Share This Page

Modern-day usury

| Tuesday, June 25, 2013, 9:00 p.m.

Frederic Ozanam, Society of St. Vincent de Paul founder, stated: “Charity is the Samaritan who pours oil on the wounds of the traveler who has been attacked. It is Justice's role to prevent the attacks!”

Joseph Sabino Mistick's column “The payday Trojan horse” (June 16 and TribLIVE.com) does an excellent job calling for our state senators to prevent greedy, exploitative attacks on vulnerable Pennsylvanians.

Billed as “consumer protection,” Senate Bill 975 would legalize predatory loans at 300-percent and higher annual interest rates. Rather than protecting consumers, it would roll back prohibitions on usurious lending in place for more than a century.

In states that allow such payday-loan interest, the typical borrower pays back $700 on a $300 loan. A U.S. Department of Defense report on payday lending found “this debt trap is the rule, not the exception.”

Payday lending is modern-day usury, exploiting borrowers facing financial emergencies. The lender's excessive profit fails to offer the borrower a sustainable solution.

Borrowers are rarely able to pay down the principal and typically fall deeper into debt. Rather than offering a bridge to financial security, payday loans make financial problems worse, leading to increased food-stamp usage, delinquency on bills, utility shutoffs and, eventually, bankruptcy.

Today, Pennsylvania's laws are considered among the country's strongest to protect against this abusive lending. Please contact your state senator immediately to express your strongest opposition to this bill. For more information, visit stoppaydayloanspa.com .

Keith G. Kondrich

Swisshelm Park

The writer is executive director of the Society of St. Vincent de Paul, Council of Pittsburgh (svdppitt.org).

TribLIVE commenting policy

You are solely responsible for your comments and by using TribLive.com you agree to our Terms of Service.

We moderate comments. Our goal is to provide substantive commentary for a general readership. By screening submissions, we provide a space where readers can share intelligent and informed commentary that enhances the quality of our news and information.

While most comments will be posted if they are on-topic and not abusive, moderating decisions are subjective. We will make them as carefully and consistently as we can. Because of the volume of reader comments, we cannot review individual moderation decisions with readers.

We value thoughtful comments representing a range of views that make their point quickly and politely. We make an effort to protect discussions from repeated comments either by the same reader or different readers

We follow the same standards for taste as the daily newspaper. A few things we won't tolerate: personal attacks, obscenity, vulgarity, profanity (including expletives and letters followed by dashes), commercial promotion, impersonations, incoherence, proselytizing and SHOUTING. Don't include URLs to Web sites.

We do not edit comments. They are either approved or deleted. We reserve the right to edit a comment that is quoted or excerpted in an article. In this case, we may fix spelling and punctuation.

We welcome strong opinions and criticism of our work, but we don't want comments to become bogged down with discussions of our policies and we will moderate accordingly.

We appreciate it when readers and people quoted in articles or blog posts point out errors of fact or emphasis and will investigate all assertions. But these suggestions should be sent via e-mail. To avoid distracting other readers, we won't publish comments that suggest a correction. Instead, corrections will be made in a blog post or in an article.