Why the Credit Card Legislation Should Pass

Great work, webmaster, nice design!

online soma cod of WA 7:02AM July 04, 2009

This credit card bill that is going through the Senate is meeting a group of Senators who oppose the rate cap limited to 15%. I hope the media can tell the American people who these Senators who are opposing it. I bet they are the same ones who are accepting money from the Banking Industries to fill their coffers for reelection. In fact they are not representing the American people. They are representing themselves. They are in the pockets of the lobbyists of the Banks. We would like to know their names so we can vote them out at the next electiion. It does not matter whether they are Democrats or Republicans. They've got to go. If there is no limit to the rate the banks can charge us, the next time around, we will be seeing 60, 70, 80 or 90% interest rate. I don't think it is fair to the people in this country trying to make it though this terrible period.

John T of MD 3:50PM May 14, 2009

I agree transparency is important, but I sometimes wonder if the average U.S. high school or college graduate has the economic/financial skills to understand what the terms of even the most straightforward cardholder's agreement might mean to him/her under a worst case scenario (such as an extended period of unemployment during a severe recession). The fact the bank is required to advise its customers "we will separate you from your money as efficiently and remorselessly as a mob loan shark" does nothing to curtail two of the most reprehensible practices included in nearly all agreements: universal default and mandatory binding arbitration clauses. If our representatives and senators really intended to stand up to the deep-pocketed banking lobby (for perhaps the first time in recent memory), they would have included outright prohibitions of these practices in the proposed legislation.

About fifteen years ago, I noticed the major banks were all revising their cardholder's agreements in ways that would relegate many of their "best" customers to perpetual financial serfdom. I suspect the trend toward securitization of credit card debt made this even more of an imperative. (What's the profit in securitization if the overwhelming majority of customers can easily/quickly pay down their debt?) Accordingly, I paid off and closed any credit card I had with the offending banks, including once-useful accounts such as the "Universal Card" after it was purchased by a certain banking behemoth (let's call it GothamCorp). For more than ten years, my primary credit card has been one issued by a credit union that does not engage in these "worst practices." Were it not for the damage it might have done to the rest of the economy, I would have been perfectly content to have watched the arrogant overlords of Wall Street go belly-up.

GaryS of IN 1:47PM May 14, 2009