That’s right, the one made famous by wearing pink tennis shoes in her quest to eliminate restrictions on late term abortions voted FOR the man she is now saying should resign from his position as Chair of the Texas Finance Commission.
Let’s reset. There has been a lot of noise lately from the Texas political media about “predatory” lenders. You know, the people that charge high rates of interest to give people high risk loans. Oh, the shame. I suppose they are “predatory” because the “enlightened” media would never, ever borrow money at high interest rates in an emergency. And if YOU think it is worthwhile to borrow money at a high interest rate to keep your electricity on until payday, THEY think you are stupid and shouldn’t be allowed to do so.
That’s where pink shoe’d Wendy Davis comes in. She is quoted saying that the guy in charge of the Texas Finance Commission should step down from his post because he works for Cash America, one of those “predatory” lenders that the intelligentsia despises so much. From the article in the El Paso Times by Marty Schladen:
In a statement, Davis said White’s comments were beyond the pale.
“Texans are tired of back-room deals and dishonesty in Austin,” Davis said.
“William White can’t protect Texas consumers while he represents a predatory lending company on the side. Mr. White should resign from his post — and if he won’t, Governor Perry should remove him.”
…
Davis has been critical of Texas’ payday lending rules and of White’s appointment. Since 2009, she’s filed bills intended to reform industry practices and in 2011, she called White’s appointment as chairman of the finance commission “the classic fox in the henhouse,” her statement said.
“Backroom deals” and “fox in the henhouse” eh?
Well, let’s see about that. After all, Wendy Davis is a State Senator. And State Senators confirm appointments made by Texas Governors. Did Sen. Wendy Davis put on her pink tennis shoes and filibuster the ol’ fox in the henhouse when it came time to approve him as Chair of the Finance Commission?
No, she did not. In fact, she voted FOR William J. White as Chair of the Finance Commission. Don’t believe me? Read it for yourself in the Texas Senate Journal dated May 11, 2011. Yeas 30, Nays 0, 1 Present, Not Voting (Kirk Watson-D). And that was after Sen. Wendy Davis called William J. White a “fox in the henhouse” on January 20, 2011. Backroom deals? Hmmm.
You would think that a reporter as good as Marty Schladen would have bothered to look that up. Or a guy like Scott Braddock of the Quorum Report before he jumped in . Or a fine editor like Erica Grieder of Texas Monthly before she jumped in.
Nope. It took a redneck blogger from Pasa-git-down-dena to bother to look up the facts.
Vote for Wendy Davis! She’s against you before she’s for you before she’s against you!
O the hypocrisy….in Pasadena
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2013/08/21/texas-district-latino_n_3792601.html
And your comment has what, exactly, to do with the post here?
Of course, death threat Democrat John Cobarruvias is trumpeting Wendy’s “courage” and “leadership” here while insulting Greg Abbott. But of course, he will never let his readers know that Wendy voted to confirm the guy who she now believes should never have had the job in the first place. http://www.bayareahouston.net/2014/01/as-abbott-sits-quietly-davis-calls-for.html
I refuse to read any post that begins with an intentional lie.
“Truth Matters?” Well, at least it still matters to me.
Actually, that is the truth, bob42. You may not like it, but that is what Wendy the Abortion Queen is known for.
FYI, David, I’m against predatory lending practices because they exacerbate economic insecurity–and by the way, a predictable result of economic insecurity is greater demand for public services. Is this site called Big Jolly Politics because you support Big Government?
$100.00 check bounces—bank charges $34.00 returned item fee. What is the annual APR? Statists always have problems with math…
Quit banning private property owners from lending their private property in the way and at the rate the market will bear in serving a legitimate consumer service.
Yvonne, do you really think it’s OK to charge 500{997ab4c1e65fa660c64e6dfea23d436a73c89d6254ad3ae72f887cf583448986} effective interest to unsophisticated borrowers using high pressure sales techniques? Is it your view that people who get taken advantage of by predatory lending deserve all the pain they suffer? What do bank bounced charges have to do with predatory lending? Why do Republicans always introduce some irrelevant comment to avoid making a cogent point?
Ross – allow me to translate your question: “Yvonne, do you really this it’s OK to charge more interest than I think is fair to people too stupid to understand their own needs? Is it your view that people who make mistakes should actually need to take responsibility for their own actions? My brain can’t actually make the cognitive leap needed to understand that bounced check charges are actually finance charges, so instead I’ll pretend that your comment is irrelevant so I don’t actually have to respond cogently. Additionally, I’m going to phrase my own questions in the most emotionally pejorative way possible in order to make you feel bad. Finally, I’m going to totally ignore your point since I don’t really believe that private property is necessarily a good thing. I’m much more comfortable with the Government controlling as much as possible.”
We weren’t talking about bank charges for bounced checks, Yvonne introduced that issue to a discussion on regulation of predatory lending by payday and title loan companies. That’s like me trying to distract my mother by saying “my brother broke your vase” when I am being punished/questioned about some other issue. If you want to talk about bounced check charges, then start a thread on that, but it is not relevant to the current topic.
Payday lenders prey on people who are at the bottom of the social and economic heap already. The disclosures I’ve read are not very clear, and never really explain the potential total cost, or the fact that the lender may try to have the borrower arrested for not making timely payments. I think free markets work in a macro sense, but regulation is necessary at a micro level to keep everyone on the same level, and to protect society from those who exploit the gaps.
As for Davis, I don’t really care if she voted to approve White originally, she can change her mind when he makes the stupid statements about it being solely the fault of the borrowers that they are in trouble. It’s OK for him to make that statement as the President of Cash America, but not as the head of the agency regulating that business.
The reason I suspect Yvonne introduced the point about the bounced check is that a $34 fee on a $100 check represents an APR of 1768{997ab4c1e65fa660c64e6dfea23d436a73c89d6254ad3ae72f887cf583448986} for one week, whereas the same cost of a “payday” (Credit Access Bureau in TX) loan would be $25 per $100 borrowed plus 10{997ab4c1e65fa660c64e6dfea23d436a73c89d6254ad3ae72f887cf583448986} APR. So to get a payday loan of $100 for one week, you’d effectively pay $25.19, or 1310{997ab4c1e65fa660c64e6dfea23d436a73c89d6254ad3ae72f887cf583448986} APR.
In simple financial terms, it’d be more financially advantageous to pay $25.19 for a payday loan than to bounce a check and get charged $34 + any late fees from the company who you bounced the check to.
Jason: Ross knows that – but since it doesn’t fit his narrative he rejects it as being “irrelevant”. (Be thankful he didn’t call it a “straw man”.) Please note that he exposes his real goal: “. . .regulation is necessary at a micro level to keep everyone on the same level. . . .” an excellent example of a socialist mindset.
Filmmaker, regulation of lenders is not socialism. I suggest you spend some time reading up on what socialism entails. Here’s a good start with some basics http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Socialism. The links at the end will lead you to even more information on the subject. While you are at it, you might consider doing some additional research on why some level of regulation is required to keep free markets free.
Bank charges are not relevant to the discussion of payday lending, because bounced check fees are not fees for loans. A bounced check fee is typically not dependent on the amount of the check, and the bank may or may not lend you money to cover the check (but you still pay the fee). Bounced check fees are more of a charge for making the bank do extra work.
Ross – I never said that regulation of lenders is socialism. That, sir, is your own construct. I simply pointed out that your goal, in your own words, is to “keep everybody at the same level”, which is socialistic by definition. As far as bounced check fees go – you can call it what you want, but if I write a check of money I don’t have and the bank covers the check anyway – it’s a defacto loan.
Nevertheless, bank fees are merely a sidelight. Why is it that you think that there are some people who are too stupid to make their own decisions about their personal finances? And, here’s an interesting question: If they are so dim that they can’t make good personal decisions, why should we let them vote and help make decisions that affect us all? Surely a person who can’t understand the dangers of a simple predatory loan is incapable of understanding the subtleties of what is required of a President or Senator.
Regulation makes the playing field level for all players, by forcing the bad actors to adhere to the same set of rules that good and moral actors follow. Absent regulation, the tendency is for the bad actors to go after the more vulnerable segments of society by lying to them and using high pressure sales techniques. This is especially true in payday lending scenarios, where, even with regulations, some lenders threaten to put borrowers in prison if they don’t pay on time. I find this sort of behavior disgusting, and want it stopped. I want regulations that force payday lenders to disclose the true cost of their products in plain English (or Spanish), with a clear indication of what happens if the borrower rolls over the loans. That’s what making the field level for all means.
Typical of a radical Republican to argue that the less sophisticated/uneducated among us should not get to vote. There are lots of folks with college degrees that don’t understand how to read a contract, especially when it is written in obtuse language. You know, it’s attitudes like yours that will force me to quit voting Republican, and switch to a third party (there aren’t many Democrats I would vote for).
I’m sorry Ross, I assumed you would pick up the sarcasm. I m not arguing that anybody should not get to vote (as long as they are US Citizens). My point is that YOU are assuming that those “less sophisticated/uneducated” people are incapable of making good decisions. Regulations won’t make unethical lenders from being deceitful. There will always be predators in the marketplace – whether they are selling used cars, timeshare condos, fake designer handbags, or paycheck loans. You cannot regulate them out of existence. And, in trying to do so, you often end up doing more damage than the original problem.
Are predatory lenders disgusting? Absolutely! So are unethical politicians, sleazy lawyers, crooked auto mechanics and lots of others. Why? Because humans can often be disgusting.
We have spent the last 60 years telling people they can act any way they want, while simultaneously trying to regulate every facet of their existence. The results have been unsuccessful (to say the least). It’s time we went back to trying to teach ethical behavior and expecting it as a society and minimizing government in our daily lives.
Ross, I think you should open up a payday lending shop and charge, say, a 20 percent annual interest rate. You’ll help the poor, drive predatory lenders out of business, make a bunch of money AND embarrass your political opponents all at once.
Let me know when you do, so that I can attend the liquidation sale the following month.
Rhymes, My point is that hypocrisy resides in both parties. Also, if all the registered Hispanic voters actually voted, Wendy would be our next Governor.
And, if frogs had wings they could fly instead of jump. Wendy Davis has as much chance of being Governor as the Texans have to win the Super Bowl.
Oh, did I forget to mention that in my younger days I took out a 90 day short-term loan and rolled it over once before paying it back??? Silly me. The criteria to qualify was a steady job, a checking account and I could not be past due on any payments owed to other creditors—even gave them a letter from my landlord!
Are you going to tell the private property owner-members of the Pioneer Muslim Credit Union what criteria THEIR members must meet to qualify for a loan?
Matt: Having a rough time adjusting to the new pope, are you?