Small Business Assistance and Credit Crunch Relief Act of 1993
Read twice and referred to the Committee on Banking.
Congressional Research Service
Official summary
Version 00 · Introduced in Senate · May 13, 1993
Small Business Assistance and Credit Crunch Relief Act of 1993 - Amends the Federal Deposit Insurance Act to require each appropriate Federal banking agency and the Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation (FDIC) to take into consideration, in resolving the problems of an insured depository institution, the potential disruption to the local economy if the institution is closed or otherwise subjected to sanctions by Federal regulators. Prohibits such an agency from promulgating any new regulation until it has conducted a regulatory impact analysis and concluded that the regulation's benefits outweigh its costs, including the benefits and costs for small banks (those with total assets of less than $400 million). Directs each agency to conduct a thorough review and evaluation of all: (1) statutory provisions affecting small banks; and (2) regulatory provisions affecting such banks that have been promulgated by such agency. Provides for the suspension of regulations determined to be no longer necessary or ineffective and for the submission to the Congress of a recommendation to suspend the applicability of any Federal law that affects small banks. Requires publication of such suspensions in the Federal Register and appropriate consultation for such determinations. Amends the Financial Institutions Reform, Recovery, and Enforcement Act of 1989 to raise from $100,000 to $250,000 the threshold for licensed or certified real estate appraisals on small business loans. Amends the Community Reinvestment Act of 1977 to require the minimization of regulatory paperwork burden and costs of compliance under such Act for small banks with the highest (outstanding) compliance rating as determined under such Act. Exempts small banks rated "outstanding" from any documentation requirements. Outlines penalties and documentation requirements for small banks receiving a "substantial noncompliance" rating. Requires each appropriate Federal banking agency to: (1) review the extent to which this Act has reduced and eliminated unnecessary internal written policies; and (2) issue a recommendation as to whether this Act should be extended beyond the sunset date of three years after its enactment.
No related bills are listed in this snapshot. This does not establish whether the proposal has appeared in earlier Congresses.
Source last updated: Aug 26, 2025. Consult Congress.gov for the current record.
AI Conversation Starters
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 S.950 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 S.950 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 S.950 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 S.950 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.