Congress just saved your credit card rewards — for now



Sens. Dick Durbin (D-Ill.) and Roger Marshall (R-Kan.) just failed — again — in their bid to ram through the Credit Card Competition Act, a sweeping regulatory proposal that would overhaul the U.S. credit card system to resemble Europe’s heavy-handed financial regime. Their latest attempt to sneak the measure into a stablecoin bill collapsed under scrutiny, marking yet another setback for legislation that critics say would harm consumers, weaken data security, and empower retail giants.

This outcome is welcome but unsurprising. The bill is wildly unpopular with consumers — for good reason. As written, it’s a thinly veiled giveaway to big-box retailers at the expense of virtually everyone else. Its sponsors claim it would inject competition into a noncompetitive market.

Senate leadership clearly got the message. Americans don’t want to fix something that isn’t broken.

In reality, the CCCA would allow retailers to continue accepting name-brand credit cards while processing payments through lesser-known networks — all without consumer knowledge or consent. Lawmakers should stand firm against any future efforts to resurrect this awful proposal.

The central premise of the bill — that the credit card market lacks competition — is unfounded. As of 2025, 152 companies in the United States issue credit cards. Between 2020 and 2025, market entry has grown at an average annual rate of 8.1%. This kind of steady growth does not indicate a broken market, but rather a dynamic and competitive system that continues to serve consumers well.

Kiss rewards goodbye

If passed, the CCCA would jeopardize that progress. Fraud rates, already on the rise, would skyrocket. Unvetted payment processors would be handed vast troves of sensitive consumer data. The only beneficiaries of using these cheaper alternatives are the retailers, who lack a vested interest in cardholder safety. Meanwhile, smaller institutions — including community banks and credit unions — would see revenue streams dry up.

RELATED: SCARY: President of European Central Bank admits 'digital Euro' is ready for launch

dem10 via iStock/Getty Images

Retailers insist these alleged “cost savings” would trickle down to their customers. That’s about as likely as the claim that businesses absorb tariffs or taxes without raising prices. History suggests otherwise.

Worse still, the bill would also end the ability of banks and credit unions to operate popular credit card rewards programs. These programs are funded largely by the interchange fees charged by payment processors. When Durbin succeeded in passing his debit card price controls, consumers lost card benefits and experienced no savings. A Wall Street Journal article highlighted this history:

Debit-card rewards programs have nearly disappeared since the Durbin amendment, part of the 2010 Dodd-Frank law that cut retailers’ fees nearly in half. Stores didn’t pass the savings to customers, while the banks that issue the cards found other ways to recoup revenue.

A failed Trojan horse

Like a one-trick pony, Durbin and Marshall have not given up — despite the bill neither gaining traction nor receiving a committee markup. As they have done previously, the senators once again tried to tuck their proposal into a “must-pass” bill. Their first target in the 119th Congress was the GENIUS Act, a bipartisan bill focused on stablecoin regulations. Thankfully, Senate leadership saw right through this ploy.

Polling confirms that Americans are largely content with the current credit card marketplace. In fact, 77% of respondents trust credit card companies to handle key responsibilities, such as fraud prevention. Three-quarters of respondents trust that their private payment networks will handle the protection of personal data. The poll also showed that 79% of cardholders use rewards cards, and more than half (58%) use those rewards regularly. Rewards are a tool many families and businesses rely on to make purchases while also earning cash back.

Senate leadership clearly got the message. Americans don’t want to fix something that isn’t broken — which is why they rightly rejected the addition of Durbin’s credit card mandates to the GENIUS Act.

Consumers can breathe easier

It is a relief the bill didn’t slip in as an amendment with no opportunity for debate. Any legislation with sweeping financial implications deserves full congressional scrutiny — and the voices of constituents must be heard. Still, Durbin and Marshall are reportedly eyeing the National Defense Authorization Act as their next legislative vehicle.

Taxpayers must remain vigilant to hold their representatives accountable. Policymakers must also be vigilant in defending the interests of their constituents. But for now, millions of Americans can breathe a sigh of relief.

The Same Democrats Trying To Discredit Emil Bove Had No Worries Confirming Activist Judges

The truth is Bove is experienced, competent, and without glaring issues that should prevent him from being confirmed.

Democrats Warned About Unelected, Rogue Judges — Until Trump Started Fighting Them

Everything Democrats warned about before Trump returned to office is exactly what they're either now celebrating or dismissing.

Don’t let the Biden autopen scandal become just another lame hearing



Congressional hearings can serve the public — when followed by real action. They can expose wrongdoing, shape public opinion, and force accountability. But when the hearings end and nothing follows, they become a substitute for meaningful oversight — a way to check the box and collect headlines without doing meaningful work.

That’s the routine Americans have come to expect: dramatic sound bites, viral clips, and lawmakers patting themselves on the back for sending strongly worded letters. Unless Congress breaks that habit now, the autopen scandal risks becoming just another lost opportunity.

The Biden administration may have dodged the 25th Amendment, but Congress can’t dodge its duty.

Last week’s Senate Judiciary Committee hearing focused on the use of the autopen under President Joe Biden. The stakes couldn’t be higher. As Oversight Project board member Theo Wold put it in his testimony, the United States did not have a fully functioning president for the past four years. Biden’s longtime Senate colleagues know it — and should have testified as fact witnesses. Instead, all but two Senate Democrats — Dick Durbin of Illinois and Peter Welch of Vermont — boycotted the hearing. That includes Sen. Adam Schiff (D-Calif.), whose receipt of an autopenned pardon raises a glaring conflict of interest.

Senate Republicans showed up and asked the right questions. They grasped the core issue: Biden’s lack of capacity and his inability to direct subordinates. Unlike previous administrations, the Biden White House appears to have used the autopen not for convenience, but as a way to obscure who actually ran the government — skirting the 25th Amendment without invoking it.

The hearing raised serious constitutional concerns. What happens when top officials prefer an incapacitated president over triggering a process designed to protect the country? Several senators floated the idea of reforming the 25th Amendment. That’s a conversation worth having. But it means nothing without follow-through.

So what should happen now?

First, the Senate should demand every record related to the Biden administration’s use of the autopen. That includes documentation of who authorized its use and a log of every instance it was used. As Wold testified, these records exist — or their absence signals a much deeper problem. Sen. Josh Hawley (R-Mo.) quickly pledged to pursue them.

Those materials fall under the Presidential Records Act and remain off-limits to the public. Trust me, we would have been in court months ago to procure their release if we could get them. Only Congress or the Trump administration can obtain them. If they stall, they’ll be complicit in the cover-up.

Second, Jake Tapper and Alex Thompson must testify. Their book “Original Sin” relied on more than 200 sources. If they know something the public doesn’t, they have a moral — and potentially legal — obligation to come forward. The Senate invited them to the hearing. They declined. The next request should come in the form of a subpoena.

RELATED: Oversight Project over target: Dems seethe as facade of autopen presidency comes crashing down

Photo by Chip Somodevilla/Getty Images

Third, Congress should use the same tools the January 6 select committee wielded with abandon. That includes subpoenas for documents, phone and bank records, and private communications from staffers and political operatives who helped prop up the “autopen administration.” If these individuals claim executive privilege, Trump should waive it — just as Biden did during the Jan. 6 probe.

Finally, the House had better follow through. Kentucky Republican Chairman James Comer’s promised interviews and depositions can’t be treated as political theater. They must become the backbone of a real investigation.

Accountability won’t happen unless the public demands it. Americans should track every step — or failure to act — and hold Congress to its promises. The country doesn’t need another performance. It needs answers.

The Biden administration may have dodged the 25th Amendment, but Congress can’t dodge its duty. The biggest scandal in modern American history demands more than six-minute cable news hits and clips for social media. It requires courage, subpoenas, and a willingness to pull every legal lever available.

The public has largely caught on to the ineffectiveness of “strongly worded letters” and now will have a perfect test case to judge whether Congress means business or if it’s the same old tired, do-nothing routine.

It’s time to get off X and into the trenches.

Why are Republicans helping Dick Durbin gut Trump’s crypto bill?



Fifteen years ago, Sen. Dick Durbin (D-Ill.) slipped an amendment into law that handed a $90 billion windfall to mega-retailers like Walmart and Target — while forcing everyday Americans to foot the bill.

Now he’s trying to do it again. This time, he’s recruited Republican help.

President Trump has made his priorities clear. He wants America to dominate in financial tech — not hand the future to China.

As a former chairman of the House Financial Services Subcommittee on Capital Markets and Government Sponsored Enterprises — and as a proud Trump ally — I’m alarmed that Sen. Roger Marshall (R-Kan.) has teamed up with Durbin to hijack one of the most important bills of the year: the Genius Act.

This legislation, backed by President Trump, would establish the first federal framework for stablecoins — digital dollars backed by U.S. currency and issued by trusted financial institutions. It’s the cornerstone of America’s entry into 21st-century digital payments and a key to ensuring that we — not China — lead the future of global finance.

President Trump and Vice President JD Vance have made the bill a top priority. “We’re optimistic that the Senate is able to move quickly on passing a clean Genius Act and for the House to follow up and do the same,” Vance told attendees at the Bitcoin 2025 Conference in Nashville.

But that momentum will vanish if Marshall and Durbin succeed in attaching their so-called Credit Card Competition Act. This isn’t reform — it’s the Durbin Amendment 2.0, and we’ve already seen how that story ends.

In 2010, despite widespread opposition, Durbin passed his original amendment, shifting the cost of payment processing from big-box retailers onto credit card companies. He promised that consumers would benefit when retailers passed along those savings.

They didn’t.

A Federal Reserve-backed study later found that only 1% of merchants passed savings on to customers. Meanwhile, 22% raised prices. Card companies — forced to absorb the new costs — cut back on free checking accounts and slashed debit card rewards programs. The number of cardholders earning rewards dropped 30%.

Main Street lost. Big box stores cashed in. Even the left-leaning Progressive Policy Institute now admits the amendment failed and has urged Congress to “rethink” the policy.

The Credit Card Competition Act would repeat the mistake, but with credit cards. It would force every credit card to operate on at least two payment networks, letting mega-retailers route transactions through the cheapest — and often least secure — option. They’d pocket the savings. Consumers wouldn’t see a dime.

RELATED: Trump’s Bitcoin masterstroke puts America ahead in digital assets

Photo by IAN MAULE/AFP via Getty Images

Under the current system, consumers choose the networks by picking the cards they want to carry. Merchants choose which cards to accept. That’s the free market. The CCCA would dismantle that system and take away the rewards — cash back, airline miles, travel perks — that millions of Americans rely on.

Amazon, Walmart, and Target would benefit. Rural consumers, community banks, and small businesses would lose.

If this poison-pill amendment gets attached to the Genius Act, the bill’s broad bipartisan support will vanish. Sen. Thom Tillis (R-N.C.) has already warned he’ll withdraw support if Durbin 2.0 gets jammed into the final package.

Congress must not let backroom deals or crony carve-outs derail this legislation. The Genius Act should be an easy win for consumers, tech innovation, and U.S. leadership in digital finance.

President Trump has made his priorities clear. He wants America to dominate in financial technology — not hand the future to China. His administration supports clear, commonsense rules that unlock innovation, protect consumers, and safeguard the dollar’s global status.

The Genius Act achieves all of that — if lawmakers pass it clean.

Republicans can’t claim to support Trump’s economic agenda while carrying water for woke corporations and their favorite Democrat senator. They need to decide: Stand with Main Street or sell out to K Street. Back American innovation or stick with the same tired crony playbook.

The country doesn’t need another Durbin amendment. It needs leadership.

Documents Show DC Bar Skirted Its Own Rules And Due Process To Target Jeff Clark

The D.C. Bar skirted its rules dictating how to fairly open a disciplinary investigation to target and potentially disbar Trump-era Department of Justice official Jeffrey Clark, new documents obtained by The Federalist reveal. During his brief tenure as U.S. Attorney for the District of Columbia, Ed Martin sought information about the D.C. Bar’s weaponization of […]

J6 Prosecutors Brag To Congress About Locking Up Americans For Misdemeanors

The prosecutors who dedicated themselves to getting Jan. 6 convictions cannot fathom that they were heavy-handed and unjustly charged too many people.

Democrats smear, stall, and spin to stop Trump’s DC cleanup



Ed Martin’s nomination to serve as U.S. attorney for the District of Columbia marks the most consequential confirmation of President Trump’s second term so far. Predictably, it’s also Senate Democrats’ top target. Blocking Martin would be a massive blow to the administration, derailing momentum and setting a dangerous new precedent for future nominations and legislation.

Democrats know it — and they’re all in.

In a matter of months, Martin has reoriented the US attorney’s office from a political weapon into a proper law enforcement agency.

If they succeed in stopping Martin, they’ll be emboldened. Future nominees will face the same obstruction.

Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer (D-N.Y.) may understand Trump’s 20-point campaign platform better than most. He knows Trump’s political identity rests on a rare quality: keeping promises. Undermining Trump’s ability to deliver on those promises — especially while Democrats remain fractured on nearly everything else — would hand Schumer a major win.

That’s why Democrats have zeroed in on Martin.

He holds primary responsibility for delivering on Trump’s pledge to clean up Washington, D.C., and restore order ahead of America’s 250th anniversary in 2026. With the world watching, the nation’s capital cannot remain a showcase of chaos. Martin also oversees implementation of the president’s executive order titled “Making the District of Columbia Safe and Beautiful.”

He’s already delivering.

Unlike his predecessor, who obsessed over 1,600 low-level January 6 misdemeanor defendants, Martin has gone after serious crimes. He’s charged violent offenders targeting police, schools, and children. In March, he set a record with 18 federal gun crime charges — a mark he’s on pace to surpass. He’s seized over $200,000 from Hamas-linked actors, rescued 25 children from predators, and secured a 10-year sentence for a carjacker.

In a matter of months, Martin has reoriented the U.S. attorney’s office from a political weapon into a proper law enforcement agency.

Historically, D.C. U.S. attorney nominations were routine. Confirmations often happened by voice vote. Martin’s immediate predecessor, Matthew Graves — who prioritized nonviolent J6 prosecutions over spiraling violent crime — sailed through. So did Eric Holder, Bill Clinton’s pick, later Barack Obama’s self-described “wingman” in the Justice Department. Even in the face of an assassination attempt, one might expect President Trump to receive basic deference in selecting his top federal prosecutor.

So why the fight?

Democrats view blocking Martin as their best shot to stall the entire Trump agenda. If they win this round — especially before action begins on the tax and border reconciliation bill — they will exploit GOP hesitation and slow the administration’s rollout. It’s a savvy play, especially at a moment when Democrats and the left have few options.

No Senate Republican has publicly opposed Martin. But Democrats wouldn’t push this hard without sensing weakness. They’re dusting off their Kavanaugh-era playbook: smear campaigns, media pressure, and manufactured “process” complaints.

They’ve falsely painted Martin as anti-Semitic — based on an award he once gave to a person he didn’t know held anti-Semitic views. Martin later denounced the individual in no uncertain terms. He handed out dozens of awards that day, including to Jewish honorees. That hasn’t mattered to the same party that won’t denounce Hamas apologists in its own ranks.

Next came U.S. Senator Adam Schiff (D-Calif.), who claimed Martin’s assistance in helping Jan. 6 defendants secure local counsel created a “conflict of interest.” The D.C. Bar cleared Martin of any wrongdoing.

Now Sen. Dick Durbin (D-Ill.) has buried Martin in written questions and, via the Washington Post, accused him of noncompliance. The strategy is clear: overwhelm, confuse, smear, repeat.

Democrats also enjoy a tactical advantage. Martin’s interim appointment expires after 120 days — in other words, mid-May. Senate procedures reward delay, and some Republicans may prefer letting the clock run out to avoid a high-profile vote. But that strategy depends on silence.

And silence won’t last.

Public support for Martin continues to build. GOP inaction that produces the same outcome as a Democratic rejection won’t go unnoticed. There is no backdoor exit. Only forward movement will do.

Senate Republicans now face a clear choice: Hold the line or hand Democrats a tactical win with long-term consequences. Failing to confirm Martin risks turning every legislative priority — including future judicial and Supreme Court nominations — into an internal conference war.

The next few weeks will reveal what kind of Senate this is — and whether it will carry out the mandate voters gave to Donald Trump. Schumer, Durbin, Schiff, and their House allies like Jamie Raskin (D-Md.) are betting on Republican hesitation.

Let’s hope that they lose and that President Trump gets his prosecutor in D.C. so he can make the city safe and beautiful. America has a big birthday party coming up. Let’s not mess it up.

It Takes A Lot Of Jet Fuel To Throw A Funeral For A Climate Alarmist Pope

If Francis’ climate beliefs were ever to become policy prescriptions, most of the world would die, starting with the poor, elderly, and sick.

If DNC Co-Chair’s Plan Works, Democrats’ Path To Victory Becomes Road To Hell

'Hogg is helping pave the way for Republicans'