 Born in Chicago, Rep. Walberg grew up on the city’s south side and worked briefly as a union steel mill worker before attending Western Illinois University, Moody Bible Institute, Taylor University in Fort Wayne, Ind., (formerly Fort Wayne Bible College) and Wheaton College Graduate School, earning his B.S. and M.A. degrees. Prior to entering public life, he served as a pastor for nearly 10 years.
Rep. Walberg was elected to the Michigan House of Representatives in 1982 and served for a total of 16 years, gaining a reputation as an advocate of less government spending, lower taxes, fewer regulations and traditional values. Following his tenure in the Michigan House, he served as president of the Warren Reuther Center for Education and Community Impact where his duties included creating local community betterment programs in the 7th District. Rep. Walberg also worked as a division manager for the Moody Bible Institute of Chicago before retiring in January 2006.
As a member of Congress, he serves on the House Agricultural, Education and Labor and House Republican Policy committees. Rep. Walberg is an original co-sponsor of two pieces of environmental legislation impacting on Michigan, the International Solid Waste Importation and Management Act, H.R. 518, and the Great Lakes Collaboration Implementation Act, H.R. 1350. Significantly for credit unions, in May he became the seventh member of Michigan’s congressional delegation to co-sponsor the Credit Union Regulatory Improvements Act (CURIA), H.R. 1537.
Rep. Walberg and his wife of 33 years, Sue, live in Tipton, Mich., and have three adult children, Matthew, Heidi and Caleb.
During the MCUL’s “Hike the Hill” grassroots lobbying trip to the nation’s capital in June, MCUL President/CEO David Adams had the opportunity to meet with Rep. Walberg and ask a series of questions about his political philosophy and positions on key issues facing Michigan, particularly those affecting credit unions. The following are edited highlights from this interview.
Q: You are a freshman Congressman with just over six months on the job. However, you had nearly 16 years in the Michigan Legislature before term limits forced you to leave. What can you tell us about your first six months in office? How did your time in the Michigan Legislature help prepare you for your experience in Congress?
A: I have loved my first six months in Congress. It’s a privilege to be a representative of the people of the 7th District of Michigan and be an advocate for limited government — to have government only do for the people what it must do, what the people can’t do for themselves. I’m a temporary custodian of this seat, and I want to use this opportunity to the best of my ability. It’s exhilarating to get up every morning and deal with the issues of the day. Sixteen years in the State House assured of the fact that I enjoy the job — I enjoy serving people, meeting with people and dealing with all sorts of issues and interests. I also understand that you can’t always make friends with each piece of legislation. Hopefully, you don’t make enemies, but over the course of time you hope to end up representing your district well and satisfying most of your constituents.
Q: What are you hoping to accomplish during your time in Congress? What are some of your priorities?
A: My key priority is to make it very clear to my constituents that I heard them during the course of the campaign. What they were looking for clearly by their votes is that they want government to control itself, even as we, the taxpayers, have to control ourselves within our budgets. Frankly, I think the reason the voters decided to change last November and turn Congress over to the Democrats as the majority party is because Republicans lost their way. We started to over-spend and over-regulate. I wasn’t part of that problem, but I will try to restore a government that limits itself.
Beyond that, I’d like to see us promote quality in education. Education is one of those big things that deal with a community’s quality of life and its future — you have to have good schools. In agriculture, we’re looking at a farm bill that will be a huge challenge — to make our agricultural industry run as well as it can, promoting the opportunities in the free enterprise system, competing world wide and utilizing the resources that we have back in our districts. And I’d like to make it a clear priority that Tim Walberg speaks with integrity, that regardless of whether we agree or disagree on any given issue, at least people will know that I’m basing my positions on principles I’ve exposed and on my oath to uphold the Constitution.
Q: What are your thoughts about the current state of the economy? What policies can we look at nationally that could benefit Michigan’s economy?
A: On a national level, we need to make sure that the tax cuts of 2001 and 2003 that have benefited the national economy as a whole stay in place. A recent New York Times article noted that some 40 states in 2007 not only have balanced budgets but are now able to do things like increase spending on roads and bridges, medical facilities and education, and are also able to set aside rainy day funds. Some states are even talking about tax cuts. So I’ve offered legislation to make the federal tax cuts permanent, and we’ve been able to get more than 100 co-sponsors. This means that ultimately, even if we don’t pass the bill, we have the potential to hold hearings that will hopefully awaken taxpayers in Michigan and across the U.S. to the benefits of these tax cuts and the need to fight for them to become permanent.
Q: What is your relationship to and perception of credit unions?
A: My wife and I have been credit union members in our area for many years now, so we are part of the credit union family. When you give opportunities for consumers to band together as members of a credit union, you can provide services and rates that may not be available at any other type of financial institution. Credit unions offer people certainty, security and a valuable relationship. So, my motivation in supporting CURIA and other credit union legislative endeavors is to enhance competition and simply provide better financial service and opportunities for our families and neighbors.
Q: Can you elaborate a little bit on why you were comfortable making the decision to co-sponsor CURIA — even though the bill is so strongly opposed by the banking industry?
A: Well, I’m not sure “comfortable” is the best word, because it does open me up to attacks from the other side. But it’s also given me an opportunity to try to educate my banking friends that this is the right thing to do. Why should we unnecessarily restrict credit unions from doing what they can and should do for their membership? Why are we opposed to reducing unnecessary restrictions to help develop the economy and provide more incentives for savings, investing and economic development? Banks and credit unions are two different entities. I’ve told my banking friends that, if there’s something that you feel keeps you at an unfair disadvantage, well, let me know and I’ll work with you on correcting that. I’m not attempting to give banks unfair competition. But I’m also not willing to accept arguments that because something expands opportunities to credit unions, it’s bad for others. Let’s let credit unions develop as they should and also work to help banks and other lending institutions develop as they should, too.
Q: The issues of expanding credit union powers and promoting economic development and moving Michigan forward do mesh together, since one of the key provisions of CURIA would allow credit unions to make more small business loans in their communities. Could you comment about the importance of expanding access to business capital, particularly here in Michigan?
A: Well, across the nation — but in Michigan today, especially — capital is king. If you don’t have an abundant source of capital to expand your business or to just get it started up off the ground, if there are sources of capital that are not available because of excessive regulation, that’s a problem that needs to be fixed. CURIA would expand small business access to capital, and that’s good.
Q: As you know, the banking industry has lobbied not only against credit union legislation, but frequently against the credit union exemption from corporate taxes. Can you explain your reasoning in supporting the credit union tax exemption?
A: Well, I like the idea of tax exemptions for almost anybody! But again, banks and credit unions are two different entities. Credit unions are member organizations, beholden to their members and returning all their dividends to their members. Banks are totally different — they’re there to make a profit for their boards of directors and shareholders. If I can find a practical means where we can reduce unnecessary taxation on banks, I’m willing to do that. But I’m not willing to raise taxes on an entity that is working just fine as things already are. Tim Walberg has never been a friend of raising taxes. If I can reduce or eliminate taxes anywhere, I want to do that.
Q: Congressman, we appreciate very much your time today and we look forward to great things as you continue your tenure here in Washington.
A: Thanks, and I look forward to working with you.
|
Regulatory Affairs
