A “most persistent surcharge foe,” that’s what he was, according to a May 1, 2000 article in ATM Marketplace, an ATM industry news site. “Attorney General Richard Blumenthal” was “leading a legislative charge against the (ATM) fees.” Back then, he was the Connecticut Attorney General. He’s now the state’s U.S. senator. His state was “embroiled in a civil war over the regulation of such fees,” according to the article.
Then later, on May 27, 2003, ATM Marketplace reported that “efforts by two California cities to outlaw ATM fee surcharges ended with the Supreme Court’s refusal to consider an appeal from San Francisco and Santa Monica,” and this was in the story, as well:
The decision today upholds the right of banks, like other businesses, to price products and services, said Harvey Radin, a San Francisco spokesman for Bank of America.
The future senator and I weren’t on the same page, back then.
But on another Supreme Court ruling, its recent decision against the NCAA, we would totally agree. The High Court decision “paves the way for college athletes to be paid,” according to CNBC. The court had ruled “on education-related benefits and not broader compensation issues.”
In a Connecticut Fox 61-TV story, Senator Blumenthal said “This decision rightly recognizes that the NCAA’s ‘amateurism’ rules exploit the students who fuel this nearly 20 billion dollar industry. This precedent will help further protect athletes’ economic rights and wellbeing.”
As the senator said, there’s a whole lot of money, in college sports, for the schools and their coaches. You hear about big universities paying football and basketball coaches, for example, multi-million-dollar salaries, while student athletes, playing contact sports, are putting their bodies at — their potentially multi-million-dollar bodies — if they’re good enough to earn big-money with pro teams, after leaving college.
So… yeah, a little consideration for student athletes! I can agree with the Connecticut senator on that.
But on the ATM fee…
NEVER!