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

Charlotte Observer blasts “startling hypocrisy” of NC GOP

Be sure to check out today’s lead editorial ...

Top Stories from NCPW

  • News
  • Commentary

A pivotal legislative task force may be just beginning its dive into North Carolina’s school funding [...]

The controversy over “Silent Sam,” the Confederate monument on UNC’s Chapel Hill campus, has been ra [...]

North Carolina tries to mine its swine and deal with a poop problem that keeps piling up A blanket o [...]

This story is part of "Peak Pig," an examination of the hog industry co-published with Env [...]

Republicans in Congress are rushing to advance a tax reform bill that balloons the federal deficit s [...]

The post Charitable donations and the GOP’s chopping block appeared first on NC Policy Watch. [...]

13---percentage of households in the U.S. that were food insecure on average from 2014-2016. Meaning [...]

Five years ago, the U.S. Department of Justice (DOJ) filed a jaw-dropping civil rights lawsuit again [...]

Spotlight on Journalism

We invite you to join a special celebration of investigative journalism! The evening will feature Mike Rezendes, a member of the Pulitzer Prize-winning Boston Globe Spotlight Team known for their coverage of the cover-up of sexual abuse in the Catholic Church.

Tickets available NOW!

Spotlight On Journalism

This event will benefit NC Policy Watch, a project of the North Carolina Justice Center. Sponsorship opportunities available now!

Featured | Special Projects

NC Budget 2017
The maze of the NC Budget is complex. Follow the stories to follow the money.
Read more


NC Redistricting 2017
New map, new districts, new lawmakers. Here’s what you need to know about gerrymandering in NC.
Read more