PlainBillCongress, translated.Legislation. Context. Public interest.Read twice and referred to the Committee on Banking, Housing, and Urban Affairs.
Congressional Research Service
Version 00 · Introduced in Senate · Jan 29, 2009
Community Choice in Real Estate Act - Amends the Bank Holding Company Act of 1956 and the Revised Statutes of the United States to prohibit the Board of Governors of the Federal Reserve System and the Secretary of the Treasury, respectively, from determining that real estate brokerage activity or real estate management activity is financial in nature, is incidental to any financial activity, or is complementary to a financial activity. (In effect, prohibits financial holding companies and national banks from engaging, directly or indirectly, in real estate brokerage or real estate management activities.)
Exempts from such prohibition: (1) activities of a bank holding company (or any affiliate) that directly relate to managing any real property owned by national banks or their affiliates; and (2) the right, power, or ability of any financial holding company to engage in any activity, or acquire or retain the shares of any company engaged in an activity authorized for financial holding companies on December 6, 2001 ("grandfather clause").
People & committees
Sen. Boxer, Barbara [D-CA] · D–CA
Legislative record
A procedural vote is different from passage. Passage in one chamber does not establish enactment. Explore the glossary.
Read twice and referred to the Committee on Banking, Housing, and Urban Affairs.
Sponsor introductory remarks on measure. (CR S1067)
Introduced in Senate
Primary sources
Text links open the official source. We currently store references to these documents.
Source last updated: Dec 5, 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 S.356 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 S.356 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 S.356 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 S.356 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.