[Congressional Record Volume 157, Number 45 (Thursday, March 31, 2011)]
[Senate]
[Pages S2019-S2020]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
CREDIT UNION LENDING
Mr. UDALL of Colorado. Madam President, I urge the Senate to free up
capital for small businesses to allow them to grow, expand, and begin
hiring again. Unfortunately, there is a burdensome Federal regulation
that currently limits the number of small business loans credit unions
can make to family entrepreneurs. Credit unions have money to lend, and
they know small businesses in their communities. They know these
businesses desperately wanted to jump-start the economy by taking out
new loans to grow their companies and hire more workers.
Two weeks ago I came to the floor to ask consideration of a
bipartisan amendment, No. 242, which I offered to the underlying bill
to raise this cap I have alluded to on small business loans. The
amendment would simply get government out of the way and allow credit
unions to increase small business lending in their communities without
costing American taxpayers a dime.
I wish to repeat that. It would not cost American taxpayers a single
dime.
When I spoke previously in support of this amendment and asked for
the amendment to be considered, the chairman of the Small Business
Committee, Senator Landrieu, objected to my request and indicated that
Senator Johnson, chairman of the Senate Banking Committee, opposed the
amendment. I wish to clear up some misinformation the American people
may have heard at that time and thank Senator Landrieu for removing
from the Congressional Record her assertion that Chairman Johnson
opposed my amendment.
I understand that as new chairman of the Banking Committee, Senator
Johnson has an interest in revisiting this legislation which I
negotiated with the Treasury Department, the National Credit Union
Administration, and the previous chairman of the Banking Committee,
Senator Chris Dodd. But I wish to make it clear in the Congressional
Record that Chairman Johnson does not in fact oppose the amendment.
I also wish to clear up some confusion related to the $30 billion
small business lending fund established as a part of the Small Business
Jobs Act which arose when I tried to call up my amendment 2 weeks ago.
As I pointed out in my original remarks, banks were given access to the
small business lending fund, but credit unions have not been allowed to
expand their small business lending because of the very cap on loans my
amendment addresses.
In our discussion on the Senate floor, it was pointed out to me that
credit unions had been asked if they wanted to participate in the small
business lending fund, but the credit union industry had turned down
the invitation. I was unaware of such an offer; I appreciate being told
of it. But unlike many banks, most credit unions do not need extra
capital in order to make loans, which is what the small business
lending fund intended to provide. Rather, as I have said, most credit
unions currently have capital to lend to small businesses, but,
unfortunately, they are being prevented from making those loans due to
the arbitrary cap limiting their small business lending to no more than
12.25 percent of their assets.
It is no wonder credit unions didn't have an interest in the $30
billion bank fund because they don't need the money and couldn't use it
anyway because of this burdensome cap that is put on small business
loans.
I appreciate the opportunity to discuss the confusion about amendment
No. 242. I thank the chairman and ranking member for their great work
on the underlying bill which is important to my home State of Colorado.
I wish my amendment would get a vote today, but regardless of what
happens I will continue to work with Chairman Landrieu, Ranking Member
Snowe, and the rest of my colleagues to find innovative means to free
up credit for small businesses in a responsible way.
On a final note, the Presiding Officer hails from a great State that
has significant banking and credit union sectors. We know they don't
always see eye to eye, which is the root of the objection to my
amendment. Yet they still manage to operate side by side to serve the
community's credit needs. They both make up the fabric of America and
continue to grow our economy. It is simply the way we do business in
the United States.
I wish to highlight that spirit, which is in stark contrast to the
kind of divisive politics that have been brewing in America; one that
furthers disagreements and draws ideological lines in the sand and,
frankly, sows disrespect at the expense of shared interests and
collective prosperity. The American people are seeing a disappointing
example of that today. There is a vocal minority outside this very
Capitol demanding acrimony and a combative approach for Members of
Congress which I believe--and many of us believe--in the end will
further disable our capacity to get the economy back on its feet.
While this is happening outside, many of us are inside doing the
people's business. We treat each other with respect, and we are working
on a bill to help small businesses invest in R&D. We are also
negotiating a compromise to keep our government running.
[[Page S2020]]
That is the American way I have always known. I applaud my colleagues
who remain committed to working together.
I yield the floor and suggest the absence of a quorum.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. The clerk will call the roll. The legislative
clerk proceeded to call the roll.
Mr. DURBIN. Madam President, I ask unanimous consent that the order
for the quorum call be rescinded.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is so ordered.
____________________