2006•UNM’s Digital Repository (University of New Mexico)Requires access

Killing with Kindness: The Myth of "Consumer Protection" in the Bankruptcy Abuse and Consumer Protection Act of 2005

Margaret Romero

Open publisher page 0 citations

Abstract

The United States Congress considered bankruptcy reform for eight years before George W. Bush signed the Bankruptcy Abuse and Consumer Protection Act of 2005 ("BACPA") into law on April 20, 2005. Congressional proponents alleged that rampant and abusive practices required substantial reform measures to combat a staggering economic crisis that burdened every honest citizen. Bankruptcy reform offered the promise of "greater stability and fairness" in the American financial system. BACPA supporters promised that the massive reform measures were designed to curb abusive practices while protecting innocent consumers. However, despite apparently decent and compassionate intentions, some consumer protection measures may have the unintended result of penalizing the truly honest debtor. This article discusses how certain mechanisms, designed tozprotect consumers, impose unintended barriers to critical relief. The article also discusses how reform measures, intended to curb abusive practices, impose hardships on debtors fielding the system most. The specific code provision are identified and explained, and the intended goals, as expressed in the legislative history, are analyzed and compared to the practical or actual result. The author also offers ameliorative proposals to ensure that the "consumer protection" provisions of the act realize the promise that BACPA will "protect those who legitimately need help."

About this research paper

What this paper is about

The United States Congress considered bankruptcy reform for eight years before George W. Bush signed the Bankruptcy Abuse and Consumer Protection Act of 2005 ("BACPA") into law on April 20, 2005. Congressional proponents alleged that rampant and abusive practices required substantial reform measures to combat a staggering economic crisis that burdened every honest citizen. Bankruptcy reform offered the promise of "greater stability and fairness" in the American financial system. BACPA supporters promised that the massive reform measures were designed to curb abusive practices while protecting innocent consumers. However, despite apparently decent and compassionate intentions, some consumer protection measures may have the unintended result of penalizing the truly honest debtor. This article discusses how certain mechanisms, designed tozprotect consumers, impose unintended barriers to critical relief. The article also discusses how reform measures, intended to curb abusive practices, impose hardships on debtors fielding the system most. The specific code provision are identified and explained, and the intended goals, as expressed in the legislative history, are analyzed and compared to the practical or actual result. The author also offers ameliorative proposals to ensure that the "consumer protection" provisions of the act realize the promise that BACPA will "protect those who legitimately need help."

Why it matters

A significance statement is not available in the OpenAlex record.

Key contribution

A contribution statement is not available in the OpenAlex record.

Method / approach

Method details are not available in the OpenAlex metadata.

Main findings

Findings are not separately available in the OpenAlex metadata.

Limitations

Limitations are not available in the OpenAlex metadata.

Applications

Application details are not available in the OpenAlex metadata.

Available abstract

The United States Congress considered bankruptcy reform for eight years before George W. Bush signed the Bankruptcy Abuse and Consumer Protection Act of 2005 ("BACPA") into law on April 20, 2005. Congressional proponents alleged that rampant and abusive practices required substantial reform measures to combat a staggering economic crisis that burdened every honest citizen. Bankruptcy reform offered the promise of "greater stability and fairness" in the American financial system. BACPA supporters promised that the massive reform measures were designed to curb abusive practices while protecting innocent consumers. However, despite apparently decent and compassionate intentions, some consumer protection measures may have the unintended result of penalizing the truly honest debtor. This article discusses how certain mechanisms, designed tozprotect consumers, impose unintended barriers to critical relief. The article also discusses how reform measures, intended to curb abusive practices, impose hardships on debtors fielding the system most. The specific code provision are identified and explained, and the intended goals, as expressed in the legislative history, are analyzed and compared to the practical or actual result. The author also offers ameliorative proposals to ensure that the "consumer protection" provisions of the act realize the promise that BACPA will "protect those who legitimately need help."

Key concepts: Consumer Protection Act, Bankruptcy, Kindness, Mythology, Consumer protection, Business, Criminology, Psychology

Related papers

Back to paper searchBrowse research topicsOriginal source
Killing with Kindness: The Myth of "Consumer Protection" in the Bankruptcy Abuse and Consumer Protection Act of 2005 — Research Paper | ScholarLens