Jerry Nadler: “this amendment is harmless enough, and may do a little bit of good. I really do not think it is very important one way…”

“this amendment is harmless enough, and may do a little bit of good. I really do not think it is very important one way or the other. It is somewhat deceptive, however. It is somewhat deceptive. I am not going to urge a vote against it, but I do think we should have a word of caution here. It will lead to some misleading information because it demands that the credit card information tell us, the credit card information, not about our credit card, not about what we are doing, but about what some typical borrower might do if he were borrowing $500 or $300 or $1,000. Unfortunately, this amendment was made in order by the Committee on Rules in order to avoid making in order the amendment of the gentleman from Massachusetts (Mr. Delahunt) which had real consumer protections in it. The amendment of the gentleman from Massachusetts, which was voted down on a party line vote in the committee, requires actual disclosure of minimum payments and interest based on the actual debt on our own credit card, rather than have the information just give samples which may bear no relationship to our own situation. The amendment of the gentleman from Massachusetts (Mr. Delahunt) has disclosure on teaser rates and penalties. They have to tell us that, the disclosure on penalties for having no interest, for paying in full, disclosures regarding prohibiting soliciting kids, and makes other real consumer protections and disclosures.”