March 28, 2012 02:35 AM UTC

Labuda: Payday-Lending Borrowers are Like Alcoholics

•  
• by: Colorado Pols

When Corrie Houck kicked off her primary challenge to HD-1 Rep. Jeanne Labuda last year, she emphasized that Labuda’s weak record on payday-lending regulation motivated her to run.

While we suspect Houck was actually drawn into the race in part because of Labuda’s poor performance in 2010, the payday-lending issue certainly sounds a lot better than claims that the incumbent’s failure to dedicate time to her own campaign cost Democrats control of the House.

So, given that payday-lending is a touchy issue on the campaign trail, you’d think Labuda would choose her words on the matter carefully.

But as The Colorado Statesman’s Ben Conarck notes, that most certainly is not the case:

One policy issue that has taken center-stage in the contentious primary is the regulation of the payday lending industry.

Payday lenders specialize in small, short-term loans, which often come with bloated interest rates. There are many payday-lending outfits located within the southwestern Denver district.

Labuda was one of five Democrats to vote against the successful HB 1351 bill to limit payday loan interest rates in 2010.

“I voted against it because I think that we have recently passed a lot of legislation to reign in payday lenders, and I’m waiting to see if those procedures work,” Labuda explained.

Labuda said she understands her constituents’ frustration with the industry – which is seen by many as exploitive towards people in dire economic circumstances – but she likened the regulation of the industry to the laws regulating alcohol.

“Alcohol is legal, but there are always going to be some people who abuse it,” Labuda said. “There are always going to be some people who abuse the payday lending system and use it too much.”

Folks, if you’re trying to defend business practices which are generally regarded as “exploitive towards people in dire economic circumstances,” the last thing you should ever attempt to do is blame those being exploited. And if you are going to try to fashion an argument that payday-lending flaws are somehow the fault of those treading water amid one of the worst financial downturns in years, we can’t think of anything more offensive than comparing them to alcoholics.

With one asinine statement, Labuda gave Houck a remarkably large paintbrush with which to paint the incumbent as out of touch with the district. Houck says it best in rationalizing her poor fundraising numbers, noting that “We just don’t have that kind of money in our neighborhood.” Labuda’s own words make her seem like a legislator secreted away in an ivory tower: she blames those that rely on payday lenders to stay afloat because she’s never had to live paycheck to paycheck.

Above the issue itself, Labuda’s caustic remarks on payday-lending are but another example of the candidate weakening her own re-election campaign by making mistakes no candidate in their right mind would make. If these recent remarks aren’t enough to give Houck an edge in the Democratic primary, they’ll likely fall by the wayside during the general election – Republicans, after all, tend to agree with Labuda on payday lending. But if Labuda can’t even temper her words in the one area where she has to tread lightly during her primary campaign, who’s to say she won’t make an errant remark that will really hurt her during the general election?  

Or perhaps Labuda somehow snagged a page out of the Ken Buck playbook. High heels, alcoholics – it’s all the same when voters see it on a mail piece.