According to the Daily Press, the predatory lending of payday loans will be allowed to continue.
In a 10-8 vote, the Commerce and Labor Committee defeated a bill from Del. John O’Bannon, R-Henrico, aimed at repealing the 2002 law that began a new chapter in consumer lending. It led to an explosion of storefront payday lenders in Hampton Roads and elsewhere.
[…]
Rather than forbid the practice, several lawmakers said they favored tighter regulations aimed at preventing consumers from falling into the debt trap.
I have written previously about HB619 and why I thought it should be repealed. The fact that Congress restricts the charging of exorbitant interest rates to active duty service members and their families should have given a clue to our lawmakers that all Virginians deserve the same protection.
According to LIS, voting in favor of the ban were Morgan, Tata, Purkey, Griffith, Jones, D.C., Joannou, Alexander, and McClellan. Voting against the ban were Callahan, Hargrove, Kilgore, Byron, Ware, R.L., Nixon, Suit, Hugo, Abbitt, and Sickles. (Interestingly enough, four members of the committee – Dudley, Plum, Johnson, Melvin – did not vote at all.)
In its post on the subject, Bored Young Professionals Inc. pointed out who on the House Commerce and Labor Committee received campaign contributions from Anderson Financial Services/LoanMax Title Loans. From that post, I have incorporated their votes:
- Y – Harry Purkey $3,250
- N – Terry Kilgore $3,000
- X – Kenneth Plum $2,750
- N – Timothy Hugo $2,500
- Y – Johnny Joannou $2,000
- N – Samuel Nixon $2,000
- N – Terrie Suit $1,750
- N – Frank Hargrove (Vice Chair) $1,500
- X – Allen Dudley $1,250
So of the nine members of the Committee receiving contributions, five voted against the ban, two did not vote, and two voted in favor.
Delegate Glen Oder (R-NN) has already filed HB912, which puts certain restrictions on pay day lenders and creates a database for tracking borrowers. Perhaps this bill will get back on the calendar and we will at least have some regulation of the industry. Or maybe Delegate Bannon can re-introduce his bill to ban them.
With the members of the Committee being so split on this issue, it seems that allowing the full house to vote on it would make sense.
VIVIAN J. PAIGE | All Politics is Local 
So a measly 20 grand by the “loan sharks” allows them to make millions in outrageous interest rates on loans.
this is so disgusting and just highlights why NO elected person or governement official should be allowed to accept money or gifts from anyone.
Public financed campaigns would save ALL of us ALOT of money…..
Buzz…Buzz….
Alright, I’ll throw a comment in here.
I seriously dislike the idea of publicly financed campaigns. Money equals speach, according to the Supreme Court, and I agree.
I suggest, however, a few modifications to the current system:
First, donations should be made by individuals only. No PACs, no unions, no corporations. They are not citizens, and do not have the rights of citizens.
Second, contributions must go through a clearing-house, so that no-one can know who donated to which candidate. The beauty of this is that the candidates do not know who has contributed to their campaigns, so they cannot be bought.
Third, individuals donating to a particular candidate must be registered to vote in the district in which that candidate is running.