PlainBillCongress, translated.Legislation. Context. Public interest.Referred to the Subcommittee on Financial Institutions and Consumer Credit.
Congressional Research Service
Version 00 · Introduced in House · Jan 4, 1995
Management and Conflict of Interest Reform Amendments of 1995 - Amends the Depository Institution Management Interlocks Act to include foreign banks within the administrative and enforcement purview of the Board of Governors of the Federal Reserve System. Prohibits an outside counsel or outside accountant of a depository institution or a depository holding company from serving as a member of the board of directors of such institution, holding company, or any of its subsidiaries, affiliates, or holding companies. Requires each depository institution and depository holding company to provide to each member of its board of directors and each member of the board of directors of any depository institution or depository holding company it controls: (1) a list of the names and principal places of business of each individual or company which directly or indirectly owns, controls, or has power to vote five percent or more of any class of voting securities of such institution or holding company; and (2) a notice of any proposed change in control of the parent depository institution or depository holding company. Requires a majority of the voting members of the board of directors of depository institutions and depository holding companies to be outside directors.
People & committees
Rep. Kanjorski, Paul E. [D-PA-11] · D–PA
Legislative record
A procedural vote is different from passage. Passage in one chamber does not establish enactment. Explore the glossary.
Referred to the Subcommittee on Financial Institutions and Consumer Credit.
Referred to the House Committee on Banking and Financial Services.
Introduced in House
Introduced in House
Primary sources
Text links open the official source. We currently store references to these documents.
No related bills are listed in this snapshot. This does not establish whether the proposal has appeared in earlier Congresses.
Source last updated: Aug 21, 2025. Consult Congress.gov for the current record.
AI Conversation Starters
Choose a perspective, copy a prompt, and paste it into your preferred AI. Each prompt includes the bill version and available official source links, and asks for counterarguments as well as supporting evidence.
Analyze H.R.290 as objectively as possible. Explain its main provisions, who would be affected, possible benefits and harms, implementation, exceptions, and uncertainties. Present the strongest arguments for and against it, and identify evidence needed to assess its public impact.
Examine H.R.290 through a progressive lens, focusing on fairness, access, economic inequality, and effects on vulnerable communities. Explain potential benefits, costs, and unintended consequences. Consider the strongest counterarguments and distinguish stated goals from demonstrated outcomes.
Examine H.R.290 through a conservative lens, focusing on fiscal responsibility, institutional stability, federalism, and the scope of government. Explain potential benefits, costs, and unintended consequences. Consider the strongest counterarguments and any provisions that challenge this perspective.
Examine H.R.290 through a civil-liberties and limited-government lens. Consider individual rights, privacy, voluntary choice, accountability, and government power. Explain tradeoffs, possible safeguards, and the strongest counterarguments without assuming the proposal is beneficial or harmful.