Presentation Sisters’ Justice Commission: Sisters Gabriella Crowley, Kathleen Bierne and Pat Prunty.
Presentation Sisters, Cojourners and Pax Christi members have joined “SOUTH DAKOTANS FOR RESPONSIBLE [LENDING]” (SDFRL) led by Steve Hildebrand from Josiah’s Restaurant in Sioux Falls. Enough signatures have been gathered for this initiative to be placed on the ballot in November 2016 capping interest rates for all payday loans at 36%.
Unfortunately, big business is behind another initiative that will appear on the ballot that deceives people into thinking that their initiative is fairer, because they want interest rates capped at 18%. This 36% payday loan cap would actually cement the possibility of sky-high interest rates in the SD constitution. SDFRL is facing an uphill battle. It is much like a David and Goliath dynamic that is playing out. Pay day lending is a $46 billion industry in the U.S. It is interesting that the company (Select Management Resources LLC based in Georgia) was sole financer in 2015 of South Dakotans for Fair Lending, the political committee pushing for an amendment to cap rates at 18%, butallowing any rate that the borrower agrees to, has auto title locations in SD under the name North American Title Loan.
About 12 million Americans borrow more than $7 billion annually from over 22,000 storefronts. SDFRL is fighting the debt trap of triple-digit interest rate payday loans. In South Dakota alone, the average interest rate is 574% for a payday loan! It is time to CAP THE INTEREST RATES. Many who borrow from these storefront lenders are already living paycheck to paycheck. For example, one family took out a $1,200 loan from a payday lender. They needed to pay $322/month for a year. It turned out that they were paying more than 300% annually. Many need a second loan to pay off the first loan, which is called flipping. On average, borrowers “flip” eight times.
The Hebrew Scriptures give preferential option for those made poor. The Israelites were forbidden from charging “usury,” or interest, on loans to fellow Jews (Deuteronomy 23:19). In January 2015, Pope Francis claimed that high interest loans are an affront to the dignity of the human person: ““When a family has nothing to eat, because it has to make payments to usurers, this is not Christian, it is not human! This dramatic scourge in our society harms the inviolable dignity of the human person.”
Payday lending practices as we know them today are unjust, take advantage of the plight of those made poor by the very system that continues to keep them trapped in a vicious cycle of poverty! Please study this issue throughout the year because in November, there will be two ballot initiatives. Choose LIFE! [emphasis original, link added; Sisters Gabriella Crowley, Kathleen Bierne and Pat Prunty, “Why Cap Payday Loan Interest Rates at 36%?” 2016.02.15]
“Choose LIFE!” concluding a practical argument about business regulations—I’d like to see more believers and more voters make that connection.
Cory, I was thinking that PC is a place were they would definitely support your candidacy. A lot of nuns I’ve known have definitely been more progressive than the priests, so make sure you make a stop out there. Nuns staunchly lean left when it comes to refugees, safety nets for the poor, a living wage, universal healthcare.
You should definitely establish a base there.
bearcreekbat
2016-02-19 11:34
While I agree with the position of the good sisters opposing the fake constitutional amendment, I wonder if by testifying they might lose whatever tax exempt status, if any, the Presentation Sisters’ Justice Commission might enjoy?
Madman
2016-02-19 11:54
FYI bearcreekbat clergy pay taxes. They are ruled self employed.
bearcreekbat
2016-02-19 12:05
Thanks Madman, I agree that individuals who work for a religious organization must pay taxes like anyone else, and can engage in whatever political activities they choose. But, I wonder about the organizations they speak for, such as the Presentation Sisters’ Justice Commission? Aren’t these tax exempt religious organizations?
IRS regs support the freedom of individuals, but purport to restrict non-profit religious groups with this regulation: “no substantial part of (church) activities (may consist of) carrying on propaganda, or otherwise attempting to influence legislation.”
They can legally lobby if lobbying doesn’t make up a “substantial part of [thier] activities”. They may not, however, endorse/oppose candidates.
Steve Hickey
2016-02-19 12:53
The IRS reg? It does not prohibit church involvement or voice on any issue. Besides, it is entirely unConstitutional. You can’t slip someone a monetary benefit in exchange for a certain kind of speech. And it’s only a line in tax code with does not trump the Constitution (which says nothing about separating church and state.) This line of tax code is called the Johnson Amendment and it dates to 1956. Back in the day LBJ didn’t want to silence churches, he wanted to silence a different political foe (a non profit), so he slipped in an amendment that no one really noticed or thought through. In effect it muzzled churches for six decades now. I’ve sent my sermons to the IRS on political issues and candidates hoping they’d sue me. They are a paper tiger. They don’t want such a challenge in court because they’d lose.
bearcreekbat
2016-02-19 13:00
Steve, now I think I get it. It is sort of like the Blues Brothers’ “wish sandwich” where they wish they had some meat and bread. Your argument is that you wish this regulation is unconstitutional and have been trying to get some court to agree with you, right?
Jenny, this secular humanist treads carefully on sacred ground. ;-)
Nick Nemec
2016-02-19 13:16
The world would be a generally better place if Catholic nuns were in charge.
Lynn
2016-02-19 13:25
Nick,
“The world would be a generally better place if Catholic nuns were in charge.”
I agree!
Jenny
2016-02-19 14:06
Lynn and Nick, just as long as nuns weren’t of the type that tortured Native Americans decades ago, and didn’t take babies away from young unwed women.
I wouldn’t think nuns were doing these things today, hopefully not, and it is hard to understand why they ever treated groups of people that way.
Lynn
2016-02-19 14:13
Jenny,
I’ve been very grateful to have known and know some of them and there is no way! The work they do is incredible. Unselfish and generous.
Lanny V Stricherz
2016-02-20 11:11
Sister Lynn Marie Welbig, who was the lobbyist on this bill for the Presentation Sisters, taught a class for interested folks at the old convent across from St Joseph’s Cathedral in Sioux Falls. I attended those classes. After a long time, I told her, that I had never agreed with the issue of women priests, but after listening to her teaching for these many weeks, not only had I changed my mind, but I thought that she would make and excellent Pope.
So, I agree with you Nick Nemec. I was also astounded by the disrespect that Committee chairman Gosch showed her when she was done speaking. He said “thanks for your testimony Ms Welbig.” She is a cannon lawyer and has done a heckuva lot more to earn the title Sister, than he has done to earn the title Representative.
Cory, I was thinking that PC is a place were they would definitely support your candidacy. A lot of nuns I’ve known have definitely been more progressive than the priests, so make sure you make a stop out there. Nuns staunchly lean left when it comes to refugees, safety nets for the poor, a living wage, universal healthcare.
You should definitely establish a base there.
While I agree with the position of the good sisters opposing the fake constitutional amendment, I wonder if by testifying they might lose whatever tax exempt status, if any, the Presentation Sisters’ Justice Commission might enjoy?
FYI bearcreekbat clergy pay taxes. They are ruled self employed.
Thanks Madman, I agree that individuals who work for a religious organization must pay taxes like anyone else, and can engage in whatever political activities they choose. But, I wonder about the organizations they speak for, such as the Presentation Sisters’ Justice Commission? Aren’t these tax exempt religious organizations?
IRS regs support the freedom of individuals, but purport to restrict non-profit religious groups with this regulation: “no substantial part of (church) activities (may consist of) carrying on propaganda, or otherwise attempting to influence legislation.”
http://www.religioustolerance.org/chu_poli.htm
Non profits can fully engage issues just not candidates. It is ridiculous to put a segment of our communities on mute.
Steve, I appreciate your position but what about the above IRS reg? How do you legally get around that restriction?
Relevant guidance straight from the horse’s mouth:
https://www.irs.gov/Charities-&-Non-Profits/Lobbying
They can legally lobby if lobbying doesn’t make up a “substantial part of [thier] activities”. They may not, however, endorse/oppose candidates.
The IRS reg? It does not prohibit church involvement or voice on any issue. Besides, it is entirely unConstitutional. You can’t slip someone a monetary benefit in exchange for a certain kind of speech. And it’s only a line in tax code with does not trump the Constitution (which says nothing about separating church and state.) This line of tax code is called the Johnson Amendment and it dates to 1956. Back in the day LBJ didn’t want to silence churches, he wanted to silence a different political foe (a non profit), so he slipped in an amendment that no one really noticed or thought through. In effect it muzzled churches for six decades now. I’ve sent my sermons to the IRS on political issues and candidates hoping they’d sue me. They are a paper tiger. They don’t want such a challenge in court because they’d lose.
Steve, now I think I get it. It is sort of like the Blues Brothers’ “wish sandwich” where they wish they had some meat and bread. Your argument is that you wish this regulation is unconstitutional and have been trying to get some court to agree with you, right?
Jenny, this secular humanist treads carefully on sacred ground. ;-)
The world would be a generally better place if Catholic nuns were in charge.
Nick,
“The world would be a generally better place if Catholic nuns were in charge.”
I agree!
Lynn and Nick, just as long as nuns weren’t of the type that tortured Native Americans decades ago, and didn’t take babies away from young unwed women.
I wouldn’t think nuns were doing these things today, hopefully not, and it is hard to understand why they ever treated groups of people that way.
Jenny,
I’ve been very grateful to have known and know some of them and there is no way! The work they do is incredible. Unselfish and generous.
Sister Lynn Marie Welbig, who was the lobbyist on this bill for the Presentation Sisters, taught a class for interested folks at the old convent across from St Joseph’s Cathedral in Sioux Falls. I attended those classes. After a long time, I told her, that I had never agreed with the issue of women priests, but after listening to her teaching for these many weeks, not only had I changed my mind, but I thought that she would make and excellent Pope.
So, I agree with you Nick Nemec. I was also astounded by the disrespect that Committee chairman Gosch showed her when she was done speaking. He said “thanks for your testimony Ms Welbig.” She is a cannon lawyer and has done a heckuva lot more to earn the title Sister, than he has done to earn the title Representative.