This Greenville (S.C.) News editorial calls for an override of the Governor’s veto: 

The regulations this bill would place on payday lending would not force the lenders out of business — it simply would ensure the loans aren’t being used in a way that perpetuates a cycle of mounting debt that can cause financial catastrophe.

It would be nice to end the fight in South Carolina.

A guest piece from a payday lender in the Greenville (S.C.) News says this:

A few days before Christmas, a single mother sat across my desk panic-stricken. She was due in traffic court the next day for a $300 violation and feared she would wind up in jail unless it was paid, leaving her son home alone over Christmas. She got the loan and her son had his mother during Christmas.

These stories are not unusual. In fact, many of my customers come to me as a last resort because life has hit them in the face and there’s nowhere else to turn. They’ve tried the banks and credit unions and have been told no. Many have maxed out their credit cards. If I don’t help them, no one will.

Yes, to most borrowers, payday loans are a lifeline.  Unfortunately, some legislators and media like to focus on the tiny percentage of customers that inappropriately use the service.

From an editorial in the Greenville (S.C.) News:

That said, it’s a good idea to put some reasonable limits on payday lending.

The bills in the Legislature are a good start, but lawmakers should seriously consider restoring provisions like the waiting period and income-based caps that ensure these products aren’t misused in such a way that people already in troubled financial waters wind up in even more dire straits.

The “reasonable” provisions that they want added to the South Carolina bill include an interest rate cap.  So effectively, they want a ban.  This is “reasonable?”

From an article out of Greenville, South Carolina today:

AnyKind Checks Cashed Inc. said in court filings that the city is denying its constitutional right to continue at 298 S. Pleasantburg Drive and doesn’t treat check-cashing firms equally. It also said the city has denied the business due process and interfered with a contract. The company asked for an injunction.

This editorial in the Greenville, SC newspaper sums up the state of play on payday lending legislation in the state.  The Payday Pundit doesn’t now enough about the legislation to comment intelligently on it, but I’m struck by the fact that the editorial used the word  ”reasonable” twice in referring to restrictions.

Do editorial writers really know enough about finance, economics and lending to know what’s “reasonable?”  The word “reasonable” is often invoked by debators to make whatever they say sound less extreme.