HR-9900-119
Referred to the House Committee on Financial Services.
Sponsored by Warren Davidson (R-OH)
What it does
This bill would amend the Federal Credit Union Act to change two procedural requirements for privately insured credit unions seeking to convert to federal deposit insurance. First, it would remove the current rule requiring that at least 20% of a credit union's total membership participate in the conversion vote. Second, it would extend the minimum advance notice period for the member vote from the current window of 7–30 days to a minimum of 90 days.
Who benefits
Privately insured credit unions whose membership is large or geographically dispersed, making a 20% participation threshold difficult to achieve — these institutions would find conversion easier to complete. Credit union boards and management seeking to convert to federal insurance without being blocked by low voter turnout. Members of converting credit unions who would gain more time (at least 90 days) to review and respond to conversion notices. The National Credit Union Administration (NCUA), which oversees federally insured credit unions and would gain jurisdiction over converted institutions.
Who is hurt
Private deposit insurers — primarily American Share Insurance (ASI), the dominant private credit union insurer — which would lose insured institutions if conversions become easier to complete. Members of credit unions who prefer private insurance arrangements and may see their institution convert with lower overall member participation. State regulators who oversee privately insured credit unions may see a reduction in their regulated pool. Smaller credit unions where the 20% threshold was achievable and served as a meaningful democratic check on board-driven conversions.
Supporters argue
Supporters argue that the 20% participation threshold is an outdated barrier that effectively gives apathetic or unreachable members a veto over a credit union's ability to access federal deposit insurance, which is backed by the full faith and credit of the U.S. government. They contend that large modern credit unions with tens of thousands of members routinely fail to reach 20% participation in any internal vote, making conversion practically impossible regardless of member support among those who do vote. The extended 90-day notice period, they argue, more than compensates by giving engaged members ample time to organize, deliberate, and cast informed votes.
Opponents argue
Opponents argue that the 20% participation threshold exists precisely to ensure that a consequential, potentially irreversible institutional change — switching deposit insurance systems — reflects genuine member consensus rather than a low-turnout vote controlled by a small, board-aligned minority. They contend that removing the quorum requirement without replacing it with any alternative participation safeguard could allow credit union boards to push through conversions that most members would oppose if they were aware of them. While the extended notice period adds time, critics argue that time alone does not guarantee meaningful member engagement or protect against well-organized board-driven campaigns.