By Michael Fryzel
If you asked either of the lobbyists for the two major credit union trade organizations, they would tell you that getting a special interest bill passed in Congress is not an easy task. That task has been more difficult the last six years due to a divided Congress unwilling to give and take on important issues.
Efforts to enact legislation are further complicated when the trades themselves cannot agree on the best piece to pursue. Each year they both publicize their legislative programs, which look like a child’s Christmas list; full of good things they want but written knowing they can’t get it all. Asking your parents or Congress for everything you might want will get them to ask, what do you really want?
I would like to think that the credit union industry, represented by their trade associations, have enough political muscle, enough convincing strategy, and enough clout to actually get something passed into law that would be of benefit to many credit unions.
I wonder, like others have, what if the trades agreed on putting just one item on their wish lists and made it the same on both. Would Congress say “we can do that” or “is that all you are asking for?,” and move the legislation along?
Congressmen Peter King and Brad Sherman recently introduced legislation both trade associations have stated they want and the credit union regulator/insurer have said it would support. It’s a winning trifecta and common sense says it should be a done deal.
Supplemental capital is a subject that has been under discussion for a decade. At one point during that time interested parties all agreed credit unions should have it but could not reach a consensus on how it should be structured. I recall in 2008 as Chairman of NCUA asking the leaders of CUNA, NAFCU and NASCUS to meet and come up with an agreed document that could be used in talking to Congress. To their credit they did and there now appears to be consensus on the structure.
'Sounds Like a Plan'
Efforts were further advanced when in 2008 then NCUA board member Gigi Hyland formed a working group and developed a white paper on supplemental capital. The document, along with position papers developed by the trades and NASCUS are valuable tools to be used in convincing Congress that strong reasons exist for them to grant credit unions the authority to raise supplemental capital.
Consensus by the trades, well-written documents that spell out the need, regulator support and now the newly introduced Capital access for Small Businesses Act(HR 989) that will make supplemental capital for credit unions the law of the land. Sounds like a plan.
So will the trades say let’s make this our goal this year and unite to make supplemental capital a reality? Will they be willing to put all else aside and go for it all on this issue? It would be a new and different strategy if they did.
The Christmas list approach has not been successful so why not try the “one issue” approach. One for all and all for one.
Michael E. Fryzel is an attorney and advisor to the financial services industry with offices in Chicago, Illinois. He is a past Chairman and Board Member of the National Credit Union Administration. He can be reached at meflaw@aol.com.