Sioux Falls/Las Vegas loan shark Chuck Brennan stayed mostly quiet during fight between rate-capping reformers and payday lenders on this year’s South Dakota ballot. The day after voters approved capping short-term loan rates at 36% and rejected the payday lenders’ effort to trick us into writing unlimited interest rates into our constitution, Brennan said he wanted to leave the regulation of his industry up to the voters:
Brennan said he stayed out of the campaign because he preferred to leave it up to voters.
“They spoke loud and clear and they don’t want payday lending in South Dakota,” he said [Jodi Schwan, “Chuck Brennan on Payday Lending Measure: We Are Not Closing,” that Sioux Falls paper, 2016.11.09].
That, like much of what payday lenders tell you, was horsehockey. Brennan is now turning away customers seeking loans and handing them a letter telling them to urge legislators to overturn the 36% rate cap. Brennan has also posted a notice on his Dollar Loan Center website trying to stir up resistance to Initiated Measure 21:
MEASURE 21 HAS CRIPPLED South Dakota’s ACCESS TO CREDIT
Over 100,000 Hard Working South Dakotans Deserted by Lawmakers
No one would like to lend you money today more than all of us here at Dollar Loan Center. That is what we do and we have been doing it for over 15 years in South Dakota. We take tremendous pride in the way we do business and it has been an honor and a privilege helping you and your family with your financial needs.
On November 8th, 2016, the passing of the South Dakota Payday Lending Initiative 21 caps all interest rates at 36% APR. Unfortunately Dollar Loan Center or anyone in our industry cannot offer a product at that interest rate. To put things in easy terms, we normally charge around $20 for someone to borrow $300 for a week. This new law would limit us to charging $2.00 for that same loan. No short-term lender in the state of South Dakota will be able to help you with these restrictions.
We want to continue working with you and helping you and your family. It is not right that the government can control who you choose to do business with. The only way to fix this travesty is to voice your opinion. Tell your story of how Dollar Loan Center has helped you and what will happen if we’re not around anymore.
Our offices will remain open to service all of our existing customers and loans that were processed prior to today. You can rest assured we will be here to lend you money if we can get this measure overturned [Chuck Brennan, Dollar Loan Center website post, retrieved 2016.11.16].
Brennan’s cry is bogus on multiple points:
- The 36% rate cap has not crippled South Dakota’s access to credit. My household still has its mortgage, car loan, and several credit cards. I don’t have hard numbers, but I would speculate that 99% of the dollar value of credit that South Dakotans want is still available to them from reputable lenders.
- IM 21 does not cap all interest rates at 36% APR, just those from predatory short-term lenders like Brennan.
- Under this rate cap, government does not control who you choose to do business with. If Dollar Loan Center remains open, you can choose to do business with them or not. This rate cap controls what kind of business Dollar Loan Center can lure you in to do. And, as with the sale of drugs, alcohol, lottery tickets, and other products that cause social harms, it is perfectly right for government to control how short-term lenders conduct their business.
- A vote by the people is not a travesty. If it were, it would be at least ironic to call for people to fix it by voicing their opinion.
Interestingly, Brennan’s call to action doesn’t target any sitting legislators. Instead, Brennan directs citizens to call the state Division of Banking, Governor Dennis Daugaard, Daugaard chief of staff Tony Venhuizen, KELO TV, and that Sioux Falls paper. Pressuring Governor Daugaard seems misdirected: the Governor came out in the last days of the campaign in favor of IM 21. The Governor gave a soft Yes, signaling he was open to a legislative amendment in case of “unforeseen circumstances” but also saying he didn’t have strong feelings either way about the issue. The Governor seems unlikely to invest energy in leading an effort to overturn the will of the voters (especially when he’s busy cobbling together a state budget amidst sluggish revenues and the canning of state budget expert Jason Dilges).
Brennan also tells the customers he’s rejecting to go bug victorious IM 21 sponsors Steve Hickey and Steve Hildebrand:
Below are the people who started this Initiative and pushed for its passing. They are directly responsible for us not being able to help with your financial needs and put this measure on the ballot. They feel they know better than you and want to control your choice as a consumer.
Steve Hickey
Disgraced Former SD LegislatorSteve Hildebrand
Political Activist
With that “disgraced”, Brennan arguably libels Hickey: he includes the word with intent to harm Hickey’s reputation, and as Greg Belfrage notes, the insult is supported by no credible evidence. Brennan labels Hildebrand with similar degrading intent, as if “political activist” (a) fully describes Hildebrand and (b) is a negative. Hildebrand used to make a living as a campaign consultant (and a darned good one, getting a black guy with the middle name Hussein elected President of the United States), but he is now a Sioux Falls businessman who took time to advocate for a particular public policy… which one could say is the same thing that Brennan is doing with this attack right now. If Hildebrand is a political activist, well, now, so is Chuck Brennan.
But political activist Brennan is taking a far sleazier and less effective approach than political activist Hildebrand. Political activist Brennan is pressuring his customers to do his lobbying for him. Steve Hildebrand never said to his customers at Josiah’s, “Sign the rate cap petition, or you get no coffee!” Hildebrand never pushed his customers to lobby Brennan to change the law (and he certainly never sent goons over to sit in and harass Brennan at his workplace). And Hildebrand never told his customers to waste their breath lobbying Chuck Brennan or any other payday lender to change the law. Telling payday loan customers to call Hickey and Hildebrand now is completely to changing the law: Hickey and Hildebrand aren’t going to call for the repeal of their successful initiative any more than Brennan would ever have changed his mind and called for passage of the 36% rate cap. Telling borrowers to call Hickey and Hildebrand is not constructive political activism; it is pure harassment.
Jodi Schwan let Brennan call himself a “political junkie” in her interview with him last week. If Brennan were an effective political junkie, he’d have mobilized earlier and stopped IM 21 from passing in the first place. His late, misdirected, bullying activism shows he’s far more junky than political.
There is a golden opportunity for entrepreneurs in the loan business in South Dakota. Instead of a dollar loan storefront, call it the Concerned Citizen Loan storefront and proudly display the 36% limit on your loans offered. Blare that baby up in lights man. This is now a buyers market for the people that need this utilization. In fact, if you are really after the business, advertise that your top limit will be 30 PER CENT. Capitalism is competition and investment opportunities. If Chuck is refusing loans, that means that others will be able to capitalize on that fact. 30 and 36% are outrageous in the first place, but can be a necessary for things that may happen. The lower rates that can be charged will drive customers without the fear of being a slave to the offer. The loan centers are successful in other parts of the country, why not here? I smell franchise opportunities for the successful investor.
If Chuck wants to talk about being disgraced, let’s remember in 2011 he was arrested in a prostitution sting.
Thanks for this post, Cory. With one odd exception the only emails I’ve received from Dollar Loan Customers who received this letter yesterday were notes to thank me. They were also addressed to the Governor, Tony, etc. and the other contacts listed.
It’s amazing that someone who would vote to cap interest rates on predatory lenders would also vote Republican. You’re looking for some wins for Democrats in SD Cory? This is where it’s at. In policy. Probably your best chance to turn some heads. People need to reaize that things like this are what Democrats fight for. People need to realize that their votes are contradicting each other.
Steve Hickey, I don’t see eye to eye with you on many issues for sure, but for what it is worth, you were correct on this issue from the start and you and your team did an outstanding job.
Now, I am wondering this. As Chuck is refusing loans, then he is for sure showing that his outrageous interest allows him to keep his storefronts open and salaries paid without bringing in any new sources of income. Chuck shows that he is operating a CRP type business that you really do not have to do anything but collect the old vig on the slaves to keep the doors open. In his case, it is a Cash Rotation Program. You and Mr. Hildebrand can make note of that to those that are gonna fake call you, but you probably already have that figured out. Activists counter punch and this is a golden opportunity to go ringside with full exposure. Chuck has shown his ample underbelly on this move.
BTW, those turned away will not be able to contact you other than throwing rocks in the Atlantic Ocean and hope a tsunami reaches Scotland to drench your boots, no?
How downright dirty of Brennan. This guy needs to go away. The people of SD have spoken, but I wouldn’t be surprised if the ‘pubs racket up a bill to try to get loan sharks going again in SD.
Dems need to take this and run with it and ask their fellow South Dakotans – do good republicans stand by Brennan?
Remember SD ‘pubs, the majority of SD stood by a democrat initiative. Democrats can do much good in SD.
If Brennan wants to play dirty, the SDDP and the majority of SD should be ready.
1. I mean, I hate the payday loan centers and what they do to people, but why is it a bad thing for a guy to recognize the risk associated with loaning to the demographic at the rates he now can, and telling would be customers they have to tell the state to go higher for him to do so? Wasn’t this THE PRECISE POINT of the usury bill? That if you can’t function at rates that don’t bankrupt people, then you shouldn’t be a thing?
2. You should be careful about someone “libeling” Hickey. You should also look up the differences between statements of fact and statements of opinion. For instance, if I called Stace Nelson an insecure, myopic, impotent despot, this would be a statement of opinion and not subject to libel laws. If I actually accused him of criminal wrongdoing or a specific act that harmed his reputation, it would fall under libel (but not freaking likely, as the standard for public figures is much, much higher(actual malice)).
3. This line: Steve Hildebrand never said to his customers at Josiah’s, “Sign the rate cap petition, or you get no coffee!” struck me as extremely disingenuous. How many people default on Steve’s coffee?
Look, I voted for the 36% cap, largely because I don’t think that businesses which require such insane rates to operate should do so, and consider the default rate not a “risk of doing business” in the sector, but a direct result of the rates themselves. But this article isn’t a good one.
Chuck is showing, all by himself, how damaging his operation has been. Best thing is to keep egging him on so that his loud voice keeps drawing attention to himself. The absolute greed of these places is astounding, something that most folks are unaware of. I think it best to have him being a loud fart, than SBD.
There could even be community banking to step up and set a division in the local banks to cover short term payday loans. Clearly, they would be successful, while providing the service that payday loans offer. Just not so greedy.
I guess you’ve never been poor then, Dicta. Maybe this is what Troy Jones was talking about when he said this rate cap would hurt the poor more.
This is what Democrats need to present to South Dakotans: a rich man is using the poor by making a statement on an initiative that over 70% of SD voted for.
How could a GOP businessman like Brennan turn away poor people and deny them loans that they need to feed their familes? Is this family values that SD stands for? Brennan is starving the poor. Visualize it dems, visualize it to SD. Brennan is using the poor for his own interests.
Jerry, there are studies that have shown the richer a person gets, the greedier they become. What they have is never enough.
“To put things in easy terms, we normally charge around $20 for someone to borrow $300 for a week.” Ummmmm… If he normally charges “around $20 for someone to borrow $300”, then he’s only charging roughly 6.6%. With Initiative 21 in place, he could legally charge $108 to borrow $300, not “$2.00”. It’s not Initiative 21 that’ll put Chuck Brennan out of business… It’ll be his lousy math skills… He should quit while he’s ahead…
1. I grew up poor. I know the joys of commodity cheese and making the mistake of removing the layer of grease from the peanut butter rather than stirring it in so it isn’t dry. This is a complete red herring anyway, as my poverty or lack thereof has little to do with my ability to comment on the fiscal soundness of a business plan.
2. He is asking would be customers who are impacted by the measure, and the vast majority of them are poor. You know, the people it impacts. Who would you expect him to involve in commentary?
3. He denies them loans if he doesn’t think it financially sound to do so. Studies show that nearly half of these loans default: http://thehill.com/regulation/237538-borrowers-default-on-nearly-half-of-all-payday-loans-in-2-years-study-finds He is making a business decision. He doesn’t “owe” loans to anyone.
Again, I am completely comfortable with his business not existing, because if you rely on such exorbitant rates to remain afloat, then your business sucks and is a net negative. But please, be honest about the discussion.
Tell Brennan to be honest. He’s just ticked b/c he doesn’t get to pad his wallet as fast.
It is not right that the government can control who you choose to do business with.
You are so right, Chuck. I wanna buy recreational drugs directly from the source and save money, but that damn gubmint tells me it is illegal
Opportunity, opportunity, opportunity—Jerry, how about a clever entrepreneur combine short-term 36%-APR loans with other products and services? If there really is such high demand for short-term loans to help people in dire straits buy basic necessities, then how about Hy-Vee use 36%-APR loans as a loss leader? Draw customers in with quick cash, accept that the loans won’t make big money, but enjoy all the cash that rolls in as those borrowers go straight from the cash window to the dairy, produce, and diaper sections to buy what they need for their kids?
Steve Hickey! I’d love to see those e-mails, both the odd-duck complaint and the thank-yous. Can you share any of them with us here?
Fascinating that Brennan’s call for action would result in more thank-yous than complaints. A big batch of e-mails like that breaking as favorably toward the rate cap as the 75.6% favorability in the actual vote would only solidify the Governor’s support for the 36% rate cap. Good political activism there, Chuck! :-D
But Steve, I must chide: “arrested” in a prostitution sting? As with our neighbor Reynold, that certainly doesn’t look good, but innocent until proven guilty, right? I can see your point that if we’re going to play Chuck’s game about what constitutes “disgrace”, you were never arrested for anything, so if there is any disgrace floating around, far less sticks to you than arrested (and mugshotted? please? someone?) Chuck.
(And by the way, in a Protestant world, can any mortal separate any other mortal from grace?)
Chip, I tend to agree… but don’t forget: Hickey is a Republican. So are Daugaard and District 3 legislators-elect Novstrup and Dennert, who both said publicly they supported the 36% rate cap.
Jenny, I agree completely that Democrats should position themselves as the defenders of the people’s will on the ballot measures. That does mean that we have to agree to stand down on redistricting and open nonpartisan primaries for a cycle or two (former harder to let stand than the latter), but as the party named for democracy, we have an obligation to defend direct democracy.
Of course, in the Legislature, we won’t be able to mount that defense on our own. If Kris Langer steps forward as the payday lenders’ errand girl again, we will have to mobilize voters of all stripes in her district and others represented by Republicans to light up the phones and emails to pressure those Republican leaders to stand down.
Now that Dollar loan Center quit making payday loans where are these people getting their loans. Many don’t qualify for a credit card and can’t get a bank loan. I voted for the 36% cap but wonder what effects this will bring to the poor.
They could make all kinds of loans at 36% interest. They would rather throw a hissy than make less money than their lifestyles are accustomed to.
If the loan officers can’t make a living at 36 Interest tell them to get another job or two.
Dicta, I agree: in almost every instance of blog discourse when someone has cried, “libel!” I’ve found their charge incorrect. An actual libel case on one word against a public figure is likely not worth a lawyer’s time. However, I think “disgraced” carries a different meaning from the fun adjectives we may throw at our friend Stace. “Disgraced” isn’t as much an opinion as a statement of objective fact. It implies he did something bad, received widespread scorn, and generally lost reputation from it. Chuck isn’t just stating his personal opinion about Steve; he’s imputing an opinion to a wide swath of the public. That’s a claim of fact that we can test pretty easily by asking a bunch of South Dakotans, “Hey, what do you think of Steve Hickey?” and hearing 90% say, “Who?” another 8% say, “Didn’t he help pass that rate cap? Good guy!” another 1% say, “That big-government communist devil took away my payday loans!” and a remaining fringe of Bosworth/Hubbel conspiracy drones shout, “Lock him up!”
Again, likely not actionable, but still a different degree of public insult than a simple statement of negative opinion.
Not really, it is a statement about quality, as no specific act is mentioned. The statement is not “provable as false,” meaning the language cannot be proved true or false by a core of OBJECTIVE evidence. Your reliance on polling the subjective opinions of the public are irrelevant. This category of opinion also involves a statement of subjective belief based on disclosed true facts. The Milkovich Court offered the following example of a statement of non-provable opinion: “In my opinion Mayor Jones shows his abysmal ignorance by accepting the teachings of Marx and Lenin.” The court, if you recall, said this was not a statement of fact.
Dicta (you get multiple responses, because you’re that good :-) ), I disagree with your charge of disingenuousness. Brennan is exploiting his customers for his personal gain. Hildebrand certainly circulated petitions among his customers at his workplace (and customers came willingly to sign after the payday lenders attacked his business with paid demonstrators, a tactic Hildebrand’s team has not to the best of my knowledge used to disrupt any payday lending store), but he has never withheld services under current business regulations and told customers the only way they can get the usual service is to call Chuck Brennan, the Governor, and the press to hound them into changing a law that the people just approved eight days ago. Plus, Hildebrand took time to encourage his customers to take political action on an issue that has nothing to do directly with his bottom line. Hildebrand exhorted customers to political action to help their neighbors. Brennan is exhorting his customers to political action to protect his profits.
The comparison of Brennan’s and Hildebrand’s political tactics (HIldebrand’s far more altruistic, Brennan’s edging toward extortion) is valid and instructive.
Mike, banks don’t make high risk loans. Regulators will not allow them to make an unsecured loan. Where does the guy that basically has no equity and a poor credit rating go to get a short term loan if the payday loan centers won’t loan them the money?
“Dicta (you get multiple responses, because you’re that good :-) )”
Flattery will get you everywhere, man.
I don’t think the analogy holds. We aren’t really comparing apples to apples here, because the risk associated with the services provided and the expected costs of those risks are different in both scale and quality. Brennan’s argument is that he cannot provide the services expected at the lower cost mandated by the measure. Hildebrand never had such an issue. Again, I am completely fine with Brennan losing out here because I don’t think a business which relies on such crazy rates is a net positive, but I don’t think the comparison is as instructive as it is misleading.
There’s nothing wrong, Dicta, with payday lenders being honest with their customers about the impact of regulation on their business. Frankly, I’m surprised Brennan didn’t do this sooner. It would have been politically smarter—he could have mobilized more pressure against IM 21 and maybe swung the vote down.
If these impacts were obvious (and they were to Steve Hildebrand; he said all along that his hope was that IM 21 would do exactly what we see it doing, shutting down payday lenders), then it seems irresponsible that Brennan would tell his customers that business would continue as usual until the day the law takes effect and then suddenly start telling his customers the truth. Why not alert them sooner, if not to mobilize political action against the initiative, then at least to help regular customers brace themselves for the loss of this source of emergency funds?
Brennan’s timeline and sudden plunge into activism smells of fear of the public and preference for lobbying the Legislature. He and his industry colleagues knew they wouldn’t win a fair fight in a public vote. They put on a show of splashy deceptive ads (gotta have a little fun, and hey, it never hurts to roll the dice, because you never know when the polls will be wrong… right, President-Elect Trump?), but they knew all along it would be far easier to
buywin the votes of 54 legislators and one Governor than 179,000 South Dakotans. That’s why they turn up the heat now, when the people feel they’ve done their duty and can stop paying attention and turn back to reality TV.The peanut butter is true man. The business can exist and it can make money as is shown in other parts of the country. Bernie Sanders wanted Post Offices to go back to community lending, a great idea for small loans. This could be an opportunity for community based loans in small amounts.
Now that is a fair criticism. The fact that he changed his tune so quickly indicates that he either
1) Underestimated the chances of bill passage; or
2) Knew it would pass and planned on using extra means outside the initiated measure process to subvert the will of voters.
D Bice! Remember, the 36% rate cap is APR, the yearly equivalent rate. $20 interest on $300 is just 6.6% per week, but if he traps someone in such a loan for a year and charges that same amount every week for 52 weeks, that’s 343% interest.
Greg! Where do they get their loans? The hard way: admitting to people they know that they’re broke and asking for help. Or maybe not at all. Or maybe they’ll realize your question is not the only question that should determine their action or our public policy. Maybe instead of asking, “where do I get my loan?” they’ll ask, “Do I really need this loan? Can I do without?” Sure, for some, the answer will be No, but for some, the answer will surely be Yes.
So, how much will the bidding start with the legislators to demand a do over for the payday loan schemes? It has got to be a bunch to even get a listen. I say the bidding starts at 25,000 per legislator.
Cory, that fact needs to be drilled into the heads of the voters that already approved this so they can contact their legislators and kill this thing before the bidding begins.
Apples to apples, Dicta? I’ll grant the analogy isn’t perfect (is any?), but the parallels remain instructive. Hildebrand’s political activism was other-oriented, and raised the distinct possibility of not being good for his business (that the efforts to malign his business backfired was a fortunate expression of community spirit but not an outcome on which a typical South Dakota business owner might bet his profits). Brennan’s newly adopted political activism is entirely self-oriented, with customers just another resource to exploit… as usual.
On polling, subjectivity, and Brennan’s claim that Hickey is disgraced: au contraire, Monsieur Dicta!. If I call you a “meathead” (I won’t, but roll through that), I’m saying what I think. If I call you “disgraced”, I’m making a claim about what other people think. If I poll a representative sample of the public, and they all say, “Dicta? Meathead? Nah, righteous dude!” their assessments of your character are as subjective as mine, but my (rigorous, scientific) polling reveals an objective fact: there’s a 95% likelihood that you have not fallen from favor or a position of power or credibility,”—i.e., you have not been “disgraced.”
Remember, folks, the big takeaways here are (1) Dicta and I agree that Hickey won’t be taking Brennan to court over one adjective (Hickey, we welcome your declaration of litigious intent), (2) Dicta and I agree that we’re probably better off without Brennan charging people 574% interest, and (3) Dicta and I would be having no fun if we agreed on everything.
O.K., and (4) when Dicta and I do disagree, I’m probably right. :-D
…lololololoololol
Jerry, let’s assume the payday lenders can already count on 30 Republican votes. They need 41 more to assure veto-proof majorities. I’m going to guess they spent $3 million fighting the ballot measure. If they are willing to invest a comparable sum in lobbying the 2017 Legislature (and they won’t wait until the following election year), then $3M divided by 41 legislators is about $73K per head…. the equivalent of 12 years of Legislative salary.
Do I hear 75?
Cory, I can’t speak for the others, but Daugaard didn’t seem to offer resounding support for this, whether it was his own doing or someone had his ear. Regardless, this goes directly against the national conservative movement, and powers that now will be in Washington. People need to know that. If our state’s Republican leadership is pushing traditional Democratic philosophy with an obligatory R behind their name, people need to know that. Don’t let them eat your lunch.
I voted for IM 21 also, but I do love Badlands Pawn and the music and entertainment that Chuck Brennan is bringing to the Sioux Falls area. But for Badlands Pawn, the pawn business is largely a sideline. IM 21 should be good for the pawn business. Now instead of unsecured short term $300 loans from Dollar Loan Center, the poor will be pawning their 55 inch LCD tvs and their I phones to get their cigarette and hooker money.
Cory,
Do you know if Brennan contributed to the campaigns of any newly elected legislators?
One thing that low-income people can do is setup a money management account at their local banks, most banks have them and are willing to help. Some banks in Rapid City even encourage the homeless to set up an account. Money management accounts help you budget your money and to see where your money is going without over spending and needing a last minute loan to keep the power on. This is not a complete answer to the loss payday lenders but it is a start.
Why not make robbing convenience stores legal. The sums you’d get from a convenience store prolly won’t exceed $300 and you wouldn’t have to pay usurious interest. Either way someone gets robbed and it is not the Brennan’s of the world.
have them call right away and then in three months when the legislature is meeting let the same ones call that their life has actually gotten better.
This will force people to be smarter about their money. Win-win for everyone.
How is Brennan going to fund his big improvements to his Badlands Speedway without sucking the last dollar out the poor.
Upon reading KELOs’ story on this today, it sounds as if half the business district will be boarded up when the Pay Day lenders get finished giving up their leases. Who knew this was soo foos main business.
You also need someone to certify that these ads are factual so voters can’t be blindsided when they are sold a bill of goods. Same with campaigns.
You saw how well Drumpf’s constant lies worked. Even his campaign manager said after the election Drumpf makes up his own facts.
Hmmmm Kelo land again. You cannot take them seriously there. They have shown that they are completely in on the fix.
Who wants to bet theft goes up and pawn shops start making more money? A large group of the customers are using these as intended. I read it was something like <10% fall into the loop of continually getting these and hitting up multiple spots. Instead of reforming the tracking and reporting which would stop this, we are going to cut off the nose to spite the face and create a much different issue. This type of lending will go away and those who used it responsibly are not going to have options. Those who used it the wrong way will end up committing crimes to get by. If you can't assess the risk and apply the rates accordingly, it will take only a few defaults to wipe out your entire revenue stream. Brennan's portfolio includes very little revenue from SD so I doubt this will really affect anything other than closing his branches here and laying off his employees. His main revenue comes from other states. Maybe Steve can give them all loans out of the coffee shop if it is such a great investment opportunity. He will be broke before the end of the year if he does. Any person with half a brain and knows lending understands this. I've known people who have used this and I guess next time they will be forced to pawn their shotguns and not hunt rather than take out a $500 short-term loan to make rent and pay $50 to do it. My bet is on pawn shops seeing an increase in traffic. Just better hope they aren't pawning your property.
Ayup, Buresh, and then we will blame it all on Herr Drumpf and his Nazi goons.
I will take your bet Daniel. Lest we forget, the new minimum wage is set to go into place right quick like. That will take a huge burden off those that think they have to use payday’s to make ends meet. Pawn Shops have regular police visits. Pawn Shop owners are also well versed in detecting stolen merchandise and usually have very good relationships with authorities. As you are unfamiliar with how those work, you must present a form of identification on these goods that are then cataloged and put into secured storage areas. So yeah, what do you want to wager.
In a society such as ours, there will be other opportunities for short term lending which was noted by Cory is still north of 300% for long term accounts. Boo friggin hoo for the leeches that think that they will close shop. They are merely on holiday.
Thank gawd Daniel! I was afraid the conservatives in this State were getting soft. Ya, seriously, <10% seems a little light. Maybe if your getting your news from Briebart or something.
http://www.nbcnews.com/business/economy/there-are-more-payday-lenders-u-s-mcdonalds-n255156
Nobody is telling them they can't do business here, they just have to do it in a manner that is consistent with our State's Democratic core values, which include treating our fellow citizens with dignity and respect, and not jeopardizing our overall financial system for your own benefit.
“Where does the guy that basically has no equity and a poor credit rating go to get a short term loan if the payday loan centers won’t loan them the money?”
The County Poor Relief (a/k/a General Assistance) program is an important option for folks. Each County is required by federal Constitutional law to adopt publicly available guidelines describing what benefits or funds are available and what is necessary to qualify for assistance. Here, for example, are Minnehaha County program guidelines.
http://www.minnehahacounty.org/dept/hs/guidelines/MCPoorReliefGuide.pdf
To clarify, our County Poor Relief programs are based on state law alone (in place here since the 19th century), but once a state adopts such a program federal due process requires clear guidelines to protect a qualified applicant from being improperly denied.
Roger, right now, determining whether Chuck Brennan has contributed to an SD Legislative candidates requires reviewing each campaign finance form, since Sec. Krebs nuked the donor-search functionality. I’m hoping IM 22 will bring us a better database for searching such information….
What do you think about this?
http://qualitylendersinc.com/locations/
“We are currently awaiting approval from the division of banking to continue serving our South Dakota customers.”
I was taking a look at what I saw posted for an organization to get approved as a “bank” in the categories that would be exempt from measure 21, but (and I am no expert) it looked like the requirements for such are much greater than the services that payday lenders offer or would want to offer. Do you think this is a loophole they will be able to get through? It doesn’t seem like it to me, and I’m guessing you vetted this out, but again I’m not the expert.
Also, as far as getting measure 21 repealed, doesn’t measure 22 go a long way to prevent people like Aycox from buttering up the legislature? Or do they plan to try to dismantle that as well?