<p>Your headline in the March 27th issue, "Great debate or same old, same old?" questioned whether the debate between CUNA economist Bill Hampel and ABA economist Keith Leggett was a great debate, or the same old arguments. As one who heard the debate first hand, I can attest that in fact, no new ground was explored. Like the impasse in the Middle East, both sides stuck to their traditional posturing points, and made little attempt to respond directly to the other's arguments. One point made by Mr. Leggett, regarding the fact that other cooperatives are taxed, was ignored by Mr. Hampel, and his response when prodded by the audience was vague at best. Perhaps due to the limitations of the format, Mr. Hampel did not believe he could go into detail regarding the legal and moral justification for the exemption; however, if we in the credit union business are going to successfully defend our tax-exempt status, we are going to have to be much more precise in defining our position. Failing to do so, we will be in the untenable position of trying to justify why we should enjoy a tax benefit that other similar organizations do not also enjoy. Without a clear justification of the exemption, we will look like just another special interest group asking for a free ride. I suggest that CUNA, if it has not already done so, develop and publish a detailed justification for the continuation of our exemption. If it cannot, then we should be prepared to move beyond the tax debate to the question of expansion of services and fields of membership so we can fully compete with other local financial institutions. Rick Leas President/CEO Golden Bay Federal Credit Union Moffett Field, Calif.</p>