Wednesday, March 19, 2008

Another Letter from My Congresswoman!

Yup, John has been all up into sending angry letters to Congress!

And seriously, what's up with Congress irradiating my snail mail?

--------------------------------------------

March 19, 2008

Mr. Das Binky
XXXX Way
Madison, Wisconsin 53XXX

Dear Mr. Binky:

Thank you for contacting me about H.R. 5244, the Credit Cardholders' Bill of Rights Act of 2008. It is good to hear from you, and I apologize for the delay in my response.

Like you, I believe that Congress must stand up for American consumers and take on the modern-day loan sharks. As you know, some credit card companies engage in deceptive practices that make it difficult for consumers to control their finances and reduce their debt. Countless consumers have made the mistake of believing advertisements and responded to "pre-approvals" offering low "fixed rates" that are "prime locked" only to find out later that the interest rates can not only rise, but the new higher rates will apply retroactively to the purchases and transfers made under the old terms. Additionally, many people with poor credit are not able to easily switch credit card companies, and thus become trapped with a credit card company that continually raises their interest rate.

While credit card growth has certainly provided consumers with valuable convenience, it has also come at a price. To fuel growth, credit card issuers have increased the number of solicitations sent to consumers 500 percent since 1990, and many have resorted to using misleading advertising. In 2004, the U.S. Better Business Bureau reported more than 17,000 complaints about credit cards. To this end, I believe that we need to assure that adequate consumer protections against the abusive business practices of credit card companies exist.

I strongly support H.R. 5244, comprehensive credit card reform legislation that seeks to protect consumer rights. This bill seeks to protect cardholders from arbitrary interest rate increases by: requiring credit card companies to give at least 45 days notice of any interest rate increases, providing cardholders faced with an interest rate increase with the option to cancel their card and pay off their existing balance at the existing interest rate and payment schedule, and preventing credit card companies from arbitrarily changing the terms of their contract with the cardholder or applying retroactive increases in the cardholder's interest rate. H.R. 5244 also:

  • prevents credit card companies from penalizing cardholders who pay on time;
  • requires credit card companies to mail billing statements 25 calendar days before the due date (9 days earlier than is currently required);
  • requires that payments made before 5 p.m. eastern standard time on the due date be considered timely by credit card companies;
  • requires credit card companies to provide a phone number and Internet address where the cardholder can pay off their balances on each statement;
  • prohibits credit card companies from charging late fees to a cardholder who can present proof that they mailed their bill within 7 days of the due date;
  • prohibits credit card companies from using misleading or deceptive language, such as "fixed rate" or "prime rate;" and
  • allows cardholders to fix their credit limits and prevents credit card companies from charging over-the-limit fees on a cardholder with a fixed credit limit.

Additionally, this bill contains provisions that prevent credit card companies from imposing excessive "over-the-limit" fees on cardholders, prohibit credit card companies from issuing subprime credit cards to individuals who cannot afford them, and improve data collection and Congressional oversight of the credit card industry. H.R. 5244 has been referred to the House Financial Services Committee, of which I am not a member.

Please know that I am committed to preventing abusive credit card practices and protecting cardholder rights. I will keep your views in mind as H.R. 5244 or other legislative measures seeking to achieve these goals are considered by the House of Representatives.

Again, thank you for sharing your views. Your opinion matters to me. If I can be of service to you in any other way, please do not hesitate to let me know. As a security precaution, all mail sent to Congress is first irradiated. This process causes significant delays. To ensure the fastest response, I encourage all constituents who have access to the internet to contact me through my website at http://tammybaldwin.house.gov.

Sincerely,

Tammy Baldwin
Member of Congress

3 comments:

Drewfus said...

It's interesting to see that you at least received a response from her. I wonder if it is the result of being ideologically more closely aligned that garnered you a response. I've written to her twice in the past the caveat being I was expressing concern about issues on which I'm pretty sure she fundamentally disagrees with me. Still, I wasn't sure that that should preclude me from respectfully asserting my position on the matter and reminding her that I am one of many that she represents. Now I don't expect that any letter to any congressperson should result in a complete reversal of personal or political philosophy but it begs a larger question. In a perfect world is it ultimately the responsibility of our representatives to put aside their beliefs or platform in the face of a preponderance of evidence that those they represent desire the contrary? Should a representatives bias only be allowed to tip the scales only up to a 60-40 or even 75-25 showing of opposition within your constituency ("Is you is or is you ain't?"). I can't see anyone actually doing this, but that may be my abysmally poor perception of the importance of individual honor these days.

John A said...

It's a good question. For better or worse, I see our elected officials as autonomous once they're elected. In our representative democracy, our time to show our opinions is really at election time. Mid-term, if the representative sees a huge groudswell change of opinion, they can choose to react, or not to react.

In short, we elect individuals, not policies. If we want to directly impact policies, we need to get more referendums. But the representatives' job is not necessarily to be beholden to the constituency. It's more to be true to themselves.

Our system is set up so we elect a representative, bias and all. If you don't like that bias, it's your job every few years to make that known on election day.

Which in a way is admitting that I don't expect my letters to Congress to have any effect, which in truth, I don't. Political cynicism is loads of fun.

Drewfus said...

True, election time is the time to voice one's opinion but once elected aren't officials technically "civil servants"? Are all elected officials sworn in though maybe not ceremoniously? Isn't their bid for office a wish to serve the people? Doesn't or shouldn't our vote consider aptitude as much as platform? In any election there are those that voted for the loser. Vote for her or not Tammy Baldwin is still MY representative. It's depressing to think that a balance can't be struck throughout a person's term to account for the disenfranchised minority (especially if slim) that did not vote for her . As for those that didn't vote at all. Screw 'em. I've got no respect for people with no shopping agenda.