Comptroller Gould presents the OCC's debanking report beside Kentucky Senate candidate Andy Barr

The record shows a regulator that has already changed how it supervises and floated one more change. American Banker reported that Gould suggested the OCC may consider rules related to the instances in the report ^[16], and Gould said there is "more work to do" on the issue ^[17]. Neither source reports a proposed rule, a deadline, a penalty or an action against a named bank.

We think the evidence describes a supervisory standard with a campaign attached, and other outcomes fit the same facts. The report could be a one-time answer to the presidential directive that opened the review ^[13], with nothing after it. Rules could follow, and the Bank Policy Institute has said it would back "clear and consistent standards that promote access while maintaining sound risk management" ^[10]. Or the event could be mostly about the race: American Banker called a day of press events with the comptroller, in a state where Barr is running for an open seat with "increasingly tight margins," "a notable departure from the norm" ^[11]. Our view is that the first two matter more to a bank than the third, because the campaign ends on election day and the criteria language stays. A proposed rule or an action naming a bank would show we undersold enforcement.

The political frame is wider than the findings. Barr said on a radio show that "if you're running a law-abiding business in Kentucky or anywhere else, you deserve a fair shot at the financial system" ^[12], and the businesses he listed were coal miners, firearms retailers, pawnbrokers and non-bank small-dollar lenders ^[14]. The OCC's published excerpts cover coal and firearms ^[6][8], so two of the four, or half the list, sit outside what we can see of the findings ^[15].

Gould's test is the harder part. "We are not forcing these banks to serve every customer," he said. "Instead, banks should evaluate every customer on objective, risk-based criteria" ^[4]. For a coal lender that is a real question, because a protest outside a branch can cost a bank measurable business. The OCC's finding is that the banks cited "negative headlines, public protests, and the perceived reputational consequences" instead of financial risk ^[7]. A bank can still lose a depositor over a headline.

On this record no bank has reversed a sector policy, so the lending those limits withheld from new or expanded coal operations and from firearms makers and retailers is still withheld ^[6][8].