzt0Y1~iIvwOgvAiZzKKIPlAE8N7AhTK3MklQHCxjC323BlyhsoFi2nDJBgNyTrgq87j07YFxgXUa2kKDBctjZkgpAZbS27IIGs6iS4R-Ss6hfUltbt~Y44gWF-zw__&Key-Pair-Id=KUT5TJCACFTXG","Bank Failure Prevention Act advances out of committee after debate over merger timelines.

Representative Andy Barr, chair of the Subcommittee on Financial Institutions, led consideration of HR 1900, the Bank Failure Prevention Act, and argued the measure “establishes a shot clock for federal regulators to act on bank merger applications.” He said the change would bring “efficiency, transparency, and accountability” to merger reviews and would not alter the substantive standards for approval.

The bill’s supporters told the committee that timely merger decisions help community and regional banks expand and invest in technology, benefiting customers and small businesses. Barr said the bill aims to limit delays to only “those cases that involve complex applications” and to require documented criteria for decisions.

Ranking Member Maxine Waters said she “strongly oppose[d] HR 1,900,” arguing the bill “would further weaken an already lax merger and acquisition process” and would impose an “arbitrary 90 day deadline for regulators to approve or deny merger applications” even when information is incomplete. Waters warned the provision could hamstring regulators’ ability to evaluate safety and soundness and to consider public comments.

Committee members debated competing framings: proponents emphasized predictability for banks and communities; opponents emphasized risks to consumers and to oversight, citing past consolidation and branch closures. The subcommittee adopted the amendment in the nature of a substitute and ordered the bill favorably reported to the House. The committee later recorded the final tally as 29 ayes and 21 nays on ordering HR 1,900 as amended to be reported to the House.

The bill will proceed to the full House for consideration. The committee did not change the statutory standards for merger approval in the course of the markup; it amended timing and process provisions and debated the scope of limited exceptions for complex cases.","Representative Andy Barr, chair of the Subcommittee on Financial Institutions, led consideration of HR 1900, the Bank Failure Prevention Act, and argued the measure “establishes a shot clock for federal regulators to act on bank merger applications.”",{"_33":88,"_35":36,"_37":38,"_39":89,"_41":90,"_43":91,"_45":92,"_47":93,"_49":94,"_51":95,"_53":96,"_55":56,"_57":58,"_59":97,"_61":62,"_63":64,"_65":98,"_67":68,"_69":70,"_71":72,"_73":72,"_74":72},6545763,"Committee approves FIRM Act to remove ‘reputational risk’ from supervision language",15814,4259000,20073000,"/Search/View?dp=1&key=3428708-a69486b4c6c1f2b454cd17b95bff90bb&start=4259&end=20073","https://assets.pipeline.soar.com/3428708-a69486b4c6c1f2b454cd17b95bff90bb/thumbnail_4259000.jpg","/articles/6545763/Committee-approves-FIRM-Act-to-remove-reputational-risk-from-supervision-language","https://secure.pipeline.soar.com/6545763-0f619a0d021c876b3d11ce72e4af8741/orig.mp4?Expires=1771121336&Signature=TJ3nBFV0HwtW-bvqjn89BWcw3Rl7Io2ay9HsQMdDNjeD33yq6QUqMEREVxY~xhTQDxGsWQlVr789VGKVs41AHlpkgu3aOpVcvd9NOi~0kN7TzQHv8tnijyG-T6xZgnXFghLBLPqsArg0jKqSRJXFSDPLPKN9URYR5Sx1UXondsjaRHNgMy6lik4B-UmGWOgnF~VT2oBx2InXLvZDRk1Fqne8A7E0bctzr8Sm63Y34vAo40KFt4nfscW5OGIXwoRMufijU49yu5xBw6u0EOYzSwiyUR4bTbWdUkCGi5YRoBggNwA8~2SGcpTbKjAGjQBbt4R-XG5SIe9-bPmkEPghkw__&Key-Pair-Id=KUT5TJCACFTXG","Committee advances bill to exclude reputational risk from supervisory guidance.

Representative Andy Barr introduced HR 2702, the Financial Integrity and Regulation Management Act (FIRM Act), which would remove references to “reputational risk” from federal banking agencies’ supervisory guidance. Barr described the bill as bipartisan and said it would “ensure that bank supervision remains focused on clear objective criteria” and would prevent regulators from using reputational risk to influence banks’ customer decisions.

Representative Ritchie Torres, a cosponsor, said access to banking is an essential economic liberty and that “If you are a law abiding family or business, you should never be debanked unless the decision is based on objective, quantifiable risk.” Supporters argued the bill would limit politicized debanking and protect lawful businesses.

Opponents, led by Representative Maxine Waters, said HR 2702 would tie regulators’ hands. Waters warned that eliminating reputational risk as a supervisory component could prevent regulators from responding to factors that materially affect bank stability, and she cited past bank failures as evidence that perception and confidence matter to stability.

The committee adopted an amendment clarifying treatment in terrorism-related circumstances (Sherman amendment) and ordered the bill favorably reported to the House. The recorded committee vote on ordering HR 2702 as amended was 33 ayes and 19 nays.","HR 2702, the Financial Integrity and Regulation Management (FIRM) Act, was advanced in committee. Sponsors said it prevents agencies from pressuring banks to cut off lawful customers for political reasons by removing “reputational risk” from supervisory guidance; opponents said it would blind regulators to real-world risks that affect stability.",{"_33":100,"_35":36,"_37":38,"_39":101,"_41":102,"_43":103,"_45":104,"_47":105,"_49":106,"_51":107,"_53":108,"_55":56,"_57":58,"_59":109,"_61":62,"_63":64,"_65":110,"_67":68,"_69":70,"_71":72,"_73":72,"_74":72},6545768,"Committee advances Taylor Act to require regulators to tailor rules to institution risk profiles",16773,3121000,19894000,"/Search/View?dp=1&key=3428708-a69486b4c6c1f2b454cd17b95bff90bb&start=3121&end=19894","https://assets.pipeline.soar.com/3428708-a69486b4c6c1f2b454cd17b95bff90bb/thumbnail_3121000.jpg","/articles/6545768/Committee-advances-Taylor-Act-to-require-regulators-to-tailor-rules-to-institution-risk-profiles","https://secure.pipeline.soar.com/6545768-29af9e8f04a159a9efab5e4a3f61ad28/orig.mp4?Expires=1771121336&Signature=mpxEHFxGmBvGvn8NaUIW7nZ1H01pglEpg7G6J10FZOZrAnHTm1ydGXzA~It1DgCVcofMGFbLurlg~pm07lJEjPqdF3nmFYYMkXLs3Wzo9ItOJFBpDkVsFuTeyDSj4v9IwOy9rH4GblT1GFEzS3D6syGgyWvsJcDyVOSEr01OKoOq6Xinr-7jwgESUipl6yVWa~yKJ3dMrLeQ1x7xElRSX5amqVk7Fu6d7cWceLST~MEcM52so97tBy8Lf~ZKXjLBwzbmYSGO556mrSbiFYJXbo43cHuSM6hDxlDOxxlc4DoMwC54WtiSeG3tOzSJawENOkiyi9mSU5DW1Iep~1AjXQ__&Key-Pair-Id=KUT5TJCACFTXG","Taylor Act would require regulators to consider institution-specific risk and business model before issuing rules.

Representative Barry Loudermilk, sponsor of HR 33 80, told the committee the Taylor Act would “right size federal regulation” by requiring regulators to tailor rules to the risk profile of small and midsize institutions rather than applying a one-size-fits-all approach.

Proponents, including Subcommittee Chair Andy Barr, argued tailoring would reduce regulatory costs that force community banks to limit services or shrink, and that the bill would require agencies to explain tailoring decisions and report to Congress.

Ranking Member Maxine Waters said she “strongly oppose[d] HR 33 80,” calling it a “dangerous, sweeping, deregulatory measure” that could undermine the CFPB and allow wealthy megabanks to challenge regulations and block rulemaking. Waters cautioned that the bill could make it difficult for agencies to act in the public interest if a rule’s benefits were not weighed against costs.

Committee members who supported the bill said it preserves regulators’ authorities for safety and soundness while focusing compliance on material risks. The committee adopted the amendment in the nature of a substitute and ordered HR 33 80 favorably reported to the House; the committee recorded the final tally as 29 ayes and 23 nays on ordering the bill to be reported.","HR 3380, the Taylor Act, would require federal regulators to tailor regulations and supervisory actions to an institution’s size, risk profile, and business model. Proponents said the change protects community banks from one-size-fits-all rules; critics warned it could enable legal challenges and weaken consumer protections.",{"_33":112,"_35":36,"_37":38,"_39":113,"_41":114,"_43":115,"_45":116,"_47":117,"_49":118,"_51":119,"_53":120,"_55":56,"_57":58,"_59":121,"_61":62,"_63":64,"_65":122,"_67":68,"_69":70,"_71":72,"_73":72,"_74":72},6545748,"Committee backs Fair Exams Act to create independent review for exam disputes",5449,15195000,20644000,"/Search/View?dp=1&key=3428708-a69486b4c6c1f2b454cd17b95bff90bb&start=15195&end=20644","https://assets.pipeline.soar.com/3428708-a69486b4c6c1f2b454cd17b95bff90bb/thumbnail_15195000.jpg","/articles/6545748/Committee-backs-Fair-Exams-Act-to-create-independent-review-for-exam-disputes","https://secure.pipeline.soar.com/6545748-527e116cf6af9fb820d776de45811d1e/orig.mp4?Expires=1771121336&Signature=finPnqQ9y~h73ehQzqTMICST4mS72d2zdddITYLoUg0opplgAr62U~G~1rK~1NFUqMbwQ6arVPaionimn04csEiAhNOnni6SLkzj0xosulKQOgLAiI5fD4JITSVLyIgp~frZGw5~h588DH3yQa6AMb8vQENaLZEqc8eixr2K4itYNMBK3XCBjZVoyMBEqLOM7EcNZwI1EAMUrxP16yXJbq5dvOb~vdFNMcDDG6QIWMoqtFPCYz-CsIqqZqPBDWdt4IUWdt1Mvlx8mE~oM2XbC~ZEq0eKa7K3gPdaXZQiHA4djwrQtA~Jrr-xte2k00vPWtqtAftnK0nZcx6IZGdqww__&Key-Pair-Id=KUT5TJCACFTXG","Committee advances Fair Exams Act to create independent appeals process for supervisory determinations.

Representative Hill (of Arkansas), chairing the committee, introduced HR 940, the Fair Exams Act, saying it would restore and implement the 1994 Riegal Act’s goal of an independent review process for material supervisory determinations. Hill said current appeals processes are insufficiently independent and that the proposed Office of Independent Examination Review would increase transparency and fairness.

Representative David Scott and other backers argued the bill would protect institutions from adverse findings that are not properly grounded and would make the exam process more consistent. Representative Andy Barr also expressed support, noting that the appeals process as implemented across agencies has not delivered meaningful independent review.

Opponents, including Ranking Member Maxine Waters, warned the bill could allow large institutions to challenge supervisory findings and delay required corrective actions and consumer remediation; Waters said the appeal board as drafted lacked a mandate to ensure safety and soundness or consumer protection expertise.

The committee adopted several bipartisan amendments to the substitute (including changes to board composition and qualification classes) and ordered HR 940 favorably reported to the House; the committee later recorded the vote on ordering HR 940 as amended as 35 ayes and 17 nays.","HR 940, the Fair Exams Act, would establish an independent Office of Independent Examination Review to improve appeals of supervisory determinations. Supporters said current intra-agency appeals lack independence; opponents warned creating a new appeals path could delay remediation and complicate supervision for large institutions.",{"_33":124,"_35":36,"_37":38,"_39":125,"_41":126,"_43":127,"_45":128,"_47":129,"_49":130,"_51":131,"_53":132,"_55":56,"_57":58,"_59":133,"_61":62,"_63":64,"_65":134,"_67":68,"_69":70,"_71":72,"_73":72,"_74":72},6545753,"Committee votes to raise statutory asset thresholds for regulatory obligations",6397,13942000,20339000,"/Search/View?dp=1&key=3428708-a69486b4c6c1f2b454cd17b95bff90bb&start=13942&end=20339","https://assets.pipeline.soar.com/3428708-a69486b4c6c1f2b454cd17b95bff90bb/thumbnail_13942000.jpg","/articles/6545753/Committee-votes-to-raise-statutory-asset-thresholds-for-regulatory-obligations","https://secure.pipeline.soar.com/6545753-253d76a13f0307f2904d1f8b64fe89e9/orig.mp4?Expires=1771121336&Signature=HBi2939e6cMahF4m8PmkD5B5A4k3JrsKv8b89dpMKWiR5AEJnGSGGAjmCZ8PeytR0Gp1x5-GcKtVVi1gl2rmwxkzdhNCSCPVAInLaMmQNBxel5t6TxVX~67eYh1JMYolIUbxwMopruJUg52FGJkhWK0ggpdpbRUnim3PDlfXeVDk2~R0JEWVpG78popldo-h74a48fBrnWItaMsKNAMLhYMNLdQ5MOKqSk-XTLCug29mozQyxR7WnqkS4rFrR42OUJnoXvNZQq1R02SQuoIhgNCqzgdgea4CqfLUMsatzGqes8NULxDj~3OwCrCiCSz0D-9ClGGAWtVZzV6Lyup4IQ__&Key-Pair-Id=KUT5TJCACFTXG","Committee approves bill to modernize asset thresholds that trigger enhanced regulation.

Representative Andy Barr presented HR 32 30, the Financial Institution Regulatory Tailoring Enhancement Act, saying the bill “modernizes outdated statutory thresholds that have imposed unnecessary and disproportionate burdens on smaller, lower risk financial institutions.” Barr proposed raising several thresholds that were set following the Dodd‑Frank Act and said the increases reflect inflation and industry changes.

Supporters argued that the $10 billion thresholds created compliance burdens for institutions that are not systemically complex, and that arbitrary lines can force banks to limit growth or merge to absorb compliance costs. Barr said the bill raises a key threshold to $50 billion for certain enhanced requirements.

Ranking Member Maxine Waters strongly opposed the measure, describing it as “too many dramatic increases in regulatory thresholds with little justification” and warning that raising thresholds to $50 billion would exempt many large institutions from important post‑crisis safeguards. Waters noted that inflation-adjusted thresholds would be far lower than the $50 billion figure proposed.

The committee adopted the substitute and ordered HR 32 30 favorably reported to the House; the recorded committee vote on ordering the bill as amended was 29 ayes and 23 nays.","HR 3230, the Financial Institution Regulatory Tailoring Enhancement Act, would raise multiple statutory asset thresholds (including a proposed increase from $10 billion to $50 billion for certain requirements). Supporters said thresholds are outdated; opponents called the change a large rollback of post‑crisis safeguards.","actionData","errors"]

Article not found

House committee backs bill to make CAMELS ratings more objective

House Financial Services Subcommittee advances bill to set deadlines for bank merger reviews

Committee approves FIRM Act to remove ‘reputational risk’ from supervision language

Committee advances Taylor Act to require regulators to tailor rules to institution risk profiles

Committee backs Fair Exams Act to create independent review for exam disputes

Committee votes to raise statutory asset thresholds for regulatory obligations