PlainBillCongress, translated.Legislation. Context. Public interest.Received in the Senate and Read twice and referred to the Committee on Banking, Housing, and Urban Affairs.
Congressional Research Service
Version 53 · Passed House · Jun 23, 2023
Middle Class Borrower Protection Act of 2023
This bill rolls back changes made by the Federal Housing Finance Agency (FHFA) to the fees charged by Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac for a conventional single-family mortgage (i.e., loan-level pricing adjustments) and restricts future fee adjustments. These changes, effective May 1, 2023, revised the fee charts that provide percentage adjustments based on a mortgagor's credit score and down payment.
(Sec. 2) This section reinstates the fee structure that was in place prior to May 1, 2023.
Showing the opening paragraphs of the official summary.
(Sec. 3) Further adjustments to the fee structure by FHFA are prohibited until 90 days after the publication of a report by the Government Accountability Office (GAO) required by section 5 of the bill. After this period, FHFA must follow Administrative Procedure Act requirements when proposing adjustments to the fee structure.
This section also requires that, to the greatest extent feasible, revisions to the fee schedule must be based on risk.
(Sec. 4) FHFA, Fannie Mae, and Freddie Mac are prohibited from imposing any loan-level pricing adjustment fee that is based on the ratio of the debt of the mortgagor to the income of the mortgagor.
(Sec. 5) The GAO must report on the changes to the fees made by the FHFA.
(Sec. 7) This section extends through FY2033 the authority of Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac to charge a guarantee fee.
People & committees
Rep. Davidson, Warren [R-OH-8] · R–OH
Legislative record
A procedural vote is different from passage. Passage in one chamber does not establish enactment. Explore the glossary.
Received in the Senate and Read twice and referred to the Committee on Banking, Housing, and Urban Affairs.
Motion to reconsider laid on the table Agreed to without objection.
On passage Passed by the Yeas and Nays: 230 - 189 (Roll no. 289).
House roll call 289 · Individual votesPassed/agreed to in House: On passage Passed by the Yeas and Nays: 230 - 189 (Roll no. 289).
House roll call 289 · Individual votesOn motion to recommit Failed by the Yeas and Nays: 197 - 214 (Roll no. 288).
House roll call 288 · Individual votesThe previous question on the motion to recommit was ordered pursuant to clause 2(b) of rule XIX.
Mr. Cleaver moved to recommit to the Committee on Financial Services. (text: CR H3127)
The House adopted the amendments en gross as agreed to by the Committee of the Whole House on the state of the Union.
The previous question was ordered pursuant to the rule.
The House rose from the Committee of the Whole House on the state of the Union to report H.R. 3564.
DEBATE - Pursuant to the provisions of H. Res. 524, the Committee of the Whole proceeded with 10 minutes of debate on the Pettersen amendment No. 4.
DEBATE - Pursuant to the provisions of H. Res. 524, the Committee of the Whole proceeded with 10 minutes of debate on the Lee (NV) amendment No. 3.
DEBATE - Pursuant to the provisions of H. Res. 524, the Committee of the Whole proceeded with 10 minutes of debate on the Lee (NV) amendment No. 2.
DEBATE - Pursuant to the provisions of H. Res. 524, the Committee of the Whole proceeded with 10 minutes of debate on the Boebert amendment No. 1.
GENERAL DEBATE - The Committee of the Whole proceeded with one hour of general debate on H.R. 3564.
House resolved itself into the Committee of the Whole House on the state of the Union pursuant to H. Res. 524 and Rule XVIII.
The Speaker designated the Honorable Dan Newhouse to act as Chairman of the Committee.
Rule provides for consideration of H.R. 3564, H.R. 3799 and H. Res. 461. The resolution provides for consideration of H.R. 3564 under a structured rule with one hour of general debate; H.R. 3799 under a structured rule with eighty minutes of general debate; and H.Res. 461, under a closed rule with one hour of general debate. The resolution provides for a motion to recommit on H.R. 3564 and H.R. 3799.
Considered under the provisions of rule H. Res. 524. (consideration: CR H3115-3128; text: CR H3120)
Rules Committee Resolution H. Res. 524 Reported to House. Rule provides for consideration of H.R. 3564, H.R. 3799 and H. Res. 461. The resolution provides for consideration of H.R. 3564 under a structured rule with one hour of general debate; H.R. 3799 under a structured rule with eighty minutes of general debate; and H.Res. 461, under a closed rule with one hour of general debate. The resolution provides for a motion to recommit on H.R. 3564 and H.R. 3799.
Placed on the Union Calendar, Calendar No. 79.
Reported (Amended) by the Committee on Financial Services. H. Rept. 118-103.
Reported (Amended) by the Committee on Financial Services. H. Rept. 118-103.
Ordered to be Reported in the Nature of a Substitute (Amended) by the Yeas and Nays: 26 - 22.
Committee Consideration and Mark-up Session Held
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.
Source last updated: May 27, 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.3564 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.3564 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.3564 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.3564 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.