In-District Meetings Made the Difference

Debbie Kwon-Moore
July 28, 2009 | COMMENTS

In the span of a week, President Barack Obama signed two momentous bills into law: S. 896, the Helping Families Save Their Homes Act and H.R. 627, the Credit Cardholder's Bill of Rights Act. These two bills are aimed at helping average Americans during these fiscally challenging times. What the average American may not know is what went on behind the scenes to craft these bills, or how California and Nevada credit unions used their experience and knowledge to shape them into law.

There is no question California and Nevada have been hit hardest by the economy. The unemployment rates for both states lead the nation, and housing prices have been reduced up to 70 percent in some areas. Our credit unions have been victims of geography, while the average credit union nationwide hasn't felt a significant impact from this crisis. But your efforts to make our voices heard during in-district meetings made the difference.

While meetings in Washington, D.C. remain crucial—we were able to delay a mortgage modification “cram-down” bill in the House of Representatives during Congressional visits in February—the emphasis has been placed on in-district meetings. Credit unions mobilized in greater numbers to educate members of Congress and their staff through district office and town hall meetings.

Since January, credit union representatives have been busy meeting with local staff. At least six meetings included senators Feinstein (D) and Boxer (D) of California, and Senators Reid (D) and Ensign (R) of Nevada. Meetings with House members included representatives Lynn Woolsey (D-6), George Miller (D-7), Jerry McNerney (D-11), Jackie Speier (D-12), Anna Eshoo (D-14), Zoe  Lofgren (D-16), Sam Farr (D-17), George Radanovich (R-19),  Kevin McCarthy (R-22), Brad Sherman (D-27), Howard Berman (D-28), Adam Schiff (D-29), Maxine Waters (D-35), Gary Miller (R-42), Joe Baca (D-43), Dana Rohrabacher (R-46), John Campbell (R-48), Darrell Issa (R-49), Brian Bilbray (R-50) Duncan Hunter (R-52), and Susan Davis (D-53). Nevada credit unions also were successful in meetings with their delegation during the Congressional recesses.

What have these meetings accomplished? Let's remember what is not included in both S. 896 and H.R. 627:

• Absent from S. 896 is a judicial mortgage modification or “cram-down” language.
• H.R. 627 could have potentially contained damaging provisions capping interchange income fees.

Due to our meetings and targeted grassroots efforts, members of Congress listened. Some may have disagreed and tried to formulate compromises, but ultimately, these harmful components were not included in either bill, and sometimes what isn't included in legislation can be considered a huge victory.

Furthermore, both these bills were essentially “reshaped” in the Senate. Meetings, especially with the Senators, have been very positive. They understand that credit unions have been making smart business decisions all along.

Our efforts are far from over, however. We will continually rely on your expertise to ensure all elected officials understand our unique perspective. The Leagues are thankful for the commitment shown by many of you who work tirelessly on behalf of all credit unions.

Credit unions have created opportunity out of this current climate by redoubling our advocacy efforts and returning to basic grassroots. District meetings continue to build those long-lasting relationships with our elected officials. You can also become a credit union advocate by joining the Leagues' advocacy network, Connect for the Cause, at www.connectforthecause.com. The proof is in the results; grassroots advocacy is not a spectator sport!

Debbie Kwon-Moore is director of federal government affairs for the California and Nevada Credit Union Leagues. This article was reprinted with permission from Credit Union Digest, the publication of the California and Nevada Credit Union Leagues.