PlainBillCongress, translated.Legislation. Context. Public interest.Referred to the House Committee on Financial Services.
Congressional Research Service
Version 00 · Introduced in House · Aug 2, 2013
Investor Choice Act of 2013 - Amends the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 and the Investment Advisers Act of 1940 to revise the authority of the Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) to prohibit, or impose conditions or limitations on the use of, agreements that require customers or clients of any broker, dealer, or municipal securities dealer to arbitrate any future dispute between them arising under the federal securities laws, related rules and regulations, or the rules of a self-regulatory organization if it finds that prohibition, imposition of conditions, or limitations are in the public interest and for the protection of investors.
Declares unlawful for a broker, dealer, funding portal, or municipal securities dealer (entities) to enter into, modify, or extend an agreement with customers or clients governing a future dispute between the parties that would mandate arbitration.
Declares likewise unlawful acts by such entities that would restrict, limit, or condition the ability of a customer or client to: (1) select or designate a forum for dispute resolution, or (2) pursue a claim relating to a dispute in an individual or representative capacity or on a class action or consolidated basis.
People & committees
Rep. Ellison, Keith [D-MN-5] · D–MN
Legislative record
A procedural vote is different from passage. Passage in one chamber does not establish enactment. Explore the glossary.
Referred to the House Committee on 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 12, 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.2998 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.2998 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.2998 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.2998 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.