1. United States
2. Ohio
3. Letter

I’m writing to clarify and revise a previous letter I sent regarding H.R. 987, the Fair Access to Banking Act. At first, I misunderstood the bill’s implications and believed it might allow financial institutions to more easily deny services to marginalized communities, such as LGBTQ+ individuals, adult content creators, or other stigmatized groups. Based on that concern, I initially expressed opposition to the bill. However, after reading the bill more carefully, I now realize that H.R. 987 would actually protect these communities by preventing large financial institutions from refusing to serve lawful businesses or individuals based on reputation, ideology, or social stigma—a pattern that has harmed queer creators, sex workers, online subcultures, and dissident voices. I now believe this bill offers important protections against politicized financial discrimination, not only for the industries often cited in its support (such as firearms or fossil fuels) but also for those whose existence or livelihoods are often targeted by cultural and political backlash. By requiring banks and payment processors to use objective, risk-based standards when evaluating clients, this legislation can help ensure that lawful activity does not result in unjust exclusion from essential financial services. I appreciate the opportunity to correct the record and urge you to consider this broader context when evaluating H.R. 987. Fair access to banking should mean just that—for everyone. Thank you for your time and for your service to our district.