Welcome To CT

My Left Nutmeg

A community-driven blog featuring news and commentary on local, state, and national politics.

helphaiti

Donate to CT Dems
Enable ActBlue
for CT Races
$
John Larson
(1st CD)
$
Joe Courtney
(2nd CD)
$
Rosa DeLauro
(3rd CD)
$
Jim Himes
(4th CD)
$
Chris Murphy
(5th CD)
$
Ads on My Left Nutmeg
 


 
Contact Info
To contact the site admin email ctblogger at ctblogger@yahoo.com

Resources
2007 Legislative "Heroes and Zeroes"
2007 "Worst Republicans In The State"
2007 "Worst Democrats In The State"
CT Congressional Delegation and the Progressive Agenda
CT Clean Elections Funding Explained
Federal Legislative Advocacy Toolkit
State Legislative Advocacy Toolkit
 
 
My Left Nutmeg

The Moment for Credit Card Reform

by: Senator Chris Dodd

Tue Mar 31, 2009 at 13:01:31 PM EDT


We all know what an uphill battle reforming abusive credit card practices has been.  As a twenty-five year veteran of that fight, I know it as well as anyone.  But this morning, the Senate took a big step up that mountain.

Today, the Senate Banking Committee passed the Credit Card Accountability Responsibility and Disclosure Act - legislation I wrote to stop abusive and deceptive credit card practices once and for all.  Indeed, 2009 may well prove a watershed moment for credit card reform.

For people like Samantha Moore, a paralegal from Guilford, Connecticut I met a few weeks ago, it couldn't come a moment too soon.  In January, she was three days late on a credit card payment - the first late payment in 18 years.  For that seemingly minor transgression, she had her interest rate raised from 12% to 27% and her credit limit slashed from $31,400 to $4,500 - told that the reason for the severe penalty was that she hadn't been paying enough to other creditors and that their high credit limit exceeded their income.  

Samantha was a victim of "universal default" - where credit card companies use unrelated information, like a late utility bill, to increase that family's rates.

Universal default is one of countless abusive practices credit card companies regularly engage in today that my legislation would put to an end.  

Here are a few other practices the Credit C.A.R.D Act ends:

"Any Time, Any Reason" interest rate hikes.  Issuers often unilaterally change the terms of a credit card contract before the term is up.  One issuer "voluntarily" eliminated these hikes after Congress exposed them.  They even ran ads stating that "a deal is a deal." But there is nothing binding them to that commitment, and most issuers have already gone back to the practice - one a Pew Charitable Trusts survey found in 93% of 400 cards issued by the country's largest banks and issuers.  This bill makes that practice illegal.

Penalty Rates With No End.  Let's say you've been a customer in good standing, and you have a reasonable interest rate of 12%.  You pay your bill three days late, and you get raised to a penalty interest rate of 29.9%.  Once that penalty rate increase is triggered, there is no limit on how long it will last.   From that point on, you continue to pay your bill on time, but despite that, you continue to pay the penalty rate for the life of that card.  The amount and duration of the penalty rate is entirely determined by the card issuer.  My bill says that after 6 months of on time payment, your rate has to go back down.

Double-Cycle Billing. Say a few months ago, you had a credit card debt of a thousand dollars - and that since then, you've paid off $900 of that debt.  It's not uncommon for credit card companies to keep charging interest not on a hundred dollars but on the full $1,000 for another cycle or two.  The Credit C.A.R.D Act prevents that practice.  

Aggressive Marketing to Young People.  Recently, my seven year-old daughter received a credit card solicitation in the mail.  Jackie and I laughed it off, but it brings up a serious point: young people are faced with an onslaught of credit card offers.  And just as we saw in the mortgage crisis with lenders and borrowers, too often, issuers offer cards to young people without verifying any ability to repay whatsoever.  This is particularly true for students, who are flooded with offers the second they set foot onto a college campus - in fact, industry officials have testified to Congress that simply being a college student is considered a "positive factor" toward the ability to pay.  This bill simply says that credit card companies must take into account a young person's ability to repay before allowing them to take on what is all too often a lifetime's worth of debt.  

The truth is, I've been working with advocates and consumer groups to reform credit card company practices for 25 years.  For much of that time, our efforts have fallen on deaf ears.  But I think this time is different.  

And as we learned in this housing crisis, when companies lure people into deceptive, abusive and predatory financial agreements, it not only means mountains of debt for families, bankruptcy and financial ruin for too many - it can also prove catastrophic for our economy.  

That is why I have said again and again that consumer protection must be at the forefront of our efforts to modernize our financial regulatory system.  There are so many things we must do to make that possible.  But none will be more important than reforming the practices of our nation's credit card companies drive so many families deeper and deeper into debt.  It is one issue that quite literally touches every family in the country.

The moment to act is now.

Senator Chris Dodd :: The Moment for Credit Card Reform
Tags: , , , , , , (All Tags)
Print Friendly View Send As Email
Great to see progress being made ... (4.00 / 1)
... but has the bill changed at all from its original version?  

If so, it would be great to include a link to the bill that was passed by the Senate banking committee.  

A lot of people would say that a rate increase from 12% to 29% is a form of loan-sharking, and should never be OK. If the new rate only applies to future purchases, and the customer has enough time to cancel that card (say 45 days notice) before making any future purchases, then it doesn't bother me so much.

That's the kind of thing I'd like to know about this bill.

Also, any chance of doing anything about the interchange fee?


I'm with you Captain, (0.00 / 0)
It's hard to imagine credit card "reform" that allows banks to continue charging interest rates of 20%, 25%, or even 30%.

That being said, if an issuer could only jack rates on new purchases, (and not past balances), that would be a big improvement. However, I doubt that provision will make it to the floor for a vote.

So what we're going to get is an end to the abusive billing practices, an end to Universal Default, and an end to marketing to 18-21yr olds. And probably a lot more transparency.

Yet what consumers will still have to swallow are:
1). usurious rates of up to 30%,
2). having the issuer jack your rate in an outrageous manner because of a single late payment or for going over-limit.

My question: Is this all we get from a Democratic President and a Democratic Congress? Ugh.


[ Parent ]
Glad you found us Senator (4.00 / 2)
 And happy to have you here.

I hope this bill can be made even more consumer freindly by adopting some of Sen. Bernie Sanders ideas through the amendment process on the Senate floor and in the conference committee after passage.

Sadly,I believe this bill may never make it to the Presidents desk unless the Senate Democrats start a campaign for "up or down votes" and threaten,just like the Republicans did when they held a much slimmer majority,to change the minorities right to filibuster.

The Senate Republican minority has made the choice that total obstruction is to be their singular tactic.The country and the Democratic Majority must not let this stand.


Thank you for posting here (0.00 / 0)
and I'm forwarding this to my 25 year old son - to remind him it's really not a good idea to build your life style on debt.  

Thank you for posting here (0.00 / 0)
and I'm forwarding this to my 25 year old son - to remind him it's really not a good idea to build your life style on debt.  

Pleased (4.00 / 2)
I'm pleased to see Senator Dodd communicating with constituents here and hope he continues to do so.

I think we should be wary of the demonization of Dodd that we're seeing currently and pay attention to where it's coming from, and why.  While the Senator has quite probably made some bad decisions on the banking committee during his tenure, I'd hate to see him destroyed by a political machine, set on Twitter, that is bent on replacing him with someone like Simmons.  



Openness, Please (0.00 / 0)
Why is this "story" front-paged yet also on the sidebar? Attribution please, we deserve to know. And while you're at it illuminate the chain of events of how the Senator's staff approached this blog and then got the stage...

"If those in charge of our society...can dominate our ideas, they will be secure in their power. They will not need soldiers patrolling the streets. We will control ourselves." ~~Howard Zinn

Bernie Sanders (0.00 / 0)
I suggest that Senator Dodd   call Senator Sanders  who  has  some great  ideas  to toughen up  the credit card  bill.

If I borrow money (4.00 / 1)
at less than 1% and then charge 12% for it, is that usury? 15%? 20%? At what time have I stepped over the line?

BofA borrows at less than 1%. They are charged $1.00 per $100.00. They "loan" that money out at rates as high as $29.00 per $100. Until there is a "cap" set by law that says the max rate allowed is X% over some standard lending benchmark at which they borrow at, then there is no reason for the banks to not continue to ream the consumer.

If the banks don't like them rules, then they can find another vehicle for consumer lending. And please don't tell me about levels of risk. It's the banks that created the problem with easy credit that they would give to anyone. For instance, I have available unsecured credit in excess of my current yearly income. Is that a wise decision by lending institutions? But they can make those unwise business choices because they can pass along their bad decision making process to the rest of the consumers since they can charge usurious rates.

Until that is addressed, either through credit card legislation or by changing the bankruptcy laws back to where they were before, then no little tweaking here and there, which is what this bill does, will suffice.

The question is not what you are, we already determined that, we are now negotiating price.
electrealdemocrats.com Online since 3/07 -- TimetogoJoe.com Online s


You get it, I get it, (0.00 / 0)
But I wonder if Dodd gets it.

Does he have any friends struggling to get out from under a load of credit card debt? Does he know what it feels like to owe $20,000 and to have interest accumulate at $500/month?

My guess is no.


[ Parent ]
Do you believe (0.00 / 0)
Rob Simmons or Sam Caligiuri have a better feel for your freind?

Dodds Bona fides as someone who looks out for the working class are certainly as good as any other Dem save maybe Ted Kennedy.

You've made your point both here and at CLP. If you ask me I think it's Time to stop the freindly fire.


[ Parent ]
Okay Keith. I'll just shut up and fall in line, (0.00 / 0)
because that's what I do best.

From now until he gets his next six-year term, Dodd can do no wrong. Bills like this should not be criticized but worshipped, and I'll join you in telling every progressive I run into to shut-up about Dodd being in the pockets of the banks and beholden to their campaign $$$, because voicing independent opinions might cost us the Senate seat. (kind of reminiscent of the early days of DumpJoe, btw.)

And even though there are good, Democratic alternatives to Dodd, (heaven forbid rank-and-files ever gets a choice), we must respect the current hierarchy and kiss the ring, even though the doing of that, instead of rebelling, might also ultimately cost us the Senate seat.

PS-- Do you personally think this C.A.R.D. bill looks out for the working class? To me it's brazen safety-valve legislation, designed to give the appearance of doing something, but really, in essence, allowing the credit card industry to continue raping the struggling consumer.

PPS-- Did you notice that Dodd won't even bring up the concept of usury. It's as if the word is taboo. Frankly if that's the bona fides of a true progressive, we've got an awful lot more work to do.

PPPS-- If the storyline of 2010 is that Lieberman saves Dodd's ass, are we supposed to join Dodd and Obama in trying to re-elect Joe in 2012? That one fact, that he wants to open the door for Lieberman's return is enough...


[ Parent ]
Also, Dodd's reason for not pushing new Usury laws is... (0.00 / 0)
exactly what? Because for the life of me, outside of pissing off the CC industry, I can't see much downside in coming out against 29% interest in a zero-inflation environment. Folks hate the credit card companies even more than Comcast or Sprint. Going hard after the usurious rates would be hugely popular with voters, everywhere.

[ Parent ]
The cap on rates (4.00 / 1)
Why I don't think you need the caps:

1. As long as any new higher rate would apply only to future purchases, and customers can choose to not use that card, then the CC company would be disinclined to jack up the rates. To keep the customer, it would have to keep the rates down.  

2. In an open market, you can't tell a company what it can charge for its products. If a company wants to charge $4 for a cup of coffee or $10,000 for a TV .... who are you to say it can't? Consumers will just have to say no.

3. If someone is so desperate that they choose to borrow at 30% interest, then they don't need a credit card, they need counseling. This is the type of person who just might end up at a loan shark, and I'd rather have them dealing with Capital One than with Bruno.


[ Parent ]
thoughts (0.00 / 0)
http://www.fdic.gov/bank/analy...

It's from 1998, before the Bushies and the GOP ran the country into the ground.

Let's also look at the difference between what I do (in running my online store) and what a bank does. I list a product for sale. You want it. You come to my store and pay for it. I ship it to you. I then pay my supplier for the product. They pay theirs, and so on. Through this process I made 20% (it would be 30% at MSRP, but I sell everything at discount since I lack the overhead of a standard retailer) , my distributor made 20%, and so on.

But the difference between what I do an what a bank does is that there is an actual product that changes hands. Banks on the other hand don't actually own the $100 they loan to you. They borrow it at under 1%. Then they pass it off to you at over 25%.

Rather than looking at it in the retail model, look at it as the sublet model. I rent a place for $100 and I sublet it for $2800. In this case I don't actually "own" the item, I just have a low cost contract on it. I then resell that "contract" at inflated prices.

Fairness in lending is indicative of a 1 to 1 relationship between costs to margins. If my "cost" were to increase 400% would yours? If not, then what I have done is padded my margins to be able to cover a 400% increase in my costs without feeling any effects. That is a clear sign that there is something unbalanced.

Let's consider another financial vehicle, the standard 30 year variable rate mortgage. In this case there is a fixed rate above what I borrow at (let's say the mortgage is connected to the LIBOR) that ensures a reasonable profit margin for me against a secured asset.

So why can't there be a "reasonable profit margin" against unsecured credit? Is it a reasonable profit margin for unsecured credit to be 25%.

Today's 1 month LIBOR is 0.50.
Today's Federal Funds Discount Rate is 0.50.
Today's Federal Funds Target Rate is 0.25.
Today's WSJ Prime Rate is 3.25.
Today's Average Fixed Rate on a 30 Year note is 5.098.

So, let's take the average on a 30 year fixed and double it to 10.2 to take in the associated risk factors for unsecured credit. Then we tie the rate to the current Federal Funds Discount Rate. We arrive at a differential of 9.7% over the Federal Funds Discount Rate as the rate for a credit card. That makes the assumption that there is a 100% increased risk between the secured asset and the unsecured asset.

This would allow the bank to make a almost guaranteed return of 10% (shades of Madoff) on the money that they borrow and then re-loan out.

Now I have a credit card in my wallet that I got in 1987 with a teaser rate of 8.5% rising to 10.6% max. In 22 years on the card I may have had 2 over 30 and none over 60 (I know for one of the over 30 I was in Vietnam and missed the 30-day by 4 days sending in my payment when I returned). In the same time period I went from $2,500 credit to over $25,000, but as my payment history would show, increasing my limits didn't actually increase my debt load to non-payment. Today the same card, due to changes in the policies and agreements, is now at 27%.

Something is seriously wrong with the picture. Especially when my balance for the last 90 days has been a carry over of $0.00 (it has been paid in full since Dec 1 when they made an 9% increase because the carry-over load remained static for six months at about $10K - at least that's what they told me).

Here is some interesting spare time reading from the Fed (it's from 2000, but that shouldn't effect any of the things that it says as it's a good study of the macroeconomics of the prime rate in relation to things like the Fed Rate and LIBOR).

http://search.stlouisfed.org/s...

Enough of my rant. I am not a professional economist, nor do I play one on the net. It's just business common sense. Today there is a disconnect between two numbers that should have some common bond. In my mind that disconnect has gotten so bad that I believe that it's time to regulate the industry. That would be the job of Senator Dood.  

The question is not what you are, we already determined that, we are now negotiating price.
electrealdemocrats.com Online since 3/07 -- TimetogoJoe.com Online s


[ Parent ]
You're not factoring all the costs of lending (0.00 / 0)
Lending is based on ability to pay back the loan, and the most expensive kind of loan is unsecuritized. That's why a mortgage rate is cheaper than a car loan, which is cheaper than a credit card loan.

Also, there's a thing called "bad debt risk." The risk that a good percentage of the people you loan to will not be able to, or have no intention of, paying you back.

You can do two things about bad debt risk: eliminate a swath of people you lend to. Or, you can lend to this larger group of people knowing that many won't pay you back -- not being sure whom -- and charge higher rates to your now larger lending pool. This is something that many companies -- including all kinds of suppliers -- do, and not just credit card companies.

So, the effective cost of lending is much higher for a credit card company than that 1%.

Also, keep in mind that low risk borrowers can pay almost nothing for credit. I, for instance, pay 0% interest. I have 3 credit cards, which I pay in full each month. As a result, I get 30 days of 0% interest each month. If I can't afford to pay off my bill in 30 days, I don't put in on a credit card. (I drive an 8 year old car that needs body work, and try to live within my means.)

The evil of credit card companies is that they change the terms of the loan after the fact. That's criminal. They also use a lot of deceptive marketing that should be outlawed. But if there's a customer who is a major risk to the company, and the only way the bank will loan them money is at 30% interest, then who's to say they can't offer that rate?

If the consumer loans at that rate, they don't need a loan, they need counseling.  


[ Parent ]
But ... (0.00 / 0)
... anyone who's currently paying these usury rates -- like 15-30% -- because of abusive practices of credit card companies, well they should have their rates rolled back.

The Credit CARD bill doesn't do anything for these current customers, as far as I can tell, but it should.


[ Parent ]
 
11 user(s) logged on.
Menu

Make a New Account

Username:

Password:



Forget your username or password?


Spotlight

Use the Spotlight tool to send a diary to offline journalists, with your feedback or suggestions.
(What is Spotlight?)


Search


   Advanced
My Left Nutmeg Feeds

Links
Connecticut's War Dead

MLN Facebook Group

Blogroll
Powered By
- SoapBlox

Connecticut Blogs
- Capitol Watch
- Colin McEnroe
- Connecticut2.com
- Connecticut Bob
- ConnecticutBlog
- CT Blue Blog
- CT Energy Blog
- CT Local Politics
- CT News Junkie
- CT Smart Growth
- CT Voices for Civil Justice
- CT Voters Count
- CT Weblogs
- CT Working Families Party
- CT Young Dems
- Cool Justice Report
- DanMalloy.com
- Democracy for CT
- Drinking Liberally (New Milford)
- East Haven Politics
- Emboldened
- Hat City Blog (Danbury)
- The Laurel
- LieberWatch
- NB Politicus (New Britain)
- New Haven Independent
- Nutmeg Grater
- Only In Bridgeport
- Political Capitol (Brian Lockhart)
- Rep. David McCluskey
- Rep. Tim O'Brien
- State Sen. Gary Lebeau
- Saramerica
- Stamford Talk
- Spazeboy
- The 40 Year Plan
- The Trough (Ted Mann: New London Day)
- Undercurrents (Hartford IMC)
- Wesleying
- Yale Democrats

CT Sites
- Clean Up CT
- CT Citizen Action Group
- CT Democratic Party
- CT For Lieberman Party
- CT General Assembly
- CT Secretary of State
- CT-N (Connecticut Network)
- Healthcare4every1.org
- Judith Blei Government Relations
- Love Makes A Family CT

CT Candidates
- Joe Courtney (CD2)
- Jim Himes (CD4)
- Chris Murphy (CD5)
- Jonathan Harris (SD5)
- John Hartwell (SD26)
- Tim O'Brien (HD24)
- Matt Lesser (HD100) - Deb Heinrich (HD101)
- Lonnie Reed (HD102)
- Di Masters (HD111)
- Michelle Mount (HD112)
- Kim Fawcett (HD133)

Other State Blogs
- Alabama
- Arizona
- California
- Colorado
- Delaware
- Florida
- Georgia
- Idaho
- Illinois
- Indiana
- Iowa
- Kentucky
- Louisiana
- Maine
- Maryland
- Massachusetts
- Michigan
- Minnesota
- Missouri
- Missouri
- Montana
- Nebraska
- Nevada
- New Hampshire
- New Jersey
- New Mexico
- New York
- New York
- North Carolina
- Ohio
- Ohio
- Oklahoma
- Oregon
- Pennsylvania
- Rhode Island
- South Dakota
- Tennessee
- Texas
- Texas
- Utah
- Vermont
- Virginia
- Washington
- West Virginia
- Wisconsin

More blogs about connecticut+politics.
Technorati Blog Finder


 
Powered By
MLN is powered by SoapBlox
 
Return to front page

Powered by: SoapBlox