Contact Congress about H.R. 987: Fair Access to Banking Act

Large banks and payment networks would have to serve lawful customers unless they fail clear risk rules. Customers who are wrongly cut off could sue and seek triple damages.

Modern Action shows what the legislation would change, helps you choose whether to support, oppose, or ask for changes, and drafts a message tied to the bill, your stance, and the elected officials who can act on it.

Fair Access to Banking Act is a House bill in committee. The latest recorded action: Referred to the House Committee on Financial Services.

Latest action on H.R. 987: Referred to the House Committee on Financial Services.

Who this affects: This bill mainly affects lawful businesses and people who may be denied banking or payment services because their work, views, or public image is controversial. It also affects large banks, large credit unions, and payment card networks because they would need clear records and risk rules before denying service. Federal bank regulators and courts would help decide how these rules work in practice.

Why this matters: This bill matters because losing banking or payment access can shut down a lawful business in practice. The bill tries to stop large financial firms from using political views or public pressure as the only reason to cut off customers. It could expand access for some lawful but unpopular businesses. It could also make banks less able to avoid customers they see as risky for reputation or long-term business reasons.

Key provisions in H.R. 987

• The bill mostly applies to “covered banks.” That means banks with enough market power to affect prices or access to financial services. Banks with $50 billion or more in assets are presumed covered unless they prove otherwise to the Office of the Comptroller of the Currency, the federal bank regulator.
• Covered banks would have to offer each service they provide to everyone in their local market on proportionally equal terms. Another law could still require a different result.
• A bank could deny service only when the customer fails clear risk rules. Those rules must be neutral, written ahead of time, measured with numbers, and backed by records.
• A bank could not deny service only because of political risk or public-image risk. It also could not team up with others to deny service when the customer follows federal law.
• When a bank denies service, it must give the customer a written reason. The notice must name any specific law or rule the bank thinks the customer broke.

How Modern Action helps you take action on H.R. 987

You do not have to start with a blank letter. Modern Action turns the bill, your position, and the relevant congressional context into a message you can edit and send. The goal is to make contacting Congress clear, specific, and useful without forcing you to parse bill text or figure out the right office on your own.

Questions people ask about H.R. 987

What is H.R. 987?

Large banks and payment networks would have to serve lawful customers unless they fail clear risk rules. Customers who are wrongly cut off could sue and seek triple damages.

How do I support or oppose H.R. 987?

Choose support, oppose, or ask for changes on Modern Action. The action flow drafts the message for you and keeps the wording tied to this bill.

Who should I contact about H.R. 987?

Modern Action uses your location to route the action to the congressional offices relevant to the bill and your representation.

How does Modern Action help me act on H.R. 987?

Modern Action gives you bill-specific context, lets you choose support, opposition, or changes, and drafts a message from your position and reasons.