MADISON, Wis. - Anger, shock, disappointment, disgust, all of the above. That was the consensus of reactions of representatives from the Wisconsin Credit Union League, the Wisconsin Bankers Association, the state Department of Financial Institutions and Gov. Tommy Thompson to the last minute curve ball thrown by the state Senate that ultimately defeated a historic compromise financial omnibus bill worked out between credit unions and banks in the state (CU Times, May 10.) The state Senate concluded its deliberations for the 1999-2000 legislative session on May 2 without passing what all sides involved described as "a landmark bill for the state's financial services industry that would have benefited consumers of Wisconsin" that was passed by the Assembly Financial Institutions Committee by a 15-0 vote and the full Assembly on a unanimous voice vote. A spokesperson for Gov. Tommy Thompson confirmed the governor was "firmly behind the bill" and accused the Senate of "playing political games." The spokesperson further confirmed that "had the financial omnibus bill passed, Gov. Thompson likely would have signed it." Dave Anderson, executive assistant for the Wisconsin of Department of Financial Institutions who was instrumental in bringing the Wisconsin Credit Union League and the Wisconsin Bankers Association together to work out the compromise bill, said "the financial omnibus bill was a victim of politics, it's that simple." Anderson said that it took three weeks to bring the original Credit Union Consumer Choice Bill-S.B. 274-together with the WBA's Universal Bank Bill-A.B. 563. Since the department directly has banks under its regulatory umbrella and indirectly credit unions, because they have their own division, Anderson said DFI "had an interest in both measures." He further explained that "it's the philosophy at the Department of Financial Institutions that whenever we go to the state legislature with a bill, we've worked out all the legislative problems in advance. Although there's nothing in politics as a sure thing when it comes to passing a bill, when it came to the financial omnibus bill, we used our formula and came to the legislature with a complete package." Perhaps the first red flags signaling there might be problems in the state Senate with the financial omnibus bill were waved in March before the bill was brought up in the state Assembly. Anderson said he met with Assemblywoman Suzanne Jeskewitz (R-24), chairperson of the Assembly Committee on Financial Institutions, and Sen. Jon Erpenbach (D-27), chairman of the Senate Committee on Privacy, Electronic Commerce and Financial Institutions the evening of May 1. Describing the legislators' reactions to the omnibus bill, Anderson said Jeskewitz "embraced it." But Erpenbach, who was the main author of the original credit union bill, said "he wanted to take a look at it." What Anderson, credit unions and the WBA didn't count on though was a last minute `poison pen' amendment the Senate wanted added into the bill at the last minute. The so-called `wage lien' amendment would have given priority to workers' wages when a company goes bankrupt. Under current state law, financials that have lent money to a company that goes bankrupt can get their money back before workers are paid their wages.) A bill on this was passed by the state Democrat-controlled Senate last year but it wasn't considered by the Republican-controlled Assembly. "It was as if the Senate said `you won't consider our wage lien bill, we won't consider your compromise financial bill.' We're extremely disappointed the Senate didn't act on what we and other interested parties including the governor considered to be landmark legislation," said Anderson. "If the wage lien bill was so important, why didn't the state Senate add it to the financial omnibus bill in December (1999) during the public hearing or when the executive session voted on it in January?" asked Georgia Maxwell, director of Government Affairs for the Wisconsin Credit Union League. Erpenbach told Credit Union Times he was always in favor of the credit union and banking bills remaining separate "because the Universal Bank Bill had so many more important ramifications such as privacy concerns and legislative oversight, than the credit union bill." He defended the Senate tacking on the wage lien amendment to the financial omnibus bill. "That was the legitimate bill to attach it to because the bill deals with financial institutions," he remarked and added that, "Had the Financial Omnibus Bill come up for a vote, I would have voted for it." WCUL President/CEO Ron Halvorsen said the league knew going into the legislature that "it would be a push up to the end" and noted that the omnibus bill wasn't the only piece of legislation that got caught up in the contentious legislature. "We were thrown into the midst of it," Halvorsen remarked. "We thought we had friends in the Senate to fight for the bill, but politics took precedence." This being an election year, Halvorsen added, "Passage of the financial omnibus bill would have been something Democrats and Republicans alike could have taken credit for, it was good for all Wisconsin consumers." Although he's disappointed with the outcome of the financial omnibus bill in this year's state legislative session, Anderson is ready to take both houses on again when the legislature convenes in January. "We've proven what can be done when groups that usually don't work well together, put their differences aside and do." He promised, "to work to maintain the dialog we've initiated between the credit unions and bankers and will craft new legislation." Halvorsen too is ready for next year's legislative session. Two days after the bill's demise in the state Senate, he told Credit Union Times that although the outcome wasn't what he'd hoped for, he'd learned a lot about the political process and what can be accomplished. "We made a lot of friends in the state legislature, we showed them we're willing to compromise and go the extra mile when necessary." Erpenbach is also ready for the legislature to convene. Asked whether he would sponsor or author a new financial bill, the senator said, "Yes, I will author it if I am chair of the Senate committee." He added that the wage lien amendment would be part of a new bill. -
ekingoff@cutimes.com
