Durbin to keep pushing card bill
This story was originally published on Payments Dive. To receive daily news and insights, subscribe to our free daily Payments Dive newsletter.
Sen. Dick Durbin is retiring, but that doesn't mean he's done with credit card reform efforts.
The Illinois Democrat announced last week that he wouldn't seek re-election next year and his four-decade congressional career will end in January 2027.
Still, he plans to use some of his dwindling days in the Senate to continue a crusade for the Credit Card Competition Act. A spokesperson for his office confirmed that intent by email on Thursday.
That's the piece of legislation that would force bank card issuers to ensure that credit card processing systems always make a network other than Visa and Mastercard available to retailers, restaurants and other merchants. It would be no small change, given that Visa and Mastercard handle about 87% of all transactions when consumers swipe their cards, according to industry research firm Nilson Report. (That's all cards, but they dominate the market for credit cards alone too.)
The idea behind the legislation is that it would create an opening for more competitors to challenge the duopoly, ultimately cutting card processing costs.
Durbin, 80, has pushed the bill in the past two congressional sessions, with backing from Kansas Republican Roger Marshall. But so far this year, the legislation hasn't resurfaced, despite Durbin's promises it will.
Durbin is waiting for the right moment, says Doug Kantor, who serves as general counsel for the National Association of Convenience stores and who has been a major proponent of the proposal since it landed in 2022.
Durbin's camp is keeping an eye out for a larger bill that would be a suitable vehicle for carrying the legislation across the finish line, Kantor said in an interview last week. The lack of movement this year has probably been a result of the chambers being preoccupied with other major issues like the budget, he said.
The Merchants Payments Coalition, which includes the National Retail Federation and the National Restaurant Association, among others, has also encouraged the legislation.
'There is a broad and growing recognition that the credit card companies don't do business the right way, and this bill may be one piece of addressing that,' Kantor said.
But things aren't so clear across the aisle. Marshall's office has steadfastly not responded to requests for comment on the reintroduction of the legislation in recent weeks, despite his very vocal support last year.
On the House side, Arkansas Republican French Hill, who is chairman of the House Financial Services Committee, doesn't see the bill going anywhere because Congress shouldn't be in the position of refereeing between retailers and banks, he said recently. 'This isn't the way to resolve it,' Hill said during an event hosted this month by the media outlet Punchbowl News.
The lack of Republican interest may have something to do with other financial services priorities being floated by newly elected President Donald Trump, like his fascination with cryptocurrencies. That may be propelling a Republican congressional focus on pursuing stablecoin legislation.
In addition, interest groups on the other side of the fight, in particular the Electronic Payments Coalition and Bank Policy Institute, have not let up this year in skewering the CCCA proposal with press releases, statements and event appearances.
'We're taking this extremely seriously,' EPC Executive Chairman Richard Hunt said at the Punchbowl News event, contending the bill is a favor for big box retailers that would undercut card rewards and security.
Hunt lamented Durbin's success 15 years ago in passing his namesake amendment to the Dodd-Frank Wall Street Reform and Consumer Protection Act, which ushered in limitations for fees in processing debit card transactions.
Congressional Republicans are still seeking to blunt the impact of that law. A pack of House Republicans, including Hill, last month wrote to the Federal Reserve to reverse course on a planned reduction of the debit fee cap prescribed by that law.
For the long-time Democratic Senate whip, Republican control of both chambers and the White House has not only weakened Durbin's power, it has seemingly reset the agenda. Some congressional colleagues have moved on to new card industry legislation that aims to protect consumers from high credit card interest rates.
Part of Durbin's decision to retire may have been influenced by younger peers eager to take on leadership. He may find he has to leave his card reform agenda for them, if they're interested.
Recommended Reading
Republicans pressure Fed on debit card fees
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Politico
an hour ago
- Politico
Andrew Yang Is Ready to Team Up With Elon Musk
Andrew Yang has reached out to Elon Musk with a sales pitch: Let's build a third party together. The former 2020 Democratic presidential candidate has been pushing his independent Forward Party for several years — and he sprang into action after Musk's feud with President Donald Trump erupted and Musk polled X users on whether they wanted a new political party. In an interview with POLITICO Magazine, Yang said he hasn't heard back from Musk yet, but he's optimistic. Yang also acknowledged he doesn't agree with Musk about everything, but said that his Forward Party should appeal to those across the political spectrum. And don't forget that Musk had endorsed Yang's previous presidential bid. Enormous hurdles exist to breaking through in America's two-party system. But Yang argued the American public is ready for a change, particularly if the effort gets help from the richest man in the world — who also happens to control a massive social media platform. 'Elon has built world-class companies from nothing more than an idea multiple times, and in this instance, you have the vast majority of Americans who are hungry for a new approach,' Yang said. 'I'm happy to spell it out for Elon or anyone else who wants to head down this road: A third party can succeed very quickly.' This conversation has been edited for length and clarity. I saw that you retweeted a post Elon Musk made about needing 'to create a new political party in America that actually represents the 80 percent in the middle.' Have you reached out directly to Musk about creating a new party or working with your Forward Party? I have reached out, and some mutual friends are also looking to connect us. Have you heard back yet? Not yet, but I assume he's been very busy. We have been of the opinion that America needed a new political party for a number of years, and so waiting another 24 hours is nothing. Is he someone you'd want to work with to build a third party? I want to work with people that recognize that America's political system has gone from dysfunctional to polarizing to even worse. And at this point, the fastest growing political movement in the United States is independents. They feel like neither party represents them, and the two-party system is not delivering what they want to see. And the two of you have seen dysfunction on both sides — you on the Democratic side and Musk on the Republican. If you think about what animates Elon, he wants to get us to Mars, and I feel that he's been driven these last several years by an opposition to 'wokeness,' by what he sees as excessive bureaucracy, and by waste and overspending in the federal government. And in our two-party system, he thought that Trump was the better choice. If you look at Musk's politics over the last number of years, he waited in line to meet Barack Obama, he endorsed me in a Democratic cycle, and even earlier in this cycle — 2024 — he was looking for an alternative to Trump. There are a number of things that I think Elon shares in common with a lot of other folks I talk to who want to see some kind of middle ground or balance. The problem is: In our two-party system, you get whipsawed either one direction or the other. I will say that the deficit in spending, neither party has done a good job of addressing it, because as soon as they're in power, they don't want to make the tough choices. You're coming politically from the center-left; Elon Musk is coming from arguably the hard right. How would you overcome your political differences? If you look at the Forward Party makeup, my co-chairs include Christine Todd Whitman, who was governor of New Jersey and EPA secretary under George W. Bush, and Kerry Healey, who was lieutenant governor of Massachusetts under Mitt Romney. And I would say that the three of us don't line up on every issue, but we're in lockstep on the fact that America's current political system is not delivering real solutions or results, and both parties are captive to perverse incentives. Anyone who wants to modernize and restore the American political system, so that it actually listens to people and communities, we can agree on that. And that is the mission. The fact is that the two parties do a great job of falsely segmenting us along some ideological spectrum, saying, 'Oh, you want this? You're over there. You want this? You're over there,' when in reality the current system is not going to deliver what either of those sides want. Unless what they want is strife and conflict and mistrust. But is that enough to maintain a third party or does there need to be a political or policy goal that propels the party forward? Are there any specific policies that you feel like you agree on with Musk? The three pillars that we're operating on are dignity, dynamism and democracy, which is something that most Americans can get behind. But in practical terms, if you can imagine three or four U.S. senators who are from a new party, they could work with either side to get things done and would become the most powerful legislators in the country, because their votes might be necessary to pass any legislation. And I dare say that you would have a much more interesting and balanced set of solutions as a result. What about his work to dismantle USAID and cause havoc in much of the federal government? Did you agree with that? One thing I found interesting was that a number of moderate Democrats signaled over the last 24 hours that they would be open to receiving Elon as an ally as a result of his feud with Donald Trump, despite him being essentially one of their primary boogeyman over the last number of weeks. I don't have to agree with everyone's past decisions in order to agree that the primary mission has to be getting our political system back in a place where it's actually responsive to both the views and the needs of the American people, and right now, we don't have that. Anyone who's kept up with me over the last number of years knows that I've been driven by the fact that AI is going to transform our economy in ways that push more and more Americans to the side. That is playing out before our eyes right now in real time, with [Anthropic CEO] Dario Amodei coming out saying that entry-level white collar work is going to be automated, and that we need to think bigger about solutions. I think that Dario is right. I've been making the same case since 2019, 2018. I'd ask anyone who is reading this right now, 'What is the current plan when it comes to the economic changes that are going to be brought by AI?' The answer is, 'Not much.' Because our current political class does not have to address that issue, or any of a panoply of other issues in order to keep power. They have done an expert job of gerrymandering the country into red zones and blue zones, such that all of us are looking up, wondering, 'What the heck is going on?' Speaking of AI, do you think Musk could be a good partner on that? If you look back at the [2020] cycle, he was openly saying that AI was going to have a massive impact, and he did endorse me while I was running as a Democrat on some of those solutions. Musk has become very polarizing to much of the country. Who are the people you think you'd attract if you built a third party with Musk? Again, people have come to the Forward Party from all different walks of life and different ideologies. Elon has a very, very significant following and megaphone, and you can see that with the number of people that have voted on his post about starting a third party. It's about 5.3 million votes, with 81 percent saying yes, it is time to create a new political party, and Forward has gotten thousands of new followers just in the last 24 hours, because we are the preeminent effort to modernize and rationalize America's broken political system. I'm thrilled that others are waking up. Do you think Elon Musk is actually serious about creating a new party? What do you think he wants out of all this? I haven't spoken to Elon recently, but I think there are several things that are animating him, and very, very high on his list is America's financial solvency. I think he's deeply frustrated by the fact that he wanted to reduce waste in government, and then the Republicans turn around and propose a bill that would increase the deficit by two and a half trillion dollars. If your goal is to have the government on a positive fiscal path, that's not the way to do it. I think Elon's frustration is shared by lots of other Americans who realize that when push comes to shove, politicians don't want to make the tough choices that would be necessary to put us on a sustainable path — certainly politicians from the current parties. I saw [JP Morgan CEO and Chair] Jamie Dimon speak the other day, and he seems to share similar concerns and had a number of very sensible proposals. But you realize that it would take a figure, in my view, who's not of the two major parties to make some of these solutions happen. Is that person Elon Musk? I think there are any number of people that if they were to be elected as an independent or a Forward Party member, they would then be able to propose the common-sense solutions that most Americans say we need. One figure that I'm very excited about that recently declared that he was running for governor of Michigan as an independent is [Detroit Mayor] Mike Duggan, who has turned around Detroit, and before that, turned around a hospital chain. Someone like Mayor Duggan would make very sensible choices for the state of Michigan, free of party constraints. You can imagine someone doing that at the national level. Millions of Americans would love to see that happen. I have a feeling that the right independent ticket could galvanize a tremendous amount of energy, because more and more Americans sense that the status quo isn't working and that neither party has our interests at heart or wants to solve the tougher problems. Elon Musk is clearly still very new to politics. Why do you think he knows what it would take to build a third party that could actually overcome all the hurdles that exist in our 2-party system? Elon has built world-class companies from nothing more than an idea multiple times, and in this instance, you have the vast majority of Americans who are hungry for a new approach, as evidenced by the overwhelming response to Elon's poll and to every other poll that shows that not only are half of Americans saying they're independent, but more than two thirds are saying that the current political system is not working. I'm happy to spell it out for Elon or anyone else who wants to head down this road: A third party can succeed very quickly. Just to throw some numbers out to you, there are over 500,000 locally elected officials around the country, and up to 70 percent of those races are not meaningfully contested. Up to 10 percent of those positions go unfilled, and thousands of those positions are technically non-partisan, which includes many, many mayors and county executives. So if the Forward Party were to simply start recruiting and contesting at scale, which you could do with a certain level of resources, you could have thousands, even tens of thousands, of locally elected officials within one cycle. You could have several U.S. senators and a very serious presidential ticket within the next several years. At some point you have to wonder, 'OK, when do the American people raise their hands and say, 'I get it. This system is not meant to deliver good things. It's meant to deliver me thinking that my neighbor is bad and out to get me'?' Eventually, enough of us have to get together and say, let's create a positive, independent political movement that can drive us towards solutions, and also is able to say, 'You and I don't agree on everything, but you're a good person. I believe in your good will.' I don't think that goodness or character are somehow confined to any one party or another. I don't think that people on the opposite side are my enemies, and let's create a system that actually will make us feel good about our future. Even if every last measure does not line up with me, I know that the people who are adopting it actually are making earnest, sincere efforts to move us forward. Do you think Musk is a good person? Or does the desire to recruit people who also want to create a third party trump any character assessments? I'm someone who tends to judge people by their actions more than anything else. And Elon Musk has done more for sustainability on this planet than virtually any other human, and that's something that I think is incredibly estimable and admirable. I've been in public life now for a number of years, and I'm sure I've said or done things that people can brandish and say, 'Oh, I disagree with this person.' I live my life trying to use actions as the guiding principle. I try to hold other people to a standard where actions and impacts are much more important than statements or misstatements. If Musk were serious about building a third party, what do you think the path would look like with the help of his money and social media platform? It would be very straightforward. I've spent several years looking at it. You can start with candidates like Mike Duggan, who are running as independents in very significant races, in this case, for the governorship of Michigan. You could energize tens of thousands of local candidates and wind up with thousands of elected officials very, very quickly. You could create a fulcrum in the U.S. Senate. I call it the Legislator Liberation Fund, where you could offer to buy out senators or members of Congress from their contract with their current party by funding their next election, and they could vote their conscience. There are a lot of legislators who are on the verge of retirement who might take that and say, 'Okay, I don't have to grovel before the donors for the last number of years. I can actually try and fix American politics.' There are multiple members of Congress I've spoken to whose ears are very, very open to that kind of offer. In the scheme of things, none of the things I'm talking about are that expensive for someone with a certain level of resources. I'll give you the opportunity to make a direct sales pitch to Musk: What would you say to him in this moment to get him on board and help fund the Forward Party or the creation of a new party? Elon, the political class will never get serious about putting America on a path to sustainability, and you've seen it up close. You know that if it's going to happen, it's going to be from some new force in American politics. Help us build it.
Politico
an hour ago
- Politico
‘Trump movement' turns on Cornyn, poll finds
MAGA loyalists have put Sen. John Cornyn's reelection campaign in a Texas-size hole. An early May poll commissioned by the American Opportunity Alliance, a major conservative funding group linked to megadonor Paul Singer, shows the Texas Republican down 17 points in a head-to-head primary matchup with state attorney general Ken Paxton. Below the top-line of Paxton's 52-percent-to-35-percent advantage, the poll found a clear divide between those voters who were defined as 'Trump Movement' voters and those who were 'Traditional Republicans.' In the former category, which made up of 58 percent of the electorate, Paxton had a 45-point lead. Among the latter, who made up only 35 percent of voters, Cornyn had a 27-point lead. The findings reflect a increasingly prominent divide among Republican primary voters in Texas where an insurgent hard-right faction has been steadily gaining ground in recent years while ousting more traditional GOP elected officials. Paxton, who has faced federal investigation and impeachment, has long been a darling of right-wingers in Texas, while Cornyn — first elected to the Senate in 2002 — is considered a pillar of the establishment GOP. In a speculative three-way race with GOP Rep. Wesley Hunt, who is exploring a bid, the margin barely narrowed with the Cornyn trailing Paxton, 43 percent to 27 percent, with Hunt receiving 14 percent. There was some good news for the incumbent in the poll. Despite trailing Paxton significantly, he is still viewed favorably by the Republican primary electorate in the Lone Star State — just not as favorably as the state attorney general. The poll, conducted from April 29 through May 1 among 800 Republican primary voters, is among a series of public and private surveys all showing Cornyn significantly trailing Paxton. They have sparked increasing concern from national Republican operatives about a potentially ugly and costly primary, as well as the possible elevation of a scandal-plagued candidate who might be at risk in a general election. The American Opportunity Alliance's interest in the race is notable; it's one of the key donor consortiums in Republican politics and its members including Singer and Chuck Schwab are some of the biggest funders on the right.
New York Post
an hour ago
- New York Post
Why there's no shame in corporate America boycotting LGBT Pride Month
'Private companies can do whatever they want,' leftists once snorted in defense of companies like Facebook banning conservative speech. But now the tables have turned, and LGBTQ activists have found themselves in a state between panicked and sulky as their fair-weather friends in corporate America are pulling sponsorships of Pride celebrations this month. As a result, Pride events across the nation are facing budget shortfalls, and activists are blaming everyone but themselves. Advertisement 8 LGBT Pride events across America have seen millions of dollars in sponsorship deals dry up since President Trump returned to the White House, according to reports. lazyllama – At least 14 companies — including Pepsi, Citi, MasterCard, Nissan, Garnier, and US defense contractor Booz Allen Hamilton Holding Corp. — have dropped or greatly scaled back their financial contributions to annual Pride events nationwide. Anheuser-Busch, makers of Bud Light, has also backtracked on Pride sponsorship — and for good reason. The company lost an estimated $395 million after its botched partnership with transgender influencer Dylan Mulvaney led to a nationwide boycott in 2023. Advertisement Ever since, Bud Light has struggled to reposition itself as the good ol' boys, God 'n' guns beverage, to lukewarm reception. The numbers are grim: Heritage of Pride, organizers of New York City's festivities, by far the largest in the nation, faces a $750,000 shortfall this year after nearly a quarter of corporate donations dried up. This follows years of operating at a loss: In 2022, the group was $2.7 million in the hole, and another $1.2 million the following year. 8 At least 14 companies, including MasterCard, have scaled back on their financial contributions to annual Pride events nationwide. 8 Pepsi has also decreased its financial contributions to Pride events around the country. Advertisement 8 Nissan is also including in the group of companies that have either scaled back or dropped their contributions for national Pride events. Christopher Sadowski In California, longtime corporate donors ran for the hills when San Francisco Pride executive director Suzanne Ford reached out begging for money. Twin Cities Pride has seen longtime corporate sponsors in Minnesota shift into retreat mode, and now the group is scrambling to meet a $200,000 goal. Organizers in Washington, DC, Milwaukee, and St. Louis all have reported being ghosted by big companies they once relied upon. All of this is occurring at a time when a dozen companies have withdrawn participation from the Human Rights Campaign's Corporate Equality Index, a shakedown scheme used by the LGBT nonprofit behemoth to enforce woke capitalism. For LGBTQAI2S+ activists, the reason for all this is simple: It's Trump's fault. Advertisement 8 Trans-influencer Dylan Mulvaney set off a billion-dollar backlash against her 2023 sponsorship program with Bud Light Xavier Collin/Image Press Agency/MEGA 8 'There's a lot of fear of repercussions for aligning with our festival,' Wes Shaver, president of Milwaukee Pride, said. Wes Shaver 'There's a lot of fear of repercussions for aligning with our festival,' Wes Shaver, president of Milwaukee Pride, told The New York Times, joining others who believe companies fear they may be penalized by the White House if they donate to Pride events, citing the administration's effort to curtail DEI initiatives. (When asked about this, the White House didn't respond to multiple requests for comment from The Post.) What's equally likely is that everyone just has gay fatigue — a collective eye roll at the oversaturation of LGBT themes in culture, combined with all the negative connotations now associated with Pride. Once a niche event of subculture fun and revelry, it's devolved into a mainstream, month-long orgy of far-leftism that looks more like a tent revival beckoning an impending open-borders transgender race war. Rage-hungry conservative influencers have latched on to videos of public nudity and shameless parents forcing Pride spectacles onto their children. Transgender insanity has swallowed the entire movement and, in doing so, repelled middle-of-the-road Americans. Simply put, it's exhausting. Advertisement And what company, in its right mind, wants to be tied to all that? While activists say companies are afraid of Trump, the same could have been true about Biden. Businesses certainly felt the Democrat gun in their back to start coughing up their woke bona fides during his term. Overall, the corporate retreat from Pride is a good thing for everyone, and it ought to continue. The grotesque parade of political and corporate pandering that's defined Pride over the last two decades is embarrassing, as any honest gay person will admit. 8 Trump has set his sights on banning identity-based initiatives and organizations, according to reports. AP After all, who wants their sex life validated by junk food companies and bomb-makers? Advertisement It's also alienated plenty of old-timers. 'The cold corporations are more important to the rotating Heritage of Pride than the actual surviving Stonewall veterans. Plenty are still alive and kicking,' former New York City Pride Grand Marshall Williamson Henderson, of the Stonewall Veterans Association, and who participated in the original Stonewall rebellion in June 1969 (the reason Pride Month exists), told The Post. 8 NYC Pride alone has seen nearly a million dollars in funding losses. Some community observers, however, suggest the Pride event has become over-commercialized. Getty Images Corporate America is a shallow and skittish place, and only the most destructive HR managers want their businesses butting in on the culture wars. Advertisement Rather than blaming Republicans for a long-deserved pushback against Rainbow Totalitarianism, LGBT activists ought to do a better job policing themselves, embark on a little soul searching as to how they became so toxic, and maybe even re-examine their unbridled love of money. That last one might be a tough sell. Free Love? Not anymore. It's just about free stuff.
