Dan Crenshaw: “For 9 years arbitration agreements have been legal, and they have been upheld by the courts. They provide an alternative…”

“For 9 years arbitration agreements have been legal, and they have been upheld by the courts. They provide an alternative method of resolving disputes. They are quicker and cheaper than the slow, more expensive court system. The provision in our bill before you merely requires the CFPB to stop and further study the use of arbitration before moving forward with this arbitration rule. In their own study, it is noted that consumers didn't select financial products like credit cards or cell phones based on whether they were subject to dispute resolution clauses or may require arbitration. And actually, studies have shown that consumers receive more compensation in arbitration than they do in class action. So you have to ask yourself: Why is the CFPB trying to go after something consumers say they don't care about but actually financially benefit from? I urge rejection of this amendment. I yield back the balance of my time. The Acting CHAIR (Mr. McClintock). The question is on the amendment offered by the gentleman from Minnesota (Mr. Ellison). The question was taken; and the Acting Chair announced that the ayes appeared to have it.”