iPhone app iPad app Android phone app Android tablet app More

Swipe Fee Reform: Banks Lose, Merchants Prevail In Senate Vote

Swipe Fee Reform

First Posted: 06/08/11 05:15 PM ET Updated: 08/08/11 06:12 AM ET

WASHINGTON -- The six-month Senate fight over debit card swipe fees is finally over. The banks lost.

An amendment pushed by Sen. Jon Tester (D-Mont.) that would have delayed implementation of a law that caps the fees banks can charge merchants for swiping debit cards picked up 54 votes, with 45 voting against. It fell six short of the 60 needed to break a filibuster. But in the year since the Senate last voted, the banks managed to shave 19 votes off the merchants' total. In May 2010, the Senate approved interchange reform by a 64-33 margin, setting a cap at twelve cents per transaction. Sen. Joe Lieberman (I-Conn.) was the only Senator who did not vote, but in a Tuesday interview with HuffPost, he indicated that he was supporting Tester and the banks.

HuffPost followed the debate live on Wednesday and in April wrote about how the off-radar issue was quietly dominating the congressional agenda, with Wall Street battling major retailers for every last vote.

Sen. Bob Corker (R-Tenn.) who, with Tester, cosponsored the amendment to delay swipe fee reform, acknowledged the intensity of the corporate squabbling.

"The people have spoken," Corker told reporters after the vote. "This was a tough fight ... I apologized to my colleagues non-stop for causing them to have to be involved in this," Corker said.

Senators dreaded the vote because no matter whose side they chose, a major corporate interest would be angered. "They don’t wanna choose between their two favorite children," Sen. Tom Carper (D-Del.), a bank backer, said before the vote.

As the votes began coming in, Sen. Dick Durbin (D-Ill.) sat alone at his desk on the Senate floor, flashing a wide, relaxed grin. Tester appeared nervous as counting began, but his posture became visibly relaxed after the 41st Senator voted against his legislation. Tester laughed in conversation with supporters Joe Manchin (D-W.Va.) and Kay Hagan (D-N.C.) once it was clear he'd lost. After six months of wrangling and millions of dollars in lobbying, the fight was finally over.

The KBW Bank Index has declined since the vote. The index was at 46.78 at 2:04 p.m. ET, the time the final tally was recorded. At 3:35 p.m., the index hit the day's low at 46.26, a decline of 1.1 percent from the time of the vote. The day's high is 46.99, recorded at 12:12 p.m.

The House is generally supportive of the bank position, but there will be little appetite to continue the fight now that the Senate has rejected it. One bank lobbyist said that it'll be "tough to get traction. But I'll do whatever they tell me to."

You don't lose 19 votes in the Senate without some folks flip-flopping. Several senators switched sides over the course of the year, among them Hagan, a former Durbin supporter who signed on as a cosponsor for Tester on Tuesday. Other Democrats who flipped from supporting merchants to Wall Street include Ben Nelson (Neb.), Barbara Mikulski (Md.), Michael Bennet (Colo.), Mark Begich (Alaska), Kirsten Gillibrand (N.Y.), Claire McCaskill (Mo.), Debbie Stabenow (Mich.) and Jim Webb (Va.).

Many of these senators have a close relationship with Sen. Charles Schumer (D-N.Y.), who flipped to support Wall Street. As former head of the Senate campaign arm, Schumer recruited Senators Hagan, Bennet, Begich, McCaskill and Webb and is very close with Ben Nelson and his New York colleague Gillibrand. Baucus, who also flipped, is Tester's senior senator in Montana.

But Schumer wasn't actively whipping support on the Senate floor. He arrived early for the vote and cast his ballot on behalf of Tester's amendment, but he made no effort to persuade his colleagues to do the same and left within two minutes of arriving, leaving the floor to Durbin and Tester.

The banks did have an ally on the floor, though: Alan Dixon, a bank-friendly former Democratic senator from Illinois, was spotted in the Senate chamber during the vote.

On the GOP side, Mike Crapo of Idaho and Roger Wicker of Mississippi switched sides, jumping from the merchants to the banks. Bill Nelson (D-Fla.), meanwhile, didn't vote in 2010 but sided Wednesday with the banks.

The biggest surprise was perhaps from Sen. John Boozman (R-Ark.), who voted with Tester and the banks, despite a heavy push from Walmart, which is headquartered in Boozman's state. In April, Boozman told HuffPost that he was undecided, but strongly opposed the notion of fixing prices.

Big banks have not lost many fights in Washington in the aftermath of the Wall Street bailout, but Wednesday's vote underscored at least one limit on their power. Wall Street can beat almost anyone in a legislative brawl, but it cannot defeat the entire American retail industry.

Banks score $16 billion a year from swipe fees, with $8 billion flowing to just 10 banks. Stores of all sizes hate paying the fees and have argued that they will be able to pass on lower prices to consumers if swipe fees are capped. Several retailers, including Home Depot, have also acknowledged that they will not pass on all of the savings to consumers.

Last year's Wall Street reform bill required the Federal Reserve to crack down on the fees on debit cards, which currently average 44 cents per transaction. In December, the central bank proposed a rule limiting fees to 12 cents a piece. Today's failed vote to delay that rule means it will go into effect on July 21.

Stores were quick to declare victory. The Main Street Alliance, a coalition of small business owners, circulated a statement from Mary Noel Black, owner of a Baton Rouge, Louisiana, UPS Store.

"Today’s vote was a big win for small businesses," Black said. "Today, 45 Senators stood up to the bottomless pockets of Wall Street’s lobbying operations and said enough is enough."

The reaction from Durbin's office was more muted. "We don't take victory laps," said Durbin spokesman Max Gleischman.

Corker told reporters that he and Tester had "turned numbers of folks" but also said that too many were worried that they would be castigated for flip-flopping if they had voted for Durbin previously.

"Some of the folks were worried politically even though they knew the policy was right," he said. "They were worried that folks back home wouldn't understand their vote."

Corker added there may be another chance to push for changes on card fees, but that he thinks the issue will be laid to rest for a while.

"For a period of time, the water is sort of under the bridge," he said.

Wall Street stood to make the most from Wednesday's vote, but politicians supporting Tester and Corker typically couched their position as a defense of small banks and credit unions. However, all banks and credit unions with less than $10 billion in assets are explicitly exempted from the pending fee caps. Fed Chairman Ben Bernanke has warned that this exemption will not actually work in practice, although Visa has announced that it will be able to accommodate charging different fees for banks of different size. Only three credit unions will be directly affected by the price controls, and one of them, the North Carolina State Employees Credit Union, explicitly acknowledged to HuffPost on Tuesday that it is not lobbying on the issue and does not expect to begin charging its customers new debit card fees as a result of the legislation.

In a statement after the vote, Tester again shied away from the benefits his bill would bestow on large banks, criticizing "big-box retailers" and mentioning "rural America" three times.

"This measure earned broad support from both sides of the aisle because it was a bill written by Main Street rural America," Tester said. "Despite falling short of 60 votes today, our fight for rural America marches on. I’ll always remain on the side of rural America."

The vote has significant implications for the Democratic Party. Tester, a protege of Schumer, faces a tight reelection bid in November. But he has proven a prolific fundraiser, aggressively courting Wall Street. Schumer is officially the third-ranking Senate Democrat, but has taken over many of the duties of top-ranking Majority Leader Harry Reid (D-Nev.). As Majority Whip, Durbin is the second-ranking Senate Democrat, and although Schumer officially remained fairly quiet as the swipe fee squabble dragged on, the vote was perceived in Washington as part of a struggle between the two lawmakers for the top leadership spot after November. The two are long-time housemates and friends.

The vote also reflects Durbin's fundraising strategy for the Party. Unlike most Senators, Durbin was all too happy to criticize Wall Street banks during the debate, even taking on JPMorgan Chase CEO Jamie Dimon by name, mocking his outsized bonus from the Senate floor. As financiers have given more and more heavily to Republicans of late, Durbin has opted not to appease bankers but instead create a different fundraising base for the Democratic Party by targeting other segments of corporate America. And major retailers like Walmart and Home Depot are much happier with Durbin and the Democratic Party today than they were a year ago.

FOLLOW HUFFPOST POLITICS
Subscribe to the HuffPost Hill newsletter!
WASHINGTON -- The six-month Senate fight over debit card swipe fees is finally over. The banks lost. An amendment pushed by Sen. Jon Tester (D-Mont.) that would have delayed implementation of a la...
WASHINGTON -- The six-month Senate fight over debit card swipe fees is finally over. The banks lost. An amendment pushed by Sen. Jon Tester (D-Mont.) that would have delayed implementation of a la...
 
 
  • Comments
  • 2,835
  • Pending Comments
  • 0
  • View FAQ
Comments are closed for this entry
View All
Favorites
Highlights
Recency  | 
Popularity
Page: 1 2 3 4 5  Next ›  Last »  (59 total)
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
Joe Tucker
Concerned citizen
07:31 PM on 06/10/2011
HP has to be commended for continuing to expose frauds like this one.
photo
HUFFPOST COMMUNITY MODERATOR
Quinxy von Besiex
My micro-bio is empty. :(
12:32 PM on 06/10/2011
Obama has tried to work with the Republicans in congress and it has not proved a worthy tihng to do; their mission has been all about obstruction. Now is the time to go around his opponents, not get along with them.
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
Jen Celli
Done sitting and watching quietly.
02:01 PM on 06/09/2011
It would be nice to think that there would be some positive impact. Instead I'm just positive the impact will be higher fees in other areas to cover the losses. Jamie Dimon needs a new yacht, I'm sure.
photo
castlerider
"A man's home is his castle"
01:55 PM on 06/09/2011
Makes me thoroughly sick to hear of Democrats taking the sides of Banks for anything. Then even more so when I hear they are up for re-election, so that is supposed to be the rationalization for putting the screws to hard-working average Americans.

When in the world are some patriotic leaders going to stand up and fight for making all lobbyists and contributions illegal? I know, I know, dream on;... But truly, It is the essential reason we are what and where we are, and by and large the fundamental reason why out government is so badly broken.
01:42 PM on 06/09/2011
It ain't over yet...The (R)s will figure out a way to de-fund the legislation so it becomes nothing but but another "toothless tiger" bill for the American middle class...And what will the (D)s do to counter this radcial right-wing social engineering economic terrorism? Can you say nada, bipkiss, zilch?
photo
comicpro
Stupid Should Be Painful
01:37 PM on 06/09/2011
The only real way to stick iit to banks is put your money in Credit Unions and when you go to small merhcants use cash! Why do you think it was such a big push by the banks to change everyone to DEBIT cards?? They make money! F'em!!!!!!
photo
comicpro
Stupid Should Be Painful
01:34 PM on 06/09/2011
The banks did not lose anything. They will just stick their customers with higher fees! Problem solved!!!!
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
Veganie
Live food, live bodies
12:16 PM on 06/09/2011
Why is it necessary for banks and insurance companies to make a profit, why can't they all be non-profit? Pay the employees, cover fixed and variable expenses, maybe some bonuses and rebate the rest back to the consumer and taxpayer in the form of lower fees.
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
candcje
Progressive, Liberal Democrat and Proud of it!
01:42 PM on 06/09/2011
That's a lovely idea, and would make our nation a much more affordable and better place to live for everyone. Unfortunately, there is a slightly warped sense of what capitalism is and because so many feel that the US is a "truly capitalist nation" they believe that every entity has the right to make as much money as possible, without interference from anybody, no matter if it scr3ws the rest of the country. It's very much a to-each-their-own and last-man-standing kind of mentality we have here in the 'great' USA.
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
Veganie
Live food, live bodies
02:10 PM on 06/09/2011
Nice comment candcje . . . Fanned
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
canoeal
Wooden Boatbuilder, Hab 3:17-18
11:56 AM on 06/09/2011
My Business refuses to take cards. The thought process is that there are other ways to pay that don't cost us, so we won't pay the cost of cards, and that way we keep our cost lower. The lower cost are reflected in our prices.
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
x1jodonn
11:51 AM on 06/09/2011
HuffPo presents this issue as a “battle of the giant special interests,” but I believe that frame is misleading. In my opinion, this development represents the best policy yet to result from the otherwise weak Wall St. “reform" bill passed last year (especially since the consumer protection agency has stalled).

American businesses -- and not just the big retailers -- will broadly benefit from this significant (nearly 75%) reduction in debit card “swipe fees.”

I recall reading last year that card swipe fees are ridiculously high in America compared to such fees in Europe. That article suggested that if we were to adjust our fees accordingly, American businesses would save $32 billion per year -- between debit AND credit card transactions (the Fed should now finish the job and reduce the fee for credit cards, too).

Still, thanks to the otherwise wimpy reform bill, the subsequent actions of the Federal Reserve, and the inaction of the Senate, America will finally make some progress on this front.

I, for one, am happy to see a handful of banks forgo some $11.5 billion (approx.) in debit card fees so thousands of American businesses can reap the savings -- some of which WILL be passed on to consumers. Such savings for retailers might even result in new hires for some of these businesses (though probably not the “Great Wal- of China,” aka some folks’ favorite “Mart”).
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
candcje
Progressive, Liberal Democrat and Proud of it!
01:46 PM on 06/09/2011
I just hope the banks don't turn around and add a "small" usage fee to those of us who use our debit cards everywhere. If they start charging me to spend my own money, I'll have to make many more trips to the bank to make sure I just have cash on hand - like I had to do back when ATM cards were ONLY ATM cards and not debit cards...
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
Joe Padilla
Ever hear of a credit union crisis?
03:12 AM on 06/29/2011
I bet a credit union won't do that to you. I was eligible join mine because I use utilities. In other words everyone is eligible.

Best money move I ever made. It must save me $500 per year at least.
11:33 AM on 06/09/2011
The real problem with this is we as the consumers will not really see these savings passed on to us.. The businesses will make a better profit and the banks will find away to get they profit from us. Big banks and big business both will win in the long run.. What about the consumer
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
candcje
Progressive, Liberal Democrat and Proud of it!
01:49 PM on 06/09/2011
Ideally, the businesses would split their savings with the consumer - modestly lower some prices and reap the savings from the rest. But, if they don't do that, then perhaps the potentially very large savings will inspire them to hire more people - now that they can afford it... And with more people working, there will be more people spending and local economies will finally start to feel some of that recovery that is clearly occurring in the upper echelons and as the local economies begin to grow, so will grow the national economy in a way that can be felt by the average citizen.

This is one potential result of such legislation, so if we put that positive spin out there, perhaps the universe will respond and things will actually move in that direction. One can hope, anyway.
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
edgeninja
Ayn Rand was an Atheist & Reagan Raised Taxes 11x
11:21 AM on 06/09/2011
The day the banks lose is a good day.
libertyanne
Red-haired Freedom lover
11:10 AM on 06/09/2011
I'm glad the banks have lost this one but Walmart is no prize either. They are destroying small businesses by sticking thier big box stores in surburbs. They're trying to pollute the DC area now.
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
Joe Padilla
Ever hear of a credit union crisis?
03:14 AM on 06/29/2011
The banks used Wal Mart as a PR gambit. Fact is most of the business you use is based in your state and probably is locally owned.
This user has chosen to opt out of the Badges program
photo
JustaSlob
"I'll either be dead or in jail" ..Need help TED?
11:08 AM on 06/09/2011
A gas staion at Irving and Pulaski in Chicago 7 cents a gallon discount for cash......

A liquor store on Western ave is 50 cents cheaper that their closest competitor on a 6-pack of beer...... cash only.....

Seems like a trend that's here to stay....
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
El Saltine
11:00 AM on 06/09/2011
And this will create jobs how?
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
candcje
Progressive, Liberal Democrat and Proud of it!
01:53 PM on 06/09/2011
Well, if the businesses are saving potentially billions of dollars per year (that's how much the banks will NOT be making from these swipe fees), then that's money that the businesses might be willing to invest in new hires because they'll be better able to afford it.

At the end of the day, the businesses have to WANT to improve the jobs situation and economy of this country. If the businesses don't care, if they really are only trying to line their pockets in the short term and not looking at the long term potential of their own sustainability if no one is working and thus no one is buying their goods/services, then it will not create jobs. If the businesses are looking at the long term and recognize that more people working means more people purchasing, then the extra funds from this savings will likely create many jobs. But, in the end, it's up to the individual businesses.