The editorial , among other things, says that check cashers fill a “legitimate need”; that legislation to restrict check cashers “misses the point”; says that check cashers locate “where there is demand for their services” and concludes that “the proposed restrictions are draconian.”
Check-cashing stores cater to the “unbanked,” as well as any others who are willing to pay a fee for the ease and convenience they provide. Often open when banks are not, these stores fulfill a legitimate need for many workers in Prince George’s County who are unable to maintain a bank balance or who prefer quick access to cash. Check-cashing stores are already limited by state law in the fees they can charge, and a state office licenses and regulates them.
Yet in the campaign to make Prince George’s gorgeous, such establishments are an easy target. A perception that they make neighborhoods undesirable, drive away other businesses and contribute to crime has resulted in a positive community response to the council proposal. But the proposed restrictions are draconian. They limit the hours of business for check cashers, require them to provide security guards and bulletproof glass, and prevent them from sharing space with other businesses. This last clause is especially problematic, as check-cashers currently share space with everything from grocery stores to Wal-Marts. True, people leaving with cash are easy targets for crime. But the same could be said of ATMs or even traditional banks. What sets check-cashing stores apart from these businesses is their image. Such establishments are not associated with “nice” neighborhoods. But restricting them would inconvenience only those who use them, and it would do little to make neighborhoods nicer.
Do we dare say it? WELL SAID!!
