Regulator, regulated should be independent

Mike Welch misses the mark in his May 3 column, "Better way needed to appoint NCUA Board Members. When the federal credit union community decided it wanted to be regulated by an independent agency, the die was cast and the federal credit union community accepted the reality that the selection of its administrators would be subject to political influence. There is nothing new here and frankly, it has not been at all bad for federal credit unions. The reality is that this system has brought new faces into the credit union regulatory community and many of these people have brought novel insights, perspectives and ideas to their "regulatory" desks. Beginning with Larry Connell, the first Administrator of the NCUA, who brought sound financial experience to a fledging agency, followed by other Presidential appointees such as Ed Callahan and David Chatfield, the federal credit union network has been the beneficiary. And, yes there is a steep learning curve for all who earn an appointment to the NCUA Board, but all who have served have been quick learners like the two most recent Presidential appointees, Mrs. Wheat and Mr. Dollar who are a credit to the NCUA and to the movement. Mr. Welch goes on to imply that the credit union movement should influence the selection of its NCUA Board members. I suggest that the credit union community think twice about whether it benefits from accepting that responsibility. During my tenure at NASCUS, I have come to learn that a regulator best serves the regulated industry when the regulator is independent from that industry and is free to insure the institutions are sound. In that way, the users' confidence is rightfully placed. And by the way, who gets to make the recommendation? CUNA? NAFCU? NASCUS? AACUL? ACCU? Etcetera? Doug F. Duerr President/CEO NASCUS