In “Legislators,Regulators Seek Credit Union Oversight Secret Sauce,” Ms. Cookeputs forth a flawed notion that the size of the NCUA board can makethe difference between what is good policy vs. “cheap” policy.Frankly, that is not the issue, efficacy is.

What benefit would be derived from increasing the size of theboard? Improved governance is not guaranteed simply because thereis more debate or the size of the board increases. Greatertransparency and accountability do not necessarily require eitherof these. For this reason, NAFCU has been steadfast inopposing any unnecessary government actions that increase costs tocredit unions without providing any benefit or relief to theirmembers. This has included various past proposals to change theNCUA board from three to five members.

The fact is a move from three board members to five, andadditional support staff, would increase the board's expenses inthe range of 60%, with no clear benefit. Already, NCUA travel isone of the greatest expenses in the budget. Adding two new boardmembers would not only increase costs directly related to the twoadditional board members, but it would also add costs for the boardmembers' support staff, which would include additional advisers andassistants.