The bill to tighten regulations on payday lending in Ohio is encountering rough waters in the Senate. The resistance is not surprising. The legislation, which was approved by the House in April, delivered a package of tough reforms, a stunning reversal by a Republican-led House that had stalled an earlier proposal.

There was good reason for the turnaround. Ohio consumers will be better protected if the Senate backs up the House in controlling lending practices that trap many residents in a cycle of borrowing and debt. The bill attempts to address a range of complaints, from the high rates charged on payday loans to irresponsible policies such as not verifying the ability of customers to repay loans.

The payday lenders argue that the industry has been caught up unfairly in the national furor over subprime lending. Perhaps so. The larger point is the unfolding crisis has sensitized both the public and policymakers to the broader consequences of continued lax regulation of the lending industry, be it for mortgages or payday loans, for debt-ridden consumers and communities as a whole.

The House legislation would place a 28 percent APR cap on payday loans, steeply reducing the current rate, $15 on a $100 two-week loan, which amounts to 391 percent APR. The proposed rate cut is severe, going lower than the 36 percent limit that Congress imposed on loans to military families.

The lenders have balked at any cap at all, contending anything less than the current rate would force them to pull out of Ohio. The question the Senate must resolve is what cap would be fair to consumers who already are financially stretched and reasonable to support an industry that is legal in Ohio and employs 6,000 people, by the operators' count.

The concern with payday lending goes beyond the question of rate caps. It also involves expanding the options for small, short-term loans. Payday operators point out, correctly, that they have flourished in Ohio because they meet needs other financial institutions are not eager to fill. They argue that the majority of their clients use the services responsibly and that available alternatives are much worse for those who need a loan to take care of an emergency and end up overdrawing their bank or credit account, bouncing a check or paying their bills late.

For the legislative remedy to be effective, it is important to encourage alternative sources for affordable short-term loans. Wisely, the bill would follow this path, making provision for other lenders to participate in a new small-loan program. Some senators probably think Speaker Jon Husted and his House colleagues have lost their minds. More likely, the bill's sponsors understood that it is the excesses in the industry that call for quick correction.