Such is now–a time for credit unions to re-examine our movement for any leaks and to strengthen its foundation wherever possible.

Despite a non-conclusive Treasury study last month and a non-specific statement recently made by an acting IRS Commissioner that might make some over-reactors fearful that credit union taxation is "on the table," the credit union tax-exemption actually looks to be on quite solid ground.

The President has not backed off his public stance against taxing America's credit unions, nor has the Treasury Department itself.

The current House Ways and Means Chairman, the committee where all tax law changes must originate, is a dependable credit union supporter and opponent of taxation.

Co-sponsorship of CURIA is increasing dramatically on both sides of the aisle.

Democrats in Congress generally support credit unions because they see credit unions as having a history of helping the little guy who is often overlooked and underserved in today's market. And, frankly, because the banking industry has traditionally put the bulk of its campaign resources on the other side of the aisle, the not-for-profit credit union sector usually finds a willingness to listen among the now-in-majority Democrats.

Republicans likewise generally support credit unions, despite years of banking industry contributions that have weighted most heavily to their campaigns. This credit union support is largely because the GOP philosophy tends to oppose taxation of small business, encourage self-help entrepreneurship and favor the type of non-governmental financial solutions that credit unions help provide for Americans from all walks of life.

So, despite the banking lobby's best efforts, there just isn't a great appetite in the administration or Congress to jump into the middle of an intra-financial industry squabble that has one side with millions of dollars and the other with millions of voters.

As a former elected official, I can assure you that no political figure lays up at night thinking: "Oh boy, I can't wait to make 86 million credit union members angry today just to make some bankers profit margins go up. Credit union taxation…yep, that's good politics."

Indeed, campaign contributions matter. But votes matter more.

So, how should credit unions react to this ongoing battle and build upon their already strong foundation in the political arena?

First, political involvement must be redoubled.

If the recent tax winds remind us of any lurking danger, it is that the bankers have not abandoned their mean spirited anti-credit union lobbying campaign. Credit unions must match the bankers contact for contact with Congress and the administration, and credit unions must continue to build their own political action committees in order to make sure that the bankers don't dominate the campaign contributions from the financial industry at election time.

Second, credit unions must know the issues.

Credit union leaders must be able to cite the structural arguments that distinguish credit unions as not-for-profit financial cooperatives from their for-profit brethren. In fact, the tax issue itself can be a potential credit union winner since a recent GAO study showed that the tax-exemption for credit unions only costs $1 billion annually compared to $108 billion in tax exemptions claimed by the banking industry each year. Does the banking lobby really want that expensive "level playing field" on the taxation front?

Third, credit unions must stay on the message of the four S's.

Structure. Service. Savings. Soundness. This is the credit union message.

Size does not define a credit union. Structure does.

Their structure is the credit union defining difference. Large and small credit unions alike have the same cooperative not-for-profit structure. Every $2 billion credit union was once a $2 million credit union which met its members' needs and grew.

The value of their service to their members has enabled credit unions to grow as they provide countless millions with a lower cost alternative to the pawnshops, check cashers and payday lenders that have proliferated in thousands of neighborhoods where credit unions operate and banks have fled. Any supporting data that can be gathered by credit unions themselves, without requiring a costly CRA type regulatory or legislative burden, should be compiled internally to help document their strong historical performance in saving their members from higher cost loans and lower earning deposits.

Let's also look at the savings to American consumers. Reports indicate that consumers save over $13 billion a year in loan interest costs because credit unions are in the marketplace. The majority of these savings accrue to credit union members but, interestingly, almost $5 billion is saved annually by bank customers because of the downward impact on consumer pricing that credit unions bring to the market.

Safety and soundness is the fourth, but perhaps most persuasive argument for retaining the tax-exemption for credit unions. Whereas the American taxpayers paid hundreds of billions to bail out the savings and loan industry, not a single penny of taxpayer dollars has ever been required to bail out America's credit unions.

To keep credit unions safe and sound, they must be able to build reserves. The only way credit unions can build reserves is through retained earnings. If the tax raisers ever prevail in taxing credit union earnings, the result will inevitably be reduced reserves and a potential greater risk to the insurance fund.

Keeping the credit union tax-exemption is good politics and good policy.

Even with the howling of the wolves who seek nothing more than to stifle legitimate competition that benefits American consumers by serving their members within the long recognized legal structure of a not-for-profit cooperative, there does not seem to be much more than the usual huffing and puffing in recent taxation talk fostered by the bank lobbying groups.

The credit union house is made of brick and remains strong.