Today, the House Financial Services Committee echoed their Senate colleagues in voicing concerns to federal banking regulators about Washington's proposed capital regulation plan. The committee's Democratic members noted that the plan would negatively impact small businesses, lower- and middle-income Americans' ability to access loans, and the clean energy transition:

Rep. David Scott (D-GA) argued that the proposed changes to capital requirements would drastically harm American farmers and manufacturers: "I want you to know that I have some serious concerns with the bank capital requirements that you are proposing. Not only with the impact it will have on our smaller farmers and their ability to access capital, but also on the increases to the cost of derivatives transactions, meaning higher prices for everyday consumers. So Vice-Chairman Barr, American companies like manufacturers, airlines, in addition to our small farmers and retailers, all rely on derivatives to responsibly hedge their risk for commodity fluctuations, for fuel costs, and interest rates increasing. This is deep into the very soul of our business and our total economy, and all of these inherent costs and imbalances impact the average consumer. So we got sort of a big problem here. I fear that making these hedges more costly for all of these major industries, airlines, the manufacturers, as I mentioned, will only make the cost of goods and services, food prices at our grocery stores, airline tickets, gasoline at our stations; our everyday American households more expensive."

Rep. Brad Sherman (D-CA) noted that the plan would negatively impact homebuyers and small businesses: "You're doing a tiny step forward when you had a massive crisis thought to be a risk to our entire economy. You invoke that law and you're taking this tiny step and you're leaving on the balance sheet assets at a million that you know are worth 600,000. But in doing so, you're discriminating against small businesses. Every time a bank is incentivized to buy that long-term debt on a securities market, that's money they can't lend to a local pizzeria. Speaking of discriminating, I mentioned first-time home buyers. First-time home buyers all often need mortgage insurance. Your current roles recognize that mortgage insurance may not be perfect, but it's useful. Can any of you raise your hands if you want to defend the idea of having a zero value for mortgage insurance? I see no hands going up."
 
Rep. Nydia Velázquez (D-NY) expressed concerns about the proposal's impacts on small businesses: "You and I spoke recently about the Basel III proposal's potential impact on small business lending. While I'm supportive of the reforms, I am always concerned about small businesses' ability to access capital. What economic analysis has the Fed conducted to ensure small business lending won't be constricted or that the cost of origination won't dramatically increase because of this proposal, particularly in a high interest rate environment?"

Rep. Sean Casten (D-IL) echoed concerns from Senate colleagues about the proposal's impact on clean energy investments: "The proposed rule would quadruple the capital requirements for banks that make tax equity investments. I'm particularly concerned about that as it may frustrate the intent of the Inflation Reduction Act since the clean energy provisions were led so heavily on tax credits. (...) Last thing I wanna raise in the little time we've got left. In talking with clean energy developers and talking with banks, we are hearing that banks are already starting to slow down their investments in the clean energy space because they are anxious about the potential need to build capital reserves. I'm curious if you all are hearing that in the pushback? 'cause we're certainly hearing it from the industry."
 
These concerns echoed issues raised by Democratic and Republican Senators earlier this week that Americans can't afford Washington's capital regulation plan.