Uncategorized

Behind-the scenes maneuver greases skids for predatory lending bill

(Cross-posted from Legislative Watch)

It’s clearer than ever that the predatory consumer finance industry is pulling out all the stops to advance its big Christmas tree bill.

Yesterday, in a quiet move that went mostly unnoticed by observers and completely unreported by the news media, House leadership removed one of the big hurdles that stood in the bill’s way.

As introduced, the bill was “serially referred” to two different committees — the House Banking Committee and, if favorably reported there, to the House Finance Committee. Yesterday, however, the referral to Finance was quietly “stricken” thus clearing the path for the bill to move directly to the floor if it’s favorably reported by the industry-friendly Banking Committee.  This is in direct contravention of longstanding practice in the House which has always required such bills to get a Finance Committee review.

And you just know the fact that some of the Finance Committee chairs are long-time skeptics/critics of the small loan industry had nothing to do with that.

One Comment


  1. Jack

    April 15, 2011 at 4:50 pm

    Whole section of the existing bill has been struck and rewritten. It doesn’t take a lawyer to understand from the text of the bill what is taking place. The title of the bill is interesting enough: AN ACT TO MAKE VARIOUS AMENDMENTS TO THE NORTH CAROLINA CONSUMER FINANCE ACT TO INCREASE CONSUMER ACCESS AND CREDIT MARKET PARITY.

    So lets consider the parity: For example lets look at the language in the bill where it reads – “For loans made pursuant to G.S. 53-173, greater than fifteen dollars 17 ($15.00).”

    G.S. 53-173 section (a) reads – “Every licensee under this section may make loans in installments not exceeding three thousand dollars ($3,000) in amount, at interest rates not exceeding thirty six percent (36%) per annum on the outstanding principal balance of any loan not in excess of six hundred dollars ($600.00) and fifteen percent (15%) per annum on any remainder of such unpaid principal balance.”

    Well, at least there is percentage limit. Not much of one but at least there is one.

    Lets see if the Guvs VETO pen is mightier than those seeking parity.

    Parity in a sentence – I was parity with my pants on.

Check Also

Burr and Tillis stick to their irresponsible, NRA-funded lines in aftermath of Florida high school massacre

Raleigh’s News & Observer reports this morning that ...

Top Stories from NCPW

  • News
  • Commentary

On a sultry day last September, Megan Stilley arrived at Lanier Farms, a large swine operation in ru [...]

When North Carolina lawmakers approved what one Republican described as a “historic” investment in r [...]

Lawmakers late last week released two new versions of a judicial redistricting bill, making these th [...]

An omnibus bill alleviating some of the headaches associated with North Carolina’s class size crisis [...]

The General Assembly’s latest mashup legislation is an example of government at its worst In the com [...]

The post Tied up in knots appeared first on NC Policy Watch. [...]

Every day brings new reports that Congress is interested in further whittling away at the programs c [...]

When Congress finally passed a continuing resolution last month allowing the government to re-open, [...]

Upcoming Events

Friday, Feb. 16

12:00 PM

Crucial Conversation – Prof. Peter Edelman discusses his new book, Not a Crime to be Poor: The Criminalization of Poverty in America

Prof. Edelman is coming to the Triangle to mark the 50th anniversary of Durham-based nonprofit MDC. His visit is the first of a series of MDC-sponsored events focused on ways that Southern leaders can work together to create an Infrastructure of Opportunity that shapes a South where all people thrive.”