If you read the Huffington Post at all, you've no doubt read about this "Move Your Money" notion they've been pushing. Since New Year's Day, the lefty news site has been trumpeting this "New Year's Resolution" that you should take your money out of national chain banks and put it into local banks.
The Post says it's a way to send a message to the too-big-to-fail national banks who received bailout money and inject some much-needed cash into the nation's smaller community banks.
Treasury Secretary Timothy Geithner says he doesn't think it's a good idea. While he told Politico that he understands the anger and agrees with the basic principle that "people are right to expect more" from their banks, he didn't elaborate on why he thinks "Move Your Money" is a bad plan.
But at least one state legislator thinks it's an idea worth pursuing. New Mexico state representative Brian Egolf has introduced a bill to move the state's money out of Bank of America and into New Mexico banks. From the Huffington Post:
"I saw the Move Your Money video the day it came out and thought it made a lot of sense," Egolf told HuffPost.
So the Santa Fe Democrat wants to move as much money as he possibly can -- that would be $1.4 billion.
Egolf's bill would direct the New Mexico Department of Finance and Administration to "give a preference to a community bank to act as the fiscal agent of the general fund operating cash depository account."
Egolf says he hasn't heard any opposition and has even met with Gov. Bill Richardson to discuss the plan.
Obviously, this is similar to the move we've seen in states to divest pension founds from companies that do business with countries such as Iran and Darfur. But somehow this feels...different. Is it smart for governments to put all their savings into institutions that aren't too big to fail?
What do you think? Should states and cities jump on this idea? Or are citizens better served by keeping this money where it is?