I think I must take issue here. That is not an accurate statement of either
the constitution or the present state of the law on banking. The original
transaction under discussion was (probably) in interstate commerce and the
federal government has always, and traditionally regulated all aspects of
interstate commerce and any intra state commerce affecting or impacting
interstate commerce. Good golly, that goes back to the milk subsidy cases
from the New Deal.
I have spent the last ten years as bank counsel for a small chain (4
locations) of rural banks in downstate Illinois. I can say without
hesitation that the federal regulation is overwhelmingly more pervasive than
state regulation. Although I have not the inclination nor desire to cite
chapter and verse, I can say without hesitation that consumer credit
practices are already regulated from Washington.
If we wanted to turn this into a hot political debate, (which, for the
record I don't!) get me started on "Governor" Clinton. Although I mostly
agree with the policies of the administration, I can find major fault with
the invasion of traditionally states rights issues (adoption and divorce for
Christ sake!) by the federal government. States rights used to be the
conservatives issue, but more and more the left is embracing it as the
federal government continues it's cancerous growth. Anyone who wants to
blame that growth on the last two terms need only compare the growth for the
12 years prior to that. Big government isn't the curse of the Democrats,
(solely) anymore. To suggest that the bank practices complained of in the
original post is (in 1999) an issue for state regulators or that federal
regulation would be some how unconstitutional is simply incorrect. Whether
you agree with it or not, the fact remains that the practices the original
poster was gripping about would be taken up at the federal reserve, not at
the state banking authority.
(already heading to the corner with flame suit on)
[mailto:firstname.lastname@example.org]On Behalf Of Jim Davis
Sent: Monday, October 04, 1999 11:03 PM
To: Robert M. Lang
Cc: email@example.com; firstname.lastname@example.org
Subject: Re: TRF Nightmare
I agree that banks and most other financial institutions are greedy and
poorly regulated in respect to protecting the average banking customer.
However the states, not the federal government regulate banking
practices within their borders. Local legislators should and would be
more responsive if citizens would contact them with their local concerns
instead of expecting relief from the federal government on matters to
which the constitution gave Washington no authority. Being from New
England, a state representative must reside in your town or very close
by. Contact them and let the federal representatives concern themselves
with truly national concerns like providing for our common defense and
regulating international trade.
I don't want Ted Kennedy & Barney Frank having much to do with the
internal affairs of GA, any more than most folks in MA want Bob Barr or
Paul Coverdell having anything to do with affairs in their state.
I guess your statement touched a sore place with me,
>... and I'm appalled that our wonderful
> lawmakers in Washington don't do anything about it. The banks are just
> plain greedy...