COFIR Statement in Response to Supreme Court Decision in Watters v Wachovia
On April 17, 2007, Ed Yingling, president of the American Bankers Association, stated in response to recent U.S. Supreme Court decision in Watters v. Wachovia , "Avoiding a patchwork of duplicative and conflicting federal and state regulation makes it easier for national banks to grant credit to customers across state lines."
The Coalition Opposed to a Federal Insurance Regulator ( COFIR) agrees there is a complex and confusing patchwork of federal and state regulations in the banking industry---and that is exactly the reason Congress should not consider creating a new federal patchwork of insurance law and regulations for the insurance industry.
COFIR is engaged with Members of Congress to add to the chorus of opposition to the creation of a federal insurance regulator through legislation known as an "optional federal charter." Congress should resist federal preemption into 135 years of state insurance law and regulations which would threaten consumer protections, state oversight and accountability, and revenues to state operating budgets.
The U. S. Justice Department supported the position of Wachovia in the case by stating that federal regulation gives federal officials exclusive authority over national banks and their operating units.
COFIR will continue its efforts to oppose a massive new federal bureaucracy, far-removed from the states and the consumers across America.
For a copy of the article High Court Rules Against State Regulation of Home Lending, which appeared on CNBC.com on April 17, 2007, please visit the link below.
http://www.cnbc.com/id/18156453/from/ET/
Print »