For starters, credit unions already work with community banks to promote reg relief. Our trade associations regularly sign joint letters with the bank lobby in support of bills such as Sen. Richard Shelby's (R-Ala.), which passed the Senate Banking Committee July 31. When asked if credit unions support bills that would benefit both credit unions and banks, our folks say yes every single time.

Credit unions don't lobby against what bankers want if it doesn't affect credit unions. The only exception I'm aware of is when credit unions lobbied against the extension of the Transaction Account Guarantee in late 2012. Conversely, bankers regularly oppose any and every bill that would benefit credit unions. Banks not only want their big fat piece of the financial services cake, they want to build a fence around the rest so credit unions don't even get a crumb.

Take member business lending for example. The banking lobby has made it clear that they will never, ever in a million years allow a bill that would raise the MBL cap to gain any traction on Capitol Hill. I can't help but roll my eyes whenever a new MBL bill is introduced, because we all know that sucker ain't going nowhere.

Bankers also turned their vitriol toward the NCUA when it proposed relaxing MBL regs. The NCUA received a record number of comment letters on the proposed rule, and about 90% of them were from bankers. The letters included the usual misrepresentation of the role of credit unions, distorted Federal Credit Union Act statute on MBL and, of course, called for the elimination of the tax exemption.

When I asked ICBA Executive Vice President of Congressional Relations and Chief Economist Paul Merksi about his trade's opposition to the rule, he downplayed it. He said MBL isn't a top legislative priority for the ICBA; working together with credit unions to promote regulatory relief was instead. Apparently he had just left Vitter's office.

I've spoken with a few community banks who confessed they're embarrassed by how aggressively their trade associations lobby against credit unions.

Still, the banking lobby is clearly trying to intimidate the NCUA into withdrawing its rule. I've heard they are even pressuring House and Senate committees to call NCUA Chairman Debbie Matz back to the Hill for another hearing to grill her on the MBL proposal.

I can't help but chuckle at anyone who thinks the NCUA Board can be intimidated or bullied. They obviously don't know Matz very well. Or Board Member Mark McWatters. Or even the board peacemaker, Vice Chairman Rick Metsger.

I hear over and over again that when credit unions ask for something on Capitol Hill, lawmakers tell them they can't support it unless bankers get something too. However, when bankers want something, the favor is not returned. Case in point: the law Congress passed in January that required the Federal Reserve Board to have one member with community banking experience.

Did credit unions also get a seat at that table? No. Why not? There are roughly as many credit unions as community banks in the U.S. The answer is because credit unions play nice and play fair. That's why suggesting credit unions meet banks halfway on Capitol Hill deserves a big fat boo and a hiss, too.

The folks who need to play fair are the bankers, and lawmakers need to recognize that fact.