The Credit Union National Association (CUNA) spent $1.2 million on independent expenditures and $1.4 million on partisan communications during this mid-term election cycle.
Despite these expenditures, some high-profile credit union supporters lost their elections.
The biggest loss on election night was Senator Mark Udall (D), who is the chief Senate sponsor of a bill that would increase the credit union member business lending cap from 12.25 percent of assets to 27.5 percent of assets. Senator Udall was defeated by Rep. Cory Gardner (R) in the Colorado Senate race. CUNA spent $400,000 on direct mail to credit union members urging them to support Udall.
In the Iowa Senate race, CUNA-supported Rep. Bruce Braley (D) was defeated by Republican Iowa State Senator Joni Ernst. CUNA spent approximately $265,000 on a series of eight mailers for Rep. Braley, who is a cosponsor of several pro-credit union bills in the House of Representatives.
In California's 25th District, Republican Tony Strickland lost to fellow Republican Steve Knight. CUNA spent $99,000 for Rep. Strickland with the money going to direct mail production and postage.
In Florida, Rep. Steve Southerland (R) lost his bid for a third term in the 2nd District, falling to Democrat Gwen Graham. CUNA spent $176,340 in television advertisements for Rep. Southerland.
These trade organizations wasted money on the democrat candidates. As the election showed, the majority of Americans wanted to vote the democrats out of office because they are going along with the Obama policies. Why any trade organization can justify putting money into these candidates is beyond me. No Jobs, heavy regulations to include the Dodd-frank Act, waster stimulus, union involvement, etc. I can go on forever on these bad policies. I encourage all credit unions that are members of leagues to quit and use those monies on their membership for better service. At least you know how the money is going to be spent.
ReplyDeleteRight on!
DeleteOnly don't stop there.
Credit unions and banks have BOTH wasted money on both parties...
...and look at what it got us.
Do an honest tally.
Congress was first and loudest to blame banks for congress' failed mortgage gamble. Then they let the 2 biggest culprits write the new bank rules (Dodd/frank). Meanwhile EVERY bit of legislation and regulation since has continued to crush bank and credit union operations and margins.
And yet, we keep contributing to them.
Look in the mirror and repeat after me, " I am the reason this is so wrong".
Then fire your trade associations.
CUNA continues to pour money down the same rat-hole. And CUNA continues to obtain the same results. Can CUNA read a trend? Oppressive NCUA Regulations, a CFPB that is not only out of touch but out of control, BSA, CTR, regulations that now require huge labor costs to the credit unions and no reimbursement from the regulators. And CUNA continues to support the folks that have made all of this possible. Shame on CUNA. Look at your trade association dues - What is your ROI? Where is the ROI? We have the best trade association MONEY CAN BUY. Indeed we do. But what has it got us?
ReplyDelete1. How much was spent by banks,their trade associations, and their PACs on campaigns and candidates and how much of that money was spent on candidates that lost? Are you telling me that the banks and their trades associations simply sit on the sidelines during political campaigns and don't participate in the process?
ReplyDelete2. How much was spent by credit union trade associations and their PACs on candidates that did win?
Bank trade associations through their PACs do give to candidates. You can find this information at opensecrets.org. .
ReplyDeleteYeah, according to your source, the ABA spent twice as much, $2.8 million, as CUNA. How did they fare?
DeleteABA's 501(c)(4), the Financial Education and Advocacy Initiative, was successful in all five of the races where it supported get-out-the-vote efforts: Arkansas, Colorado, Georgia, Iowa and Kentucky.
ReplyDeleteKeith, you know that banks can outspend credit unions. They throw money at the candidates of their choice like snow flakes in the dead of winter. So if credit unions were able to do the same perhaps in some of the closer races their candidates of choice may have won. Perhaps this year they just made some bad choices.
ReplyDelete