It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Democrats Kill Amendment Protecting Americans from Credit Discrimination Based on Politics

page: 1
25
<<   2  3  4 >>

log in

join
share:
+5 more 
posted on Jan, 31 2020 @ 09:23 AM
link   
It has become increasingly obvious that the Democrat Party is intent on forcing the country along a path that leads to a uni-party, uni-thought system that de-platforms, cancels, fires, ousts or otherwise ostracizes anyone who doesn't adhere to the globalist, "woke" (and ever evolving leftward) doctrine.

In short, variance from the inevitable path to making the United States an authoritarian Communist regime will not be tolerated. If you listen to, speak about, associate with anyone who wants to preserve American values and constitutional rights...you will be expelled, or otherwise prevented from living a free and normal life.

And, in keeping with this troubling direction...


Democrats in the House of Representatives voted on Wednesday against an amendment to a proposed bill that would prevent the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau (CFPB) from forcing credit reporting agencies to evaluate Americans based on political opinions or religious beliefs.

Without such an amendment, Republicans warn, the powerful CFPB would have the legal authority to make nearly any criteria mandatory for a private credit evaluation company to take into consideration, paving the way for a system in which the federal government has the power to assign numerical scores to individuals based on their loyalty to a certain political party, membership in civil society groups that the government approves or disapproves of, or other private behaviors.


To simplify this, the Democrats favour credit ratings that reflect your political views and activities...not just how well you manage your finances and your debts. So being a conservative, I assume, will end up negatively affecting your ability to get a mortgage, a car loan - or even get a job (as many employers now review prospective employee's credit scores as part of the hiring process).


The system, they say, would mirror the newly minted “social credit system” in place in China, which bans citizens from key social services like public transportation if they lose too many points behaving in a way the Communist Party disapproves of.

The CFPB, the brainchild of Senator Elizabeth Warren (D-MA), is an executive agency that does not answer to the presidency, making it unaccountable to anyone but its head. The constitutionality of giving an unelected body the power to impose its demands on private individuals and corporations has been the subject of extensive debate, and the unique power given to a bureau director triggered an aggressive fight for the seat after founding director Richard Cordray, chosen by President Barack Obama, resigned.

Republicans moved on Wednesday to amend the 1970 Fair Credit Reporting Act in light of the existence of the CFPB. The failed amendment would have prevented the Bureau from forcing private credit scoring companies to “make use of information related to political opinions, religious expression, or other expression protected by the First Amendment, whether obtained from a social media account of a consumer or other sources.”


It is startling, to me, the rapid rise of plainly far-left socialists like AOC and Warren - and the openly Communist-leaning Bernie Sanders. Anyone seriously considering voting for Democrats (for President, Congress or Senate), really needs to understand that there is a very serious price attached to all of the free stuff they are dangling in front of you. That price is going to be your freedom, dead stop.

I think, as well, that people should take a very sober look at just how hard Democrats have worked...and continue to work...to create the Orange Man Super-Bad narrative (in spite of all of his accomplishments since taking office). Do they really believe that Trump is a danger to national security, a criminal, a racsit, a xenophobe, etc., etc. - or are they really just trying to make people feel like they will be painted with these brushes if they support him (or any Republican).

The only way to stop this leftward surge of the Democrat Party is to hand them a resounding defeat...in the House, in the Senate and for the Presidency...in November 2020. If accomplished, the Democrat Party will (hopefully anyway) be forced to reform itself, and steer itself back to the middle.

It's up to you America...stop this madness before you are no longer allowed to have a voice.

Democrats Vote to Lower Credit Scores for Thought Activities
edit on 31-1-2020 by mobiusmale because: typo




posted on Jan, 31 2020 @ 09:30 AM
link   
a reply to: mobiusmale

Utterly disturbing. I have hollered plenty about social credit and its foolishness (creates a giant highschool out of our nation).

I had no idea the CFPB was instituting these types of metrics! Absurd, how can you have a bill of rights, and this bs co existing in the same country?

Somebody stop the ride...my family wants off.



posted on Jan, 31 2020 @ 09:31 AM
link   
Disgusting, but hardly surprising. The Democrats are well on their way to going full-on communist. They're about a half-step away from suggesting that we criminalize dissenting political views at this stage.



posted on Jan, 31 2020 @ 09:31 AM
link   
Your thread title says this:


originally posted by: mobiusmale
Democrats Kill Amendment Protecting Americans from Credit Discrimination Based on Politics.

But your source says this:

Democrats in the House of Representatives voted on Wednesday against an amendment to a proposed bill that would prevent the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau (CFPB) from forcing credit reporting agencies to evaluate Americans based on political opinions or religious beliefs.


Voting AGAINST and amendment that would force credit reporting agencies to evaluate you based on politics is good, no? Maybe it's me but that article might be worded confusingly or inaccurately. If you take out the extraneous wording you are left with this:


Democrats in the House of Representatives voted on Wednesday against...forcing credit reporting agencies to evaluate Americans based on political opinions or religious beliefs.



posted on Jan, 31 2020 @ 09:37 AM
link   
a reply to: AugustusMasonicus

His title is correct. Here is the proposed amendment:

republicanleader.house.gov...



posted on Jan, 31 2020 @ 09:37 AM
link   
a reply to: vor78

Where's the rest of the text? Also, what else was attached to that amendment? They often get shot down because of additional thing added to them.

This sounds like typical House politics where something good intentioned ends up turning into a **** pile because everyone adds their nonsense to it.




edit on 31-1-2020 by AugustusMasonicus because: 👁❤🍕



posted on Jan, 31 2020 @ 09:40 AM
link   

originally posted by: AugustusMasonicus
Your thread title says this:


originally posted by: mobiusmale
Democrats Kill Amendment Protecting Americans from Credit Discrimination Based on Politics.

But your source says this:

Democrats in the House of Representatives voted on Wednesday against an amendment to a proposed bill that would prevent the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau (CFPB) from forcing credit reporting agencies to evaluate Americans based on political opinions or religious beliefs.


Voting AGAINST and amendment that would force credit reporting agencies to evaluate you based on politics is good, no? Maybe it's me but that article might be worded confusingly or inaccurately. If you take out the extraneous wording you are left with this:


Democrats in the House of Representatives voted on Wednesday against...forcing credit reporting agencies to evaluate Americans based on political opinions or religious beliefs.

Glad I'm not the only one that noticed the wording on that. I must have read it 3-4 times and came to the same conclusion but then I figured maybe I took an extra pain med this am...hey, it happens.



posted on Jan, 31 2020 @ 09:41 AM
link   
a reply to: AugustusMasonicus

AGAINST a bill that would PREVENT the CFPB from using social media.

So they are fine with it...no?



posted on Jan, 31 2020 @ 09:42 AM
link   

originally posted by: vor78
Disgusting, but hardly surprising. The Democrats are well on their way to going full-on communist. They're about a half-step away from suggesting that we criminalize dissenting political views at this stage.


Well, in the House Impeachment Inquiry...they did not allow the President to have legal representation present to cross-examine witnesses. They did not allow the minority (Republicans) to freely call their own witnesses, or to have a minority hearing day.

And now Pelosi has suggested that the lawyers who mounted the Presidents defence in the Impeachment Trial should maybe not be allowed to "retain their lawyer status".

The Democrats apparently feel that they can accuse anyone of anything, refuse to allow due process rights to the accused, and then threaten lawyers who defend the targets of their wrath.

During the last Supreme Court confirmation process, and again during the Impeachment process, Democrats spoke of accused persons as needing to prove their innocence - this is downright dangerous!
edit on 31-1-2020 by mobiusmale because: ETA



posted on Jan, 31 2020 @ 09:42 AM
link   
a reply to: stosh64

read it again...I just did a 1000x



posted on Jan, 31 2020 @ 09:43 AM
link   

originally posted by: BlueJacket
AGAINST a bill that would PREVENT the CFPB from using social media.

So they are fine with it...no?


That's not what the portion of the article I quoted says.



posted on Jan, 31 2020 @ 09:43 AM
link   
a reply to: AugustusMasonicus

Good question, but that's what's on the House GOP site. There may be more to it, but on the basis of what's there, it seems pretty clear.



posted on Jan, 31 2020 @ 09:43 AM
link   
a reply to: BlueJacket

If more than one person is seeing it this way then something isn't correct, either with the claim or the article itself.



posted on Jan, 31 2020 @ 09:44 AM
link   

originally posted by: vor78
Good question, but that's what's on the House GOP site. There may be more to it, but on the basis of what's there, it seems pretty clear.


it's not clear, you need the full text and if anything else was attached.



posted on Jan, 31 2020 @ 09:44 AM
link   

originally posted by: vor78
a reply to: AugustusMasonicus

His title is correct. Here is the proposed amendment:

republicanleader.house.gov...

This was supposed to clarify the wording in the OP?



MOTION TO RECOMMIT H.R. 3621
Ml. llllllll moves to recommit the bill
H.R. 3621 to the Committee on Financial Services with
instructions to report the same back to the House forthwith with the following amendment:
Page 161, line 2, strike ‘‘; and’’ and insert after
such line the following:
1 ‘‘(c) LIMITATION WITH RESPECT TO PROTECTED
2 EXPRESSIONS.—The Bureau may not require, as a condi3 tion for a credit scoring model to satisfy the standards
4 established under subsection (a) or as a condition for de5 termining a credit scoring model is appropriate under sub6 section (b), that a credit scoring model make use of infor7 mation related to political opinions, religious expression,
8 or other expression protected by the First Amendment,
9 whether obtained from a social media account of a con10 sumer or other sources.’’; and

Umm...thanks? smh



posted on Jan, 31 2020 @ 09:45 AM
link   

originally posted by: BlueJacket
a reply to: stosh64

read it again...I just did a 1000x




posted on Jan, 31 2020 @ 09:46 AM
link   
a reply to: stosh64

It also shows this passed on the 29th. We need the full text.



posted on Jan, 31 2020 @ 09:47 AM
link   
a reply to: AugustusMasonicus

The wording is very wishy washy, Ill admit. I cast no blame, but in re-reading it, including the quote in the OP...they used a double negative



posted on Jan, 31 2020 @ 09:47 AM
link   
a reply to: mobiusmale

Yeah, there's that, too. They're acting even more ridiculous than usual. Again, maybe there's more to it than is presented here, but given the Dems' behavior since the election, I wouldn't put anything past them whatsoever.



posted on Jan, 31 2020 @ 09:51 AM
link   
a reply to: BlueJacket

What we need is the FULL text of the amendment.



new topics

top topics



 
25
<<   2  3  4 >>

log in

join