❓What is so important in H. 410 that the Carolinas' Credit Union League (CCUL) is willing to sacrifice anything and anybody to get it passed?
Why is Dan Schline - and, by reference, all the credit unions which belong to the CCUL - using this extreme "take no prisioners", "damage any reputations necessary" approach to passing a bill Schline has peddled around to our representatives in the N.C. House as just minor "Updates"?
To provide an honest, accurate answer to that question for the N.C. Senate is our task; and, that will be easy to do now that we have more time to explain what is actually going on.
You should know, that from the outset, everyone said that stopping H. 410 in the House was not going to be possible with Representatives Howard and Bell as primary sponsors. Republican House members were not going to go against their leadership on minor credit union "Updates"; it just wasn't going to happen. (Can't blame 'em, I get that.)
The word however was - and still is - that the N.C. Senate would listen, if arguments against H. 410 were sound. So, lets focus on doing that!
Here's what we're going to prove so write it down: 1) H. 410 purposefully under-informs and misleads our elected representatives in both the House and the Senate, 2) H. 410 permits a) open membership for N.C. state-chartered credit unions, b) provides authority for N.C. credit unions to permit membership - and to lend almost without limitation - to commercial corporations anywhere in the Country, 3) will destroy the traditional focus of N.C. credit unions on North Carolina and individuals in North Carolina of modest means, and 4) perhaps the real key to all this is, as one commenter stated correctly,: " Although H. 410 has nothing to do with SECU, it has everything to do with SECU".
It should be said that if the N.C. Legislature wants North Carolina state-chartered credit unions to he anyone can join, commercially focused financial institutions with national ambitions - then so be it! But vote those major "Updates" into North Carolina law knowingly and forthrightly - not by accident, under the table as contrived in H. 410 by CCUL.
Got it, then lets move on to the task with the Senate!
But one parting question for Carolinas' Credit Union League member credit unions, are you really "united" behind H. 410 as CEO Dan Schline claims? Or, have you been busy running your credit union and not paying attention? Will you remain "united" once the puppet strings attached to Mr. Schline by SECU become a bit more visible? What exactly is in H. 410 which will benefit the members of your credit union enough to risk your credit union's reputation?
Best example for CCUL member credit unions? Did you notice that one of the essential talking points of H. 410 when introduced just a month ago was membership for "women and minority-owned businesses"? Why did Dan Schline and the CCUL agree to throw women and minorities under the bus (because those mean old bankers made him?)
As a member of CCUL, did your credit union authorize Dan Schline to sacrifice these folks? Would your credit union members - in Goldsboro, Mocksville, Durham, Winston-Salem, Plymouth and all points in between - approve of throwing women and minorities "down under"? Does this fit well with your diversity, equity, and inclusion (DEI) program? Burnish your reputation in your local community?
❓What
is so important in H. 410 that the Carolinas' Credit Union League
(CCUL) is willing to sacrifice anything and anybody to get it passed?
You're getting ready to find out... and so is the Senate.
... something stinks with H. 410, doesn't it?
