17 thoughts on “Yeah, you’d BETTER quit…”

1. John Warner July 9, 2007 at 3:49 pm

   “I’ve been impressed with the great strides they have taken to educate consumers about responsible use of the service.”
   O yeah, and he was also impressed by one honking salary you can be sure they laid on the table.

   Reply ↓
2. jeff July 9, 2007 at 4:13 pm

   Did Tommy Moore stop the ban on Payday lending? I doubt it. It makes for a good headline. As usual for this paper…just not factual.

   Reply ↓
3. Brad Warthen July 9, 2007 at 4:38 pm

   Boy, talk about being literal-minded (I refer to “jeff,” whose comment is below)…

   For the rest of you, who believe that just maybe we have a culture in the Legislature that isn’t all that hard to co-opt, here’s a recent column from our own Warren Bolton.

   And while I’m at it, here’s another one, which suggests maybe they DID hire the wrong guy. Others were SO deserving…

   Published on: 05/09/2007
   Section: EDITORIAL
   Edition: FINAL
   Page: A10
   Warren Bolton
   Associate Editor

   I’VE SAID it before, but this bears repeating: Payday lenders aren’t the kind of folks you do business — or bargain — with.

   Consumer advocates were reminded of that last week when the industry and its supporters undermined proposed rules that could give consumers some relief.

   During a Senate subcommittee meeting, the industry, which has suggested it wants to improve South Carolina’s law, fought most ideas that would help consumers. That led to the subcommittee adopting a weakened bill that, while it might do some good, wouldn’t keep people from being sucked into a cycle of debt.

   Sen. John Hawkins, R-Spartanburg, was incensed at how the industry fought reasonable measures. "Even the database, they were fighting that."

   "You can’t underestimate the power of these people. I haven’t seen anything like it since video poker," Sen. Hawkins said. "This is the new video poker in South Carolina."

   I must agree. It’s not just that payday lenders ensnare people and ruin them financially, as video poker barons did, but they also use the fortune they’ve amassed from borrowers to court elected representatives so they’ll stand by and allow constituents to be ripped off. A big difference between payday lenders and video poker operators is that video poker folks used their wealth to oust officials they didn’t like or who weren’t in their corner. Instead of targeting — and alienating — politicians, payday lenders contribute to practically all of them, regardless of party or position.

   In addition to the hundreds of thousands it pours into state campaign coffers, the industry has made friends in an effort to insulate itself. It gives money and favors to various organizations, including the NAACP and the Columbia Urban League.

   The industry is well-connected politically. For example, Advance America co-founders George Dean Johnson and Billy Webster have lots of Republican and Democratic friends, respectively. Mr. Webster is a close friend of Sen. Darrell Jackson, a member of the subcommittee that dealt with payday lending last week.

   Sen. Jackson said he feels Mr. Webster’s heart is in the right place and he got into the business to help people in need. The industry "seems to have spiraled out of control to a point," he said.

   Prior to last week’s meeting, Sen. Jackson told me twice that he favored a sound bill that came out of the Judiciary Committee.

   When I got to the meeting, I wasn’t surprised that Sen. Jim Ritchie of Spartanburg, home of Advance America, stridently defended the industry. Sen. Larry Martin, R-Pickens, also leaned the payday lenders’ way.

   Despite that, I thought Sens. Kay Patterson and Jackson, both Richland County Democrats, along with Sen. Wes Hayes, R-York, would fight for consumers, as they all have in the past. While Sens. Hayes and Patterson stood firm, Sen. Jackson surprised me and many others by opposing a cap on the number of loans a borrower can get in a year. He said he’s "philosophically opposed" to setting a cap, adding that no other state does it and it’s unfair to single out one industry.

   But 11 states, including North Carolina and Georgia, have placed the ultimate cap on payday loans — zero: They’ve banned them. If South Carolina caps the number of loans in a year, it wouldn’t be in uncharted waters.

   Sen. Jackson said he also doubts that a majority of senators would support a cap, and he doesn’t want that to kill the chance to help consumers. "I think it’s really important for us to get something this year," he said.

   Still, Sen. Jackson said Tuesday he’s "rethinking the whole caps thing." While he cherishes friends such as Mr. Webster, he has a mandate to do what’s right on behalf of constituents, he said.

   Sen. Hawkins, who, along with Sen. Joel Lourie, D-Richland, helped craft a decent compromise in the Senate Judiciary Committee, said the Banking and Insurance subcommittee watered the legislation down. He said that’s why the bill, which had cleared Judiciary, was sent to Banking and Insurance. "It was either being sent to water it down or kill it."

   The bill has now been returned to the full Senate.

   When it came out of Judiciary, the bill would have limited the number of loans a person could have at once to one, capped the number of loans a person could have in a year at five, required a seven-day cooling-off period between loans and set up a database.

   The new version still calls for a database but doesn’t cap the number of loans a person can get in a year and requires only a twoday cooling-off period. The best part of the bill, proposed by Sen. Hayes, is a provision that would limit the amount consumers can borrow at one time to $500 or 20 percent of their gross income, whichever is less. For example, if a consumer makes $800 a month, he can only have a total of $160 in loans outstanding at once.

   "It does nothing to hit at the heart of the problem, which is serial lending," Sen. Hawkins said.

   But Sen. Hayes said he believes this will provide some consumers substantial relief. "I think it’s going to cut back on the abuses," he said. It will especially help those on Social Security and other fixed incomes, he said. "I think it’s a major step forward."

   But make no mistake, lenders have no intention of allowing meaningful reform. Just as the bill was watered down last week, expect attempts to further weaken it when the full Senate considers it.

   I say ban the industry and rid our state of it and the regulatory headaches that come with it. But if lawmakers insist on allowing it to survive, they should do it right. It would be a travesty for them to pass half-measures that do nothing.

   They might as well meet borrowers in the parking lot and rob them themselves.

   ———————————————————–

   Reach Mr. Bolton at (803) 771-8631 or [email protected].

   Reply ↓
4. Karen McLeod July 9, 2007 at 4:54 pm

   Yeah, another politician is bought. Maybe he’ll be an ‘honest’ politician and stay bought. I do not understand why it seems to be the democratic party who favors these types of things. As I’m sure you remember, it was a democratic govenor who got us the lottery, so the poorest folks could pay for the well off to go to college. I’m glad Mr. Moore is impressed with their consumer “education.” Does he not realize that people who go to payday lenders are usually desperate? They usually don’t see any way out except payday lenders, and they frequently don’t really understand accumulated interest, and don’t (or can’t) look ahead well enough to realize that they’re going to be just as poor the next payday. I tend to vote democratic, but these two issues disgust me.

   Reply ↓
5. maverick July 9, 2007 at 5:04 pm

   Guess the boiler business isn’t paying as well as it has been. This is just like when a Congressman resigns and then takes a big lobbying job. It should make everybody on this board sick.

   Reply ↓
6. Brad Warthen July 9, 2007 at 5:08 pm

   Yes, Karen, payday lending has particularly strong ties to Democrats. Maybe that arises from the fact that Billy Webster used to work for Bill Clinton. But there’s more to it than that, I’m sure.

   Reply ↓
7. Doug Ross July 9, 2007 at 5:10 pm

   The lottery scholarships have no value any more since the state colleges have been allowed to raise tuition at rates that would make a payday lender blush.

   Reply ↓
8. Brad Warthen July 9, 2007 at 5:13 pm

   Oh, and just FYI, with reference to what "maverick" just said… South Carolina doesn’t exactly have what you’d call a stellar history when it comes to regulating BOILERS, either:

   THE STATE
   ACCIDENT AGAIN HIGHLIGHTS NEED FOR BOILER CHECKS
   Published on: 04/09/2005
   Section: EDITORIAL
   Edition: FINAL
   Page: A14

   MORE THAN two years ago in this space, we noted that South Carolina had been lucky when it came to boiler safety. Just over a week ago – and just a mile or so from this newspaper’s Shop Road offices – a fatal accident tragically highlighted again the need for better oversight of boiler operations in our state.

   A blast at the Intertape Polymer Group plant at Shop and South Beltline killed worker Tommy Jarvis, 47, of Lexington. Mr. Jarvis, a former Marine, worked alone in the boiler room. As this accident shows, being around boilers can be dangerous, even deadly.

   Boilers are high-pressure water heaters that provide hot water to large buildings. They are located in many public and private buildings. Previous boiler accidents in South Carolina have occurred in schools. In 1999, a boiler exploded at Summerville High School, and in 1997 one caught fire at Mid-Carolina High School in Newberry County. Both accidents happened when classes were not in session, and no one was injured.

   However, South Carolina daily puts its residents at risk of another, even more costly, boiler tragedy. Ours is the only state without boiler inspection laws. Richland Sen. Joel Lourie has introduced a bill to create a boiler registry and a chief inspector. The Senate has passed the legislation, which is pending in the House. Of course, this isn’t the first opportunity lawmakers have had to address this issue. The General Assembly has killed a similar bill almost every year since 1976.

   That is despite the long-time campaign waged in this community by retired engineer Bob Woodward. Mr. Woodward lobbies the Legislature on behalf of the American Society of Mechanical Engineers.

   Mr. Woodward argues that our state needs registration of boilers, proof of regular inspections by a state inspector or certified contractor and a requirement that repairs be performed by certified technicians. Most states have a board that oversees boilers. Business owners usually pay an inspection fee ranging from $25 to $300, depending on the state and the boiler’s size.

   Boilers use their heat and pressure to provide warmth, hot water and power. Deadly explosions were commonplace in the 1800s and early 1900s, before inspections became routine across the country.

   The American Society of Mechanical Engineers first set standards for boilers in 1914. North Carolina passed its inspection law in 1935. That measure was credited with spotting problems that could have led to more than 3,000 accidents between July 2000 and July 2001.

   Some business groups have opposed the regulations in our state, saying they are too intrusive. When you consider such standards are in place in the 49 other states – most with greater economic success than ours – that argument doesn’t hold up.

   Over the years, some South Carolina lawmakers have opposed the boiler inspection measure by saying they don’t know of any deaths in our state due to boilers. They can’t say that anymore.

   Reply ↓
9. Brad Warthen July 9, 2007 at 5:17 pm

   … but I should add quickly, that AFTER that death, lawmakers did take long-delayed action:

   THE STATE
   STATE BUSINESS BRIEFS
   Published on: 05/06/2005
   Section: BUSINESS
   Edition: FINAL
   Page: A13

   Boiler regulation bill passes Legislature

   A bill to regulate boilers is on its way to the governor’s desk.

   If signed by Gov. Mark Sanford, the bill would make South Carolina the last state to regulate boilers. Versions of the bill have failed in the Legislature since 1975, but a fatal boiler explosion in March pushed the cause.

   The bill would create a chief boiler administrator to work with the S.C. Department of Labor, Licensing and Regulation. Businesses would pay $50 to register boilers and have them regularly inspected by insurers. Boiler owners would face fines of up to $5,000 for violations and a $100-a-day noncompliance charge.

   After a procedural vote, the bill will head to Sanford’s desk.

   Reply ↓
10. Reed Swearingen July 9, 2007 at 5:22 pm

    A sad day for SC’s Democrats. First, it’s former Gov. Hodges supporting a state-run lottery that feeds off of the poor. Now, we have Sen. Moore joining the payday lenders who take what remaining dignity the poor may have.
    We all, regardless of party affiliation, should strive to do better.

    Reply ↓
11. Brad Warthen July 9, 2007 at 5:24 pm

    Doug, the lottery scholarships never HAD value. When lawmakers quit funding “public” colleges at more than — what is it now, 23 percent or so? — and funneled millions through the hands of students’ parents instead, of COURSE the schools went there for the money. Basically, the Legislature is now funding colleges through “scholarships.” It would be better to send the money straight to the institutions, and to do it with taxes rather than money conned out of the gullible, but scholarships are so much better for buying votes.

    Reply ↓
12. Brad Warthen July 9, 2007 at 5:30 pm

    Hey, where’s ol’ "Weldon VII" when we’re all whaling away on the Democrats?

    You ever notice that Republicans are never around to hear it when you’re criticizing Democrats, and Democrats are never around when you’re pounding on Republicans, so that all the partisans can continue to accuse you of being "biased" toward the other side?

    Well, if you were a newspaper editor, you’d notice it for sure.

    Reply ↓
13. maverick July 9, 2007 at 5:38 pm

    Brad and Doug are EXACTLY right. As soon as the scholarship program began, the Legislature immediately reduced funding for colleges and now higher education funding is shifted to the lower income and minority lottery players who I must stand in line behind at 6:55 pm with a hot 12 pack in my hand at Young’s.
    That’s one tax shift I bet Sanford loved.

    Reply ↓
14. Doug Ross July 9, 2007 at 6:50 pm

    Brad,
    Is it just me, or are the comments now sorted in reverse chronological order? Used to be able to read from the top down…

    Reply ↓
15. Brad Warthen July 9, 2007 at 7:31 pm

    Yeah, I sort of did that on an impulse when I was restoring some coding today, and ditching the “authentication” thing.
    What do y’all think? I thought it would be nice for the first thing you see to be the latest, but then maybe it makes it harder to follow a thread chronologically.
    Feedback eagerly welcomed…

    Reply ↓
16. Weldon VII July 10, 2007 at 12:02 am

    Congratulations, Brad. Ol’ Weldon VII had to take the day off the blog to spend some money on being able to see the blog after his glasses literally split in half overnight.
    The horn rims are on order, and a trash-bag twist-tie has united the halved spectacles so the ol’ boy can pat you on the back for catching his foot in his mouth again.
    Yep, those newspaper editors do know what it’s like to be danged if they do and darned if they don’t, to be caught between a rock and a hard spot, to be stuck between a cliche and a mixed metaphor.
    Heck fire, I wish I had found out about this earlier. Like a fellow riding a school bus with me once said: This is almost as big as when we beat Hartsville.
    And it does provide a nice balance for the Ravenel follies.
    The body politic is beset by warts, n’est-ce pas?

    Reply ↓
17. Mark Whittington July 10, 2007 at 10:49 pm

    This news makes me sick! Get this scumbag out of the Democratic Party! These people are nothing more than loan sharks in pinstriped suits. Our entire political system is evidently corrupt from top to bottom. The Democratic Party is pathetic to have allowed this bottom feeder to become a candidate.

    Reply ↓