H.R. 6392, the so-called Systemic Risk Designation Improvement Act of 2016, would not, as its name implies, "improve" how our government designates banks as "systemic risks" to our economy. In fact, one would more accurately say it would hopelessly damage our government's ability to protect us from big bankster crises, as it would excuse banks with $50 billion or more in assets from performing stress tests to ensure their solvency, and would allow those banks to start taking the kind of risks with our money that crashed the economy in 2008. And when banks fail, you know what that means? More bailouts. Moreover, the bill would give the Treasury Department power to determine which banks need to follow such rules and when -- and, ah, have you met our next President? He's not exactly going to appoint a staunch defender of consumers to the Treasury post. And lest we lament that Republicans never, ever seem to learn the lessons of the 2008 financial services Armageddon, note well that more than a few "moderate" Democrats have also lately gotten on board with "relaxing" rules and providing a "light touch" on regulations. By "light touch," of course, they mean no touch. The House will plan to vote on this bill this week -- because of course they can work quickly when it means giving away what's ours to banksters -- so you may want to use the tools in the upper left-hand corner of this page to tell your House Reps to reject H.R. 6392 and thus protect our economy from bankster decadence.
Meanwhile, you've no doubt read all about the multitudinous potential conflicts-of-interest Mr. Trump could have once he takes office -- conflicts of interest Mr. Trump has said the media knew about already, and though I can't say I find that latter point entirely unsympathetic, it shouldn't mean a thing to us: a man either has conflicts of interest that will impede his ability to execute his duties as mandated by the Constitution and by our nation's laws, or he doesn't, and Mr. Trump doesn't seem to be the kind of fellow who thinks it matters that personally profiting off being President runs rather counter to the whole idea of public service. Hence CREDO helps you tell House Oversight Committee Chair Jason Chaffetz to investigate Mr. Trump's financial arrangements, discover perceived or actual conflicts of interest, and ensure that he and his advisors comply with the law and with ethics once he becomes President. Rep. Chaffetz, a Utah Republican, likes to cut an independent figure every once in a while, so maybe he'll be amenable to displaying some independence against a man who'll undoubtedly be the most unpopular man ever to ascend to the Presidency. Indeed, if I were a coward, that's how I'd do it! But I wouldn't count on such a thing happening, though, not merely because politicians disappoints us so often, but because it takes your focus off of counting on yourself. And that's who you need to count on in America.
Finally, world leaders will descend on Guadalajara, Mexico on December 5th for the Internet Governance Forum, where they'll discuss (as you might imagine) issues concerning freedom, sustainability, and security on the internet; the IGF doesn't exactly generate a whole lot of mandates, but it's still a place where a lot of world leaders will be at one time, so Access Now helps you tell those world leaders to stop all internet shutdowns immediately. You recall how the Egyptian President shut down the internet as his nation was rebelling against him? You recall how former Sen. Lieberman wanted to bring the "internet kill switch" to America? Well, 2015 saw some 15 internet shutdowns carried out by world governments, but that number's more than doubled in 2016, and 2016 ain't even over yet. But think about this: how do you feel when you can't get to where you want to go on the internet? It's pretty frustrating, right? Now think how you'd feel if you couldn't get anywhere on the internet. Why, that would feel even worse than having to sit through a bunch of Miley Cyrus twerking videos before you can get to where you want to go (which is surely Donald Trump's plan for our internet). So governments of the world need to hear, from us, en masse, that shutting down the internet just to control protestors or agitators is a blow to our freedom to assemble and communicate. And I think by now we're on to how governments claim "terrorism" as a reason to shut down the internet, because that's a bad government's excuse for everything.