Less Is More....

Legal proceedings?

Know you've heard by now of the little row which occurred at Thursday's NCUA Board meeting (CUTimes - 2/17/2016 - link). 

Seems most of the dispute centered around Mr. Mark McWatters' thought that prior to voting on the new, "sure-to-tick-off-the-boinkers", member business lending (MBL) rule, that the Board should have in hand a definitive legal opinion from NCUA's Office of the General Counsel.  Chair Matz and Mr. Metsger seemed to feel that creating a legal opinion in arrears, if you needed it, was more effective and efficient.

Not sitting around?

Chair Matz even asserted that it would be helpful to the NCUA staff if Mr. McWatters was "in the office more than three days a month". 

I quite often have trouble following the Chair's logic and have frequent questions over the repeated legal and judgmental blunders of the staff, but on this issue I fully agree with the Chair!  

Why?  Because it is very clear to all credit unions - despite his brief tenure as an NCUA Board member - that the more Mr. McWatters is around the better!  The Agency is more transparent, more accountable, more responsible, and more rational. Mr. McWatters has provided a much needed compass for a seemingly rudderless ship.

But of course, it works both ways. Given their recent history (last Thursday's meeting for example!) and to be fair, the rest of the Board should cut their schedule back to say, three days a month. Suspect that performance and accountability at the Agency would not be adversely affected and might actually improve. 

A classic example of the axiom that often...

... less would be more?

More or less?

Certainly wouldn't hurt to try it!

(Hey call it "reg relief"!)