More to a "split" than meets the eye

Mike Welch suggests (CU Times Nov. 7) the “only decision” that will put the OTR controversy to rest is splitting NCUA from NCUSIF. Mike goes on to say that opponents of such a move regularly “trot out” the same blue sky argument – splitting the NCUA from NCUSIF will lead to the insurance fund being tucked into the FDIC. Mike rhetorically asks, “How difficult would it be for politicians . . . at any time” to combine the insurance funds under”one umbrella.” Obviously, not difficult at all. The late Henry B. Gonzalez, then chairman (in 1991) of the House Banking Committee, was a strong advocate of consolidating the insurance funds. NAFCU successfully trotted out what were new arguments at the time in vigorous opposition to his legislation, whose principal purpose was to shore up the bank insurance fund – just as NAFCU did previously in 1989 during debate on the S & L bailout. It is not the idea that is difficult to come up with in political Washington, but the execution. NAFCU contends now as it did then that any split of NCUA and the NCUSIF gets us much closer to a write-down of the 1% deposit and to NCUSIF being “swept” into FDIC and the regulatory functions ending up in Treasury or some newly created super regulator dominated by commercial banking interests. If necessary, we stand ready to trot out these arguments again in context of a dedicated grassroots campaign to ensure the continued independence and integrity of NCUA. You see Mike, the arguments may be old, but we keep them in great condition just so we can trot them out again should some upstart arguments make their way onto the track – the U.S. Congress. Fred Becker President/CEO NAFCU Arlington, Va.