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: 2
25
<< 1    3  4  5 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Jan, 31 2020 @ 09:55 AM
link   

originally posted by: AugustusMasonicus
a reply to: BlueJacket

What we need is the FULL text of the amendment.
I definitely want the same but when taken from the quote in the article:

"
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. "

That states that they voted against a bill that would of stopped the CFPB from using social metrics.




posted on Jan, 31 2020 @ 09:57 AM
link   
a reply to: BlueJacket

No, it doesn't. It says they voted against a bill that would have forced credit reporting agencies to use political and religious beliefs. I already parsed this and removed the excess verbiage. If they were trying to imply the opposite they need to go back to journalism school and get themselves a better grasp of the English language.

It should have be written this way if that was their implication:

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

See the difference?



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



posted on Jan, 31 2020 @ 10:00 AM
link   

originally posted by: AugustusMasonicus
a reply to: BlueJacket

No, it doesn't. It says they voted against a bill that would have forced credit reporting agencies to use political and religious beliefs. I already parsed this and removed the excess verbiage. If they were trying to imply the opposite they need to go back to journalism school and get themselves a better grasp of the English language.


You keep leaving out the "prevent" from forcing part



posted on Jan, 31 2020 @ 10:01 AM
link   
a reply to: Tekner

And you're not paying attention to what that 'force' would accomplish, it would force them to scour your beliefs in relation to your credit score. See above.

It's a poorly written article by a hack. Whomever wrote that needs to learn better grammar.



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



posted on Jan, 31 2020 @ 10:02 AM
link   
a reply to: Tekner




posted on Jan, 31 2020 @ 10:02 AM
link   

originally posted by: AugustusMasonicus

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.


This was your original quote from first page with prevent bolded
edit on 31-1-2020 by Tekner because: (no reason given)



posted on Jan, 31 2020 @ 10:02 AM
link   
Looks like it's obvious they want all doors to remain unlocked !! 🥳 😆



posted on Jan, 31 2020 @ 10:04 AM
link   

originally posted by: Tekner
This was your original quote from first page with prevent bolded



...prevent the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau (CFPB) from forcing credit reporting agencies to evaluate Americans based on political opinions or religious beliefs.


It 'prevented' something, what did it prevent? It prevented the credit reporting agencies from evaluating Americans based on politics or religion.



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



posted on Jan, 31 2020 @ 10:09 AM
link   

originally posted by: AugustusMasonicus

originally posted by: Tekner
This was your original quote from first page with prevent bolded



...prevent the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau (CFPB) from forcing credit reporting agencies to evaluate Americans based on political opinions or religious beliefs.


It 'prevented' something, what did it prevent? It prevented the credit reporting agencies from evaluating Americans based on politics or religion.




Yes, proposed bill would prevent them from doing that, and it says they voted against it? Just reading whats written.



posted on Jan, 31 2020 @ 10:14 AM
link   

originally posted by: Tekner
Yes, proposed bill would prevent them from doing that, and it says they voted against it? Just reading whats written.


You're still not reading that right, they voted against the CFPB FORCING credit agencies to check your politics or religion.

Read it again. Then read it one more time.



posted on Jan, 31 2020 @ 10:15 AM
link   
a reply to: mobiusmale

Everyone who voted against this bill should be prosecuted for violating their oath to uphold the constitution! Unbelievable!



posted on Jan, 31 2020 @ 10:17 AM
link   

originally posted by: AugustusMasonicus
a reply to: BlueJacket

What we need is the FULL text of the amendment.


Actually, I think that WAS the full text. The 'and' at the end makes it seem as though there's more, but this is a section of text being inserted into an existing bill (and also striking another section out). The 'and' is simply joining it into the section of the actual bill that follows. The rest of the text is in the bill itself already.

The problem is finding where it lines up in the bill itself. Good luck, there are no page numbers.
edit on 31-1-2020 by vor78 because: (no reason given)



posted on Jan, 31 2020 @ 10:20 AM
link   

originally posted by: AugustusMasonicus

originally posted by: Tekner
Yes, proposed bill would prevent them from doing that, and it says they voted against it? Just reading whats written.


You're still not reading that right, they voted against the CFPB FORCING credit agencies to check your politics or religion.

Read it again. Then read it one more time.


Or just read the amendment, the amendment says



—The Bureau may not require, as a condition for a credit scoring model to satisfy the standards
established under subsection (a) or as a condition for determining a credit scoring model is appropriate under subsection (b), that a credit scoring model make use of information related to political opinions, religious expression

The amendment is to prevent the bureau from using political opinion/religious expression as a condition to determine credit scoring. The amendment doesn't say anything about forcing them to use those criteria. It prevents them from using that criteria.



posted on Jan, 31 2020 @ 10:24 AM
link   

originally posted by: vor78

originally posted by: AugustusMasonicus
a reply to: BlueJacket

What we need is the FULL text of the amendment.


Actually, I think that WAS the full text. The 'and' at the end makes it seem as though there's more, but this is a section of text being inserted into an existing bill (and also striking another section out). The 'and' is simply joining it into the section of the actual bill that follows. The rest of the text is in the bill itself already.

The problem is finding where it lines up in the bill itself. Good luck, there are no page numbers.


Correct, its a small amendment that would disallow the bureau from forcing credit companies to use political opinion/religious beliefs from being used to determine credit score. Not sure why anyone would vote against that.



posted on Jan, 31 2020 @ 10:25 AM
link   

originally posted by: vor78
The problem is finding where it lines up in the bill itself. Good luck, there are no page numbers.


Well, that's what we need.



posted on Jan, 31 2020 @ 10:25 AM
link   

originally posted by: Tekner
The amendment is to prevent the bureau from using political opinion/religious expression as a condition to determine credit scoring. The amendment doesn't say anything about forcing them to use those criteria. It prevents them from using that criteria.


The article says 'forcing the CFPB', yes or no?



posted on Jan, 31 2020 @ 10:36 AM
link   
a reply to: AugustusMasonicus

I think its just as likely that the next section deals with something largely unrelated. Scanning the final bill for keywords, I find no references to religion, and only two instances of the word 'political' in an unrelated context.
edit on 31-1-2020 by vor78 because: (no reason given)



posted on Jan, 31 2020 @ 10:38 AM
link   
I believe the bill in question is the ECOA.

Link to terrifying
alternative credit scoring methods/companies .
www.creditkarma.com/advice/i/alternative-credit/
edit on 31-1-2020 by Notoneofyou because: (no reason given)



posted on Jan, 31 2020 @ 10:49 AM
link   

originally posted by: AugustusMasonicus

originally posted by: Tekner
The amendment is to prevent the bureau from using political opinion/religious expression as a condition to determine credit scoring. The amendment doesn't say anything about forcing them to use those criteria. It prevents them from using that criteria.


The article says 'forcing the CFPB', yes or no?


The article says, "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.

The wording in the article could be clearer. Let's try this...

The Democrats have proposed a bill, related to the standards set by the CFRB for uniform credit reporting practices. The Republicans offered an amendment to this bill that specifies that the CFRB may not use a person's politcal, religious or social media history to form part of that person's credit score. The Democrats voted against this amendment.

Does that help at all?



posted on Jan, 31 2020 @ 10:57 AM
link   
a reply to: mobiusmale

Man he's trolling you big time even me a french Canadian got it right on the first read



new topics

top topics



 
25
<< 1    3  4  5 >>

log in

join