We’ve received a number of calls and emails from bankers regarding the present status of the financial reform bill in the Senate, and the strategies being pursued by various trade associations. Guest blogger Steve Scurlock, IBAT Executive Vice President, provides his observations in this Missing Linc post.
As strange as this may sound, I’ve always been a fan of Kurt Vonnegut, with his bizarre sense of imagination and very unique writing style. He refers in one of his books to “peepholes,” and how the same situation or event can be perceived differently based upon the perspective of those watching events unfold.
Consider the following observations on the current state of play with the Dodd bill, (S. 3217) as being through my “peepholes…”
The American public is mad at “banks”, and our industry has very much become a political target. There has been plenty of bad behavior over the years, primarily among the largest banks, both commercial (or “traditional” or whatever) and investment, to incite this anger. And this economic crisis is the latest in a long saga. The only possible silver lining? Community banks are finally being seen as the “good guys” by the lawmakers, the press and the public. In this environment, we’re pretty happy not to be perceived as “one industry.” Can’t really imagine how aligning with the giant banks (most of whom have substantial investment banking operations as well) and their ample baggage benefits community banks in the present environment.
Case in point is the Durbin amendment on interchange. We, along with every other banking trade group, fought this thing as hard as we could. We spoke with “one voice” . . . community banks, big banks and yes, even credit unions. I would submit that the abuses of some in the industry no doubt contributed to the passage of this awful amendment, the latest example being the rush by some of the large issuers to raise interest rates and change terms on credit card agreements prior to effective dates of the CARD Act. The $10 billion exemption is obviously an unworkable scenario and really no exemption at all, but the promise that these provisions wouldn’t impact small institutions was apparently enough to persuade a number of Senators to jump on and support this horribly misguided “consumer” amendment. Once again, community banks are caught up in the backwash of a “fix” for a problem we neither created nor in which we participated.
By all indications from a wide array of insiders and experts, financial reform legislation is going to pass in some form. There are Democratic majorities in both Houses of Congress and a Democratic President. We are in an election year. The Republicans cannot afford to be painted as the party of Wall Street going into the November elections.
The public and the politicians aren’t mad at Main Street and community banks. But they’re plenty upset with the antics of Wall Street and the biggest banks in the country. The Dodd bill went to the Senate floor by unanimous consent (there were no objections) not because of a particular position on the part of any trade association, but because of a political reality that something had to be done, especially in light of the (coincidentally timed?) Goldman charges, the hyper-charged political climate and clamoring by the press and constituents.
We have a choice. First, we can recognize reality and work to make a bill as good as it can be. There are some very positive provisions for community banking in the bill, and they didn’t happen by accident. The change in insurance assessments is a huge win for community banks. Not for the big banks, who will soon begin to pay their fair share, but for community banks. Finally addressing too-big-to-fail is a huge win for community banks, who have dealt with an unlevel playing field for way too long in so many areas. IBAT remains strongly in support of both of these provisions and can do so because we represent our members and only our members.
Or in the alternative, we can just be against moving forward at all. It’s infinitely easier and sells well to “just say no.” But in the end, if “no” isn’t a viable option, what exactly has been accomplished?
There is plenty to hate in this bill for everyone. Please know that the large institutions have substantially more to hate, as is evidenced by recent rhetoric and attacks seeking to lay blame on community banking organizations.
IBAT is on record as being opposed to the passage of the House version, and have made our serious concerns very clear to both our Senators as well. We have maintained throughout the process, however, that there are some significant changes that need to be made to present law, especially as it relates to community bank competitiveness and fair treatment. The too-big-to-fail keep getting bigger, the investment banks keep doing what they’ve always done and the community banks get MOUs and C&Ds . . . and more and more regulations and burdens to deal with.
We have great apprehension regarding a number of provisions in both bills, with the CFPA/B at the top of the list. Unless otherwise directed by the IBAT Board, I don’t see a position other than continued opposition without some very meaningful changes. We will continue to work with our national association, which has done a remarkable job representing their only constituency, community banks, and others who share our passion to protect community banking interests in this very messy process.
