Working in corporate engagement, I often hear questions about why the ‘long game’ matters in changing woke company policies. If executive orders can instantly push companies away from DEI or ESG initiatives, why take other pathways? The answer is clear: lasting change takes time. JPMorgan Chase, the nation’s largest bank, just proved this with a major policy shift — one that speaks louder than any theory ever could.
In 2022, JPMorgan Chase <a href="https://nypost.com/2025/03/10/opinion/i-was-debanked-by-jpmorgan-chase-but-fought-back-and-won/" target="_blank" rel="noopener">debanked</a> former U.S. Senator and Ambassador Sam Brownback, after Brownback opened an account for the newly-formed National Committee for Religious Freedom. The son of a Kansas farmer, Brownback refused to back down. When Brownback asked the bank for its rationale in shuttering his account, he was met with conflicting (and incorrect) explanations as to why.
Brownback’s debanking experience was the start of a major wave of scrutiny over exactly what conditions a bank will close a customer’s account. Victims range from nonprofit organizations like Indigenous Advance, an organization serving Ugandan widows &amp; orphans debanked by Bank of America in 2023, to Melania &amp; Barron Trump, who Melania <a href="https://oversight.house.gov/wp-content/uploads/2025/01/2025-01-24-Letter.pdf" target="_blank" rel="noopener">described</a> as having been debanked in her memoir, prompting further inquiry from the House Committee on Oversight.
Yet JPMorgan consistently ranked as one of the major bad actors in the debanking saga, closing not only Brownback’s account (and actually <a href="https://www.ag.ky.gov/Press%20Release%20Attachments/23.5.2%20Letter%20to%20Chase.pdf" target="_blank" rel="noopener">asked</a> for his org’s donor list for restoring service) but several other conservative nonprofits. The biggest bank in America was quickly racking up hits on its record of political neutrality and customer equality.
This trend might have gone unaddressed had the Right simply let the issue lie. Luckily, some of the most influential names in both the conservative legal, financial, and government worlds stepped up to the plate. Pressure for increased transparency and commitments to ditch any policies that could lead to a client being debanked for political reasons has come from all directions, from legal giants like <a href="https://adfmedia.org/press-release/19-states-chase-stop-misleading-customers-commit-equality-treatment/" target="_blank" rel="noopener">Alliance Defending Freedom</a> to <a href="https://www.viewpointdiversityscore.org/news/statement-on-debanking-and-free-speech" target="_blank" rel="noopener">notable financial professionals</a> to <a href="https://www.ag.ky.gov/Press%20Release%20Attachments/23.5.2%20Letter%20to%20Chase.pdf" target="_blank" rel="noopener">state financial officers and attorneys general</a>. As that public pressure mounted, shareholder pressure has been growing from the inside for the past three years, spurred on by organizations like the firm I work for, Bowyer Research, with Chase investors like financial advisor David Bahnsen spending literal years <a href="https://www.nationalreview.com/corner/bahnsen-takes-the-fight-today-to-jpmorgan-chase/" target="_blank" rel="noopener">urging</a> the company to clarify its approach to debanking — and fix its spotty track record on political neutrality.
And Chase listened.
In 2023, JPMorgan made the decision to axe its “social risk” policy from its payment processing arm, no longer allowing vague terms like “intolerance” and “hate” to determine whether a customer was fit to continue doing business at Chase. But the biggest win so far came several days ago, when Chase agreed to a policy change explicitly protecting customers and employees from discrimination based on religious or political views.
This is huge. Many stories about companies ditching woke policies consist of the company putting out a public statement (and often the controversy that follows). Statements are great, but they’re not the ideal. Companies can hide behind statements — and do. Several companies that have publicly made statements supporting political neutrality clearly have work to do when it comes to actually putting their policies where their mouths are.
But companies can’t hide behind policy changes. That’s why they’re a sign of both real progress and good faith. Shareholders like Bahnsen, and groups like ADF &amp; Bowyer Research, have been engaging with Chase for years to get this change. Make no mistake: Chase’s willingness to protect against future political/religious debanking is the result of real shareholders using real influence to create real change. It’s a victory for Chase’s customers and shareholders, but also for the company itself. It’s a win for a company to clear up concerns about corporate bias, a win that’s been a long time coming, and a win that hopefully many other banks will find instructive.
* * *
Isaac Willour is an award-winning journalist focusing on race, culture, and American conservatism, as well as a corporate relations analyst at Bowyer Research. His work has been featured at outlets including USA Today, The Wall Street Journal, The New York Times Opinion, C-SPAN, and The Daily Wire. He is a member of the Young Voices contributor program and can be found on X <a href="https://twitter.com/IsaacWillour" target="_blank" rel="noopener">@IsaacWillour</a>.
The views expressed in this piece are those of the author and do not necessarily represent those of The Daily Wire.

Major US Bank Bosses To Discuss Debanking With Senate Committee

Major Win: JPMorgan Chase Ends Political Debanking

Alliance Defending Freedom (ADF)

Banking

Banks

Bias

Censorship

Christians

Conservatives

Corporations

debanking

Jamie Dimon

JP Morgan

Opinion

Woke Culture

Just days into the second Trump administration, Republicans in Washington are facing an unexpected and poorly understood headwind to unleashing our economic potential, courtesy of the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau and the leadership of Biden bureaucrats.
Under the <a href="https://www.consumerfinance.gov/about-us/newsroom/cfpb-finalizes-personal-financial-data-rights-rule-to-boost-competition-protect-privacy-and-give-families-more-choice-in-financial-services/">CFPB’s Biden-era 1033 Rule</a>, also known as the “Banking Data Exposure Rule,” American banks will soon be compelled to increase the flow of sensitive financial data to banks and businesses worldwide, with insufficient safeguards and proper oversight. The implications are enormous, and the risks cannot be overstated. 
Progressive proponents like Senator Elizabeth Warren (D-MA) might be cheering this misguided rule under the guise of empowering the consumer. But because the rule is so poorly constructed, it will only benefit a minority of well-informed consumers while creating new and potentially life-changing hazards for many Americans and businesses.
The Banking Data Exposure Rule opens a digital Pandora’s Box. By mandating that banks facilitate unprecedented access to consumers&#8217; financial data, the CFPB is creating a hunting ground for malicious cybercriminals and foreign state actors to exploit. This rule places anyone with a checking or savings account — be it an individual, a business, a municipal government, or even a hospital system — at risk of falling victim to sophisticated schemes designed to gain unauthorized access to funds and sensitive data.
<a class="c-link" href="https://get.dailywire.com/subscribe/plus/?_gl=1*1lail3r*_gcl_aw*R0NMLjE3MzIyMDEyNDkuQ2owS0NRaUEwZnU1QmhEUUFSSXNBTVhVQk9JSkM0VnNsMFVreURxYXUxVWVEVWdOdjZkNzR2Y1pEeEZQeHVBcGl2R3BLaTdBMjVzT1p5TWFBdG1nRUFMd193Y0I.*_gcl_au*NDUxNDQ0NzYwLjE3MzY3ODI2NDY.*_ga*MTc2NzM0NDQ2NS4xNzI4OTA5Nzkx*_ga_CZKR9ZYKJP*MTczNjk1NzYwMy4zNDAuMS4xNzM2OTU3NzE2LjYwLjAuMA.." target="_blank" rel="noopener noreferrer" data-stringify-link="https://get.dailywire.com/subscribe/plus/?_gl=1*1lail3r*_gcl_aw*R0NMLjE3MzIyMDEyNDkuQ2owS0NRaUEwZnU1QmhEUUFSSXNBTVhVQk9JSkM0VnNsMFVreURxYXUxVWVEVWdOdjZkNzR2Y1pEeEZQeHVBcGl2R3BLaTdBMjVzT1p5TWFBdG1nRUFMd193Y0I.*_gcl_au*NDUxNDQ0NzYwLjE3MzY3ODI2NDY.*_ga*MTc2NzM0NDQ2NS4xNzI4OTA5Nzkx*_ga_CZKR9ZYKJP*MTczNjk1NzYwMy4zNDAuMS4xNzM2OTU3NzE2LjYwLjAuMA.." data-sk="tooltip_parent">CELEBRATE #47 WITH 47% OFF DAILYWIRE+ MEMBERSHIPS + A FREE $20 GIFT</a>
The rule’s design offers bad actors a roadmap for exploitation, making the CFPB a de facto enabler of potential financial harm. Under the 1033 Rule, banks are essentially powerless to ensure their customers are not being duped by bad actors masquerading as legitimate third parties — a key point seemingly missed by the Biden administration and supporters.
Consider the broader implications of a foreign adversary using this framework to infiltrate a utility company’s financial records, hold a hospital’s payroll system hostage, or drain the retirement savings of an unsuspecting senior citizen. The CFPB’s poorly conceived rule could trigger cascading consequences across critical sectors of the U.S. economy, suppressing the nation’s optimism for an economic revival under the Trump administration and Republican-led Congress.
Proponents claim the ends will justify the means by enhancing competitive innovation and streamlining financial services. However, the 1033 Rule presumes that these benefits outweigh the risks to data security and privacy.
The CFPB’s actions undermine the reasonable demands Congress has made of banks to protect sensitive financial data and secure access to accounts. The rule establishes a false dichotomy between safeguarding consumer information and the promise of open banking, stripping consumers of their agency in making this decision. In reality, we can and should demand both security and innovation from our financial institutions.
Worse still, the Banking Data Exposure Rule is an ideologically-driven mandate. CFPB officials are misusing the Dodd-Frank Act to orchestrate a shift to an “open banking” framework that was largely theoretical when the bill was signed into law nearly 15 years ago. Open banking should only proceed with clear congressional authorization — not unelected, newly-unemployed, bureaucrats — following deliberation on the risks and merits of such a fundamental shift in the financial system.
The CFPB’s overreach in this instance sets a dangerous precedent for unchecked regulatory intervention in other critical sectors of the economy. Congress has a responsibility to rein in the CFPB before the 1033 Rule takes effect. Lawmakers should recognize that while open banking policies are worthy of debate, there is no urgency to enact radical changes nor necessity to do so without considerable public debate. It is a mandate ripe for rollback.
Financial innovation should not come at the expense of data security and consumer trust. Instead, we should pursue reforms that achieve both priorities without exposing Americans to unnecessary risks. By cancelling the 1033 Rule, Congress can send a clear message: safeguarding the financial security of the American people is not up for compromise.
The time to act is now. This is a fight for the integrity of our financial system and the protection of American consumers. Congress must ensure that innovation in banking is built on a foundation of trust, security, and proper oversight — not reckless experimentation.
Doug Wheeler is the Director of the George Gibbs Center for Economic Prosperity at The James Madison Institute (JMI), a free market public policy research organization based in Florida.

Fed Meets As Speculation Builds On Possible Rate Cut

This Biden-Era Banking Rule Is A Pandora’s Box Of Financial Risk

Biden Administration

Consumer Financial Protection Bureau

Elizabeth Warren

Trump Administration

Bank of America, Citigroup, Morgan Stanley, Goldman Sachs and JPMorgan Chase have just abandoned the Net Zero Banking Alliance. While it seems to be yet another dire omen for so-called environment, social and corporate governance (ESG) investing, it would be premature for people on the Right to imagine that the Left’s lock on the finance industry is ending.
ESG investing is notionally the idea that investors should consider the eponymous non-financial factors of ESG in making finance and investment decisions. The biggest part of “ESG” investing is the “E” (environment) and the biggest part of the “E” is climate and the dubious goal of “net zero emissions,” which I have previously written about <a href="https://www.wsj.com/articles/a-quiet-refutation-of-net-zero-climate-change-emissions-energy-global-warming-sec-goals-clean-power-11672262963?mod=opinion_lead_pos8" target="_blank" rel="noopener">here</a> and <a href="https://www.wsj.com/articles/net-zero-never-mind-environment-electrical-grid-carbon-emissions-climate-change-southern-co-energy-information-administration-db856556?mod=opinion_lead_pos10" target="_blank" rel="noopener">here</a>.
The phenomenon of ESG investing started out in the 1960s as “socially responsible investing” (SRI) investing, was rebranded as “corporate social responsibility” investing in the late 1990s and then rebranded again as ESG investing in the 2010s.
SRI/CSR/ESG investing was invented by the Left as a means of using stock ownership for political purposes. The practice started with labor unions in the 1960s. After the election of Ronald Reagan in 1980, a cadre of Left-wing activists got together to figure out how to use investment as a means of advancing the rest of the Left’s agenda.
In “Biz-War and the Out of Power Elite,&#8221; author Jarol B. Manheim writes, “22 young and wealthy individuals who shared a common concern about the conservative turn the country had taken … hit upon the idea to pool their [financial] resources and direct them at what they saw as socially and politically desirable programs&#8230;” aimed at corporations. Though it took time, this program succeeded beyond their wildest dreams. Meanwhile, the Right was largely asleep.
While Nobel laureate Milton Friedman prominently pushed back against SRI investing in his 1970 New York Times magazine article entitled, “The Social Responsibility of Business Is to Increase Its Profits,” there was no organized follow-up until 2005. At that point, a friend of mine and I launched a publicly traded mutual fund called the Free Enterprise Action Fund to push back against the success the Left was having in foisting its CSR agenda on publicly-traded companies.
While our fund had <a href="https://www.wsj.com/articles/SB114411692660116163" target="_blank" rel="noopener">success</a>, we didn’t have the resources to survive the catastrophic market conditions of the housing bubble collapse. The deep-pocketed Left, though, easily survived the tough market conditions and emerged on the other side with near total control of the finance industry with its rebranded and steroidal ESG investing strategy. Virtually all large banks and Wall Street firms joined one or more of the Net Zero Bank Alliance, Net Zero Asset Managers, Net Zero Insurance Alliance, Glasgow Financial Alliance for Net Zero (GFANZ), Climate Act 100+ and other similar groups.
But this success bred arrogance on the Left and awoke conservatives to a degree that the Free Enterprise Action Fund could only have dreamed about in the 2000s. By 2020, the ESG empire and its anti-fossil fuel, anti-conservative, DEI and other “woke” policies and practices had sufficiently alarmed red state politicians into pushback. State investigations, hearings and laws reining in ubiquitous ESG actors and activities popped up. Congress got involved. Then, ESG investing began to reveal itself as <a href="https://x.com/JunkScience/status/1866505394635645146" target="_blank" rel="noopener">a poor investment strategy.</a>
<h3><a href="https://get.dailywire.com/subscribe/plus/" target="_blank" rel="noopener">JOIN THE MOVEMENT IN &#8217;25 WITH 25% OFF DAILYWIRE+ ANNUAL MEMBERSHIPS WITH CODE DW25</a></h3>
Perhaps most importantly, though, it had become increasingly clear that the ESG actors were illegally colluding as a cartel, possibly running afoul of anti-trust laws. While the ESG actors could possibly organize themselves into pushback against red states, the post-2024-election prospect of facing a federal government entirely controlled by Republicans would be too daunting. So, amid the holiday distractions, Bank of America, Citigroup, Morgan Stanley, Goldman Sachs and JPMorgan Chase all dropped out of the Net Zero Banking Alliance.
But those concerned about ESG would be wise not to declare victory and move on. The Left has acquired immense influence and power over the financial industry and has no intention of surrendering it. ESG may be dead as brand, but not as a strategy. The Left has been invested in SRI/CSR/ESG for a long time and for the long-term. While they will likely head underground for a few years, they will certainly be plotting a comeback that may start as soon as the 2026 elections.
* * *
Steve Milloy is a senior legal fellow with the Energy and Environment Legal Institute.
The views expressed in this piece are those of the author and do not necessarily represent those of The Daily Wire.

NYSE Opens For Last Day Of Trading In 2024

As Banks Flee ESG, Conservatives Should Remain Vigilant

Bank of America

Citigroup

finance

Goldman Sachs

Social Justice

Debanking — when a bank decides they do not want you as a customer — has become a hot topic amid a flurry of accusations from people and companies who say they were kicked out of their banks over their politics.
The apparent targets of debanking tend to be prominent people on the Right and cryptocurrency companies, which tend to lean right and are under scrutiny from regulators. Former First Lady Melania Trump said in her recently published memoir that both she and her son Barron were refused bank accounts after January 6.
“I was shocked and dismayed to learn that my long-time bank decided to terminate my account and deny my son the opportunity to open a new one,” Trump <a href="https://nypost.com/2024/10/09/us-news/barron-trump-was-denied-bank-account-due-to-cancel-mob-mom-melania-claims/" target="_blank" rel="noopener">wrote</a>.
She blamed the “venom of cancel culture” and said she had “serious concerns about civil rights violations.”
<blockquote class="twitter-tweet" data-width="500" data-dnt="true">
Your bank account will be closed if you don’t follow orders. 
Don’t believe me? 
WATCH👇 <a href="https://t.co/4PB9lhfQuv">pic.twitter.com/4PB9lhfQuv</a>
&mdash; Bitcoin Archive (@BTC_Archive) <a href="https://twitter.com/BTC_Archive/status/1861854554049909082?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">November 27, 2024</a></blockquote>
<script async src="https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js" charset="utf-8"></script>
Last month, conservative author Dinesh D&#8217;Souza claimed he was kicked out of Chase Bank without explanation.
&#8220;Walked in one day to discover they had closed my account,&#8221; D&#8217;Souza <a href="https://x.com/DineshDSouza/status/1862611334002544987" target="_blank" rel="noopener">posted</a> on X. &#8220;The local branch couldn’t understand it since I was a good and known customer. They said the order came from the top with no explanation given or even available!&#8221;
When a person or company is debanked, they are blocked from having a bank account at one or multiple banks, often with little explanation. Sometimes they are blocked from other financial services, such as making credit card transactions or using payroll platforms. If they cannot find another bank, they may be forced to rely on alternatives, like check cashing services with high fees and interest.
<a href="https://get.dailywire.com/">50% OFF ALL DAILY WIRE ANNUAL MEMBERSHIPS FOR A LIMITED TIME!</a>
Meanwhile, debanking hurts their reputation.
Critics <a href="https://medium.com/@nic__carter/marc-andreessen-and-the-cfpb-debunking-the-debanking-debunkers-33e934442647" target="_blank" rel="noopener">note</a> that debanking resembles Big Tech&#8217;s censorship at the behest of the government <a href="https://www.dailywire.com/news/facebook-docs-reveal-fbi-agent-made-completely-false-congressional-statements-involving-hunter-biden-laptop-jordan-says" target="_blank" rel="noopener">during</a> recent presidential elections.
Marc Andreessen, the tech billionaire founder of venture capital firm Andreessen Horowitz, which invests in dozens of crypto companies, <a href="https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ye8MOfxD5nU" target="_blank" rel="noopener">spoke</a> in depth about debanking last month on Joe Rogan&#8217;s podcast. Andreessen said the Biden administration has used debanking to target its political opponents and crypto company founders.
&#8220;We&#8217;ve had like 30 founders debanked in the last four years,&#8221; he told Rogan. &#8220;It&#8217;s been a big recurring pattern. This is one of the reasons why we ended up supporting Trump. We just can&#8217;t live in this world. We can&#8217;t live in a world where somebody starts a company that&#8217;s a completely legal thing and then they literally get sanctioned and embargoed by the United States government.&#8221;
The Biden administration&#8217;s targeting is an expansion of the Obama administration&#8217;s debanking of certain legal businesses, including gambling, marijuana, prostitution, and gun shops, <a href="https://www.cei.org/wp-content/uploads/2014/08/Iain-Murray-Operation-Choke-Point.pdf" target="_blank" rel="noopener">under</a> a program called Operation Choke Point, Andreessen said.
&#8220;This administration extended that concept to apply it to tech founders, crypto founders, and just generally political opponents. So that&#8217;s been super pernicious,&#8221; Andreessen said.
Andreessen said that while the First Amendment protects speech, there is no constitutional amendment saying the government cannot debank you, so the government pressures private banks to do so. The banks comply because they rely on the government to exist, he <a href="https://x.com/pmarca/status/1862683729292083551" target="_blank" rel="noopener">said</a>.
&#8220;The government gets to say, &#8216;we didn&#8217;t do it,'&#8221; he said, and this system &#8220;lets bureaucrats do to American citizens the same thing we do to Iran, just kick you out of the financial system.&#8221;
&#8220;It&#8217;s just raw administrative power,&#8221; Andreessen said.
After Andreessen&#8217;s interview, a string of crypto founders <a href="https://x.com/davidmarcus/status/1862654506774810641" target="_blank" rel="noopener">spoke</a> out <a href="https://x.com/sidkal/status/1862117529667199033" target="_blank" rel="noopener">about</a> their experiences being debanked.
Elon Musk, who himself recently <a href="https://www.dailywire.com/news/shamelessly-breaking-the-law-elon-musk-blasts-california-officials-denying-spacex-launches" target="_blank" rel="noopener">faced</a> political discrimination against his SpaceX rocket launches by a California regulator, also spoke out and <a href="https://x.com/elonmusk/status/1862640443789357487" target="_blank" rel="noopener">called</a> for it to be a federal crime to debank political enemies. Musk <a href="https://x.com/elonmusk/status/1862633099906937251" target="_blank" rel="noopener">said</a> debanking shows &#8220;just how evil the government has been.&#8221;
As far as which regulators are involved, critics mainly point the finger at the Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation, but they also <a href="https://a16zcrypto.com/posts/article/debanking-explained/" target="_blank" rel="noopener">take</a> aim at the Department of Justice, the Office of the Comptroller of the Currency, the Federal Reserve Board, and the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau.
Earlier this month, the crypto industry finally uncovered what it says is hard proof that federal regulators have been targeting them.
Documents obtained by the crypto platform Coinbase during a court fight <a href="https://www.coindesk.com/policy/2024/12/05/u-s-regulator-told-banks-to-lay-off-crypto-letters-obtained-by-coinbase-reveal" target="_blank" rel="noopener">showed</a> that in 2022, crypto companies saw their banking activity blocked at a large number of banks by the Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation.
&#8220;We respectfully ask that you pause all crypto asset-related activity,&#8221; the banking regulator wrote to banks in one message.
Advocates for cracking down on crypto <a href="https://a16zcrypto.com/posts/article/debanking-explained/" target="_blank" rel="noopener">say</a> they aim to prevent risky businesses from doing business.
Last year, the White House cited crypto as it <a href="https://www.whitehouse.gov/nec/briefing-room/2023/01/27/the-administrations-roadmap-to-mitigate-cryptocurrencies-risks/" target="_blank" rel="noopener">encouraged</a> banks to separate “risky digital assets from the banking system.” This is also a common cry <a href="https://x.com/SenWarren/status/1773805978762322376" target="_blank" rel="noopener">from</a> Sen. Elizabeth Warren, (D-MA) who received backlash for <a href="https://news.bitcoin.com/elizabeth-warren-explains-her-anti-crypto-army-stance-waves-of-democrats-oppose-her-bitcoin-criticism/" target="_blank" rel="noopener">vowing</a> to mobilize an &#8220;anti-crypto army.&#8221;
However, the crypto world is optimistic about the next few years.
President-elect Donald Trump has promised to make the United States the “crypto capital of the planet,” and he acknowledged the ire around debanking during his campaign.
“They target your banks. They choke off your financial services,” he told a Bitcoin conference in Nashville in July.
Earlier this month, Trump appointed venture capitalist David Sacks the White House AI and Crypto Czar. Sacks previously <a href="https://www.thefp.com/p/how-big-tech-is-strangling-your-freedom" target="_blank" rel="noopener">criticized</a> PayPal, where he was product manager, for its 2017 <a href="https://www.cbsnews.com/news/paypal-suspends-dozens-of-racist-groups-sites-altright-com/" target="_blank" rel="noopener">ban</a> on what it deemed right-wing extremists.
Conservatives have expressed other concerns about banks allegedly targeting them as well.
Although not debanking exactly, after the January 6 Capitol riot, the Financial Crimes Enforcement Network instructed banks to comb through customer transactions for “suspicious charges,” which included words like “MAGA” and “Trump” as well as guns and religious texts.
Under a new Trump administration, conservatives hope regulators will be more reluctant to target them through the banking system, and they may be in luck.
Trump <a href="https://www.politico.com/newsletters/morning-money/2024/07/03/the-looming-battle-over-debanking-00166402" target="_blank" rel="noopener">promised</a> at a rally this year that once elected he will “place strong protections to stop banks and regulators from trying to debank you from your political beliefs.”

Hand Putting Card into ATM

What Is Debanking And Why Are People Talking About It?

Cryptocurrency

Deep State

Speaking with podcast host Joe Rogan, Silicon Valley billionaire venture capitalist Marc Andreessen accused the Democrats and the Biden administration of weaponizing executive agencies to pressure financial institutions to “debank” companies politically opposed to them.
“Debanking” a person or business means being kicked out of the financial system.
“The First Amendment says the government cannot censor American citizens,” Andreessen began. “And so, what they do is if you want to censor American citizens in the government, if you&#8217;re smart, you don&#8217;t do that. What you do is you fund an outside organization and then you have them do it.”
“We have this thing called the Consumer Finance Protection Bureau, CFPB, which was the – it&#8217;s sort of Elizabeth Warren&#8217;s personal agency that she gets to control,” he continued. “And it&#8217;s an independent agency that just gets to run and do whatever it wants, right? And if you read the Constitution, like, there is no such thing as an independent agency. And yet there it is.”
<a href="https://get.dailywire.com/gift-guide/" target="_blank" rel="noopener">CHECK OUT THE DAILY WIRE HOLIDAY GIFT GUIDE</a>
“Basically, it terrorizes financial institutions,” he explained. “Prevent new competition, new startups that want to compete with the big banks &#8230; just by terrorizing anybody who tries to do anything new in financial services.”
When Rogan asked for an example, Andressen answered:
<blockquote>
Debanking. This is where a lot of the debanking comes from, is these agencies. So, debanking is when you as either a person or your company are literally kicked out of the banking system. &#8230; My partner, Ben’s father, has been debanked. &#8230; for having the wrong politics. For saying, “unacceptable things” under current banking regulations.”
</blockquote>
“Under current banking regulations, after all the reforms of the last 20 years, there’s now a category called a ‘politically exposed person,&#8217;” he said. “PEP. And if you are a PEP, you are required by financial regulators to kick them out of your bank. You’re not allowed to have them. “
“But what if you&#8217;re politically on the Left?” Rogan asked.
“That&#8217;s fine,” Andreesen replied.
“So, no one on the Left gets debanked?” Rogan asked incredulously.
“I haven&#8217;t heard of a single instance of anyone on the Left getting debanked,” Andreessen answered. “You get kicked out of your bank account. You get kicked out of the — you can&#8217;t do credit card transactions.”
“This is where the government and the companies get intertwined,” he continued. “And back to your fascism point, which is there&#8217;s a constitutional amendment that says the government can&#8217;t restrict your speech, but there&#8217;s no constitutional amendment that says the government can&#8217;t debank you, right? And so, if they can&#8217;t do the one thing, they do the other thing. And then they don&#8217;t have to debank you. They just have to put pressure on the private company banks to do it. And then the private company banks do it because they&#8217;re expected to. But the government gets to say, &#8216;We didn&#8217;t do it. It was the private company that did it.’”
“It&#8217;s this sleight of hand that happens &#8230; it&#8217;s a privatized sanctions regime that lets bureaucrats do to American citizens the same thing that we do to Iran, just kick you out of the financial system,” he explained. “And so, this has been happening to all the crypto entrepreneurs in the last four years. This has been happening to a lot of the fintech entrepreneurs, anybody trying to start any kind of new banking service because they&#8217;re trying to protect the big banks.”
“And then this has been happening, by the way, also in legal fields of economic activity that they don&#8217;t like,” he recalled. “And so, a lot of this started about 15 years ago with this thing called Operation Truck Point, where they decided, as marijuana started to become legal, as prostitution started to become legal, and then guns, which there&#8217;s always a fight about, under the Obama administration, they started to debank legal marijuana businesses, escort businesses, and then gun shops, just like your gun manufacturers. And just like you&#8217;re done, you&#8217;re out of the banking system. And so, if you&#8217;re running a medical marijuana dispensary in 2012, guess what? You&#8217;re doing your business all in cash because you literally can&#8217;t get a bank account. You can&#8217;t get a Visa terminal. You can&#8217;t process transactions. You can&#8217;t do payroll. You can&#8217;t do direct deposit. You can&#8217;t get insurance. You&#8217;ve been sanctioned, right? None of that stuff is available.”
He turned to the Biden-Harris administration. “And then this administration extended that concept to apply it to tech founders, crypto founders, and then just generally political opponents. &#8230; Operation Truck Point 1.0 was 15 years ago against the pot and the guns. Truck Point 2.0 is primarily against their political enemies and then to their disfavored tech startups. And it&#8217;s hit the tech world. We’ve had like 30 founders debanked in the last four years. This is one of the reasons why we ended up supporting Trump. It’s like we just can’t live in this world.”
“We can&#8217;t live in a world where somebody starts a company that&#8217;s a completely legal thing and then they literally like get sanctioned, right, and embargoed by the United States government through a completely unaccountable – by the way, no due process,” he said. “None of this is written down. There&#8217;s no rules. There&#8217;s no court. There&#8217;s no decision process. There&#8217;s no appeal. Who do you appeal to, right? Like who do you go to to get your bank account back, right? And then there&#8217;s also the civil asset forfeiture side of it &#8230; that happens to people in a lot of places now who get arrested and all of a sudden the state takes their money. &#8230; There will be some investigation into safe deposit boxes, and the next thing you know, the feds have seized all the contents of the safe deposit boxes, and that stuff never gets returned.”
“When Trump says the ‘deep state,’ the way we would describe it is, it&#8217;s administrative power. It&#8217;s political power being administered not through legislation. So there&#8217;s no defined law that covers this. It&#8217;s not through regulation. There&#8217;s nothing you can do– you can&#8217;t go see a regulator to fix this,” he said. “It&#8217;s not through any kind of court judgment. It&#8217;s just raw power. It&#8217;s just raw administrative power. It&#8217;s the government or politicians just deciding that things are going to be a certain way and then they just apply pressure until they get it.”
<iframe loading="lazy" title="YouTube video player" src="https://www.youtube.com/embed/ye8MOfxD5nU?si=wEjdhK3e4GGyPws1" width="560" height="315" frameborder="0" allowfullscreen="allowfullscreen"></iframe>

Key Speakers At The TechCrunch Disrupt SF 2016 Summit

Billionaire Tech Investor Says Biden Admin Pressured Financial Institutions To ‘Debank’ Opponents

Biden-Harris administration

Executive

General

Politics

Silicon Valley

There is no such thing as a free nation where the police and military are allowed to keep and bear arms and citizens are not. Our Founding Fathers understood this and enshrined the basic right to self-defense in the U.S. Constitution. The Second Amendment guarantees the absolute ability to live in peace without fear.
The U.S. Supreme Court has, time and again, reaffirmed that right. Yet elected Democrats and other stakeholders continue their all-out assault on this freedom with the ultimate goal of denying law-abiding Americans the opportunity to purchase and carry guns.
That’s why, in 2022, I became concerned when Visa and Mastercard <a href="https://www.dailywire.com/news/visa-to-categorize-sales-at-gun-stores-in-win-for-gun-control-advocates" target="_blank" rel="noopener">announced</a> they would separately categorize and track purchases for guns and ammunition. This move followed the International Organization for Standardization (ISO), an international standards organization based out of Europe, approving an application for a firearm-specific Merchant Category Code (MCC). This move would set a dangerous precedent targeting legal gun owners, the <a href="https://www.pewresearch.org/short-reads/2023/09/13/key-facts-about-americans-and-guns/" target="_blank" rel="noopener">vast majority</a> of whom are Republicans or independents who lean Right.
A specific MCC for gun purchases would subject Americans attempting to exercise their constitutional rights to unnecessary and unethical surveillance. If rolled out, a national gun registry would be closer than ever, even though it is <a href="https://www.nraila.org/get-the-facts/registration-licensing/" target="_blank" rel="noopener">prohibited</a> by federal law. The Left, however, does not care about the rule of law and they certainly aren’t hiding their desire to take away your freedoms. An elected Democrat recently <a href="https://vinnews.com/2024/07/09/rep-bonnie-watson-coleman-advocates-for-national-gun-registry-during-atf-debate/" target="_blank" rel="noopener">called</a> a federal gun registry a “wonderful idea.”
A gun-specific MCC is a clear threat to the privacy and Second Amendment rights of all Americans. Not only does it present an easy opportunity for liberal institutions to de-bank firearms sellers, which is abruptly closing financial accounts for religious and political reasons, but it could also discourage Americans from exercising their Constitutionally-protected rights. Importantly, the MCC would do absolutely nothing to improve public safety.
The <a href="https://www.dailywire.com/news/more-than-100-house-republicans-demand-answers-from-credit-card-giants-categorizing-sales-at-gun-stores" target="_blank" rel="noopener">application</a> for a gun- and ammo-specific MCC came from Amalgamated Bank in 2022, a <a href="https://amalgamatedbank.com/who-we-are" target="_blank" rel="noopener">blatantly Left-wing</a> company that dubs itself America’s “socially responsible bank” and proudly says deposited money supports “sustainable organizations, progressive causes, and social justice.” Upon further examination, it’s clear the organization is closely connected to the Democrat Party. The New York Times in 2015 even <a href="https://nypost.com/2023/02/07/how-amalgamated-bank-became-the-the-lefts-private-banker/" target="_blank" rel="noopener">called</a> it “the left’s private banker.”
Clients of the union-owned bank <a href="https://amalgamatedbank.com/political-organizations" target="_blank" rel="noopener">include</a> President Joe Biden, Elizabeth Warren and Nancy Pelosi. Additional past and present clients <a href="https://amalgamatedbank.com/clients" target="_blank" rel="noopener">include</a> the Democratic Governors Association, the Biden Foundation, the Democratic National Committee, and Ready for Hillary 2016. Not exactly ardent defenders of the Second Amendment.
Amalgamated has also explicitly <a href="https://amalgamatedbank.com/anti-violence-and-gun-safety" target="_blank" rel="noopener">called for</a> unconstitutional red-flag laws and says it discriminates against gun, nuclear weapon and ammunition manufacturers and distributors. Radical private organizations like this and the ISO should be nowhere near our Second Amendment.
At the time of the approval, Amalgamated Chief Executive Priscilla Sims Brown <a href="https://www.cnn.com/2022/09/10/business/gun-stores-merchant-code-visa-american-express-mastercard/index.html" target="_blank" rel="noopener">said</a> the move “answers the call of millions of Americans who want safety from gun violence.” Does this call supersede the constitutional right to keep and bear arms? As a state representative serving the people of Northwest Tennessee, I can tell you my constituents would say that coastal elites and liberal corporations better stay far away from their guns and finances.
That’s why I set out to ensure this gun tracking scheme would never happen in the Volunteer State. This year, I sponsored the Second Amendment Financial Privacy Act, which was passed by the General Assembly and went into effect July 1. This new law will prohibit financial institutions from requiring retailers to use a specific MCC for firearms sellers in Tennessee.
Law-abiding Americans deserve to make these purchases without fear of liberal corporations and an overbearing federal government coordinating to spy on them. I was proud to provide that peace of mind to Tennesseans with the passage of this new law.
Just before the new law took effect, Tennessee Attorney General Jonathan Skrmetti warned that Visa, Mastercard and American Express were potentially gearing up to ignore it.
“Specifically, I am concerned that your compliance efforts are not sufficient and will allow you and other financial institutions to continue to utilize impermissible codes in violation of Tennessee law,” he <a href="https://www.tn.gov/content/dam/tn/attorneygeneral/documents/pr/2024/pr24-53-letter.pdf" target="_blank" rel="noopener">said</a> in a June letter to the chief executives of each company.
No credit card company should be able to cancel the votes of millions of Tennesseans by disobeying our policies.
We’ve already seen the Orwellian-like behavior from the Biden Administration and the private companies all too willing to hand over sensitive information. Earlier this year, the House Judiciary Committee <a href="https://judiciary.house.gov/media/in-the-news/alarming-surveillance-feds-asked-banks-search-private-transactions-terms-maga" target="_blank" rel="noopener">revealed</a> federal investigators had asked financial institutions to search customer transactions for various MCCs, stores and phrases, including Cabela’s, Bass Pro Shops, Dicks Sporting Goods, and MAGA.
The goal? Rooting out alleged “extremism” following the events at the U.S. Capitol on Jan. 6, 2021.
If the federal government and private companies are already using banking information to target conservatives, ask yourself why they might want a separate MCC for firearms and ammunition sellers. It’s clear that in attempting to force these codes on Americans, they are also attempting to reshape what the Second Amendment means in our country.
Americans are tired of these people and groups pushing an agenda contrary to our founding ideals. I’m proud Tennessee has taken a stand against the ever-increasing leftist corporate-government alliance meant to intimidate and silence Christians and conservatives. It’s time every state stands with us.
* * *
Rusty Grills represents District 77 in the Tennessee House of Representatives. He is chair of the Agriculture and Natural Resources Subcommittee.
The views expressed in this piece are those of the author and do not necessarily represent those of The Daily Wire.

Biden Administration Cracks Down On Gun Dealers For Violations

Financial Surveillance: Why We Have To Prevent Liberal Organizations From Subverting The Second Amendment

Gun Rights

Gun Sales

Guns

Readers Pass

Second Amendment

Tennessee

<a href="https://www.dailywire.com/topic/housing" target="_blank" rel="noopener">Home foreclosures</a> are soaring across the nation, especially in certain states, new data shows.
Tens of thousands of houses were facing foreclosure as of last month, according to a <a href="https://www.attomdata.com/news/market-trends/foreclosures/u-s-foreclosure-activity-continues-to-see-an-annual-increase/" target="_blank" rel="noopener">report</a> from real estate data provider ATTOM.
A total of 32,938 properties across the country had foreclosure filings in February, up 8% over a year ago, although that number was down 1% from January, the report found.
Foreclosure filings can consist of default notices, scheduled auctions, or bank repossessions.
Across the country, there was one foreclosure filing for every 4,279 housing units last month.
Some states fared better than others. South Carolina had the highest foreclosure rate with one in every 2,248 housing units. Delaware was next, followed by Florida, Ohio, and Connecticut.
“The annual uptick in U.S. foreclosure activity hints at shifting dynamics within the housing market,” said Rob Barber, CEO at ATTOM.
<a href="https://onelink.to/dwapp" target="_blank" rel="noopener noreferrer" aria-describedby="sk-tooltip-9096" data-saferedirecturl="https://www.google.com/url?q=https://onelink.to/dwapp&amp;source=gmail&amp;ust=1700760801843000&amp;usg=AOvVaw2PQrVSrJfhxNb4LcARqniG">CLICK HERE TO GET THE DAILYWIRE+ APP</a>
“These trends could signify evolving financial landscapes for homeowners, prompting adjustments in market strategies and lending practices,” Barber said.
Columbia, South Carolina, was the major metropolitan area with the highest foreclosure rate.
Orlando had the highest foreclosure rate for cities with a population greater than a million, followed by Cleveland, Riverside, Philadelphia, and Miami.
Overall, lenders started the foreclosure process for 22,575 properties in February, up 4% from January and 11% from a year ago.
Florida saw the most foreclosure starts with more than 2,700, followed by California, Texas, New York, and Ohio.
The cities that saw the most foreclosure starts were New York City, Houston, Los Angeles, Chicago, and Miami.
Completed foreclosures also rose in several states.
South Carolina again topped the list with completed foreclosures up 51% compared to a year ago. Missouri was next with completed foreclosures up 50%, then Pennsylvania at 46%. Texas saw a 7% jump, and Indiana saw a nearly 1% increase over last year.
Out of major metropolitan areas, Chicago saw the most completed foreclosures, a total of 207. Philadelphia, New York City, Pittsburgh, and Detroit also had high rates of completed foreclosures.
However, completed foreclosures were down from a year ago in several states. In Georgia, they were down 52%, in New York 41%, North Carolina 34%, New Jersey 28%, and Maryland 26%.
Despite foreclosure rates rising, they are still well below the foreclosure rates of the 2008 financial crisis.
However, the new data come as concerns mount about soaring house prices, rents, and mortgage rates, which are driving home ownership out of reach for more and more families.
Prices for everyday items such as groceries also remain high due to spiking inflation over the last several years, compounding the troubles for families who may be struggling to pay their rent or mortgage.

SLUG: ME-RINGOFFIRE DATE: 3/06/2008 PHOTOGRAPHER: Tracy A. W

Home Foreclosures Soaring, Especially In These States, Report Shows

Economy

Florida

Housing

Ohio

South Carolina

U.S.

A new <a href="https://judiciary.house.gov/sites/evo-subsites/republicans-judiciary.house.gov/files/evo-media-document/How-Federal-Law-Enforcement-Commandeered-Financial-Institutions-to-Spy.pdf" target="_blank" rel="noopener">report</a> from the Select Subcommittee on the Weaponization of the Federal Government finds that federal law enforcement agencies asked major banks to monitor customers who oppose gun control and support strong border policies. The agencies equated these conservative views with potential “violent extremism.”
The investigation into the federal government’s surveillance of Americans’ financial activities <a href="https://judiciary.house.gov/media/in-the-news/house-gop-investigating-bank-america-voluntarily-giving-fbi-list-customers" target="_blank" rel="noopener">began</a> in May 2023, after House Republicans discovered that Bank of America had voluntarily turned customer data over to the feds in connection with the January 6, 2021 Capitol protests.
At that time, FBI whistleblowers alleged that BofA had given the agency records from a “huge list” of customers who were in Washington D.C. on or around that date or who used a debit or credit card to purchase a firearm around that time. The whistleblowers claimed these actions were taken was without warrants, probable cause, or any of the constitutional protections that would be typically required.
After a year-long investigation, the committee found that the FBI worked with not only BofA, but many other financial institutions like Barclays, U.S. Bank, Charles Schwab, HSBC, and PayPal who voluntarily shared private customer banking records “with federal law enforcement outside of normal legal process.” The feds were particularly interested in purchases from sporting goods stores like Cabela’s and Bass Pro Shops that sell firearms. The investigation also found that the FBI and other agencies flagged “Trump,” “MAGA,” “Bible” and other right-coded terms for banks to search in the transactions of customers who were not suspected of committing any crime. In one guidance, the agency said buying &#8220;religious texts&#8221; could be an indication of &#8220;extremism.&#8221;
Perhaps the most explosive revelation centers on an intelligence document titled “Domestic Violent Extremists Likely Emboldened in Aftermath of Capitol Breach” that the FBI, the Department of Homeland Security, and the National Counterterrorism Center shared with about 650 private financial institutions. In it, the agencies identify certain viewpoints they say could correspond with being a violent extremist. It includes opposition to gun control legislation, support for measures to control the border and crack down on illegal immigration, opposition to COVID-19 lockdowns and vaccine mandates, and a belief in the existence of a deep state. The agencies asked the financial institutions to search customer transaction records for evidence of these beliefs and share that data with them. They also created a secret portal for a select group of major banking institutions that allowed for ongoing backchannel information sharing.
<h4><a href="https://www.dailywire.com/podcasts/morning-wire/state-of-the-union-national-guard-in-ny-subway-3-8-24" target="_blank" rel="noopener">LISTEN: Hear the full report from the House Weaponization Hearing on Morning Wire</a></h4>
In essence, the subcommittee says that the FBI and other federal law enforcement agencies have weaponized financial institutions against conservatives. As the House report put it, “support for typical conservative policies…may result in an individual being labeled by the FBI as [domestic violence extremist] “Likely to Pose [an] Increasing Threat at Lawful Protests, Rallies, [and] Demonstrations.”
During a March 7 hearing related to these findings, subcommittee chair Jim Jordan (R-OH) said the message federal authorities are sending is “if you’ve got the wrong political beliefs, you’re potentially a domestic violent extremist.”
“We&#8217;ve seen the censorship, now we see what&#8217;s happening with big banks and big government relative to your financial data,” Jordan said. “Again, all this being done with no process, no warrant, no notification to the customer that the banks are actually supposed to serve. Big government&#8217;s not supposed to use big tech to censor Americans, and big government shouldn&#8217;t be working with big banks to target Americans for behavior that is legal and constitutional.”
In response to these revelations, Congresswoman Elise Stefanik (R-N.Y.) has introduced the “Protecting Privacy in Purchases Act.” The bill would ban banks and credit card companies from using a code to track gun purchases, something she says would create a “backdoor gun registry.”
However, the bill would not address the broader terms the FBI and other agencies were asking banks to search, and it is not yet clear how or if Republicans will respond to those issues legislatively.
Brian Knight, Senior Research Fellow at the Mercatus Center at George Mason University, said during the hearing the Weaponization Committee should be strategizing about how to protect Americans from unconstitutional financial data collecting at the bank-level. “I think that efforts to efforts to restrict the collection of data at the bank level are the best option we have currently,” he testified. “Because under current law, once the bank has that data, government has that data. So preventing the collection at the bank level is your first best option.”
Jordan Peterson, who is a Daily Wire personality, also testified at the March 7 hearing, warning that the practices the FBI and other federal agencies are currently involved in can quickly lead to a Chinese-style social credit system, where people with disfavored views find it very difficult to carry out financial transactions.
“This allows you purposefully to be shut out of all activities that can be virtualized,” he warned. “And in a rapidly virtualizing world, this increasingly means all activities. Driving, shopping, working, eating, finding shelter. Even fraternizing with friends and family. As merely being in the presence of someone with a low social credit score means that your own score can be lowered.”
He added that this is “precisely the payment system most desired by the most tyrannical.”
* * *
Listen to the full report on <a href="https://www.dailywire.com/podcasts/morning-wire/state-of-the-union-national-guard-in-ny-subway-3-8-24">Morning Wire</a>.

House Judiciary Holds Hearing Examining The Weaponization Of The Federal Government

Feds Equate Typical Conservative Views With ‘Violent Extremism’ In Financial Surveillance, House Weaponization Committee Finds

Feds Equate Typical Conservative Views With 'Violent Extremism' In Financial Surveillance, House Weaponization Committee Finds

Jim Jordan

PayPal

Surveillance

Weaponization

A proposed <a href="https://www.dailywire.com/topic/tennessee" target="_blank" rel="noopener">Tennessee</a> bill that would prevent banks from discriminating against people based on their political or religious views advanced in the state House on Tuesday amid national concerns that financial institutions are targeting conservatives. 
The Republican-backed bill advanced in the House’s Subcommittee on Banking and Consumer Affairs by a 5-1 vote along partisan lines. 
“The trend of freezing bank accounts based on religious or political beliefs is deeply worrying to me,” Rep. Jason Zachary (R-Knoxville), the bill’s sponsor, said. “We will put a stop to this dangerous practice in Tennessee because having to self-police speech for fear of being denied financial services is not representative of our state’s values. Tennessee Republicans will continue protecting the right of citizens to freely express their convictions.”
The proposal, <a href="https://wapp.capitol.tn.gov/apps/BillInfo/Default.aspx?BillNumber=HB2100" target="_blank" rel="noopener">HB2100</a>, would prohibit financial institutions from denying or canceling services to people based on a person’s speech, opinions, and affiliations, as well as a person’s religious beliefs, exercises, and affiliations. It would create an amendment to Tennessee’s consumer protection laws and would not impact quantitative factors banks already take into account. A previous version of the proposal included insurance companies, but the bill was amended to remove those provisions. 
Zachary <a href="https://tnga.granicus.com/player/clip/29797?view_id=703&amp;redirect=true" target="_blank" rel="noopener">said</a> before the subcommittee that the state attorney general’s office was currently dealing with cases of customers who have had their banking restricted in the state. 
“This legislation is extremely important to the well-being of Tennesseans and this puts this under the Consumer Protection Act and ensures that our Tennesseans are not discriminated against,” he said. “And if the banks aren’t doing this, which we’ve heard over and over again, ‘we’re not doing this,’ then they’re not going to have any problem with the bill.”
On Tuesday, Chris Lee of the National Shooting Sports Foundation and FirstBank CEO Chris Holmes gave additional testimony. 
Lee testified in support of the bill, pointing to moves by some financial institutions to target the firearm industry. Lee pointed to gun <a href="https://www.citigroup.com/global/news/perspective/2018/announcing-our-us-commercial-firearms-policy" target="_blank" rel="noopener">policies</a> rolled out by Citigroup in 2018 that refused to work with partners who sold guns to people under the age of 21 or sold high-capacity magazines and bump stocks. Citigroup attempted to get other financial institutions to join but failed to rally any additional support. 
<a href="https://onelink.to/dwapp" target="_blank" rel="noopener noreferrer" aria-describedby="sk-tooltip-9096" data-saferedirecturl="https://www.google.com/url?q=https://onelink.to/dwapp&amp;source=gmail&amp;ust=1709731418042000&amp;usg=AOvVaw3Rpfa0a-gECGBBfyE_tF46">CLICK HERE TO GET THE DAILYWIRE+ APP</a>
Holmes, who opposes the bill, said it would lead to burdensome regulations and could mean that banks would be required to work with businesses involved in pornography or marijuana. Zachary said that banks could still follow policies about not doing business with such entities and that his bill only applies to banks with $100 billion in assets or more. 
The bill, supported by groups like the Alliance Defending Freedom and the National Committee for Religious Freedom, now moves on to the House Commerce Committee.
The proposal comes as congressional lawmakers look into whether federal law enforcement pressured financial institutions to help them snoop on the financial transactions of supporters of former President Donald Trump and people who had visited outdoor stores like Cabela’s and Bass Pro Shops.
RELATED: <a href="https://www.dailywire.com/news/religious-liberty-advocates-warn-tennessee-lawmakers-about-dangers-of-politically-motivated-de-banking" target="_blank" rel="noopener">Religious Liberty Advocates Warn Tennessee Lawmakers About Dangers Of Politically Motivated ‘De-Banking’</a>

Sunset Behind the Tennessee State Capitol in Nashville, Tennessee

Bill To Protect Customers From De-Banking For Religious, Political Reasons Advances In Tennessee

Discrimination

NASHVILLE — <a href="https://www.dailywire.com/topic/tennessee" target="_blank" rel="noopener">Tennessee</a> lawmakers heard on Tuesday the accounts of religious groups that had lost access to their bank accounts for what they suspect to be ideological reasons.
One group, the National Committee for Religious Freedom, had only had a bank account open with JPMorgan Chase for several weeks before the organization’s head and former Kansas Governor Sam Brownback attempted to make a deposit only to be told the account no longer existed. The group, which was created to promote religious liberty in the United States, was informed that they had not returned paperwork before a 60 day deadline even though the account was terminated after around three weeks, according to senior advisor Matt Goddard.
Goddard said that they attempted multiple times to understand why their account had been discontinued only to be given multiple confusing explanations. They soon became suspicious that they had been victims of de-banking, a term used to describe people losing access to financial services for ideological reasons.
The National Committee for Religious Freedom was one of the groups warning about de-banking during testimony on Tuesday in support of a proposed Tennessee bill that would prevent banks from discriminating against people based on their political or religious views. The group testified in front of the Tennessee House of Representatives’ Subcommittee on Banking and Consumer Affairs at the Cordell Hull Building in Nashville.
“We were founded in 2022 by Sam Brownback, a former governor, U.S. senator, and U.S. ambassador,” Goddard said at a press conference after the hearing. “The reason I share that with you is that if he can be de-banked by Chase Bank, anybody can be de-banked by Chase Bank.”
The proposed bill, <a href="https://wapp.capitol.tn.gov/apps/BillInfo/Default.aspx?BillNumber=HB2100" target="_blank" rel="noopener">HB2100</a>, would block financial institutions and insurance companies from denying or canceling services to people based on a person&#8217;s speech, opinions, and affiliations, as well as a person’s religious beliefs, exercises, and affiliations. The bill would create an amendment to Tennessee’s consumer protection laws and would not impact quantitative factors banks already take into account.
Concerns over de-banking have emerged in recent years after the Canadian Prime Minister Justin Trudeau froze the bank accounts of truckers protesting his strident vaccine mandate and revelations that banks were asked to flag transactions of Trump supporters and people shopping at outdoor stores, such as Bass Pro Shop.
Also highlighted in the hearing was the case of the Memphis-based Indigenous Advance Ministries, a Christian nonprofit that helps the impoverished in Uganda. The organization filed a consumer complaint after its account was closed by Bank of America. Emails from Bank of America revealed that it closed the account because it “no longer aligns with the bank’s risk tolerance,” <a href="https://adfmedia.org/press-release/bank-america-boots-charity-serving-impoverished-ugandans-under-vague-risk-tolerance">according</a> to the Alliance Defending Freedom. The sudden closure of Indigenous Advance&#8217;s account came after it had been a customer for roughly eight years with Bank of America and the move greatly impacted its mission, according to the Alliance Defending Freedom.
<a href="https://onelink.to/dwapp">CLICK HERE TO GET THE DAILY WIRE APP</a>
The Tennessee bill, sponsored by Rep. Jason Zachary (R-Knoxville) in the House and Senate Majority Leader Jack Johnson (R-Franklin), would also prohibit banks from keeping a social credit score that factors in things like owning a gun, working in the firearm industry, working in the oil or timber industry, or a person&#8217;s support for immigration laws being enforced.
“The legislation that we presented today is about protecting Tennesseans,” Zachary said. “It’s a consumer protection act to ensure that Tennesseans are not de-banked for non-financial reasons.”
Zachary told The Daily Wire that the insurance component of the legislation was “proactive” and intended to prevent discrimination based on political speech or religious belief.
The bill was opposed by the Tennessee Bankers Association, which said that it is addressing a problem that doesn’t exist. Representatives from the association also said that federal discrimination law would protect consumers already.
The House committee ran out of time to vote on advancing the bill and is expected to vote next week about moving it past committee.
Similar measures to protect consumers from financial discrimination have been proposed this year in Florida and Iowa.

JP Morgan Chase Profits Jump 47 Percent

Religious Liberty Advocates Warn Tennessee Lawmakers About Dangers Of Politically Motivated ‘De-Banking’

Religious Liberty Advocates Warn Tennessee Lawmakers About Dangers Of Politically Motivated 'De-Banking'

Nashville

Religious Freedom

Religious Liberty

Americans are sinking deeper into financial struggles with a whopping $1.1 trillion in credit card debt, and a record number also cannot afford their rent.
Credit card debt jumped by $50 billion in just the last quarter of the year, 4.6% more than the previous quarter, according to data released Tuesday by the Federal Reserve Bank of New York.
Credit card debt first hit a trillion dollars in August.
Missed credit card payments are also rising among all age groups, especially people in their 30s, the data shows.
&#8220;In the case of credit cards, it looks like things have reverted to a level that is worse than pre-pandemic,&#8221; New York Federal Reserve researchers <a href="https://abcnews.go.com/US/americans-credit-card-debt-hits-record-113-trillion/story?id=106990807" target="_blank" rel="noopener">told</a> reporters on a call Tuesday.
Inflation and spiking rents are driving credit card debt.
The total household debt also jumped $212 billion up to $17.5 trillion in the last quarter of the year.
Another factor of debt is rising car prices — used cars and new cars are much more expensive than before the pandemic.
Car loans rose by $12 billion in the last quarter of the year, hitting $1.61 trillion. Delinquencies on those loans also increased.
Meanwhile, more Americans than ever are spending a significant portion of their income on rent.
A record 22.4 million renters, about half the country&#8217;s renters, were spending more than 30% of their income on rent and utilities in 2022, according to a <a href="https://www.jchs.harvard.edu/sites/default/files/reports/files/Harvard_JCHS_Americas_Rental_Housing_2024.pdf" target="_blank" rel="noopener">report</a> released earlier this month by Harvard’s Joint Center for Housing Studies.
The rental market is now cooling, but rent prices are still much higher than pre-pandemic, and wage growth has not kept up.
Median weekly wages grew only 1.7% between 2019 and 2023, government figures <a href="https://home.treasury.gov/news/featured-stories/the-purchasing-power-of-american-households#ftn3" target="_blank" rel="noopener">show</a>.
People earning between $45,000 and just under $75,000 a year saw the most significant increase in newly “cost-burdened” renters, according to the report.
“So you can certainly imagine the kinds of tradeoffs that have to happen,” Whitney Airgood-Obrycki, a senior research associate at the Harvard center, <a href="https://abcnews.go.com/Business/wireStory/record-number-americans-afford-rent-lawmakers-scrambling-107013779#:~:text=The%20latest%20data%20from%20the,income%20on%20rent%20in%202022" target="_blank" rel="noopener">told</a> ABC News.
<a href="https://onelink.to/dwapp" target="_blank" rel="noopener noreferrer" aria-describedby="sk-tooltip-9096" data-saferedirecturl="https://www.google.com/url?q=https://onelink.to/dwapp&amp;source=gmail&amp;ust=1700760801843000&amp;usg=AOvVaw2PQrVSrJfhxNb4LcARqniG">CLICK HERE TO GET THE DAILYWIRE+ APP</a>
“Cost-burden renters are spending less on things like food and health care and retirement. So, there are significant implications for the long-term well-being of these households,” Airgood-Obrycki said.
At the same time, homelessness is also on the rise.
About 653,000 people reported being homeless in January of last year, the Harvard report found.
That’s up about 12% from the same time the previous year in 2022, the largest single-year increase ever recorded, the report says. About 71,000 more people were homeless last year than the year before.
Even more striking, last year’s number was about 48% higher than the homeless population in 2015.

credit card and money, credit card putted on dollars.

Americans Owe Over $1.1 Trillion In Credit Card Debt, Record Number Can’t Afford Rent

Americans Owe Over $1.1 Trillion In Credit Card Debt, Record Number Can't Afford Rent

Business

credit card

Homeless

Homelessness

Saturday Night Live made headlines this weekend for all the wrong reasons. During Weekend Update, a cast member suggested that Donald Trump stumbled and introduced a “new term” to the debate called “de-banking.” What followed was a rather feeble attempt at mocking the former president.
In reality, de-banking is no laughing matter. It means losing essential financial services, like a bank account, payment processing, or even insurance, because of your views. And it is on the rise — so much so that the U.S. Supreme Court is set to hear arguments involving the issue this term.
Funny enough, the case originates in the Empire State (“Live from New York,” anybody?), where the National Rifle Association is challenging New York’s attempt to coerce banks and insurance companies to withdraw services from the group. The NRA alleges that the Department of Financial Services — at the behest of then-Governor Andrew Cuomo — used its vast power to regulate “reputational risk” along with back-channel meetings, public investigations, and threats of fines to punish the group for its Second Amendment advocacy. 
This is not an isolated incident. A string of religious ministries and conservative groups have also been <a href="https://www.viewpointdiversityscore.org/resources/instances-of-viewpoint-based-de-banking" target="_blank" rel="noopener">victimized</a> by de-banking. As Alliance Defending Freedom points out in a friend-of-the-court brief filed in support of the NRA’s position, pro-life group Heartbeat International was recently canceled by its insurance provider over its “anti-abortion” advocacy.
Likewise, Bank of America de-banked Indigenous Advance Ministries, an ADF client that serves impoverished Ugandan widows and orphans. The bank closed Indigenous Advance’s long-standing account as well as the account of a local church that donates to the ministry. The bank claimed it no longer wanted to serve their “business type” and that Indigenous Advance exceeded the “bank’s risk tolerance.”
It did this right before a planned mission trip to Uganda, sending Indigenous Advance scrambling to open new accounts and drastically reducing the funds for the trip. It couldn’t pay its Ugandan ministry partners — who live meal to meal — for several weeks. And it had to temporarily reduce aid to the impoverished people they serve.
Similar instances of de-banking abound. Former Brexit leader Nigel Farage’s high-profile case resulted in the <a href="https://www.reuters.com/business/finance/natwest-board-backs-ceo-alison-rose-over-farage-account-row-2023-07-25/" target="_blank" rel="noopener">ouster</a> of megabank NatWest’s CEO. Serial offender JPMorgan Chase’s <a href="https://www.wsj.com/articles/jpmorgan-targeted-by-republican-states-over-accusations-of-religious-bias-903c8b26?mod=Searchresults_pos1&amp;page=1" target="_blank" rel="noopener">hit list</a> includes the <a href="https://familycouncil.org/?p=25159" target="_blank" rel="noopener">Arkansas Family Council</a>, <a href="https://www.foxbusiness.com/politics/chase-bank-missouri-conservative-group" target="_blank" rel="noopener">Defense of Liberty</a>, and U.S Ambassador Sam Brownback&#8217;s <a href="https://www.newsweek.com/stop-troubling-trend-politically-motivated-debanking-opinion-1787639" target="_blank" rel="noopener">National Committee for Religious Freedom</a>.
<iframe loading="lazy" title="Weekend Update: Trump Ordered to Pay $83 Million, DeSantis Endorses Trump - SNL" width="500" height="281" src="https://www.youtube.com/embed/QLt6xK33mUc?start=133&#038;feature=oembed" frameborder="0" allow="accelerometer; autoplay; clipboard-write; encrypted-media; gyroscope; picture-in-picture; web-share" referrerpolicy="strict-origin-when-cross-origin" allowfullscreen></iframe>
There are many reasons for this phenomenon, but the root cause is vague terms of service. 
“Reputational” and “social” risk policies pervade financial institutions. Customers at all 28 commercial banks scored in Alliance Defending Freedom’s <a href="https://www.viewpointdiversityscore.org/business-index" target="_blank" rel="noopener">index</a> that measures corporate respect for free speech and religious freedom are currently vulnerable to de-banking.
Most alarmingly, 7 of the nation’s 10 largest commercial banks — including the top 3 — have “reputational risk” or “hate speech” policies. These policies’ overly broad and subjective language permit employees to discriminate based on a customer’s viewpoint and then hide their viewpoint-based actions behind opaque standards. They also allow abuse by government regulators.
A positive ruling in the NRA case — which, in a comedic twist that should provide fodder for SNL writers, is being argued by the ACLU — would affirm that the government cannot carry out its censorship schemes by co-opting third parties as censors. That would help. But that does not address the many de-banking decisions that can be laid at the feet of private actors.
The solution to this problem may lie with the states. This state legislative season presents an opportunity for states interested in protecting against politicized de-banking to act. Any such law should focus on the worst actors – the largest banks and payment processors. Thanks to wide-reaching government benefits, such as greater lending power, FDIC insurance rates, subsidies, bailouts, and an anticompetitive chartering system, these institutions dominate their markets over state-level competitors yet are responsible for the worst de-banking incidents.
At a minimum, the law should prohibit denial of services based on religious or political beliefs, give customers the right to ask for a detailed explanation when services are denied, empower the attorney general to enforce the statute, and provide aggrieved customers a private right of action.
No one should have to worry that they could lose their bank account, insurance coverage, or other essential financial services because of their religious or political views. Yet it’s clear that vague financial service policies abused by private and government actors pose a serious threat to everyone’s freedom of speech and religion.
So, an inadvertent thanks to our pals at SNL for bringing up de-banking. It’s about time we talked about it. And it’s about time for the law to require viewpoint neutrality from the biggest banks and payment processors.
* * *
Jeremy Tedesco is senior counsel and senior vice president of Corporate Engagement for <a href="http://www.adflegal.org/?utm_source=wallstreetjournal&amp;utm_medium=oped" target="_blank" rel="noopener">Alliance Defending Freedom</a> (<a href="https://twitter.com/ADFLegal">@ADFLegal</a>).
The views expressed in this piece are those of the author and do not necessarily represent those of the Daily Wire.

Menu