None in my state. None in any state, now, as far as I know. I think you've missed something in the news.

Support she only ended after being called out publicly for it...

We need some sort of credit arrangements for people living near the edge economically(as you have been from time to time)to use payday usury companies.

No disrespect to your experience intended...but you deserved and others deserve something better than that.

Using them as a small bank instead of the Pay Day Lenders, also known as "loan sharks".

That would create meetings account-holders could attend and vote at...which would put a significant part of our financial sector under democratic control.

She also supports continuing the drug war, despite the fact that it's no more winnable than Vietnam or Iraq or Afghanistan or...

the War on Drugs too. Nothing like having your constituents shot in the streets to make you hate dealers. I have a nephew who grew up in Davie and now lives near his father in Stuart. He's been an addict for 22 years. War on drugs? I'd personally like to shootl the dealers who show up at his door the day he's out of rehab with free heroin.... except I'd do that and he'd just find another dealer. My favorite nephew too... he's actually close to my age.

The law enforcement approach to the problem is NOT the answer. If sending people to prison on drug charges hasn't stopped the drug trade yet, it never will. The problem is a social, health, and human respect and dignity issue.

Nobody here is defending dealers or the rest of the scum in the narcotic-industrial-complex. And I don't blame you for wanting to shoot dealers(I've had friends and family who fight the battle against addiction-it's a horrible thing). Just pointing out that, if they are still hear after decades of the "war on drugs", the "war" is unwinnable and something else needs to be done.

Thank you for sharing your experience.

At FAU and Barry University, I had courses in Criminal Justice. And I was a mediator/therapist with the Broward County Courthouse in Ft Lauderdale. We advocated for this approach (legalizing). I hope one day it will happen. legalization and treatment

know that some people must rely on these lenders since they have no better options in many cases.

We need better options that are available before banning such lenders, IMO.

I'm not surprised you support it. It's banned in many states, btw. It's banned in mine. It's her siding with big sugar when it came to the Everglades. It's her shit tenure as DNC chair. It's that she supported her repub pals over dems in two House races. I could go on but you're MM. I've been reading you for years.

DWS faced a progressive challenger who was hitting her on this issue and, lo and behold, she flip-flopped.

She'll probably be re-elected. We'll see how long her new position lasts when the election is safely behind her.

return to her earlier position. Canova? He's probably not what caused her to change. More likely, she heard from people who convinced her. That position probably wouldn't have cost her the election, anyhow. Canova was always a very long shot.

have had to decide how much weight to put on it. That's for her constituents. I know I wouldn't risk trading her for any typical Florida conservative, though. Florida is famous for good reason for its corruption and ongoing environmental destruction in spite of many fine efforts to reverse it.

Well, I can't prove that's wrong, and I'm sure many people find it a comforting belief.

If it happens to be true, my congratulations to these "people who convinced her," whoever they might be.

Right now it's politically convenient to take a populace position, but let's see how long it holds once the election is over and she needs to fundraise.

a national issue against her.

It's what most of us would call political expedience. And when someone does something based on political expedience, it typically means they're lying. Based on DWS's ethical standards in running the DNC, I leads me not to trust her to keep her word.

Payday loan vultures are all the rage in Red states.

There's no government lending fund for people who find themselves in an emergency situation, as can happen so easily. Pawn shops have been the traditional resource, but many people have nothing to pawn. Employers used to advance money to employees who faced some sort of emergency, but that's not done much any longer.

The payday loan business is predatory. There is no doubt about it. The pawn shop industry is predatory, too, but I don't see anyone trying to ban pawn shops. I remember 6 for 5 payday lenders in the military, too. That was illegal, but it went on, regardless. There was always someone ready to loan you money near payday on that basis at every base I was assigned to. Generally, the sums borrowed were small, of course, but the interest rate on a 6 for 5 loan is huge, especially if you just got the money for a few days before having to pay it back.

Before we remove access to lenders of last resort, we will need to have an alternative ready to replace them. I can think of several ways that could be handled by some government organization. Such loans are very high risk, of course, and many wouldn't be repaid, so there would be losses. However, low income workers can find themselves in an impossible situation at a moment's notice.

It's easy to say that payday lenders should be shut down, and easy enough to make them illegal, but the situations that cause people to turn to them will not go away. We should be finding a way to provide access to emergency funds on short notice for people who need those funds desperately. I haven't seen anyone suggesting how to do that, though.

if we remove access to lenders of last resort that are an established business
They are predatory yes but the class above them are able to use predatory credit cards and make predatory car loans based on credit risks

Last edited Sun Aug 14, 2016, 01:22 PM - Edit history (1)

Like universal basic income, childcare, single payer healthcare, and other things.

The idea of payday lenders are good and I don't fault DWS for supporting them; I feel it's cis white well off privilege to just say oh it's bad, how evil. Like any lender, without regulation, they grow out of control.

Many use them to prevent getting tossed out of their house or apartment or to keep the lights on ...wealthier people max out their credit cards. I hate the industry myself. I would like to help people too to avoid it. I expect a lower interest program would make high-risk loans impossible. These things flourished after subprime credit cards virtually went out of existence.

I'm not poor and actually had money in the bank account, but I fucked up and realized I had my mortgage coming out Monday, which meant I'd be like $70 in the hole and basically without money until payday this coming Friday, so, I took out $200.00 to make sure I had money to pay my mortgage and get gas.

It sucks but I've done it before, too, and I pay it back every payday so I've never accrued interest. Without 'em, I don't know...I'd be fucked this month and having to deal with my mortgage company.

In the first place, Schultz already backed away from that position. In the second place, it's not an issue that is going to spur a lot of flaming. Finally, since the OP didn't even mention a candidate's name, most people won't even know what it's about.

Oh, well...

Ms. "Ballots or Bullets".

Some topics should transcend politics.
[hr][font color="blue"][center]Meredith McIver approves of this post.[/center][/font][hr]

Despite all the attacks, she has been a good and loyal Democrat. I say she has been scapegoated.

She was the one in charge when we lost an unprecedented amount of state and federal positions. Was she not?

If I am the CEO of a company that goes from having money in the bank to going in debt and having the largest loss of sales in the company's history, then I'd expect to be fired.

What's the difference?

The primary is over. Why would anyone here care if she won her election in Florida otherwise? I just want a Dem...and as I have said before all the folks opining about how terrible the payday industry is and how it needs to go ( yes it is terrible) what would you replace it with? You do realize the safety net has giant holes in it which we can't fix unless we get rid of the GOP house? Many use these lenders to keep the lights on or to prevent homelessness...and how many people posting on this thread have maxed out their credit cards paying for daily expenses? You would drive the poor into the arms of criminal loan sharks. We need to offer the poor an alternative...God knows we need to fix the safety net. If we all stick together and vote, we can do this. As for our electoral losses, we had the rise of the tea party and the abandonment of the president by those who could not understand why he could not get it all done in two years...so no I don't blame DWS for our losses...but the voters who did not vote or voted for useless third parties who let it happen.

Name is your only criteria, then there are plenty of them to choose from. I'll take one Elizabeth Warren over 5 Jim Webbs any day.

I will not support someone who is not fully onboard and has a history of not supporting the leader of our party's agenda.

But I live in Ohio and Florida must decide this...frankly my dear, I don't give a damn. I do think DSW has been unfairly vilified. Also while I don't like the payday industry...I work with the poor and it should be replaced with something. Sometimes it keeps people from becoming homeless or losing their heat. Easy to say...get rid of it. but what do the poor do when they have an emergency? I bet many here max out their credit cards...and yet condemn the poor from exercising their only option in many cases. We need a better safety net but that won't happen until we get Democrats back in...so yes I want people with a 'D' next to their name.

Exhibit A: The amount of opposition that President Obama faced from within the party when he first attempted the ACA.

It's not so great when you have 50 plus Dems in the Senate and can only muster 40ish votes.

DWS becomes irrelevant if we win the House by 5 seats or more. If we only win by one or two, let's s E E how helpful she is.

When we had our conservadems in the Senate...while they were pains in the ass...we still got stuff done...now we can't even get judges through. Nope that D counts.

DWS cost us 100s of seats nationwide, and voted against our President on several issues. She's not a team player, and I hate losing when it's my team that's going Tanya Harding to the knees of our leader.

We have a better option, or we can remain status quo. Status quo isn't giving us too many victories.

The primary is over. As for our losses, that has much to do with the bashing of Obama by those who could not get everything they wanted and did not support him. I guess the GOP Congress was more to their liking (sarcasm).

World she broke the rules she said she uphold, and when she got caught it was the straw that broke the camel's back.

It's funny that every one wants a job with responsibilities, up until the point they have to be responsible for their actions.

She's not a reliable vote for the party.

One can't be aware of it and still call her a loyal Democrat.

She is in Florida. And the primary is over.

That she refused to endorse or support Democratic candidates in Florida?

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/howie-klein/debbie-wasserman-schultz_b_123322.html


Or she co-sponsored a bill that goes after the CFPB? Essentially going after Elizabeth Warren.

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/entry/debbie-wasserman-schultz-paylenders-cfpb_us_56d4ce38e4b03260bf77e8fc

She is not a loyal Democrat. Shame on her.

If someone desperately needs a short term loan but cannot legally obtain one because payday lenders have been legislated out of existence, they may turn to real loan sharks who will break your legs if you don't pay.

It is a solution if we could get it...until then what is your solution?

rural being code for white Americans who support the GOP, that could widen the appeal.

When the GOP dominated Congress suggested going from 6 to 5 day delivery, the Postal Unions helped build awareness of what 6 day delivery means to America and the GOP abandoned the plans. The current Postal Affairs Subcommittee Chair is GOP Congressperson Jason Chaffetz of Utah. He recently went on record as being convinced that, due to growing demand, the USPS actually needs 7 day delivery.

Change is possible and could happen as early as the next Congress.

It will be the same as with Obama. The House has no reason to work with the Democrats and will face a primary if they do most likely.

If the issue is framed as helping Americans get the products that they need and ordered, that allows the GOP to support the issue.

who is talking nice no doubt because of fear of losing his job. If you believe that the House will work with any Democratic president, you are wrong. It is not going to happen. Be prepared. Unless we get the House, any victories will be court victories. We won't get single payer and in fact, we will have to fight to keep ACA. We won't get a $15.00 minimum wage or even a $12.00 minimum wage. All the stuff that Democrats want to do won't happen until we get the House and that is just a fact. The House is gerrymandered, there is no reason for any rep not in a Democratic area now...fearing for his seat to work with us. And once elected he won't fear a midterm.

opposing the Iran peace deal is a deal breaker for me and Tim Canova opposes it and is trying to argue that Debbie is not pro-Israel enough because she supports the deal.

So DWS and Canova are identical on the Iran Deal.

question her support of Israel because she supported the Iran peace deal?

and if he supports the Iran deal, why did he put out this piece of crap mailer?

I'm no fan of Debbie Wasserman Schultz, but this guy is a weasel.

(and why are you carrying his water --dishonestly?)

DWS allied herself with Sheldon Adelson to kill medical marijuana reform in Florida, and she has voted repeatedly to send sick people to prison for using cannabis.

Why are you carrying water for people who think granny deserves a 10 year prison sentence for using medical marijuana?

Like DWS, he's apparently not perfect. I leave it to the reader to decide whether this flyer or an alliance with sheldon adelson to send medical marijuana users to prison is more egregious.

Did they have any press conferences where they both discuss their unity on that subject?

Or are you just throwing shit out to see what sticks?

Meanwhile when Canova's own campaign flyer misrepresents his position on a major issue, and you're like "meh".

I actually provided proof of what I said, but rather than provide proof, all you did was try to throw enough words out to get the Bernie supporters riled up.

He sure did. He was the main force against it.

https://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/govbeat/wp/2014/10/28/casino-billionaire-sheldon-adelson-is-behind-85-percent-of-floridas-anti-pot-campaign/

http://www.miaminewtimes.com/news/on-medical-marijuana-debbie-wasserman-schultz-sounds-like-a-republican-6544176




I get it, defending DWS is more important than the medical marijuana users in Florida. And I get it, a 53 year old woman followed home by cops from the hydroponics store facing a decade in Florida prison isn't a "major issue", fine.

There are no "bernie supporters" anymore, by the way. Maybe you missed the memo.

Good for you.

Now, I'm someone who has actually used the payday loan system in place of credit cards-it's a long personal story, my husband and I come from poverty--my husband extreme poverty--and, at first, had no idea on how to manage income. We're all good now, more or less.

I can say that stricter and stricter leading rules have been going into effect for several years--especially for people in the military, but restictions are in place for amount to be lent based on income and limits to how many times a year one can borrow.

That being said, I'm glad to see the further crackdown--it's far too easy to get sucked in, but a payday loan has also kept water and lights on during periods of my life. Glad DWS is supporting this, but it's not a deal-breaker for me.

Party. Her lack of leadership or action while chair of the DNC handed many state seats and governorships over to republicans from coast to coast. But she served her purpose and the Floridians she represents will most likely vote her back in...unfortunately.

In Washington, despite some bumps, legalization is working out very well--although I frequently have to educate my patients to not smoke it--vape it or eat it when used for medicinal purposes. In transplant there is always the danger of deadly mold or fungus, plus marijuana is still associated with drug abuse, so many centers will expect you to abstain

More and more often though such patients know exactly what to do.

Recreational and medicinal users need to not drive--there were some troubling statistics recently, but neither should people who are taking Vicodin or oxycodone.

I had a friend killed by a drunk driver, so I'm pretty black and white on the idea of people not getting behind the wheel when under the influence of anything.

(Of course, this too to my mind is an argument both for self-driving cars and services like Uber. Back in my drinking days I would have loved to have an service like Uber or lyft, because I took a lot of cabs but the service was atrocious and at times nonexistent)

I do think that the troubling statistics need to be broken down properly- it's not clear that there has been an actual uptick in accidents, more that they're finding THC more frequently. Of course, THC is fat soluble so the mere presence of THC doesn't necessarily imply impairment; no one would rationally argue that 3 weeks after smoking a joint someone is impaired by it. I believe the AAA study acknowledged this as its end conclusion, even though it was presented in some outlets as "epidemic of stoned driving"- what the AAA study really said was, we need better metrics to determine actual impairment.

But yes, legalization is working out down here, too.

But legalization works and works well. I'm not a recreational user, and my husband--who has Multiple Sclerosis could benefit from marijuana therapy--won't because of the stigma and because he used to smoke tons of it years ago. If it comes down to narcotics and marijuana--Im going to talk him into it. I am lucky to have the option without facing prison. And here I agree with you (it's not quite the deal breaker for me as it is for you though)--lawmakers need to knock it off and get Pot legalized.

I suspect examples from Washington and Colorado showing the profits from revenue is the only thing that will motivate enough lawmakers to buck up against constituents who are ill-educated.

I've got a BIL with ms, too. I hear you.

I know people who have had issues with pot and need to avoid it entirely, of course. I used to smoke tons of it as a youth but never found quitting any particular big deal. I stopped drinking alcohol a long time ago, and that was a much tougher nut to crack- but I discovered over the years that I could occasionally use cannabis and the sky would not fall. Nor do I find I have any desire to start doing it every day, and I still have enough self-honesty to call myself out if that was the direction it was going to go.

Different people have different relationships to different things, I think. At this point I'm just relieved that during the time so many of my friends were starting to smoke cigarettes I was way too busy smoking pot. Because I know nicotine is a very difficult addiction to shake.

One good thing about legalization (among many) is the fact that there is such greater transparency and knowledge around potency, strains, etc. There is high CBD low THC stuff available that I think helps people significantly with anxiety, pain relief, muscle control, seizures etc. but doesn't produce the anything like the same "high" as THC.

But people gotta do what they gotta do. My Father in Law has parkinsons and we suspect he could benefit from it potentially, too, but they're old school Republicans and they have all sorts of preconceived notions about pot.

followed home by police from Hydroponics store.

http://www.wptv.com/news/region-martin-county/stuart/stuart-woman-faces-10-years-in-prison-in-medical-marijuana-case

No loans were available. I'm not sure whether that proposal included lending in restarting the postal banking. I doubt it.

But allowing the USPS to offer full service banking would be a logical way to expand banking to millions of US citizens who currently lack access to banking services. USPS window clerks are already trained to handle sale of money orders and many other financial transactions. Given that there is a USPS Station or sub-station in every Zip code in the country this would be a great thing for the many urban and rural residents that banks ignore.

I deposited in it from working various kid jobs right up until I graduated from high school in 1963. Then, I closed the account, and used the money to pay my first quarter's fees at the state college I attended. The system ended in 1967.

The USPS will never actually have normal banking services, because that would compete with private company banking and other services. We are not going to be competing with private businesses and corporations for such services as lending, etc.

I could see restarting a savings bank system that would do things like cash checks for account holders, but more banking services that that won't happen. They just won't.

When there was no other way. Ya it sucks, yeah the interest is high, but those few times were what kept me from being kicked out of my house so I support it enough unless someone comes up with a better way.

of the folks on DU would readily say they do NOT support the pay loan industry, which as you mentioned amounts to legalized loan sharking.

However, the problem with a one issue voter is that other issues get put on a back burner, and that can be very problematic when the whole picture is viewed.

Voters should look at all the issues, and determine which candidate more closely represents their views with regard to ALL the issues, and make their choice accordingly.

If both candidates support an issue that the voter disagrees with, then the question arises, should the voter not vote for either candidate, with the almost certain result that one of the two leading candidates will win, or instead examine where the candidates stand on all the issues, and vote for the candidate that more closely represents their views.

there are other criteria also, such as would the loss of one candidate over another cause the loss of the majority in a legislative body, and would that outcome create more damage?

This is why single issue voters run a risk of actually voting against their own interest. The republicans love to use wedge issues to influence single issue voters. Guns, Gays, and God, are issues republicans have used in the past to try and influence single issue voters.

It's not just poor people who get sucked into payday loans. I'm not poor. I have a steady job, a decent income now and live almost always within my means. I say almost always because, sometimes, I fuck up and forget I have a payment that'll pull automatically out of my checking account at a certain point in the month. That happened to me this Friday. I was checking my account, realized I had my mortgage coming out next week, and stupidly had spent more than I would have in my checking account to cover the mortgage. So, while I had money in the actual account, doing the math, the mortgage payment coming out would've put me in a $70 or so hole.

I had no option but to take out a payday loan since I don't get paid until next Friday. So, I did.

False dichotomy.

Payday lenders don't want customers like you.

There is nothing about them being regulated in the OP. Try again.

If you can show me that part I'll concede my point. Calling something legalized loan sharking suggests you believe it should be illegal. It's not science. You're debating a non-point here.

Also, the OP mentions how they're illegal in Vermont, and again suggests they want the same nationally.

http://www.democraticunderground.com/?com=view_post&forum=1251&pid=2365765

Don't make things up.

And the post is extremely negative toward 'em, saying we couldn't support someone who even supports these people, I'd wager that's pretty much clear here.

i hope you need a pay day lone In The Near Future .

careless disregard for the poor, doesn't mean everyone does. I'm supporting a dem against her. Yes, she'll probably win, but that is not a good thing for the democratic party. Nothing ugly about pointing out facts.

And your comment is ugly- wishing me misfortune. Tough on you that your wish will go ungranted. I would never, ever wish anything that horrible on you.

Your comment was ugly. Predictable as well.

And I wouldn't be so cruel as to wish that on anyone. You have no problem with it though- wishing misfortune on others. How interesting.

it's contemptible.

So rest assured, my dear cali.

is a nasty thing to do.

But karma is a sneaky thing - it DOES exist, from my experience, and it is almost like a kind of black magic or witchcraft. It's something which seems to be a curse brought upon someone's own self through cursing others.

Anyway, thanks for the thread - I completely agree that DWS has to go. As long as she caucuses with Dems, fine, but she can NOT be in charge of anything any longer, since she's a complete failure.

Except for this one issue which the candidate doesn't support any more, or something. Ever.

Republicans are notorious for single issue wedge issues

In view of Bernie's position on excessive and unbalanced force against the Palestinians I wonder what he is feeling now about DWS opponent?

I have this feeling it is a lot more complex than that and that the statement is exaggeration. And what is the solution for when poor people need money? Going to get that one though Congress?

Florida's State Governor could close or reduce interest rates from loan sharks, help Florida's "desperate poor", but Rs, especially Florida Republicans never would.

What record and experience does the opposition have in the Florida district?

That's good enough for me.

I always thought that liberals, by and large, were totally opposed to the payday loan industry. John Oliver did an entire segment on the issue.

The OP is not about supporting the payday loan industry. It is about not voting democratic because of this ONE issue.

I can't imagine anyone liberal would pick that as the single issue in which they are willing to fall on the sword over.

a TeaPubLieKLAN for that seat but rather another Democrat.