Peter Roff, 4/2/2017 [Archive]

One Part of Dodd-Frank That's Hurting Consumers

One Part of Dodd-Frank That's Hurting Consumers

By Peter Roff

If I had a dollar for every time a politician tried to push something through Congress they said would protect consumers, I probably would have back all the dollars these efforts have cost me over the years. Somehow things never seem to line up the way they're promised and we all pay the price.

Take the period following the so-called Great Recession. With Barack Obama in the White House and the Democrats in control of both parts of Congress, they couldn't wait to pass all kinds of new rules and regulations governing banks, mortgage lenders, the consumer finance industry, credit cards, and anybody else they believed we all needed to be protected from. It was crackdown on greed and the voters, aided by a cheerleading cadre of reporters that really don't understand financial issues but write about them anyway, bought it all.

Now that a little bit of time has passed we can see how Dodd-Frank and the Consumer Protection Act of 2010 have actually harmed the same consumers they were meant to help. The worst example of this may be the price controls imposed on debit card transaction fees on the merchants who accept them by the companies that issue them.

This came about as the result of pressure from Illinois Democrat Dick Durbin, for whom the amendment instituting the caps is named. He thought consumers were being taken advantage of, and thought that capping the interchange fees imposed by the banks would get us all a break.

The nation's' leading "big box" retailers greatly benefit from the use of debit cards. Transactions process faster (which they like) and that keeps lines moving (which consumers like) and are very convenient (which everybody likes). As soon as the Durbin Amendment passed they started looking for ways to get around the now capped at 21 cents per transaction interchange fees -- down from an average of 1.15 percent of the transaction total value -- many of them felt were unnecessarily punitive.

What got lost in the discussion were the high costs associated with the use of debit cards. Convenience comes at a price. So does network maintenance, theft protection, reissuing cards to update their security and a host of other things. Banks and other card issuers used to use the income generated by interchange fees to pay for all that. Once the Durbin Amendment capped what could be charged, card issuers had to look elsewhere to recoup their expenses.

Card companies are now charging the same maximum processing fee for smaller transactions as they do for large transactions, saddling small businesses with a sharp increase in business expenses. Debit card use is now limited in many cases and many places have some minimum transaction amount. Free checking has just about gone the way of the passenger pigeon while fees on checking and savings accounts have increased by three to five percent.Just how is any of this better for you and me?

If all that were not bad enough, the higher costs the cap has imposed on merchants are, according to a study conducted by George Mason University law school, being passed along to everyone who buys anything in the form of higher prices.

Price controls are never a good idea. The ones the Durbin Amendment to Dodd-Frank instituted are especially pernicious because they are hidden so far below the surface. That's the kind of government-directed activity that produces cronyism, limits consumer choice, raises the price of goods at the point of sale, and redistributes wealth by creating an environment in which smaller Mom and Pop operations and coffee shops are subsidizing more expensive, higher volume purchases made at national chain stores and big box retailers.

Whatever Sen. Durbin's intentions, his amendment did not work out the way he said it would. He should be gracious enough to acknowledge this an offer the language necessary to repeal it as the Senate takes up Dodd-Frank reform and repeal. At the very least, if he would rather just forget the whole thing, he shouldn't fight to save it when someone else introduces language to knock it out. It is bad policy that produced higher prices and left consumers with fewer protections and conveniences than they had before it became law.


© 2017 Peter Roff. Distributed exclusively by Cagle Cartoons newspaper syndicate.

Roff is a former senior political writer for UPI and a well-known commentator based in Washington, D.C. Email him at

Download Peter Roff's color photo - Download Peter Roff's black and white mug shot photo
Why not run a cartoon with the column? We recommend the cartoons below as a good compliment to Peter Roff's topic.
Click on the thumbnail images to preview and download the cartoons.

Related Cartoons

Senator Christopher Dodd
By: Taylor Jones

March 22, 2009

Razing wall street reform regulations COLOR
By: Monte Wolverton
Cagle Cartoons
December 26, 2010

Razing wall street reform regulations
By: Monte Wolverton
Cagle Cartoons
December 26, 2010

 Con  Angry Mob
By: Eric Allie

March 21, 2009

Angry Mob COLOR
By: Eric Allie

March 21, 2009

We do not accept and will not review unsolicited submissions from cartoonists.
Sales & Information: (805) 969-2829
Billing Information: (805)
Technical Support:

FREE cartoons for your website if you're already a paying print subscriber!
Artwork and columns are copyrighted by each creator. All Rights Reserved. Unauthorized reproduction prohibited. Privacy Policy | Terms of Service