H.R. 9828

H.R. 9828: To amend the Fair Credit Reporting Act to prohibit certain adverse information related to late or missed payments during a Government shutdown by a furloughed or unpaid Government employee from being included in consumer reports, and for other

Introduced Mark Alford (R) HOUSE_BILL — 119th Congress
Plain English Summary

H.R. 9828 aims to amend the Fair Credit Reporting Act to ensure that late or missed payments resulting from a government shutdown do not negatively impact the credit reports of furloughed or unpaid government employees. This means that if government workers are unable to make payments on time due to a shutdown, that information cannot be reported to credit bureaus, protecting their credit scores during such financial hardships.

Positive Media Summary

Supporters of H.R. 9828 have praised the bill for providing necessary protections for government employees during shutdowns, highlighting its role in safeguarding the financial well-being of workers who are already facing economic uncertainty. Advocates argue that it reflects a commitment to fairness and acknowledges the unique challenges faced by public servants in times of government crisis.

Negative Media Summary

Critics of H.R. 9828 have raised concerns about the potential implications for the credit reporting system, arguing that it could set a precedent for altering credit reporting practices in response to government actions. Some financial experts warn that the bill might lead to complications in credit assessments and could inadvertently encourage irresponsible financial behavior among borrowers.

Conflict of Interest Analysis Deep Analysis
2/10
Risk Level
Low
Total Donations
$157,500,000
PAC Percentage
0%
Committee
UNKNOWN

The bill H.R. 9828 aims to protect furloughed or unpaid government employees from negative credit reporting during government shutdowns. The sponsor, Mark Alford, has significant contributions from the health professionals industry, totaling $120 million, and from retired individuals amounting to $37.5 million. However, there is no direct overlap between the subject matter of the bill and the industries of the sponsor's top donors. This lack of connection suggests that the bill is unlikely to serve the interests of his major financial backers directly. As such, the risk of a conflict of interest appears minimal, with the focus of the bill being on consumer protection rather than benefiting specific industries. Voters should be aware that while the financial backing is substantial, it does not correlate with the legislative intent of this bill.

Sponsor's Top Donor Industries

Top industries funding Mark Alford, ranked by total contributions.

Health Professionals $120,000,000
Individuals: $120,000,000 PACs: $0
Retired $37,500,000
Individuals: $37,500,000 PACs: $0

Source: OpenSecrets.org (Center for Responsive Politics)

TheBillRoom is free and independent. No ads, no subscriptions, no political funding. If this analysis was useful, reader support keeps it running.
Support Us