Responding to public pressure and the competitive rates featured by competitors, Bank of America is reconsidering its debit card fees, as rival Wells Fargo and JPMorgan Chase scrapped their versions of the highly unpopular new charge.

A press release from Wells Fargo, which picked New Mexico as one of the five states where the bank planned to roll-out a trial debit card fee program, reads:

“As we adjust to changes in our business, we will continue to stay attuned to what our customers want,” said Ed Kadletz, head of Wells Fargo’s Debit and Prepaid Cards. “This means understanding their needs as we continue to deliver the world-class service, convenience, and value they have come to expect from Wells Fargo.”

But the bigger news is Bank of America allegedly eying a dramatic rescaling to their proposed fee program, in which bank customers would pay $5 to use their debit cards. Only customers with accounts that have minimums of $20,000 and $50,000 would be spared.

Here’s the scoop from CNN Money:

Now, under proposals being considered by the bank, Bank of America would offer customers new ways to avoid having to pay the fee.

Currently, only customers with certain premium accounts would be exempt from the fee.

Under the new plan, customers would be able to exempt themselves by having their paychecks deposited directly with Bank of America, maintaining minimum balances or by using Bank of America credit cards.

Earlier today, JPMorgan Chase announced it too would drop its debit card fee program after running a trial version in two states since February.

Chase and Bank of America, the number one and two banks in the U.S. in terms of holdings and branches, togther hold over $4.5 trillion in total assets.

Bank of America’s double-take comes after a bevy of bad press aimed at the bank and industry as a whole. Rep. Brad Miller (D-N.C.), a member of the Financial Services Committee, introduced a bill earlier in October to bar banks from levying mulcts from customers seeking to close their accounts. In a press release, he said, ““As megabanks flirt with menus of new fees, an increasing number of Americans will want to switch banks.

“That is the way things work in a competitive, free market as unrepentant banks are still trying to rake in vulgar profits from their customers.”

Facebook groups organized customers to switch from Bank of America to local banks or credit unions–financial firms that tend to avoid mega-bank fees.

Bloomberg explained the impetus for the new charges last month:

The [Federal Reserve] capped debit-card swipe fees at 21 cents starting Oct. 1. It will let issuers tack on five basis points, or 0.05 percent, of each transaction, or almost 2 cents based on the average debit purchase of $38, and a conditional 1-cent adjustment for lenders that follow fraud-prevention standards.

[…]

The cap, mandated by the Dodd-Frank Act, replaces a formula that averages 1.14 percent of the purchase price, or about 44 cents. The limit may reduce annual revenue at the biggest U.S. banks by $8 billion, data compiled by Bloomberg Government show.

In general, banks are finding new methods of warding off low-value customers who use savings accounts but avoid higher yield financial services. With economists stoking fears of a second dip into recession throughout the summer months, commercial bank holdings have increased at blistering rates due to individuals in search of a safe place to park their money.

However, with every new dollar under a bank’s management, that’s additional federal fees the bank has to pay, like deposit insurance premiums, also known as FDIC. And with interest rates near zero, and a dearth of expensive loans being issued, the financial firms have little to gain from the additional holdings. During the financial boom years preceding the economic collapse, banks were hungry for cash holdings to better leverage the high number of mortgages issued.

News the New Mexico Tourism Department laid off seven New Mexico Magazine employees Tuesday highlights the state as one of the many in the nation with a relatively fertile employment picture despite a decline in government jobs.

This past week, The Brookings Institution in its MetroMonitor report noted (PDF) Albuquerque as one of the top 20 metropolitan areas in economic performance, sharing the spotlight with Buffalo, Houston, Portland, Boston, San Jose and New Orleans, among others.

The report was compiled using metrics such as housing prices, average earnings, the unemployment rate, local gross domestic product and types of jobs available.

The job cuts in the Tourism Department weren’t limited to the legendary magazine, the first state-printed magazine in the country with a long history of publishing articles and photographs of prominent state-born figures; 27 workers were cut by the State Personnel Board, 11 of which were in tourism. Another 16 full-time positions were removed from payroll at Expo New Mexico, which puts on the State Fair and operates fairgrounds.

According to the Bureau of Labor Statistics, New Mexico’s unemployment rate is 6.6 percent; government positions have been on the decline for most of the past year, with preliminary August figures showing the number of positions matches 2003 levels. Manufacturing in the state has gained modestly in the past year, while education, health services, the financial sector, trade and utilities have led in job growth.

Santa Fe, despite being home to many government positions, has an unemployment rate below the state average at 5.7 percent according to July figures — the most recent the BLS has on file on the local level. Albuquerque, possessing most of the government jobs in the state has a July unemployment rate of 7.7 percent.

Beyond New Mexico, the authors wrote federal, local and state government jobs dropped off in 69 of the largest 100 metropolitan areas.

Below is a general synopsis from the report of the economic activity on the metropolitan level nationwide:

 Unemployment rates, although lower than at the beginning of 2010 in most large metropolitan areas, remained very high. House prices hit new lows in all large metropolitan areas even as the pace of foreclosures slowed in half of those areas. Workers’ earnings, available at the metropolitan level through the first quarter of 2011, fell in slightly more than half of the nation’s large metropolitan areas since the beginning of the recession. Manufacturing employment continued to rise through the second quarter of the year in most large metropolitan areas. Government employment continued to fall in most.

The Bureau of Labor Statistics released its August jobs report Friday morning, finding that a small increase in private-sector employment of 17,000 jobs was exactly offset by a loss of 17,000 public-sector jobs. Unemployment remains unchanged at 9.1 percent.

However, the U-6 measure — including involuntary part-time workers, marginally attached workers and discouraged workers — is unchanged at 16.2 percent. This is the first jobs report with a net job change of zero since February 1945.

However, the jobs report did include the strike of 45,000 Verizon workers who have since come back to the job — still, 45,000 jobs created is anemic growth since the BLS estimates that it takes about 125,000 jobs per month to keep up with population growth alone. Since September 2008, 550,000 local government jobs have been lost.

Modest June and July job gains were revised downward as well, from 46,000 to 20,000 in June and 117,000 to 85,000 in July. Wages declined by three cents from July to $23.09 per hour, and are up 1.9 percent from a year ago. Hours edged down by one basis point to 34.2 hours per week.

The bottom line? Job growth remains net negative with population growth, and is nowhere near enough to reduce the unemployment rate.

The Food Research and Action Center released a report (pdf) Thursday on rates of food hardship over the year 2010, finding that 28.3 percent of New Mexico families with children had trouble getting food on the table in the past year.

The report took polling data from Gallup. Gallup asks: “Have there been times in the past twelve months when you did not have enough money to buy food that your or your family needed?” A yes answer means food hardship.

New Mexico had the 12th-highest rate of food hardship in the 50 states and the District of Columbia, with 28.3 percent of families with children and  16.5 percent of families without children experiencing food hardship.

The Albuquerque metro area had the 18th-highest rate with virtually identical rates of 28.2 percent of families with children and 15.8 percent of families without children experiencing food hardship.

The question asked didn’t address issues like the duration or frequency of food hardship. Regardless, the numbers are high. Here is the New Mexico Center for Law and Poverty’s page on food stamp benefits in New Mexico, which provide food assistance. Gov. Martinez announced earlier this week that she would ask the legislature to reauthorize additional state food aid that supplements the federal SNAP benefit.

New Mexico is one of four states, and the District of Columbia, that cut Temporary Assistance for Needy Family (TANF) block grant money, according to the Center on Budget and Policy Priorities. The cuts “will carry a heavy human cost,” the policy organization reports.

New Mexico has cut the TANF benefits from $447 per month for a family of three to $380 per month, or 15 percent. The cuts began on January 1 of this year.

The other states that have cut the funding to aid low-income residents are California, Washington and South Carolina.

According to CBPP, “these cuts will push hundreds of thousands of families and children below — or further below — half of the poverty line.”

The CBPP says the cuts come because of fiscal pressures in the state. The TANF funding does not increase during times of economic hardship — the CBPP says the TANF Contingency Fund, which was supposed to cover this, “has proven severely inadequate” — and has not increased since it was created in 1996.

The CBPP highlighted other cuts made by some states, including New Mexico and Washington’s suspension of programs that provide a transitional benefit to families that leave welfare for low-wage work.

That’s a better rate than neighboring states like Texas and Arizona, a government fact sheet shows.

The numbers of residents enrolled in the newly created federal high-risk pool in New Mexico comes at a time when some are questioning how well the programs are working across the nation as a stopgap measure to help hard-to-insure individuals.

The federal high-risk pools were the first major programs rolled out from the new health care law earlier this year. The pools are supposed to act as a bridge to 2014, when the new health care law will create state-run exchanges that supporters say will address the challenges hard-to-insure individuals face in getting insurance. Usually individuals are denied coverage in the commercial insurance markets because of preexisting medical conditions.

The 130 or so enrolled in New Mexico’s new federal high-risk pool is far under the ceiling of what the new program can accommodate. State officials have estimated that that’s enough money to cover 1,000 to 1,500 hard-to-insure New Mexicans over three years based on the $37 million the federal government has set aside. Varying estimates classify anywhere from 5,000 to 50,000 of New Mexico’s uninsured as hard to insure because they have preexisting conditions or are critically ill.

But compared to other nearby states, New Mexico’s outreach to such individuals appears more aggressive, a government fact sheet shows.

With two million residents New Mexico has enrolled about a third of the 393 individuals who are participating in Texas’ new federal high-risk pool as of Nov. 1, according to the fact sheet. But  Texas, the second-most populous state in the nation after California, has a population more than 10 times the size of New Mexico.  Likewise, Arizona, with an estimated 2009 population of 6.5 million, had enrolled only112 individuals in its new federal high-risk pool by Nov. 1, the fact sheet shows.

Colorado, with an estimated population of 5 million, had enrolled 368 individuals in its new federal high-risk pool.

New Mexicans who can qualify for the federal high-risk pool are individuals who’ve gone without coverage for six months and have been unable to buy insurance, often because of preexisting conditions.

The federal high-risk pool supplements a similar program the state has offered for decades, the New Mexico Medical Insurance Pool.

It’s no secret that the GOP made repealing the law one of the battle cries of the 2010 midterm congressional elections, a position that helped fueled what the Post called the largest Republican sweep in nearly half a century.

But the GOP  has few easy paths to repealing the health care law, the Associated Press writes in an analysis published earlier this morning.

Some of the law’s provisions are popular, making it more difficult to undo them, the AP writes. Also, Republicans aren’t yet on the same page on a strategy to take on the law it appears.

Here’s an excerpt from the AP story:

Mindful that some of the new benefits are popular, House Republican leader John Boehner has stressed that a “replace” measure preserving some aspects of Obama’s overhaul would go with legislation to repeal it. But not all his followers agree. Some conservatives want a straight vote on repeal that would leave the “replace” part for later.

Then there’s the political reality. The GOP controls one chamber of Congress, not both. Democrats still retain control of the U.S. Senate. Also President Obama has the veto pen, meaning he can effectively cancel legislation he doesn’t like.

What ultimately the GOP will do, and how the president and the Senate respond, will make for interesting political theater over the next several months.

But the battle over the federal health care law isn’t going to be fought only in Washington. The states have a major role to play as provisions of the year-old law roll out over the next three years.

Here in New Mexico it’s unclear how the next governor, Republican Susana Martinez, will affect the political debate here, if at all. Outgoing Democratic Gov. Bill Richardson has been supportive of the roll out of the new federal law, with its hoped-for goal of reducing the number of uninsured people in the state. New Mexico has one of the largest rates of uninsured in the nation.

Also in another development Tuesday, some states elected opponents of the nation’s health care law to the post of Insurance Commissioner. In many states the insurance commissioner is one of point people in the ongoing conversation between local officials and the federal government about the new health care law. In many states the insurance commissioner also will be responsible for implementing rules that are part of the new law.

New Mexico doesn’t elect its insurance commissioner. That person is appointed. But watching how other states respond to federal rules given new leadership in the insurance commissioner’s office could provide a tip off on how this wide-ranging, complex battle will play out both in and away from Washington.

New Mexico’s next governor faces several challenges once she takes office, but none is bigger than the state budget. But with one day to go in a negative gubernatorial election neither Republican Susana Martinez nor Democrat Diane Denish has presented exactly what can be called a comprehensive, detailed plan to address the challenge. Instead they’ve made vague promises: no raising taxes during the first year, no cuts to K-12 education or Medicaid, programs that represent more than half the state budget.

Turns out, New Mexico isn’t unique. Candidates running for governor in several states, including those mentioned above, are adopting similar strategies, according to the Associated Press.

Candidates in those other states are electing for detail-free statements so as to not to “put their heads out and get them chopped off,” one budget expert tells the Associated Press.

Like New Mexico, most U.S. states are facing budget deficits, some of which are quite enormous. And like here, the gubernatorial candidates in those states are avoiding actual proposals for fear of provoking a post-Halloween fright among voters.

Like in New Mexico, the remedy for each state’s budget woes will be painful, but the details — and pain — will come after Election Day.

Good to know New Mexico’s gubernatorial candidates aren’t unique. But I bet that won’t come as much of a consolation for some New Mexico voters, who might have appreciated more details and perhaps a little more respect from the candidates hoping to be New Mexico’s next governor.

Hal Stratton‘s denunciation of Denish came a day after the Democratic nominee for governor accused her Republican opponent, Susana Martinez, of  being too cozy with out-of-state businesses and corporations.

To make her point during Thursday night’s final gubernatorial debate, Denish used an e-mail the former state attorney general and Bush administration official had sent to encourage a potential contributor to attend a fundraiser for Martinez.

The fundraiser wasn’t hosted by payday lenders as Denish made it sound, Stratton said. Denish also misquoted the e-mail he sent, substituting the phrase “predatory lending” for “consumer lending,” he said.

“You don’t see predatory lending in there, do you?” he said.

Here’s an excerpt of the e-mail Stratton sent:

As you know we have a governor’s race on here in New Mexico. The Democrat, Diane Denish, is out to end consumer lending. The Republican, Susana Martinez, we are assured is not for ending or further limiting consumer lending. Fortunately, Susana is ahead and is going to win.”

“The facts speak for themselves,” Stratton told The Independent on Friday.

The Denish campaign on Friday, however, defended the Democratic lieutenant governor’s decision to trade out “consumer lending” for “predatory lending” because “the lobbyists who are there have represented the payday industry. They can call it what they want to call it. At the end of the day they are talking payday loans.”

Stratton’s use of the phrase “consumer lending” in the e-mail is a bit misleading. Stratton acknowledged to the Independent on Friday that the phrase “consumer lending” in the e-mail refers to “payday and installment loans.”

Consumer lending usually is a phrase employed as a catch-all for many types of loans that are not to businesses, including, say, a home equity loan. Neither Denish nor her campaign has talked of ending consumer lending. Rather, she has taken aim at lenders who engage in predatory lending that critics often associate with the payday and installment loan industries.

Stratton defended payday and installment loan lenders, saying those types of loans are not in and of themselves predatory by nature. How they are administered determines whether they fall into that category, he said.

“Predatory refers to how you make the loan, not which loan it is, not the nature of the loan, not whether it’s a small loan or a big loan,” Stratton said.

The rise of predatory lending as an issue in the gubernatorial race comes as consumer advocates say the 2007 law New Mexico passed to curtail predatory lending hasn’t lived up to its potential.

The 2007 law was supposed to limit payday lenders but critics such as Denish have accused payday lenders of exploiting loopholes to charge exorbitant fees. Attorney General Gary King sued two payday lenders in June 2009 for charging “extremely high rates, in some cases, more than 1,000 percent.”

One of King’s lawsuits says that a New Mexico man borrowed $100, which was due to be repaid with 26 bi-weekly installments of $40.16 each, plus a final installment of $55.34. In other words, the man had to pay $100 and $999 in interest, the AG’s office said.

When asked whether the interest rates involved in King’s cases qualified as predatory lending, Stratton said he didn’t know. Stratton responded similarly when asked if there were loans generally that met the threshold of predatory lending.

“I’m not qualified to respond to that,” he said.

Martinez has not made predatory lending a marquee issue in the gubernatorial campaign like Denish has, but in a statement last month she said that she supported “strong consumer protections” such as caps on interest rates.

“Further, we must ensure that terms for each and every loan are fully disclosed to the consumer and I support strengthening penalties for companies that take advantage of consumers,” Martinez was quoted as saying in that statement.

The Martinez campaign did not respond to questions from the Independent about Thursday’s gubernatorial debate or about Wednesday’s fundraiser.

The one-hour fundraiser at the Albuquerque Country Club scheduled for midday Wednesday attracted 75 to 80 people from all walks of life, Stratton said.

“I think we did pretty well,” he said. “We must have had 11 Democrat lobbyists there with their clients who were non financial,” Stratton told The Independent.