The regulators have the opportunity to consider the CRA issues presented among a range of other issues--capital adequacy, a whole host of things that may be unrelated. Even if the institution which has the application has the lowest possible rating--substantial noncompliance, which, in effect, means they have done virtually nothing--the regulator can still approve the application. They can still approve it. So there is no requirement under the existing law with respect to the kinds of mergers, acquisitions, charter changes, and branch expansions that requires a financial institution to even have a satisfactory rate. So this is hardly an onerous provision, I say to my friend from Maryland.
William Bryan: “The regulators have the opportunity to consider the CRA issues presented among a range of other issues--capital…”
Editor's note · Context
Discussing the role of bank regulators and the Community Reinvestment Act during a Senate debate.
Share
More from William Bryan
Do I understand the thrust of the Senator's argument is not to advocate some new standards for CAFE but simply to permit those who are charged with that responsibility to make a basic inquiry as to whether or not there is room, based upon…
I wish to respond to the gracious statement by the chairman of the Energy Committee. Although we have had strong differences on this issue, the differences have been professional, not personal. He has been very professional in the way in…
If the Senator follows that line of reasoning, would he not agree the same managers will tell you that $220 million is adequate for the timber harvest program, would the Senator agree with that?
If I may respond to the excessively generous comments of my chairman, my colleague, and my friend, the reality is that working with him has been a pleasure. Without his cooperation and, obviously, trying to work in a bipartisan way to…





