Image provided by: University of Oregon Libraries; Eugene, OR
About The skanner. (Portland, Or.) 1975-2014 | View Entire Issue (Aug. 7, 2013)
Opinion Cogen: It’s About Confidence and Trust “Challenging People to Shape a Better Future Now” B ERNIE F OSTER Founder/Publisher B OBBIE D ORE F OSTER Executive Editor T ED B ANKS Advertising Manager J ERRY F OSTER Account Executive L ISA L OVING News Editor H ELEN S ILVIS Multimedia Editor B RUCE P OINSETTE Reporter D AVID K IDD Graphic Designer M ONICA J. F OSTER Seattle Office Coordinator J ULIE K EEFE S USAN F RIED Photographers The Skanner Newspaper, established in October 1975, is a weekly publica- tion, published each Wednesday by IMM Publications Inc., 415 N. Killingsworth St., P.O. Box 5455, Portland, OR 97228. Telephone (503) 285-5555. E-mail: info@theskanner.com World Wide Web site: http://www.theskanner.com Fax: (503) 285-2900 The Skanner is a member of the National Newspaper Pub lishers Associ- ation and West Coast Black Pub lishers Association. All photos submitted become the property of The Skanner. We are not re - spon sible for lost or damaged photos either solicited or unsolicited. © 2013 The Skanner. ALL RIGHTS RE SERVED. REPRODUCTION IN WHOLE OR IN PART WITHOUT PERMISSION PROHIBITED. To see The Skanner News on your smart phone go to theskannermobile.com or scan this QR code with your app. • • • • • • • • Local news Opinions Jobs, Bids Sports Entertainment Music reviews Bulletin board RSS feeds I n his role as Multnomah County Chair Jeff Cogen has done good work. Despite shrinking government rev- enues, Cogen championed the social welfare safety net and kept the books balanced. Under his leadership, the coun- ty has made a significant commitment to equity in con- tracting, hiring, and justice. It has built one of the best health departments in the country. Much more remains to be done in all those areas. And we’ve been disappointed in the county’s lack of outreach on disaster preparedness. It’s true that in most circum- stances, having an affair is not a firing offense. If it were, we’d see a lot more people losing jobs. But Cogen’s mistakes were far more than a private stumble that’s best sorted out in family therapy or with pas- toral support. The affair between county boss Cogen and his subordinate Sonia Manhas hurt the county and its employees. Cogen has denied pulling strings to promote Manhas to a top job in the health depart- ment. And we’d like to make it clear that we believe Manhas deserved her position. E DITORIAL The Skanner News Nevertheless their affair has created the perception that power was abused. been called out by an anony- mous letter. Nobody likes being lied to or taken for a fool. County employ- ees don’t like it. County commissioners don’t like it. And neither do voters. So even though law does not require it, it’s hard to see how But the crux of the matter is that Cogen has lost the confidence and trust of his colleagues and the public But that’s just part of the harm done. For more than a year, Cogen and Manhas main- tained a secret affair, manipulating their work envi- ronment to carve out time together, blurring the lines between work and romance, traveling together on more than one occasion. Their colleagues have a right to feel betrayed. It’s clear they had passion for their work. But it’s unclear where that passion left off and their passion for one another started. It’s also unclear if the affair would have stopped had their reckless behavior not Cogen can justify holding tight to his job when Ms. Manhas was forced to quit hers. After all, both are adults and Cogen was in the more powerful position. Cogen denies any misuse of county funds and resources. But even if the criminal investi- gation agrees, his ability to lead has been irreparably damaged. Unfortunately, Cogen is no longer the man for the job. Last week all four of his colleagues asked him to resign. He refused. As an elected official that is his right. He answers to the citizens of Multnomah County and no-one else. But the crux of the matter is that Cogen has lost the confi- dence and trust of his colleagues and the public. He simply can’t continue supervis- ing 4,500 employees under that cloud. That leaves him no other alternative. Chair Cogen you should resign. What do you think? Post your comment on articles in The Skan- ner News at www.theskanner.com Overdraft Fees Cost U.S. Over $36 Million In recent years, many banks and credit unions have encour- aged new checking account customers to accept two items: a debit card that replaces cash transactions and a ‘protection’ known as overdraft coverage. Overdraft programs automatical- ly pay for transactions not covered by available funds; the bank then repays itself the over- draft amount along with fees – often hefty ones — from the cus- tomer’s next deposit. However what many unsuspect- ing consumers soon discover is that this so-called protection from banks comes at an extremely high cost. In only one year, 2011, finan- cial institutions charged consumers $16.7 billion in over- draft fees, affecting over 36 million Americans’ checking accounts. High-Cost Overdraft Practices, the latest installment in the Center for Responsible Lending’s research series, The State of Lend- ing, found that debit cards trigger the most disproportionate fees. On debit card purchases, the median overdraft charge is $35 for a $20 overdraft. Further, debit card and ATM transactions account for at least 35 percent of all overdraft fees charged. The high share of fees generated by debit cards is ironic, since banks and credit unions can sim- ply decline these transactions at no cost to the consumer – and some institutions do. For banks that con- tinue this pernicious practice, the consequences for their customers can be severe. The report states, “Abusive overdraft programs drive con- sumers out of the banking system; indeed they are the leading reason Page 4 The Portland Skanner August 7, 2013 R ESPONSIBLE L ENDING Charlene Crowell consumers lose their checking accounts.” Today, three-fourths of the nation’s largest banks and large numbers of smaller banks and credit unions charge fees on debit card purchases, ATM withdrawals, or both. Moreover, these over- drafts and associated fees are assessed without regard to a con- However, CRL and others have found that many financial institu- tions aggressively market their overdraft programs, pushing cus- tomers most likely to generate the most fees to “opt-in” for coverage. Customers with small and no cushions in their accounts may ini- tially view overdraft coverage as a way to save money. But as over- draft fees are assessed per transaction, the costs can quickly become burdensome, leaving fewer available dollars for the next month. “Over time, the repeated fees strip away consumers’ cash assets, leaving them financially worse off than when they first over-drafted and unable to meet obligations ‘Abusive overdraft programs drive consumers out of the banking system; indeed they are the leading reason consumers lose their checking accounts’ sumer’s ability to repay them. In response to widespread criti- cism surrounding overdraft programs, the Federal Reserve Board made a 2010 regulation that required institutions to obtain a customer’s ‘opt-in’ for overdraft coverage on debit card purchases and ATM withdrawals before fees would apply. Additionally and in the same year, the Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation’s guidance advised that more than six over- draft fees within a 12-month period was excessive for any account holder. they otherwise could have met even with no overdraft coverage at all,” says CRL. Some major banks have heeded consumer concerns and improved their overdraft practices. For example, Bank of America, the nation’s largest debit card issuer, stopped charging overdraft fees on debit card purchases. HSBC also stopped charging overdraft fees on debit card purchases as well as at ATMs. Citibank has never charged overdraft fees on debit card or ATM transactions, and JP Morgan Chase does not charge them on ATM transactions. Recent related findings by the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau (CFPB) show that the Fed’s opt-in rule has not eliminat- ed the substantial harm inflicted by overdraft fees triggered by debit cards. CFPB determined that involuntary account closures were more than twice as likely for cus- tomers that opted in to overdraft than those who did not. “Banks and credit unions have long defended overdraft fees by saying they protect customers from bounced checks, which typi- cally trigger insufficient funds (NSF) fees and potentially mer- chant fees”, states the CRL report. “But the same justification could not be made for debit card pur- chases, since there is no NSF or merchant fees charge for debit card transactions that are declined at check-out when the customer’s account is short.” CRL offers a set of policy reme- dies to halt overdraft’s harmful features. Highlights include ban- ning overdraft fees on debit cards, ATM transactions and on pre-paid cards. CRL also advocates ban- ning banks from manipulating the order of consumers’ checking transactions to increase fees. “Without substantive reform of the product, the fees overdrafts generate provide financial institu- tions too powerful an incentive to ensure that customers continue to incur overdraft fees – an incentive that will continue to outweigh even the best disclosures,” con- cluded CRL. Charlene Crowell is a communi- cations manager with the Center for Responsible Lending.
