 |
| Mighty Michigan! |
Well, the Michigan League has either A) stepped out front or B) stepped out of line!
[I'd give 'em an "A"]
Either way, we have finally found firm evidence of some real "backbone" amidst the timid, perpetual, internal diddle-daddle over what CUNA should become, whenever [if ever] it decides "to grow up".
Dave Adams and the credit unions of Michigan deserve high praise - and support. An honest, open dialogue on the future of CUNA among credit unions - not among functionaries conflicted by self-interest - has long been needed and too long thwarted by the "parties that be."
 |
| Standing up! Refusing to kneel... |
The MCUL credit unions simply voted unanimously for local autonomy, local control, and local choice. Michigan decided to get off its knees and firmly reject CUNA's requirement that all credit unions bow down to "the whims of Washington". Sounds like democracy has broken out all over Michigan. What a wonderful cooperative principle!
Most importantly, do you know what CUNA's response was to Michigan's unanimous resolution?
 |
| Really?! |
Well, according to that CUTimes article: "CUNA declined to comment on the Michigan league's resolution."
CUNA has provided a lot of famously "no comment leadership" of late, whether it is not commenting about NAFCU, the proposed "stop and study" RBC legislation, a "lay-down-the-gauntlet" revolt in Michigan, NCUA overreach, or about the severely adverse results of its own recent CUNA-member opinion survey.
Is CUNA permanently "out to lunch"? Is CUNA's leadership too conveniently "away from his desk" when important issues arise and credit unions need clear guidance and better understanding?
CUNA has provided a lot of famously "no comment leadership" of late, whether it is not commenting about NAFCU, the proposed "stop and study" RBC legislation, a "lay-down-the-gauntlet" revolt in Michigan, NCUA overreach, or about the severely adverse results of its own recent CUNA-member opinion survey.
 |
| "Welcome to Denver!" "I'm ...." |
Doesn't saying "No comment" confirm that
- when it counts -
CUNA is increasing irrelevant ?
7 comments:
Are you heading out to Denver?
No Comment!
Disagree with your entire categorization of the Michigan vote. Michigan has simply voted for status quo; no changes, no progress, no choice. Right or wrong, it is premature since the recommendation hasn't even been finalized and the CUNA board has taken no action.
Doug,
Fair point, but think it also illustrates the problem and key question. Do the credit unions in Michigan need to seek approval from CUNA on what to do? Does MCUL need CUNA's approval to act? Who is driving the bus?
The way I read the MCUL resolution, they did vote unanimously for choice... not the status quo - no choice. What did I miss?
What happens if MCUL "goes rogue"?
Momma said "If you don't have anything intelligent to say, don't say anything".
Gym Mussel
The key question for credit unions has little to do with trade associations.
They key question for credit unions is, why do credit unions get nothing good from congress except the tax exemption...
...while credit unions get all the bad stuff from congress that the banks are getting?
Suggest the focus move to wasting no more time or money on trade associations or congress.
It's not Cuna or nafcu's fault they're winless in the last 17 years. Why waste more money?
Let's see; state charters can join NAFCU and pay dues for national lobbying of federal government and regulators and compliance service. They will give up advocacy at state level and or seperately fund. Can they vote for boards or leadership? No? Sounds like a second class kind of membership.
Georgia Birddog
Post a Comment