Credit union debate still hot

After another flurry of procedural twists and turns, a hotly contested credit union resolution finally went to a vote in the Utah House of Representatives Tuesday, passing by a 41-34 margin.

HJR1, "A Joint Resolution Related to Financial Institutions," survived another kill attempt during House floor debate Tuesday morning and was amended one more time before the vote.

Rep. Glenn A. Donnelson, R- North Ogden, made a motion to send the resolution back to the House Rules committee, where he hoped it would be held until the conclusion of the 2005 Utah Legislature.

"I call this the 'B/C Waste Bill,' " Donnelson said. "We've wasted a lot of time on banks and credit unions."

The resolution asks the U.S. Congress to re-examine rulings by the National Credit Union Administration regarding fields of membership for Utah's federally chartered credit unions; allow states and local governments to levy the same taxes on federally chartered credit unions as are imposed on state-chartered ones; and provide states with an explanation for maintaining the current tax structure, if it decides to do so.

Tuesday's amendment, offered by the resolution's original sponsor, Rep. Jeff Alexander, R-Provo, "softened" the language of the resolution as it was amended last week. In its latest incarnation, the resolution states that the Utah Legislature "affirms its decision to differentiate between traditional credit unions and those that have lost a meaningful affinity or bond and encourages Congress to consider a similar approach."

The latest amendment also urges Congress to "examine whether the economic circumstances have changed since the Federal Credit Union Act such that credit unions should have a broader role in the current financial marketplace."

Donnelson argued that the issue pitted lawmakers against one another and against their constituents. He urged Alexander and other members of the Financial Institutions Task Force to instead send a letter to Congress spelling out their concerns and recommendations — which, he said, would have the same force as a resolution and "get us off the hook with constituents."

Alexander struck back, arguing that "we're not here just to do things to get ourselves off the hook with our constituents. We're here to draft legislation and do the work of the people."

Rep. Stephen Urquhart, R-St. George, urged an up-or-down vote, saying lawmakers should not "punt" when confronted with divisive or controversial issues. Rep. Susan Lawrence, R-East Millcreek, responded later, saying she didn't mind "going to the mat for tough issues."