Outnumbered Democrats argued unsuccessfully against the resolution. The Dodd-Frank legislation was designed to give a face-lift to the nation’s financial system responsible for the 2008 collapse. Since the law’s inception, critics have motioned against the rule, saying that the legislation is flawed and restricts the U.S. economy, the Miami Herald reports.
Several other financial agencies, including the American Bankers Association and Elizabeth Duke from the Board of Governors, claim that the legislation is too cumbersome for smaller financial institutions that lack the resources necessary to adhere to so many new regulations.
Senator Larcenia Bullard (D-Florida) asked colleagues why they planned to repeal a law that she said will protect consumers, according to the Miami Herald.
Senator Garrett Richter (R-Florida), who introduced the motion, said that the legislation “inhibits small banks from making loans,” the Miami Herald reports. Richter further claimed in the motion that while Dodd-Frank has been championed as a key piece of legislature for U.S. economy reconstruction, the rule is far too expansive.
“The [Dodd-Frank Act] was championed as creating the most significant financial regulatory reform since the Great Depression, but, in contrast, it has become a radical expansion of federal regulation, vests unprecedented power in the hands of unelected bureaucrats, increases the likelihood that there will be more taxpayer bailouts, has not strengthened the economy or brought stability to the housing market, and does nothing to address the most elemental causes that created the financial crisis of 2008,” Richter said, according to the Miami Herald.