- The Washington Times - Thursday, June 25, 2009

ANALYSIS/OPINION:

Virginia legislators fail to acknowledge that when access to short-term payday lending is restricted, borrowers are forced to turn to more expensive alternatives to make ends meet (“Payday lender laws slash loan numbers,” Metro, Sunday).

An article in the New York Times Magazine last year highlighted the difficulty for many Americans of accessing consumer credit. It took a balanced look at the services offered by short-term payday lenders and found them to be a valuable financial service because they offer easy-to-understand conditions with “no surprises, no hidden fees,” unlike many banks.

On the heels of the Times’ article came a Dartmouth College study looking at a 2007 payday lending ban in Oregon. That study concluded that banning financial options ended up hurting Oregon borrowers and forced them to turn to inferior substitutes like bounced checks and overdraft fees.

Adults are best served when they can choose among many competing financial options.

SAMANTHA O’NEIL

Center for Consumer Freedom

Washington

LOAD COMMENTS ()

 

Click to Read More

Click to Hide