State AGs Urge Congress to Rescind OCC's True Lender Rule

2/28/23, 10:56 AM Illinois Attorney General - A TT ORNEY GENERAL RAOUL URGES CONGRESS TO RESCIND PROPOSAL ALLOWING PREDA … https://illinoisattorneygeneral.gov/pressroom/2021_04/20210421.html 1/1 April 21, 2021 ATTORNEY GENERAL RAOUL URGES CONGRESS TO RESCIND PROPOSAL ALLOWING PREDATORY LENDERS TO TAKE ADVANTAGE OF CONSUMERS Chicago — Attorney Gener al Kwame R aoul today led a bipartisan coalition of 25 attorneys general in urging Congress to use the Congressional Review Act to rescind the Office of the Comptroller of the Currency's (OCC) T rue Lender Rule. The rule would allow high-cost lending schemes that are devised to evade state usury la ws. Such laws, or caps, prevent predatory lenders from taking advantage of consumers by limiting the interest r ates that can be charged on loans. Raoul and the coalition issued a letter calling for the OCC's T rue Lender Rule to be rescinded because it would enable predatory lenders to circumvent state interest r ate caps through "rent-a-bank" schemes, in which banks act as lenders in name only, passing along their state law exemptions to non-bank pay day lenders. These arrangements would allow lenders to charge consumers r ates that far exceed the r ates permissible under United States usury laws. "State usury laws, or interest caps, are important tools that help protect people from the high interest r ates charged by auto title and payday lenders, and the OCC's T rue Lender Rule would allow predatory lenders to take adv antage of our most vulnerable residents," Raoul said. "I am urging Congress to tak e action to rescind the rule, and help states protect residents from exorbitantly- high interest rates." In January, 2021, a consortium of states filed a lawsuit to prevent the implementation of the OCC's T rue Lender Rule. Congress, however, can resolve this issue b y repealing the rule under the Congressional Review Act (CRA). In today's letter, A ttorney General Raoul and the coalition urge Congress to pass pending House and Senate resolutions introduced March 26, 2021 that use the CRA to repeal the T rue Lender Rule. If Congress does not use the CRA to rescind this rule, the state litigation to stop enforcement could take sever al years. While that litigation is pending, predatory small-dollar lenders will be able to utilize rent- a-bank models to evade state usury caps and harm consumers. The National Bank Act permits federally -regulated banks to charge interest on loans at the maximum rate permitted by their "home" state, even in states where that interest r ate would violate state usury laws. For years, non-bank entities such as pa yday, auto title, and installment lenders have attempted to partner with national banks to tak e advantage of banks' exemptions to state interest caps in order to offer ultra-high-r ate loans in states where such loans are forbidden. Courts have scrutinized these lending relationships and concluded that because the national bank is not the "true lender" of the loan, state-law usury caps apply to the non-bank lenders. The OCC's T rue Lender Rule would prevent courts from interv ening if a national bank is either named as the lender on loan documents or the bank initially "funds" the loan. Further, the rule would allow the bank to instantly sell the loan and nev er take any meaningful risk on it. This rigid, formalist approach will provide an adv antage to only banks and predatory lenders, at the expense of hardworking and unsuspecting consumers. Moreover, the rule represents a stark departure from decades of OCC policy admonishing national banks from entering into these sham "rent- a-bank" arrangements. Joining Attorney General R aoul in this letter are the attorneys general of Arkansas, California, Color ado, Connecticut, District of Columbia, Hawaii, Iowa, Maine, Maryland, Massachusetts, Michigan, Minnesota, Nebr aska, Nevada, New Jersey, New Y ork, North Carolina, Oregon, Pennsylv ania, Rhode Island, South Dakota, V ermont, Virginia and Wisconsin.

OFFICE OF THE ATTORNEY GENERAL STAT E OF ILL INOIS Kwame Ra oul ATTORNEY GENERAL April 21, 2021 VIA ELEC TRO NIC MA IL Hon. Charl es E. Schumer Majority L eader U.S. Senate Hon. Nancy Pel osi Speaker U.S. House of Representa tives Hon. Mitc h McConnell Minority Le ader U.S. Senate Hon. Kevin McCa rthy Minority Le ader U.S. House of Representa tives Hon. Sherrod Brow n Chairma n U.S. Senate Commi ttee on Banking, Housing and Urban Affai rs Hon. Maxine W aters Chairw om an U.S. House Commit tee on Financial Service s Hon. Pat T oomey Ranking Membe r U.S. Senate Commi ttee on Banking, Housing, and Urban Affai rs Hon. Patri ck Mc Henry Ranking Membe r U.S. House Commit tee on Financial Service s Re: Use of Congress ional Review Act to Invalidate OCC Tr ue Lender Rule That Facilitates Predatory Lending Honorable Congressional Lea ders, On behalf of the 25 undersigned State Attorneys G eneral (t he “States”), we write to ex pres s our strong and bipartisan objections to the s o-called “True Lender Rule” 1 (the “Rule”) finalized by the Office of the Comptroller of the Currency (“OCC”) on October 30, 2020. That 1 See OCC, National Banks and Federal S av ings Associations as Lenders, 85 Fed. Reg. 68,742 (Oct. 30, 2020) (codified a t 12 C.F.R. § 7. 1031), available at ht tps://www.go vinfo.gov/conte nt/pkg/FR-2020- 10 -30/pdf/ 2020- 24134.pdf.

Rule would sanction high-cost lending schemes devi sed to evade state usury laws. A growing number of states continue to pass state usury interest- rate caps on high-cos t small-dollar loans in an effor t to protect thei r consumers from predatory financial pr oducts. The OCC’s Rule would be ex ploited by lenders seeking to circumvent these sta te i nterest- ra te caps and invite, indeed welcome, predatory consumer-lending partnerships between banks and lightly r egulated non- depository lenders. We urge you to use the Congre ssional Review Act, 5 U.S.C. §§ 801-808 (“CRA”), to rescind the OCC’s True Lender Rule and sa feguard states’ fundamental sovereign rights to protect their citizens from financial abuse. The Rule would sanc tion the use of so-ca lled “rent-a- b ank” schemes in which banks, regulated by f ederal agencie s like the OCC, enter into sham relationships with non-bank entities for the principal purpose of allowing the non-banks t o evade state usury laws. To facilitate these arrangements, the Rule heedless ly licenses non-ba nk entities to preempt state usury laws, notwithstanding the fact that Congress delegated this pr ivilege exclus ively to banks. Such sham rent-a- bank s chemes have been widely scrutinized by courts to determine whether the bank is, in fac t, the “true lender” of t he loans. In order to iden tif y the true lender, courts look to the substanc e r ather than the form of the loan, examine the relationship between the bank and the non-bank and the totality of the circumstances surrounding the transa ction. Numerous courts across the United S tates have hel d that non-banks cannot esca pe state usury prohibit ions under the guise of rent- a-bank schemes. 2 Courts have not hesitated to apply the “true l ender doctrine” when a bank is named as the nominal principal party to a loan transaction but the trans action i nvolves a non-bank participant attempting to skirt state usury limits. 3 For example, in applying the doctrine, the W est Vir ginia Supreme Court of Appeals, relying on a long line of federal circuit court holdi ngs, held that the “predominant economic interest” test is the pr oper standa r d to use when dete rm ining who is the “true lender” and thus whether state law is pr eempted. 4 Thi s test examines which part y (be that the bank or non-bank 2 See, e.g., Cmty. State Bank v. Strong, 651 F. 3d 1241, 1260 (11th Cir. 2011) (conclud ing that feder al banking law does not im munize a bank from state usury law “ if it is no t the true l ender of the lo a n”); T hink Fin., 2016 WL 18 3289, at *13 (sa me); Spitzer v. Cnty. B ank of Rehoboth Beach, 45 A.D.3d 1136, 1138 (3d De p’t 2007) (holding th at “the true l ender, ” rath er than “the written chara ct eri za tion that t he parties seek t o gi ve” the transa ction, determines whether a bank or a non-ban k would be treate d as the lender); cf. CashCal l, Inc. v. Morr i sey, No. 12 - 1274, 2014 WL 2404300, *7, 14-15 (W. Va. 2014) (affi rming judgm ent finding that unlic ense d en tity “was the de facto or true lend er” and thus vi ola te d st ate licensing a nd usu ry laws). 3 See Daniel v. First Nat’l Bank of Birmingham, 227 F.2d 353, 357 (5th C ir. 1955) (holding a National Bank wa s liable for usury because the tra nsaction involved “a loan or extension of credit t o which the Bank was privy t hrough out” even though the contra ct was assigned to the bank afte r t he transac tion closed); Ubaldi v. S LM C orp., 852 F. Sup p. 2d 1190, 1203 (N.D. Cal. 2012) (denying mo ti on to dismiss in case alleging that Salli e Ma e, not a Natio nal Bank, was the t rue lender); Goleta Nat'l Bank v. O'Donnell, 239 F. Supp. 2d 745, 747, 755 (S.D. Ohio 2 002) (concluding that if a non-bank was the “true lender,” then it would “unquestionab ly [be] subjec t to” state usury la w, even though a different entity “is clearl y li sted as the lender on t he loa n documents”); Goleta Nat’l Bank v. Lingerfelt, 211 F. Supp. 2d 711, 717-18 (E.D.N.C. 2002) (same); Salazar v. Ace Cash Exp., Inc., 188 F. Supp. 2d 1282, 1285 (D. Colo. 2002) (same); Eul v. Transworld Sys., No. 15 C 7755, 2017 WL 1178537, at *6 (N.D. Ill. Mar. 30, 2017) (“Bec ause Plainti ffs allege that [a National Bank] was not the true originator of their loans, the C ourt is not persuaded that NBA preempt ion appl ies here. ”). 4 Cashcall at 14-15; citin g Go leta Nat. Bank v. Lin gerfelt, 211 F.Supp. 2d 711(E.D.N.C.2002); Colorad o ex rel. Salazar v. Ace Cash Exp., Inc., 188 F. Supp.2d 1282 (D.Colo.2002); Flowers v. EZPawn Oklah oma, Inc., 307 F.Supp.2d 1 191(N.D.Ok la.2004).

entity) has the predominant economic interes t in loans “made” by a bank, considering factors such as which party uses its own money to fund th e tr ansaction and who holds the ultimate financial risk. 5 The predominant economic interes t tes t, employed by cou r ts across the country, ex amine s the substance, not j ust the form, of rent-a-ba nk lending agreements. 6 Moreover, scrutinizing a tr ansaction for the “true lender” in order to determine if parties are attempting to evade state usury limitations is a modern applicati on of the centuries old anti-evasion doctrine. 7 Recently, Georgia codifi ed this test in state law to prevent rent-a-ba nk schemes from violating that state’s usury cap. 8 In dir ect contradiction to this reasoned judicial analysis, the OCC has issued a harmful Rule that establishes a simplistic standard to redefine the meaning of “true lender”. Under the OCC’s Rule, r egardless of the totality of the circu mstances surrounding a bank and non-bank relationship, the national bank will be viewed as the true lender “when, as of the date of origination, it (1) is named as lender in the loan agreement or (2) funds the loan.” This superficial approach allows free rein for the pr edat ory rent-a-ba nk lending artif ice to ex pand i nto and thrive within every state regardles s of state cons umer protection laws. In an attempt to halt the application of the Rule, the State Attorneys General from New York, California, Colorado, District of Columbia, M assachusetts, Minnesota, New Jersey and North Carolina 9 have fi led a multistate lawsuit agai nst the OCC for its wholesale disregard of regulatory l aw and administrative p r ocedure in promulgating the Rule. 10 While that litigation remains pending, and may take years to resolve, a high cost will be borne in needless consumer 5 Cashcall at 14, footnote 19: Courts hav e al so appl ie d th e “predominan t economic i nterest ” test in dec idi ng ca ses on the meri ts. For example, in S pitzer v. Cou nty Bank o f Re hobot h Beach, 846 N.Y. S.2d 436 (N.Y. App.D i v.2007), New York's Attorney Genera l brought an e nforc ement ac t ion aga inst payda y lenders who had e nte re d in to rent-a-bank a rrang ements. In S pit z er, the Attorney General al le ged tha t the payday lenders wer e the true lend e rs and t hat their a greements wi th a rent-a-bank wer e a scheme to circum ve nt N ew York's usury laws. The Spi tz er cour t not ed that the payd ay lenders purchas ed ninety-fiv e percent of each of the bank's l oans, assumed all risks of th e loans, and indemni fied the bank against any los s a rising from a loan transa ction. Th e Spitz er court then fou nd that a tot ality of the cir c umstan ce s must be used to determine t he identity of t he “true lender,” wit h t he key facto r being who ha d the predomin ant economic i nterest in the transa ctions. Id. at 438–3 9. Ultima tely, the bank and the payd a y lender in Spitzer ente re d in to a $5.2 mi l lion settlement agreement with New York's Attorne y G ene ral. See also Andrews v. Cram e r, 25 6 Ill.App. 3d 766, 195 I ll.Dec. 825, 629 N.E.2d 133, 136 (Ill.App.1993) (quot e omitted); Ghirar do v. An tonioli, 8 Cal.4th 791, 35 Cal.Rp tr.2d 418, 883 P. 2d 960, 965 (Cal.1994) (citations omitted) (stat ing that the tri er of fact m ust look to the subs tance of th e tr ansaction, rath er than its form, and must d etermine wh e ther such form was a m ere sham and su bterfuge t o cov er up usurious tra nsactions); Williams v. Po well, 216, 214 Ga.App. 216, 447 S.E.2d 45, 48 (Ga.Ap p.1994) (quote omi tted). 6 Id at 15, re lying on Carp er v. Kanawha Banking & Trust Co., 157 W.Va. 477, 207 S.E.2d 897 (478, 901) (1974). 7 Se e, De Wolf v. Johnson, 23 U.S. 367 (1825) (“Usury is a mortal ta int wherever i t exists, and no subterfuge shall be permitted to c onceal it from the e ye of the law; this is the substanc e of all the cases, and they only vary as they follow t he det ours through wh ich they have had to p ursue the mon ey lender. ”); see also Sco tt v Lloyd, 34 U.S. 418, 446-47 (1835). 8 See, e.g., Ga. Code. Ann. § 16- 17-2(b)(4) (c rea t ing tot ality of th e circum stances test t o determine wh en “a purport ed agent sha ll be consid ered a de f ac to le nder ” for p urposes of state usury laws); 9 Thes e s tates are also signat ories to this letter. 10 Se e New Yor k v. OCC, Cas e No. 1:21 - Civ. -00057-SH S (S.D.N. Y.), com plaint availabl e at https://ag.ny.gov/sites/de fault/files/0 1. 05.21 complaintdo c.no.1.pdf.

hardship and waste of precious t ime, during which predatory lenders, under cover of the OCC’s Rule, will propagate their rent-a- bank scheme s. The most efficient cour se to prevent unrestrained a buse and avert immediate and ongoing consumer harm would be for Congress t o invalidate the Rule pursuant to its remedial oversight powers under the Congressiona l Review Act. 11 Americans spanning all political alignm ents are de manding that lenders who impose unconscionably ex orbitant interest rates be subject to more, not less, regulation. 12 Currently, 45 states and the District of Columbia cap interest rate s on installment loans, depending on the size, at a median r ate of 38.5% for a $500, 6-month loan and 32% for a $2,000, 2-year loan. 13 During an unprecedented economic downturn, br ought on a nd ex acerbated by Covid-19, the OCC seeks to expand the availability of ex ploit ative loans that tr ap borrowers in a never-ending cycle of debt. We ur ge Congres s to use its powers under the Congres sional Review Act to invalidate the OCC’s True Lender Rule and safeguard the right of sovereign states, and the ability of an in dependent judiciary, to safeguard our citizens from rent-a- bank schemes designed to work end- runs around ess ential consumer protections. Respe ctfull y submitted, LESLIE R UTLEDGE Arkansa s Attorney Gener al MATTH EW RODRIGUE Z California Acting Attorney Gene ral 11 5 U.S.C. §§ 801-8 08. 12 For examp le, wh en South Dakot a voted on an interest ra te cap in 2016, the payd a y loan industry spent over a mil li on do llars lobby i ng ag ai ns t the measu re, which w as ultima tely approve d by 76 % of voters in wh at one opponent of the cap conc eded was a “landslide.” Se e Bart Pfankuch, Payda y Loans Gone, But Need for Quick Cash Remains, Capital Journal (Pi e rre, S.D.), Ma r. 23, 2018. Se e al so Megan Leonhardt, Nebras ka becom es the latest state to cap payday loan interest rates, CN BC.com., Nov. 4 2020. Roughly 83 % of Nebrask a vot ers approved Mea su re 428 sup porting a ba ll ot ini tiative that ca ps rates on payday l oans a t 36% throughou t the stat e. https://www.cnbc.com/2 020/11/04/n ebra sk a-becomes-the - lat est - state - to - ca p -payday- lo an - inte rest - rates.htm l 13 See Nationa l Consumer Law Center, State Rate Caps for $ 500 and $2, 000 Loans (M arch 2021), http://bit.ly/st ate- ra t e -caps. Thes e st ate s include Nebrask a, where a 36 % rat e cap passed by ballot me a sur e on November 3, 2020, with 83% of the vote. N e braska Initiated State St atute 45-901 et s eq., 20 20 Init iative 428. Montana pass e d i ts 36% consumer loa n r ate cap in 20 10. Montana D eferred Depos it Loan Ac t, Mon t. Code Ann. 31-1-701. A rkans as set a 17% i nter e st rate cap i n 2010, even includin g this rate c a p in its st a te const itution. Ark. Const. Amend. 89 § 3. S outh Dakot a pass ed a 36% inte re st r ate cap on co nsumer loans, i nclud ing title lo ans, in 2016. S.D. Codif i ed La ws 54-4-3 6 et seq. O the r st ates with a rate cap of 36% or low er includ e: Colorad o, Connecticu t, Illinois, Mass achusetts, N orth Carolina, New Hamps hire, N e w J ersey, New Yo rk, Pennsylv ania, Vermont. Se veral other states cap the interes t rat e at 36% but allow a fee t hat can increase th e APR on smaller l oans: Arizona, Ge orgia, Maryl and, Virginia and West Virgini a. On Jan. 13, 2021, the Ill inoi s General As sembly passed SB1792, the Predatory Loan Preventi on A ct. The legisla ti on passed with a bipartis an vote in both chambers. T his measure, s igned into law on M arch 23, 2021, is largely mir rored on the Federal Mili tary Lend ing Act, 10 U. S.C. 98, implemente d by the Dep art me nt of Defense, that protec ts active-duty m i litary, the ir spous es and their depen dents, with a 36 pe rcent rate ca p referr e d to as t he Mi litary Annual Percentage Rat e. T he Ill inois Preda tory Loan Prevention A ct extends th at same prote ction to vete ra ns a nd al l Illinois consumers who use finan cial products of under $40, 000 i n valu e, including p a yday and car title loans.

PHI LIP J. WEISE R Colorado Attorne y Gene ral WIL LI AM T ON G Connecticut Attorne y General KARL A. R ACINE District of Columbia At torney Genera l CLARE E. CONN ORS Hawa ii Attorney Genera l STE PHEN H. L EVI NS Executi ve Directo r, Haw aii O ffice of Con sumer P r otec tion KWAM E RAOUL Illinois Attorney Gener al TOM MILLER Iowa Attorney Ge neral AARON M. FR EY Maine Attorney Gene ral BRIA N E. FROSH Maryland Attorney Gene ral MAURA HEA LEY Massachuse tts Attorney Genera l DANA NES SE L Michigan Attorney General KEITH ELL ISON Minnesota Attorne y Gene ral

DOUGLAS J. PETERS ON Nebra ska Attorney Genera l AARON D. FORD Neva da Att orney Gene ral GURB IR S. GREWAL New Jerse y Att orney Gene ral LETITIA JAMES New York Attorney Gene ral JOSHUA H. S TEIN North Carolina Attorne y Gene ral ELLEN F. ROS ENBLUM Oregon Attorney Ge neral JOSH SHA PIRO Pennsylvania Attorne y General PET ER N ERON HA Rhode Island Attorne y Gener al JASON RAVN SBORG South Dakota Attorney Gene ral TJ DONOVAN Vermont Attorney Gene ral MARK R. HERRING Virginia Attorney Gener al JOSHUA L. KAUL Wisconsin Attorne y Gene ral

cc (E lectronic M ail): Honorable Senators: Hon. T om Cotton – Arkansas Hon. John Boozman – Arkans as Hon. Dianne F einstein - Califo r nia Hon. Alex Padilla - Californi a Hon. Michael Bennet – Colorado Hon. John Hickenlooper - Colorado Hon. Chris Murphy – Connecticut Hon. Richard Blumenthal – Connec ticut Hon. Mazie Hirono – Hawaii Hon. Brian Schatz - Hawaii Hon. Chuck Gr ass ley – Iowa Hon. Joni Ernst – Iowa Hon. Richard Durbin – Illinois Hon. T ammy Duckworth – Illinois Ho n. Ed Markey – Mass achusetts Hon. E lizabe th Warren – Mass achu setts Hon. Ben Cardin – Maryland Hon. Chris Van Hollen – Maryland Hon. S usan Collins – Maine Hon. Angus King – Maine Hon. Debbie S tabenow – Michigan Hon. Gary Peters – Michigan Hon. Amy Klobuchar – Minnesota Hon. T ina Smith – Minnesota Hon. Richard Burr – North Carolina Hon. T hom Tillis – North Carolina Hon. Ben S ass e – Nebraska Hon. Debra Fisc her – Nebraska Hon. Cory Booker – New Jersey Hon. Bob Menende z – New Jersey Hon. Jacky Rosen – Nevada Hon. Catherine Cort ez Mastro - Nevada Hon. Kir sten Gillibrand – New York Hon. Ron Wyden – Oregon Hon. Jeff Merkley – Oregon Hon. Bob Case y - Pennsylvania Hon. Jack Reed – Rhode I sland Hon. S heldon Whitehouse – Rhode Island Hon. John T hune – South Dakota Hon. Mike Rounds – South Dakota Hon. T im Kaine – Virginia Hon. Mark Warner – Virginia Hon. P atrick Le ahy – Vermont Hon. Bernie Sanders – Vermont Hon. T ammy Baldwin – Wiscons in Hon. Ron Johnson - Wisconsin Honorable House Representatives Arkansas Hon. S teve Womack Hon. Rick Crawfor d Hon. F rench Hill Hon. Bruce Westerman California Hon. Doug LaMa lf a Hon. Jaared Huff man Hon. John Garamendi Hon. T om McC lintock Hon. Mike T hompson Hon. Dor is Matsui Hon. Ami Bera Hon. Jay Abernolte Hon. Jerry McNerney Hon. Josh Harder Hon. Mark DeSaulnier Hon. Barbara Lee Hon. Jackie Speier Hon. Eric Swalwell Hon. Jim Costa Hon. Ro Khanna Hon. Anna Eshoo Hon. Z oe Lofgren Hon. Jimmy Panetta Hon. David Valadao Hon. Devin Nunes Hon. S alud Carbajal Hon. Mike Garcia Hon. Julia Brownley Hon. Judy Chu Hon. Adam Schiff Hon. T ony Cardenas Hon. Brad Sherman

Hon. P ete Aguilar Hon. Gr ace Napolitano Hon. T ed Lie u Hon. Jimmy Gomez Hon. Nor ma Torres Hon. Raul Ruiz Hon. Karen Bass Hon. Linda Sanchez Hon. Young Kim Hon. Lucille Roybal- Allard Hon. Mark Takano Hon. Ken Calvert Hon. Nanette Barr agan Hon. Katie Porter Hon. Luis Correa Hon. Alan Lowenthal Hon. Michelle Steel Hon. Mike Levin Hon. Darr ell Issa Hon. Juan Vargas Hon. S cott Peters Hon. S ara Ja cobs Colorado Hon. Lauren Boebert Hon. Doug Lamborn Hon. Joe Neguse Hon. Diana DeGette Hon. Jason Crow Hon. E d Perlmutter Hon. Ken Buck Connecticut Hon. Jim Himes Hon. Rosa DeLauro Hon. Jahana Hayes Hon. John Larson Hon. Joe Courtney Hawaii Hon. E d Cas e Hon. Kaiali ‘I Kahele Illinois Hon. Bobby Rush Hon. Robin Kelly Hon. Marie Newman Hon. Jesus Garcia Hon. Mike Quigley Hon. S ean Casten Hon. Danny Davis Hon. Raja Kri shnamoorthi Hon. Jan Schakowsky Hon. Brad Schneider Hon. Bill Foster Hon. Mike Bost Hon. Rodney Davis Hon. Lauren Underwood Hon. Mary Miller Hon. Adam Kinzinger Hon. Cheri Bustos Hon. Dari n L aHood Iowa Hon. Ashley Hinson Hon. Mariannette Miller-Meeks Hon. Cynthia Ax ne Hon. Randy F eenstra Maine Hon. Chellie P ingree Hon. Jared Golden Maryland Hon. Andy Harris Hon. A. Dutch Ruppersberger

Hon. John S arbanes Hon. Anthony Brown Hon. S teny Hoyer Hon. David Trone Hon. Kweisi Mfume Hon. Jamie Raskin Massachusetts Hon. Richard Neal Hon. Jim McGovern Hon. Lori Tr ahan Hon. Jake Auchincloss Hon. Katherine Clark Hon. S eth Moulton Hon. Ayanna P ressley Hon. S tephen Lynch Hon. Willi am Keating Michigan Hon. Jack Bergman Hon. Bill Huizenga Hon. Pe ter Me ijer Hon. John Moolenaar Hon. Daniel Kildee Hon. F red Upton Hon. T im Walberg Hon. E liss a Slot kin Hon. Andy Levin Hon. Lisa McClain Hon. Haley S tevens Hon. Debbie Dingell Hon. Rashida Tlaib Hon. Brenda Lawrence Minnesota Hon. Jim Hagedorn Hon. Angie Craig Hon. Dean P hillips Hon. Betty McCollum Hon. I lhan Omar Hon. T om Emmer Hon. Michelle Fischbach Hon. P ete Stauber Nebraska Hon. Jeff Fort enberry Hon. Don Bacon Hon. Adr ian Smith Nevada Hon. Dina Titus Hon. Mark Amodei Hon. S usie Lee Hon. S teven Horsford New Jersey Hon. Donald Norcross Hon. Jeffer sono Van Drew Hon. Andy Kim Hon. Chris Smith Hon. Josh Gottheimer Hon. F rank Pallone Jr. Hon. T om Malinows ki Hon. Albio Sir es Hon. Bill Pascrell Jr. Hon. Donald Payne Jr. Hon. Mikie S herrill Hon. Bonnie Watson Coleman New York Hon. Lee Zeldin Hon. Andr ew Garbarino Hon. T homas Suozzi Hon. Kathleen Rice Hon. Gr egory Mee ks Hon. Gr ace Meng

Hon. Nydia Velazquez Hon. Hakeem Jeffr ies Hon. Yvette Clarke Hon. Jerrol d Nadler Hon. Nicole Malliotakis Hon. Carolyn Maloney Hon. Adr iano Espaillat Hon. Alexandria Ocasio- Cortez Hon. Ritchie T orres Hon. Jamaal Bowman Hon. Mondaire Jones Hon. S ean Maloney Hon. Antonio Delgado Hon. P aul Tonko Hon. E lise Stefanik Hon. Claudia T enney Hon. T om Reed Hon. John Katko Hon. Joseph Morelle Hon. Brian Higgins Hon. Chris Jacobs North Carolina Hon. George Butterfield Jr. Hon. Deborah Ross Hon. Gr egory Murphy Hon. David Price Hon. Vir ginia Fox x Hon. Kathy Manning Hon. David Rouzer Hon. Richard Hudson Hon. Dan Bishop Hon. David “Madis on” Cawthorn Hon. Alma Adams Hon. T ed Budd Oregon Hon. S uzanne Bonamici Hon. Clif f Bentz Hon. E arl Blumenauer Hon. P eter DeFazio Hon. Kur t Schrader Pennsylvania Hon. Brian Fitzpatrick Hon. Brendan Boyle Hon. Dwight Evans Hon. Madeleine Dean Hon. Mary Scanlon Hon. Chrissy Houlahan Hon. S usan Wild Hon. Matt Cartwr ight Hon. Daniel Meus er Hon. S cott Perry Hon. Lloyd S mucker Hon. F red Keller Hon. John Joyce Hon. Guy Resche nthaler Hon. Glenn Thompson Hon. Mike Kelly Hon. Conor Lamb Hon. Michael Doyle Rhode Island Hon. David Cicilline Hon. James Langevin South Dakota Hon. Dusty Johnson Vermont Hon. P eter Welch Virginia

Hon. Robert Wittman Hon. E laine Luria Hon. Robert Scott Hon. Donald McEachin Hon. Robert Good Hon. Ben Cline Hon. Abigail Spanberger Hon. Donald Beyer Jr. Hon. Morgan Griffith Hon. Jennifer Wex ton Hon. Gerald Connolly Wiscons in Hon. Bryan Steil Hon. Mark Pocan Hon. Ron Kind Hon. Gwen Moore Hon. S cott Fitzgerald Hon. Glenn Grothman Hon. T homas Tiffany Hon. Mike Gallagher