I would argue that the testimony (by credit unions) to Congress that the regulatory burden is the number-one concern is either a delusion or dishonest.
Compliance is a burden, but it pales in comparison to the problems that have a far greater impact on small credit unions. If you took away all compliance regulations, small credit unions would still face significant problems.
How can regulatory problems be more important than negative member growth? Members are leaving small credit unions because they are no longer competitive; because they no longer can support the kinds of services that members demand.
A credit union with $10 million in assets can't afford to provide the kinds of services that larger credit unions and banks offer.
Consumer groups and consumers in general have supported new regulations.
I find it distressing that credit unions are testifying against consumer regulations. I suppose it is a convenient excuse for not dealing with the more substantial problems that are causing negative member growth.
Most of us know that negative growth will result in far more credit union failures than any consumer regulations.
Henry Wirz, CEO
SAFE Credit Union
N. Highlands, Calif.
