Broken clocks and blind squirrels...

With the scope of Congressional intervention in our lives growing on a daily basis, even I (a life-long Democrat) can't but cringe. Since Katrina, and even more so now that I am unemployed again, I have an ever-growing appreciation for how much the Federal tangle of red-tape and "hurry-up-and-wait" mentallity are symptomatic of the evils of governmental intervention and not of the need for MORE intervention.

However, I'm not going to shed any tears if Barney Frank and the rest of the Dems do get some legislation passed making it illegal for banks to re-arrange the actual order that transactions take place in order to be able to attach over-draft fees to debit card accounts. Sure, I know the argument that, if I am unhappy with my bank and its policies... find another bank. All well and good, until one realizes that this is stardard policy in the private banking industry, meaning that finding a local bank that doesn't do it is next to impossible.

I have often complained (loudly, too) that any bank I happen to do business with can and DOES process withdrawls from my accounts instantaneously, but deposits to my accounts can be delayed up to 36 hours as a matter of course (presumably to keep the money on THEIR books for as long as possible, rather than on mine).

Has anyone here NOT had a situation similar to one we encountered ourselves not that long ago...

You're enjoying a few pints with friends at the pub, knowing the night would end after midnight. You had planned it this way, because your direct deposit from your payroll processes right at the stroke of midnight, thus ensuring that your accounts have the adequate funds needed to pay for the porter and tip the barkeep... only to find that the bank (perhaps even your local branch) failed to process the transaction (automatically, I might add) and has now charged you an additional $35 per swipe (adding a tip adds a swipe, in case you didn't know) to your evening's fun.

This is considered standard practice as a "service" to the customer of the bank... meaning that you never have to have your card rejected due to insufficient funds. However, if I would rather find another way to pay the bill than be forced to give up an additional $70 for a night at the bar... shouldn't I have that option? Most credit cards reject if you reach or exceed your limit... but debit cards can be over-used to no end, apparently. If I really wanted to follow this sort of path, let me write the actual CHECKS and prosecute me according to established Federal and State laws for bad checks... but don't fleece the 98% of the country that DOESN'T habitually abuse or neglect their personal finances to the point of criminal fraud.

Government regulation should be to ensure fair and objective standards are followed by any two (or more) parties conducting transactions, not to force one party to a disadvantage over another. Bail-outs, incentives, subsidies... all giving an advantage to one over another, rather than allowing consumer choices or the free market in general to decide the viability of company.

According to the Wall Street Journal, many banks (mine included... Wachovia) show that as much as 44% of their adjusted gross corporate incomes come not from interest charged on loans and funds... but instead on fees charged in association with the interest charged on loans and funds. This is especially true in the case of large, national brand-name banks (BoA, Citi, Wachovia, Chase... a long list), while the smaller, more regional banks and credit unions (my personal favorite... Keesler Federal Credit Union pops to mind) show less than a 10% margin of income stemming from such fees.

I'm no fan of the 111th Congress, by any stretch of the imagination... but if Barney and the rest of the Pelosi-Reid Circus can get this passed, I'd actually thank them for it.