« | »

Dems Want Judges To Set Mortgage Terms

The latest from the new era of personal responsibility, via a sympathetic Associated Press:

Rep. Maxine Waters (D-CA) speaks at non-partisan ACORN’s National Convention, June 22, 2008.

Fight building over judges redoing mortgages

By LARRY MARGASAK Associated Press
Jan. 25, 2009

WASHINGTON — Most congressional Democrats say the quickest way to save homeowners like Troy Butler of Saginaw, Mich., is to let them declare bankruptcy and allow judges to dictate new mortgage terms.

Easy, except the lenders that would absorb the pain — and lose control of any deals to ease the terms — do not want to get dragged into bankruptcy court by millions of overextended borrowers

A bill to give judges authority to alter loan terms for primary residences may be the quickest way to arrest the housing market’s collapse. Most Democrats in the House and Senate support that plan. President Barack Obama told Democratic leaders Friday he also backs it, according to a Senate aide who was not authorized to be quoted by name.

But 10 groups representing the lending industry and other businesses are fighting back fiercely. Several have engaged portions of their lobbying machines to stop the legislation. The groups spent $83 million in lobbying on multiple issues in 2008, a figure that shows the power of the banking and investing industry and their business supporters.

One Democratic backer of the bankruptcy proposal, Rep. Maxine Waters of California, said the banking industry “has owned this Congress far too long.”

The chief lobbyist for the Mortgage Bankers Association, Steve O’Connor, said new homebuyers would end up paying higher interest and bigger down payments if lenders are saddled with the risk that a judge could change mortgage terms

The bankruptcy solution would not cost taxpayers money, as would mortgage modification programs that could become part of the government’s huge economic bailout package. But it certainly would harm the bottom line for lenders and investors holding mortgages…

Sen. Dick Durbin, D-Ill., the chief Senate sponsor of the bill, said Obama persuaded him in a White House meeting Friday to remove the bankruptcy proposal from an economic recovery package — to ensure it doesn’t jeopardize the stimulus bill. But Obama pledged his support for the bankruptcy solution, Durbin said…

Well, if you can’t get an ACORN “community organizer” to redo your mortgage, we guess a judge is the next best thing.

Though why not your local (Democrat of course) Congressman? Maxine Waters and Dick Durbin are all knowing, all seeing.

They should be able to come up with a payment schedule that is fair to all.

Especially to the suckers next door who are still paying their mortgage.

This article was posted by Steve Gilbert on Sunday, January 25th, 2009. Comments are currently closed.

32 Responses to “Dems Want Judges To Set Mortgage Terms”

  1. Okay, I see a great opportunity here.

    A mortgage is a loan, correct? And the amount of that loan is what you are willing to pay for a “thing”—based on its value.

    So if you buy an overpriced home you get a do-over ’cause today it’s not worth what it was the day you had to have it.

    I need a new car, doctor’s orders (really I’m serious. No more cars with clutches, no more sport handling cars with my back and knee problems). So I should be able to buy a car with a loan, and then the next day, rearrange the terms of the loan because the car lost value because I put some miles on it. I mean that’s fair because I am not really able to afford the car anyway, but I really really want it! So the amount what I have to pay back is less. It’s only fair the evil car dealer lose money on the transaction, ’cause we are supposed to take care of each other and all.

    Am I getting this bass-ackwards logic correct?

    • 1sttofight

      Go get your new car and tell the dealer to send the bill to DuhOne because you voted for him, even though you didn’t. The ends justify the means as the libs are so fond of saying.
      Also don’t forget to fill your tank and don’t worry about your house payment either.

  2. I was kind of hoping my doctor would write a prescription and I could get worker’s compensation to pay for it. I mean, personal responsibility is just so not with the times …

    • 1sttofight

      Maybe everyone should send their mortage, car, credit card, liquor store, etc. statements to ;

      Mr. President
      1600 Pennsylvania Ave.
      Washington, DC
      20500-0001

    • Liberals Demise

      They’ll pay my booze bill? Hell….why didn’t ya say so, count ME in!!

  3. Anonymoose

    Hmmmmm……….could I also redo my credit cards? I mean all that groovy stuff I bought, now it’s just taking up space. If I lower my interest rates to, say, zero, I could pay 100% on the principle, however much I feel like paying that month. See? I’m playing along, I’m not getting out of my debt. Beside, they owe it to me………..

  4. jobeth

    Hey, this here ain’t fair. We bought a house we COULD afford.

    Just because we promised to make a payment we COULD afford shouldn’t leave us out…I want to re do our mortgage payment too.

    We is po’ too.

    Why the heck do you think we only bought a house we could afford?

    And to think we coulda had that big fancy dancy house…umm instead of this here ordinary shack….dang it! dang it! dang it!

  5. proreason

    I love my wife but frankly, after decades, I’m struggling to keep up with my marital duties. If I had government assistance at acquiring willing 19-year old girls, I would be a lot happier and it might save my marraige. I do “not want to get dragged into divorce court” by my wife because of my damaged self-esteem and diminished libido. 19 year old girls may be “the quickest way to arrest my self-esteem’s collapse”. The outdated Marital Fidelity lobby has “has owned this Congress far too long.” My proposed “19 year old girl solution would not cost taxpayers money”.

    Is this too much to ask?

    • Colonel1961

      Amen.

    • 1sttofight

      Yeah, Right , Whatever…
      19 year olds are nice to look at , but at our age, they are deadly. ;)

    • take_no_prisoners

      What are you worried about, a heart attack? If she dies she dies, life goes on!

    • Liberals Demise

      ME FIRST……..
      I say, “Pick your poison”.

    • JohnMG

      What about your wife?? And she’s the same age as you are–in my own case, 62 years old?

      I see a flaw in your reasoning. What if she got a 19-year-old college stud? I mean, 19 goes into 62 more times than 62 goes into 19! ;-}

    • Colonel1961

      JMG: Your math is correct, but my hope is not diminished… ;-)

    • proreason

      I would only be doing it for my wife of course. To preserve our marraige. And I think I deserve the help, because 14 centuries ago, some of my ancestors were enslaved. I just can’t get over it.

  6. jobeth

    Ya know, I was talking to my husband the other day. I told him we could get out of debt really easy…kinda like the gov does.

    I said we can call all our neighbors tell them we need their help in paying off all our debt..and we need their money to do it.

    Then we go out and have a spending spree and get as much stuff as we have ever wanted.

    (We don’t bother to pay of the debt off but let our grandchildren pay them back….someday…maybe)

    See? Life will be good again! All fixed!

  7. Being literate is a good thing!

    The LA Times has an article up titled “U.S. casualties in Afghanistan may rise, Biden says.”

    (I’m full of snide remarks about that title. Yes, U.S. casualties will ride because Biden can’t keep his mouth shut and will probably make a courtesy call to the Taliban to tell them more brave American men and women are on their way … but I digress.)

    A quote from the article revealing raging dems “new math:”

    Summers said Obama had inherited the worst economy since World War II, coupled with a federal budget deficit of more than $1 trillion and soaring costs for entitlement programs such as Social Security, Medicare and Medicaid. The nation lost a total of 2.6 million jobs last year as the housing market contracted and financial markets collapsed.

    The government… can afford to spend more than $1 trillion to boost the economy and save financial institutions. But he warned that fiscal discipline would be necessary once the economy recovers.

    http://preview.tinyurl.com/akon38

    Okay let’s put this into terms mathematically-challenged people like me can understand.

    My checking account has a negative balance of $100, but I can afford to spend $100.

    Must be a new math or 21st century economics thing that I missed in college …

    • take_no_prisoners

      No, what Biden is saying is: “So, we managed to get you $100 in the hole, we’re going to double down for you but we’ll get our $200 back with a shitload of interest in the coming years–don’t say anything you can’t say no the decisions are being made for you by us, you don’t even have the option to take it or leave it, we won.”

  8. You would think the failure of this formula, when people couldnt afford their homes – yet in better economic times than today would be the “common sense get the f%$* out of here” rule, but I digress.

    If you take the average default rate, minus those who had no business buying a high mortgage they couldn’t afford, minus the “I can flip 5 properties at once because I saw it on TV” crowd – we are not that far off the norm of yearly defaults.

    Of course – the real culprit to the “financial mess” is the fact 10 times the actual mortgage $$’s were repackaged and resold throguh debt swaps and other neferous financial market tricks. That is where the bleed is coming from.

    Solution:
    Go back to the tried and true model of giving loans to people who can afford it.
    Disallow many debt swap vehicles so bad money isnt being bet on bad money x 10.
    Factor out those who are unemployed – and therefore dont even qualify for a mortgage (under normal, sane rules) instead of this pancea being forced by the Dem idiots who got us involved in the first place.
    Sell those “real defaults” on the open market – with the only gov intervention – price floors (as in bidding starts at at least 30% of the adjusted real value – with no bidding ceiling, being those mortgages originate with Fed monies anyway, best to get at least that bottom amount back)
    And you will see the mortgage market return to normal.

    Free market didnt get us into the trouble – gov intervention and forced BUYING RULES did. Its so friggin simple – I suggest 5th graders run the numbers and maybe it will resonate.

    PS – eliminate bogus “rules”, supported by the financial industry that only promise success on the way up – for their greed (debt swaps, ARM’s, etc) only benefit them. Anyone who bought an ARM had to ask themselves “hmmm, whats the chance my ARM would adjust down, making it a wise investment” Answer: zero. The indsurty flooded people with confusing vehicles on purpose – aka “smoke and mirrors”.

    • jobeth

      Great weekend, thanks…especially now that we’ve thawed out! ha!
      Back to normal Fl days..at least for a while
      J.

    • jobeth

      Sorry about that. This up here should have been down there…oh pooh, I’m going to bed…(sleepy grin)

  9. jobeth

    “I suggest 5th graders run the numbers and maybe it will resonate”

    Yes but are they smarter than a 5th grader? Nope…won’t make sense to them.

    (sorry, couldn’t resist :-D)

    • I imagine my mind gravitated to “5th graders”, being that was roughly when I learned all the math needed for mortgages AND the fact the show highlights said math skills.

      I hope you had an enjoyable weekend, was lovely here in Atlanta.

  10. JohnMG

    …..” according to a Senate aide who was not authorized to be quoted by name…..”

    I propose a new rule for reporting: From this point forward, no news leak concerning policy given by any spineless, trash peddling, scum-sucking, ball-licker will be allowed to be printed or reported upon unless said individual claim authorship by allowing his/her name in attribution.

    I am sorely tried, and sick and tired of these gutless wonders hiding out where they cannot be bitch-slapped for deliberately lying, or be held accountable for their disingenuous ambiguities.

    What a bunch of media-whores!

    • John –

      Unfortunatley the Supreme Court decided it is ok for a 75 IQ, 22 year old, who happens to work as a “reporter” be given protection from releasing names of “sources”

      Now I blame all of them (except the dissenting voices) for not having the ability to see how this ruling could be dangerous as opposed to “protecting someones so-called 1st Amendment right”, considering the SC had the brains to figure out long ago “shouting fire in a crowded theater is not protected by the 1st Amendment…” being the grave danger it could cause trumnps any perceived 1st Amendment free speech right.

      Call me a wanky conservative Constitutional stickler.

    • 1sttofight

      The 1st amend gives you the right to say whatever you want to say. It does not give you the right to avoid the consequences .

    • proreason

      “a 75 IQ, 22 year old, who happens to work as a “reporter”

      Are there any other types who work as “reporters”?

      If so, I can’t find any on TV or in the Slimes cabal.

      But of course, I do enjoy the news babes and am in awe of “journalism” schools’ entrance criteria.

  11. Chinnubie

    Why should anybody be responsible anymore?? I can now forgo paying my bills because this new administration is going to pay them for me with this new legislation or is this only for home mortgages?? I mean where do we draw the line, this new responsible tone in Washington sits well with the hippie communes of the early 70s unfortunately, I thought we had learned our lesson from Charlie Manson and his bunch.

    Speaking of Charlie and his cult doesn’t this new administration remind anyone of the cult leaders that have been exposed in the past. If you look into the whole idea of cults and the way some charismatic leader lures followers into his lair to do his bidding and the followers never question the Almighty Leader. Maybe it’s just me but Obama and his drones seem to be under some kind of a spell to do whatever he says without question; SPOOKY!!!!!!!!!

  12. Media_man

    Another brick in the road paved to hell…

    These champions of the “little guy” are only going to succeed in getting mortgages priced with this kind of “risk” built into the interest rate. In other words, we’ll be seeing 15 to 20% interest rates on mortgage loans to take into account the risk of default.

    This could very well destroy the market for real estate in the US.

    And then they’ll blame the whole mess on “Wall Street” or Bush. They’ll blame everyone but the actual culprits.

    • dulcimergrl

      Another example of Carter, part deux. I can hardly wait to have a 16% mortgage where the principal goes down every month–NOT!. I had a loan like that in the early ’80s for a few years. Sounds crazy, but there were a lot of those kinds of loans at the time.

  13. bill

    What they want is you to check your responsibilities at the door, which means you have no individual rights.

    Rights and responsibilities are inextricably linked, no responsibilities, no rights.

  14. Reality Bytes

    From a little Acorn A MIGHTY OAF DID GROW!


« Front Page | To Top
« | »