nemployment is at a 24-year low, the economy's booming, inflation is low and consumer confidence is high. So how are people celebrating this good news?

They're filing for bankruptcy in record numbers. In 1997, more than 1.3 million bankruptcy petitions were filed, up 20 percent from the year before, with the petitioners seeking to unload a whopping $40 billion in consumer debt. In 1998, filings are expected to top 1.4 million - more than one bankruptcy for every 100 households - in spite of forecasts that the good times continue to roll on.

How can this be? That's what Congress wants to know. With some help from the nation's credit card industry, several bills have been introduced that would make filing for individual bankruptcy much more onerous. At the moment, it appears the mood in Congress is to hammer debtors into submission by establishing new procedures and oversight over their debt repayment.

The paradox may be, however, that the robust economy is a contributor to the increase in bankruptcy filings. People who are good credit risks are paying down their credit cards, refinancing their homes and consolidating their debts. Critics of tougher bankruptcy laws say that's led banks and credit card companies to pursue customers who can't afford to pile on more debt.

"To a large extent, the bankruptcy 'problem' is nothing but a 'bad loan' problem," the National Consumers League states in a recent report. "It could be fixed if lenders were more closely attentive to underwriting. The present interest-rate environment has taught lenders that substantial profits can be made from extending credit to risky borrowersà"

In other words, with credit card rates of 18 percent to 22 percent and inflation running at less than 3 percent, creditors have decided that high credit risks are, nonetheless, worth the risk.

In the House, Rep. Bill McCollum, R-Fla., has co-sponsored a pair of bills that creates a "needs based" bankruptcy filing system. (A companion bill also was filed in the Senate.)

What the bills would do, in effect, is force people to file for the more restrictive and less forgiving Chapter 13 version of the U.S. Bankruptcy Code rather than Chapter 7. In Chapter 13, the court takes over a person's finances and puts the individual on a very strict budget while using the remainder of the funds to pay off the person's debts. In Chapter 7, the individual's assets are seized and sold by the courts. The person then walks away from the deal and tries to get his or her life back together.

McCollum says the intended result of his bills is that "only those who truly cannot repay their debts will be able to use the complete bankruptcy in Chapter 7 of the bankruptcy code. Those who can repay their debts will have to use Chapter 13 and work out a payment plan."

Critics have argued the proposals unfairly target lower-income residents who, in reality, probably could never pay off their creditors through Chapter 13. In a concession to the critics, the bills would permit those people to file under Chapter 7.

Under all these bills, debtors would have to file annual budgets with Chapter 13 trustees. Critics claim that such filings and subsequent reviews would add unnecessarily to legal and administrative expenses.

Representatives of the banking and credit card industries contend that lax bankruptcy laws have allowed people who really can afford to pay off their debts to file for Chapter 7 while keeping their most valuable assets (such as their homes). Creditors want to close these alleged loopholes and require most debtors to file under the more severe rules of Chapter 13.

Critics of the banking industry argue that to a large extent, poor lending practices are to blame for the increase in bankruptcy filings - not the bankruptcy laws. In testimony before the Senate Banking, Housing and Urban Affairs Committee in February, the National Consumer Law Center asserted: "It would be a mistake to enact reforms without addressing reckless lender conduct, which pushes people into bankruptcy. Offering additional credit, for example, to families already struggling to pay their debts hurts not only the borrowers but also the borrowers' honest creditors if the new credit pushes the family 'over the edge.' "

That perspective led Rep. Jerrold Nadler, D-N.Y., to introduce an alternative bill that keeps some of the more restrictive regulations on filing for Chapter 7 while also taking aim at overzealous credit card companies. Nadler's bill says that if a credit card company goes after a person who's already overloaded with debt, the creditor is left holding the bag. It also attempts to curb the coercive collection practices of some lenders.

Congress seems determined to pass legislation this year that attempts to reduce the record number of bankruptcy filings. Whether the legislation simply hammers debtors or also cracks down on lender abuses may soon be determined.