I attended an event recently where the speaker said he tried to come up with one word to describe the person the event was honoring.

That's hard to do for anybody or anything, but this gentleman said during his attempts at the daily crossword puzzle he came up with the perfect word-sedulous. The word was right on to capture the studious, dedicated person he was describing. Wow, he was able to really nail it with one word! Impressive!

I wondered what off-the-beaten path word I would use to describe one of the most important issues in the credit union industry today-the ongoing, tiring, grueling, wasteful, and at times embarrassing battle with the bankers.

I too struggled to nail it, but I think I've come close-internecine.

This isn't a word I walk around saying everyday, but if I had to sum up one word to describe the arduous battle between banks and credit unions, internecine would be it. Internecine means “destructive to both sides” and if the banker/credit union battle isn't destructive to both sides I don't know what is. In fact if you think about it, the battle really only helps a few parties.

It clearly helps members of Congress as each side attempts to outdo each other with PAC fundraising. Yes, this long battle is helping to line the coffers of our elected officials-at least someone is benefiting.

CUNA and NAFCU would probably say I'm crazy for this, but the battle does indirectly help the banking and credit union trade associations on one level. Trade associations need issues. Without issues, trade associations lose their importance, lose their relevance, which could mean a loss in dues dollars, etc., etc. Do you think CUNA's GAC would be such a hit if there was no fight with bankers? I doubt it. Neither CUNA, NAFCU or any of the banking associations have to worry about losing their relevance with this continued war. Of course, these trade associations do so much more than wage the credit union/bank war, but it's the showstopper, it's what sells.

Let's get to the internecine warfare between banks and credit unions.

Check out page one of this publication. CUNA Mutual is raising its rates on plastic card coverage because of large losses hitting the industry. Credit unions and banks could certainly do a better job sharing information about scams, schemes, and rings that could help lessen fraud for everyone. Banks and credit unions should have an open book policy on this, but that will never happen today. There is too much concern about one side using it to the other's advantage. Bankers: “Look at the poor small credit unions being hit by credit card fraud, that's not the type of product Congress intended they offer. They should get out of that business for the sake of consumers.” Credit unions: “Credit unions have never caused a loss to the taxpayer, and yet we see big, sophisticated banks with all their money being hit by fraud to potentially cause yet another loss to the taxpayer. Remember the S&L crisis?”

What about financial literacy and education? Imagine how much better off this country could be if financial literacy was taught in the nation's schools. Who better to take the lead than the banks and credit unions of local communities? Bankers and credit unions should be partnering to share in the effort of educating our children on money matters. Don't bankers want to be known as the good guys any more? The days of free toasters and good experiences at banks are waning, now all people think about are fees and bad service. Why couldn't banks and credit unions put their squabbles aside for the good of every citizen and themselves? They can't because they continue to wage war against each other.

What about regulatory relief? Banks and credit unions should be teaming up to fight burdensome regulations that are putting a strain on both institutions. If Congress saw banks and credit unions join forces on regulatory issues, the path to relief would be much faster.

But these dreams of collaboration are far fetched. The angst between the two sides has never been worse, and the internecine battles are likely to rage on for years to come.

Should bankers really be spending money on placing ads about NCUA's role in credit union-to-bank conversions? Of course not, but they are. Should credit unions have to be pouring thousands of dollars into defending banker lawsuits? No way, but they are. In the end, the consumer loses. Credit unions and banks are wasting money on fighting each other instead of putting it towards better products and services.

Think of the money being spent on PAC contributions, for paying top lobbyists, for legal fees and all the ads and communications aimed at destroying each other. Tons of money will continue to be wasted on a war that the average consumer doesn't know about or doesn't care about-both sides lose.

-Comments? E-mail [email protected]