A Bank of America branch in Los Angeles. (Photo: Wikipedia)
Two senators have introduced legislation to fight back against big banks that discriminate against the firearms and ammunition industry.
U.S. Sens. Kevin Cramer (R-ND) and John Kennedy (R-LA) unveiled the Freedom Financing Act, S. 821, last Friday, which would ban financial institutions from denying services to constitutionally-protected industries.
“It’s not a bank’s job to create policy. They need to leave the policymaking to Congress,” said Sen. Kennedy in a statement. “Banks should not be able to discriminate against lawful customers on the basis of social policy. The banks should keep in mind that these lawful customers are the same hard-working taxpayers who bailed them out during the recession.”
“This legislation will ban big banks from refusing to do business with customers that may not share the same political values as the bank,” Sen. Kennedy continued. “This kind of power move is an unfair assertion of dominance by the big banks, which is why it should be illegal.”
Last year Bank of America, Citigroup and JPMorgan Chase announced that they would cut off financing to manufacturers and retailers of modern sporting rifles. The move to defund AR makers and sellers was praised by Everytown for Gun Safety, the gun-control organization funded by former New York City mayor Michael Bloomberg.
SEE ALSO: Louisiana Halts $600 Million Deal with Banks over Corporate Gun Control
Speaking specifically about BOA, Everytown president John Feinblatt said, “When the second-largest bank in the U.S. takes concrete steps to prevent gun violence, it sends a clear message to the entire industry: It’s time for every financial institution to do their part. We applaud Bank of America for walking the walk on gun safety.”
The Freedom Financing Act only applies to big banks or those with assets in excess of $10 billion.
“A small number of banks controlling most of the financial sector could effectively illegalize legal commerce by refusing to finance certain industries or process certain transactions,” said Sen.Cramer. “Look no further than pro-Second Amendment industries where such discrimination has already occurred. Big banks should not be the arbiters of constitutionality.”
The National Shooting Sports Foundation, the firearms industry trade association, sees S. 821 as a needed safeguard to protect the Second Amendment.
“American taxpayers need to be reassured their tax dollars that subsidize insurance and bailout policies for banking institutions aren’t weaponized in an attempt to eradicate a lawful industry because it has fallen out of favor with boardroom executives,” said Lawrence G. Keane, Senior Vice President and General Counsel for the NSSF.
The bill has been referred to the Senate Banking Committee. Stay tuned for updates.
Chase denied my credit card purchase of an AR barrel. The big banks are discriminating. I plan on cutting my credit card to look like an AR and sending it back to them. Vote with your dollars.
This is ridiculous legislation. You may not like that they’re not funding firearm – related companies, but do we really want the Federal government telling banks what to fund. Havent we been down this road before? Around 2008.
I wouldn’t want to fund a gun company in this political environment. From a credit risk perspective, there is too much regulatory risk that cannot be mitigated.
You came up with a totally different interpretation than I. To mean it means the banks can’t discriminate. And btw, I tried to buy an AR barrel with my Chase Credit card. Chase denied the transaction .
Bloomberg and his ilk will ignore this like they do every other Federal law they don’t like.
How will we get this through the house???
Maybe it’s just me . . . but can somebody explain to me why a bank can deny me financing (or even servicing my credit cards) because I happen to believe the Constitution means what it says — even though they disagree with me politically — but cannot deny someone (who obviously doesn’t have the financial wherewithal to repay a loan) a mortgage, just because of the color of their skin or the plumbing of the partner they like to sleep with??
Isn’t a bank as much a place of public accommodation as a restaurant or hotel? Heck, if you can’t get a credit card and the banks won’t do business with you, you can’t patronize the restaurant, or lunch counter, or hotel. If I wasn’t a believer in freedom and the Constitution, this is when I’d think that the bank regulators could solve this problem like they did in the Obama era. Just go in, wink at the bank president, and suggest that it’s a nice bank, and they surely wouldn’t want to see anything unfortunate happen to it — and then suggest that if they’re not financing Second Amendment businesses, it might be necessary to bring in a crack team of inspectors to check over the bank’s business very . . . VERY carefully.
I believe in freedom and the Constitution, so I’m not suggesting that. But . . . . it’s a fun thought, isn’t it?
The answer to unfair, discriminatory banking practices is to pull your money out of the big big banks and give your business to your credit union. That is why credit unions were created, to provide an alternative means of financial assistance for the “common man”. Power to the people, vote with your pocketbook. https://www.lovemycreditunion.org/why-credit-unions-are-different