Safe Access to Cash Act would equalize federal fines and prison sentences for stealing from bank and non-bank ATMs
Despite what many people mistakenly say, it’s not actually called an “ATM machine,” because the ‘M’ already stands for ‘machine.’
Context
In the past two years, U.S. thefts at ATMs (automatic teller machines) have skyrocketed. After totaling fewer than 75 each year from 2016 through 2019, the number of ATM thefts multiplied several times to 229 in 2020, then increased again to 254 thefts in 2021.
About 59% of ATMs are independent, rather than owned by a bank. Many such machines are located at retail businesses like grocery stores or laundromats, or in apartment buildings or other residential locations.
While the FBI has had authority over bank robberies since 1934, burglary at such independent ATM’s doesn’t technically qualify as a “bank robbery.”
What the bill does
The Safe Access to Cash Act would explicitly give the FBI authority over prosecuting independent ATM robberies, and equalize the penalties for stealing from bank and independent ATMs: potentially up to a $250,000 fine and 20 years in prison.
It was introduced in the House on October 28 as H.R. 9248, by Rep. Carolyn Maloney (D-NY12).
What supporters say
Supporters argue that if the crime is more or less essentially the same, the federal law should accordingly treat it as such.
“Robberies against small businesses are on the rise, and businesses with ATMs are being especially targeted. Along with these robberies, individuals are being mugged and forced to withdraw money from nearby ATMs,” Rep. Maloney said in a press release. “All ATM robberies cause great harm to our communities, and these robberies should be treated as the same crime, whether they are occurring at a bank-hosted ATM or an independent ATM located in a small business.”
“It is clear that immediate action must be taken to combat this rise in ATM related crimes,” Rep. Maloney continued. “The [bill] will strengthen enforcement mechanisms to deter criminals and protect small businesses and individuals. This bipartisan legislation is an important step forward in our fight to protect public safety.”
GovTrack Insider was unable to locate any explicit statements of opposition.
Odds of passage
In addition to its Democratic lead sponsor, the bill has also attracted one other sponsor, from across the aisle: Rep. John W. Rose (R-TN6).
It awaits a potential vote in the House Judiciary Committee.
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
This article was written by GovTrack Insider staff writer Jesse Rifkin.
Want more? Follow GovTrack by email, on Twitter, and for our “A Bill a Minute” video series — on Instagram, or on YouTube.
Like our analyses? Support our work on Patreon.
