Montana
Montana Viewpoint: Money for nothing
Jim Elliott
Just before the official days of excessive purchasing named Black Friday, and Cyber Monday which follow immediately on the heels of the National Day of Gluttony, Turkey Thursday, I received a new credit card.
Just for giggles, I thought I’d read the fine print. The rate of interest would be 14.99 percent. “Didn’t Jesus throw the money lenders out of the Temple?” I thought. The late fee would be 29.99 percent and would apply to future purchasers at the discretion of the bank. I then thought of a friendly fellow I knew who was originally from Chicago. “What did you do there?” I asked him once. He smiled, and said, “I was in collections.” I wondered if he had worked for a bank or some other organization.
Where did these high credit card rates come from? Long ago there were state laws that prohibited usury, which is the charging of excessive interest on loans. When did that all change?
In the United State that date would be February 6, 1980, when a bill to abolish the South Dakota usury laws passed that state’s legislature. In the 1970s inflation was running at about 20 percent and to tame the trend, Paul Volker, the Chairman of the Federal Reserve Bank had allowed the rate at which the Fed loaned money to banks to rise to 20 percent. In South Dakota and elsewhere in the 1970s farmers were having a very hard time of it for many reasons and needed to borrow money from banks just to survive. But South Dakota banks were not about to lend out money at the legal maximum rate of 12 percent when they had to pay 20 percent interest just to borrow the money from the Federal Reserve.
In a related issue, in 1978 Marquette Bank of Minneapolis was having their credit card business undermined by First National Bank of Omaha, which was issuing credit cards to Minnesota residents at 18 percent interest which was the top usury rate in Nebraska but with no annual fee. Marquette was issuing credit cards at the 12 percent maximum interest rate imposed by Minnesota, but they did charge an annual fee. They were losing business to the Nebraska bank. Marquette went to court, arguing that Nebraska banks could not charge a rate of interest in Minnesota that was higher than Minnesota banks could charge in their own state. Marquette lost. In a unanimous opinion the Supreme Court ruled that the usury law of the issuing state held, no matter where the cardholder lived.
In a second related issue, Citibank of New York was bound to the New York usury law of 13 percent and was losing money. After the Marquette decision, Citibank began looking for a new state to do its credit card business in. Under federal banking law a bank could not move to a state without an invitation to relocate, which was conveniently provided by (usury free) South Dakota on the last day of its legislative session in 1980. Citibank relocated its credit card operations to Sioux Falls, S.D. as soon as it could, bringing with it 500 new jobs, a new building, and as a special gift to its cardholders, a higher interest rate.
That’s the history of the beginning of high rates. The morality of charging high rates on loans goes back at least—as I have said—to Jesus throwing the money lenders out of the Temple when he said, “It is written, My house shall be called the house of prayer; but ye have made it a den of thieves.” (Matthew 21:13 KJV).
People who loan money will tell you that the rate they charge reflects the risk they take that the loan won’t be repaid. The higher the risk, the higher the interest charged. It used to be that bankers didn’t like to take risks. They loaned money, sure. They made money on the interest charged, sure. But they also wanted the borrower to have a solid reason for borrowing money and to be successful in the business the customer was borrowing the money for. If it was a mortgage, they wanted you to be able to afford the loan. They did not loan money for toys or vacations. They looked out for themselves by looking out for their customers.
Now, it seems, all they want to do is make money off their customers, and the faster the better. Bankers used to educate their customers because success was a two-way street. Today, people are drowning in credit card debt, and nobody seems to care. Well, someone might, but it’s not the banks.
Have fun, but don’t go broke doing it.
Montana Viewpoint has appeared in weekly and online newspapers across Montana for over 30 years. Jim Elliott served sixteen years in the Montana Legislature as a state representative and state senator. He lives on his ranch in Trout Creek.
The Montana Lottery offers multiple draw games for those aiming to win big.
Here’s a look at May 30, 2026, results for each game:
Winning Powerball numbers from May 30 drawing
01-27-35-44-52, Powerball: 12, Power Play: 2
Check Powerball payouts and previous drawings here.
Winning Lotto America numbers from May 30 drawing
05-08-09-11-15, Star Ball: 04, ASB: 05
Check Lotto America payouts and previous drawings here.
Winning Big Sky Bonus numbers from May 30 drawing
15-18-22-27, Bonus: 14
Check Big Sky Bonus payouts and previous drawings here.
Winning Powerball Double Play numbers from May 30 drawing
04-27-65-66-69, Powerball: 04
Check Powerball Double Play payouts and previous drawings here.
Winning Montana Cash numbers from May 30 drawing
17-19-23-32-38
Check Montana Cash payouts and previous drawings here.
Winning Millionaire for Life numbers from May 30 drawing
05-14-22-28-30, Bonus: 01
Check Millionaire for Life payouts and previous drawings here.
Feeling lucky? Explore the latest lottery news & results
When are the Montana Lottery drawings held?
- Powerball: 8:59 p.m. MT on Monday, Wednesday, and Saturday.
- Mega Millions: 9 p.m. MT on Tuesday and Friday.
- Lucky For Life: 8:38 p.m. MT daily.
- Lotto America: 9 p.m. MT on Monday, Wednesday and Saturday.
- Big Sky Bonus: 7:30 p.m. MT daily.
- Powerball Double Play: 8:59 p.m. MT on Monday, Wednesday, and Saturday.
- Montana Cash: 8 p.m. MT on Wednesday and Saturday.
- Millionaire for Life: 9:15 p.m. MT daily.
Missed a draw? Peek at the past week’s winning numbers.
This results page was generated automatically using information from TinBu and a template written and reviewed by a Great Falls Tribune editor. You can send feedback using this form.
A group of legal and civil rights organizations late Friday sued U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement over conditions at Camp East Montana in El Paso, the country’s largest immigration detention facility.
“Camp East Montana is nothing short of a civil rights catastrophe,” Kyle Virgien, senior staff attorney at the American Civil Liberties Union’s National Prison Project, said in a statement. “We’re suing to ensure that no other human being has to endure the inhumane treatment that the Trump administration has inflicted on our clients.”
The Texas Tribune has reached out to the Department of Homeland Security for comment.
Filed by the ACLU of Texas, the ACLU, the Texas Civil Rights Project and law firm Farella Braun + Martel, the federal lawsuit comes less than a year after the opening of the sprawling tent camp.
In that time, the facility has seen at least three detainee deaths, a measles outbreak and nearly 50 detention standards violations as reported by ICE’s own inspectors, prompting calls for the camp’s closure from immigrant advocates and Democratic lawmakers.
The civil rights groups behind the lawsuit also alleged in a December letter that detained immigrants were subject to medical neglect, physical and sexual abuse by officers, insufficient food and denial of meaningful access to attorneys. In March, ICE switched out the facility’s prime operator for a more experienced contractor, saying the agency would “work closely with them” to improve services, including higher standards of medical care. Still, in a subsequent letter to ICE dated May 22, the groups said the situation “continued to deteriorate” and outlined additional complaints such as hazardous dust exposure.
Friday’s lawsuit argues that conditions at the facility are “unconstitutional punishment” and violate detainees’ due process rights under the Fifth Amendment.
“These conditions are longstanding, pervasive, and well documented, and Defendants’ continued inaction in the face of known risks shows their deliberate indifference — not mere negligence — to detainees’ constitutional rights,” the lawsuit said.
The petition, filed on behalf of four detainees, is also seeking approval to proceed as a class action to cover all those who are currently or will be detained in Camp East Montana.
One of the plaintiffs is Gerald Akari Angye, a detained immigrant who called the conditions at the camp “inhumane and cruel.”
Prior to this lawsuit, the 35-year-old man had filed a petition in January seeking release from ICE detention. According to the filing, Angye was a high school teacher in Cameroon but fled after being kidnapped and tortured amid a separatist conflict. He sought asylum after crossing through a New Mexico port of entry in December 2024. An immigration judge later denied his application, and Angye appealed.
In a statement provided by the civil rights groups, Angye said he had been beaten at Camp East Montana and never thought he would face “such severely violent treatments” in the United States. He was also placed in solitary confinement for 15 days, according to the lawsuit.
“No one deserves such cruel treatment,” he said. “We are all humans and deserve to be treated like it.”
U.S. Rep. Veronica Escobar said in a statement to the Tribune that she is grateful for the legal fight. A leading critic of Camp East Montana, the El Paso Democrat called the facility “a purgatory for human beings held there.” She also vowed to continue her oversight visits and demand for the tent camp’s permanent closure.
Camp East Montana, first opened in August 2025, is located on Fort Bliss U.S. Army base.
Expected to ultimately reach a 5,000-bed capacity, the camp had a daily average of more than 2,500 detainees as of April 2, according to the most recent public data from ICE. The facility has also held the largest number of detained immigrants thus far in fiscal year 2026, the Transactional Records Access Clearinghouse at Syracuse University found.
“Camp East Montana is at the epicenter of the administration’s cruel deportation agenda,” Savannah Kumar, staff attorney at the ACLU of Texas, said in a statement.
Disclosure: ACLU Texas has been a financial supporter of The Texas Tribune, a nonprofit, nonpartisan news organization that is funded in part by donations from members, foundations and corporate sponsors. Financial supporters play no role in the Tribune’s journalism. Find a complete list of them here.
Source link
-
Los Angeles, Ca16 minutes agoMan found stabbed to death in Huntington Park
-
Detroit, MI38 minutes agoDetroit Grand Prix father-daughter volunteers help make winner’s circle moments shine
-
San Francisco, CA46 minutes agoTony Vitello just lost the only Giants allies he has left
-
Dallas, TX53 minutes agoFatal crash on LBJ Freeway in Dallas leaves 1 dead, multiple people hospitalized, police say
-
Miami, FL56 minutes agoDeputies searching for 2 men accused of shooting man during attempted robbery in SW Miami-Dade
-
Boston, MA1 hour agoFriend of Worcester woman killed in Virginia I-95 crash ‘cannot believe she is gone.’ – The Boston Globe
-
Denver, CO1 hour agoDenver hockey’s Johnny Hicks wins DU Pioneers’ Male Athlete of the Year
-
Seattle, WA1 hour agoVikings stealing Nolan Teasley from Seahawks might be even worse than it appears
