Content area
Full Text
The Bankruptcy Abuse Prevention and Consumer Protection Act of 2005 (BAPCPA)1 was signed into law by President George W. Bush on April 20, 2005. The enactment of BAPCPA in 2005 brought to a close a tumultuous legislative reform initiative that-over the course of a decade-became a poster child illustrating some of the most creative examples of legislative legerdemain. The legislation became embroiled in a vast array of contentious issues involving abortion, methamphetamine, the minimum wage, and asbestos. Notwithstanding repeated expressions of bipartisan and bicameral support, the legislation was the subject of a Presidential pocket veto. Congressional consideration of the legislation was prolonged by world events, such as the terrorist attacks that occurred on September 11, 2001, a Presidential impeachment, and an anthrax contamination resulting in the partial shutdown of the Capitol complex. Although its genesis can be traced to the formation of a commission charged by Congress with a modest mandate to review the state of the bankruptcy law and system,2 the end product represents one of the most comprehensive overhauls of the Bankruptcy Code in more than twenty-five years. The purpose of this Article is to lay out BAPCPA's legislative history.
I. SEEDS OF REFORM ARE PLANTED: 103RD AND 104TH CONGRESSES (1993-996)
The establishment of the National Bankruptcy Review Commission in 1994(3) either intentionally or unintentionally galvanized the consumer creditor community and ultimately became the impetus for BAPCPA.4 The duties of the nine-member5 Commission were to: (1) investigate and study issues and problems relating to the Bankruptcy Code; (2) evaluate the advisability of proposals and current arrangements with respect to such issues and problems; (3) prepare and submit to Congress, the Chief Justice, and the President a report within two years; and (4) "solicit divergent views of all parties concerned with the operation of the bankruptcy system."6
The House Judiciary Committee report, which accompanied the legislation establishing the Commission, advised that "the Commission should be aware that Congress is generally satisfied with the basic framework established in the current Bankruptcy Code" and that "[t]herefore, the work of the Commission should be based upon reviewing, improving, and updating the Code in ways which do not disturb the fundamental tenets and balance of current law."7 Similar sentiments about the Commission's role were expressed by the Senate.8