PlainBillCongress, translated.Legislation. Context. Public interest.
H.R.3717 / 107th Congress

Federal Deposit Insurance Reform Act of 2002

Received in the Senate and Read twice and referred to the Committee on Banking, Housing, and Urban Affairs.

Official summary

Version 17 · Reported to House with amendment(s) · May 16, 2002

Federal Deposit Insurance Reform Act of 2002 - Amends the Federal Deposit Insurance Act (FDIA) to mandate the merger of the Bank Insurance Fund and the Savings Association Insurance Fund into the Deposit Insurance Fund (DIF).(Sec. 3) Amends the FDIA and the Federal Credit Union Act to: (1) increase the standard maximum amount of deposit insurance coverage from $100,000 to $130,000, coupled with a five-year inflation adjustment index; (2) require the Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation (FDIC) to provide pass-through deposit insurance for the deposits of any employee benefit plan (but prohibiting an insured depository institution that is neither well capitalized nor adequately capitalized from accepting such deposits); (3) double the standard maximum deposit insurance for certain retirement accounts; and (4) increase the maximum amount of deposit insurance coverage for in-State municipal deposits.(Sec. 4) Amends the FDIA to replace assessment guidelines for achieving and maintaining a designated reserve ratio and for independent treatment of deposit insurance funds with a requirement that the Board of Directors (Board) of the FDIC set assessments as it determines appropriate, including a maximum base rate for assessments at one basis point for insured depository institutions in the lowest-risk category.Reduces from five years to three years: (1) the mandatory assessment recordkeeping period; and (2) the statute of limitations for causes of action relating to assessment claims against the FDIC or claims of recovery by the FDIC against insured depository institutions.Increases penalties from $100 to one percent of assessments per day for depository institution failure to make timely assessment payments.Revises guidelines governing the risk-based assessment system to make the portion of deposits attributable to lifeline accounts subject to half the assessment rate that would otherwise be applicable.(Sec. 5) Authorizes the Board to set assessments on depository institutions that experience rapid growth in new insured deposits, if the net increase in such deposits exceeds a Board-determined appropriate percentage (taking into account the levels of assessments paid by such an institution in prior assessment periods).(Sec. 6) Replaces the current 1.25 percent statutory reserve ratio used to recapitalize undercapitalized insurance funds with a reserve ratio range of 1.15 to 1.4 percent of estimated insured deposits, subject to specified factors and annual redetermination.(Sec. 7) Directs the Board to collect information from all appropriate sources in determining risk of losses to the DIF.(Sec. 8) Prescribes guidelines governing: (1) the payment of mandatory dividends to insured depository institutions whenever the DIF reserve ratio equals or exceeds specified percentages of the estimated insured deposits required to maintain the designated reserve ratio in effect at the time; and (2) a one-time credit predicated upon the December 31, 1996, assessment base of each eligible depository institution, as compared to the combined aggregate assessment base of all such institutions. Restricts the amount of such credit for depository institutions that exhibit financial, operational, or compliance weakness, including undercapitalization.Requires the Board to establish an on-going system of credits to be applied against future assessments on the same basis as such dividends.(Sec. 9) Requires the Board to establish and implement restoration plans for the DIF whenever its reserve ratio is projected to fall or actually falls below the designated reserve ratio. Prescribes requirements for such plans.(Sec. 11) Mandates studies and reports to Congress: (1) by the Comptroller General and the FDIC on the effectiveness of the prompt corrective action program administered by Federal banking agencies and the accuracy of risk assessments made by the FDIC, and the appropriateness of FDIC organizational structure in light of its regulatory mission; (2) by the FDIC and the National Credit Union Administration on the feasibility of establishing a voluntary deposit insurance system for deposits in excess of the maximum amount of deposit insurance, and of privatizing all deposit insurance at insured depository institutions and credit unions; (3) by the FDIC on the feasibility of using actual domestic deposits rather than estimated insured deposits in calculating the reserve ratio of the DIF and designating a DIF reserve ratio; and (4) by the FDIC on the reserve methodology and loss accounting it used between January 1, 1992, and December 31, 2002, with respect to insured depository institutions in a troubled condition.

Read the summary on Congress.gov
PlainBill analysis is coming later. This page presents official source data. We have not yet published a PlainBill explanation for this bill.

Who introduced it

Rep. Bachus, Spencer [R-AL-6] · R–AL

Committees

  • Banking, Housing, and Urban Affairs Committee
  • Financial Services Committee
63 cosponsorship records, including any withdrawals

Actions

A procedural vote is different from passage. Passage in one chamber does not establish enactment. Explore the glossary.

  1. Received in the Senate and Read twice and referred to the Committee on Banking, Housing, and Urban Affairs.

  2. Motion to reconsider laid on the table Agreed to without objection.

  3. On motion to suspend the rules and pass the bill, as amended Agreed to by the Yeas and Nays: (2/3 required): 408 - 18 (Roll no. 190). (text: CR 5/21/2002 H2787-2794)

    House roll call 190 · Individual votes
  4. Passed/agreed to in House: On motion to suspend the rules and pass the bill, as amended Agreed to by the Yeas and Nays: (2/3 required): 408 - 18 (Roll no. 190).(text: CR 5/21/2002 H2787-2794)

    House roll call 190 · Individual votes
  5. Considered as unfinished business. (consideration: CR H2860)

  6. At the conclusion of debate, the Yeas and Nays were demanded and ordered. Pursuant to the provisions of clause 8, rule XX, the Chair announced that further proceedings on the motion would be postponed until May 22.

  7. DEBATE - The House proceeded with forty minutes of debate on H.R. 3717.

  8. Considered under suspension of the rules. (consideration: CR H2787-2803)

  9. Mr. Oxley moved to suspend the rules and pass the bill, as amended.

  10. Placed on the Union Calendar, Calendar No. 278.

  11. Reported (Amended) by the Committee on Financial Services. H. Rept. 107-467.

  12. Reported (Amended) by the Committee on Financial Services. H. Rept. 107-467.

  13. Ordered to be Reported (Amended) by the Yeas and Nays: 52 - 2.

  14. Committee Consideration and Mark-up Session Held.

  15. Forwarded by Subcommittee to Full Committee (Amended) by Voice Vote.

  16. Subcommittee Consideration and Mark-up Session Held.

  17. Referred to the Subcommittee on Financial Institutions and Consumer Credit.

  18. Referred to the House Committee on Financial Services.

  19. Introduced in House

  20. Introduced in House

Bill text & related measures

Text links open the official source. We currently store references to these documents.

Related bills identified by Congress.gov

Source last updated: Apr 7, 2025. Consult Congress.gov for the current record.

Explore the bill from different angles

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.

Neutral evidence review

Objective

Analyze H.R.3717 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.

View full prompt & sources
Fairness and public impact

Progressive lens

Examine H.R.3717 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.

View full prompt & sources
Institutions and government scope

Conservative lens

Examine H.R.3717 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.

View full prompt & sources
Individual rights and government power

Liberty lens

Examine H.R.3717 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.

View full prompt & sources