Mortgage help for bankrupt homeowners dropped

[lligrd]

Source: AP

WASHINGTON - House Democrats say the idea of letting judges rewrite mortgages to help bankrupt homeowners avoid foreclosure won't be a part of the $700 billion financial industry bailout.

Speaker Nancy Pelosi, D-Calif., told Democrats at a closed-door meeting Friday evening the provision would be a deal-breaker for Republicans who she has said must deliver substantial votes for the rescue plan. That's according to several lawmakers who attended the session.

Democratic presidential nominee Barack Obama had said earlier that the measure didn't belong in the bailout.

The concession came as staff aides to key Democrats and Republicans worked into the evening searching for compromise on the rescue bill.



Read more: http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20080926/ap_on_bi_ge/financial_meltdown_1146

---

We are being sold out again.

[Pab Sungenis]

1. FUCKING COWARDS.

What did we elect you for? Bail out the brazillionaires, but leave the little guy to twist in the wind?

[western mass]

48. mispelled "Collaborators"

Corporate Dems = good cops, GOP = bad cops. They work for the same side.

Yet another example of why replacing corporate Dems with real Dems is the most important part of the election process. Without that, nothing else matters.

[superconnected]

66. Cowards hell, try corrupt.

[AllieB]

2. The Dems are the party in power. Why are they caving to the Repubs?

It figures that the Repubs don't want to take care of the little guy. Typical. :eyes:

[Cronus Protagonist]

13. Dems are not monolithic like the reptiles

Fractures are wide and conservative factions are strong.

[Dr Fate]

24. Dont worry- they have lots of excuses. Pick one and go with it.

I hope it keeps you warm.

[stillcool]

27. I think it's about votes..

if they want to actually get something passed.

[sarcasmo]

37. It appears to me like a one party system and the lobbyist are in control.

[lynnertic]

71. it seems that they're not truly the party in power doesn't it?

And the Repubs think that the little guy is what got us into this mess. The institutions aren't defaulting, we are. Us little guys.

[Zhade]

99. I've been asking this for years about the terrible bills that pass.

Dems control what bills come to the floor - if they're really against something, it would never come to a vote.

[ingac70]

3. Repukes really want...

the $700b with no restrictions so their friends can cash out before the election.

[msongs]

4. nancy blows u know who again nt

[Zhade]

100. And ironically, this time there's no impeachment!

NT!

[Sebastian Doyle]

5. Jellyfish Pelosi strikes again

Fucking useless coward. :puke:

[Skink]

6. didn't they slip that in the stimulus they are working on?

[Skink]

7. didn't they slip that in the stimulus they are working on?

[moodforaday]

25. The one Bush already said he was going to veto? (nt)

[Ilsa]

8. Will workout specialists be able to re-negotiate and set up new

loan terms for people who are in their primary residences (versus borrowers who got into spec deals to flip the RE)?

[ixion]

9. this is *'s goodbye gift to his base, and the dems are helping to deliver it

IMO

[OhioChick]

10. No surprise here.

So, the Dems cave again. What's new?

[asthmaticeog]

11. WHAT THE FUCK?

WHO CARES WHAT THE FUCKING REPUBLICANS WANT? THEY FUCKING LOST.

[demnan]

12. They have just written

our economic death warrant.

[LisaM]

14. Am I mis-reading something?

Does it say Obama is siding with the Republicans?

[Mist]

15. Sounds like it. I really need to know Obama's reason for saying that

such a measure doesn't belong in the bailout.

[Mojorabbit]

52. Are they thinking that someone who

is bankrupt cannot pay a mortgage? I don't understand the particulars.

[gateley]

16. No it said:

Democratic presidential nominee Barack Obama had said earlier that the measure didn't belong in the bailout.

He said that earlier -- he has said that there are things we shouldn't try to include in this. I'll defer to his opinion on this (although I don't always).

[moodforaday]

29. And why the hell doesn't it belong there?

Obama will need to defend this bailout to a whole lof of voters. One way of defending it would be by saying look, we had to spend that much cash, but we also got this and that for everybody.

Plus, any separate bill is veto fodder for Bush. Bush's back to the wall is now, so the time to get any concessions is now, not next week, not later.

[gateley]

41. You need to ask Obama that -- not me. He gave an explanation for it (I think)

but I don't recall.

It appears that it's important (politically) for both Reps and Dems to heartily approve whatever plan finally gets approved. That's not my take, that's what I've heard from those who understand all this stuff.

As I said, were it up to me I wouldn't want to do a damn thing, but I don't understand how that might affect you, me, other regular people. So since I trust in Obama and the Dems to keep our interests foremost, i will trust that they don't give away the store. i hope I'm not proved wrong. Again.

[madrchsod]

46. it`s the credit cards that is going to fuck the middle class next year

there are some remedies in the current bankruptcy bill but the middle class homeowners who default are going to be indentured to the credit card companies for the rest of their lives. there is no bankruptcy relief from credit cards thanks to....ya that guy and his friends in the banking industry.

[Zhade]

102. This is economic terrorism, and the bailout is a fiscal Patriot Act.

NT!

[moodforaday]

28. Yes, and it'd not be the first time

Think telecom immmunity.

But a small correction is due. There seems to be a substantial contingent of Repugs who do not want this bailout to happen - for all the wrong reasons (they think it's socialism, like in Cuba), and for some of the right reasons (their voters will strangle them). So it may be more precise to say that pro-bailout Dems are siding with Bush and the Bushevik Republicans, not so much with Republicans as a whole.

[Zhade]

101. Sure seems like it. Of course, you will be excoriated for pointing it out.

It's like the bill clinton thing - if a DUer praises mcLame, it's ON, but if clinton does, suddenly it's a different story.

[Miss Chybil]

17. The Dems are going to have a substantial majority soon enough.

They will get this later - along with credit card reform and a redo of that horrible bankruptcy deal, I'm sure.

[some guy]

19. not if they do a bailout

without this provision before the election.
which only benefits the already wealthy, before the election.

They'll be a minority party come November 5th.

There are no really good options if they try to pass something comprehensive in the next week or so, if there is a serious crisis, and there may or may not be, thinking it through and doing it right is the way to handle it.

Caving to minority party pressure is certainly NOT the way to do this.

[Dr Fate]

22. And dont forget Retro-active impeachment- and puppies!

Anything worth doing later is worth doing now.

I'm not buying it.

[alittlelark]

26. Your world of buttercups and lilacs is pretty

Too bad it's also not looking at the yellowjackets, hornets and wasps surrounding the 'pretty flowers'

[UK populist]

30. It looks like a game changer to me

If you can't protect the people your party are supposed to represent then why should they believe you will protect them on anything else. It is not about whether they can get it later it is about now and the perception of betraying the middle class. Don't count on any majority win (or even a win) after this debacle.

[moodforaday]

31. That needs a healthy dose of

:sarcasm: :sarcasm: :sarcasm:

[Runcible Spoon]

47. yeah hope in one hand and well you know the rest...

I've got a bridge in Alaska to sell you if you believe that :rofl:

[Zhade]

103. Yeah, and right after the 2006 elections the Dems will hold the b*s* admin accountable!

Oh, wait...

[jayfish]

18. I Fucking Knew This Was Going To Be Dropped.

The only real item in this "deal" that will help "main-street". Meanwhile they throw the cap on executive compensation up as a smokescreen. In the grand scheme of things it means nothing. Let it all fucking crash.

Jay

[UK populist]

20. I really feel sorry for you Americans

All I can really say is with friends like these (Obama, Pelosi, Reid & Hoyer) who needs enemies.

[amandabeech]

55. As I'm sure you realize, the U.K. banks are up to their ears in this mess.

What happens here will affect you more than the Germans or the Russians, for example, although rotten U.S. investments are everywhere.

If we don't grease the wheels of commerce here, those wheels might grind to a halt everywhere.

Or they might not.

Nobody knows and that's a huge part of the problem.

Everyone's problem.

Don't you just love globalisation?

[Dr Fate]

21. Okay Loyal DEMS- lets get some finely crafted EXCUSES ready- and fast!!!

Come on folks- we need excuses for why this is a good idea- and fast! Shouldnt be hard- we have 8 years of practice!

Heres mine:

"We have to do it or the media will kill us!"

"What part of 'we dont have the votes' dont you understand?"

"I'm glad the DEMS didnt fall into that populist trap- this is an excellent chess/rope-a-dope play by Pelosi!"

Anything? Too played out? Little help?

[FatDave]

33. Here's mine:

As necessary as this bailout may be, it will probably be wildly unpopular with the people, so the democrats don't want to be stuck with the full blame for it. Therefore, they need republicans to vote on it. They may have the votes to pass it anyway (since the president is on board and will not veto) but are unwilling to have the republicans then say "See? The lousy democrats took your money for a bailout!" Therefore, once again, the republicans have them by the balls and can get what they want.

Unless congressional democrats grow a pair and walk away. I don't think I'd put any money on that.

[amandabeech]

54. You are absolutely correct.

Nobody knows if 700 billion is enough in the right place. It's a huge risk.

If the dems pass it and the 700 billion appears to be thrown down a black hole, the dems will be toast in 2010 and maybe 2012.

On the other hand, the big O is listening to Ruben, et al., just like Clinton did when he was a bad chicken shit tool of the capitalist pigs.

If Obama doesn't vote for something that helps the little guy, why vote for him if McCain votes no and nobody gets anything.

In a way, the Congressional dems have to think about 2010. Only those in competitive districts with a Puke opponent who opposes this thing have to worry about 2008. O has to think about 2008 and nothing else.

[alittlelark]

23. WTF!!! It is the only thing the Dem's have going for them

in this CLUSTERFUCK(US)

[Gman]

32. Obama is right

get him elected then go after and repeal the entire bankruptcy "reform" legislation next year.

[Pastiche423]

56. Obama is wrong

Which means waiting to be president is not the answer. His sharp right turn after receving the nom has lost him votes. If he continues in this same vein, he'll lose more.

[Gman]

84. It doesn't matter because

whatever votes he loses from the far left will be matched by twice the number of independent and moderate Republic votes he picks up. Besides, just who are these lost votes going to be cast for if not Obama? McCain? Or maybe Nader? If Nader then they're screwed up and out of touch anyway. Besides, it's always nice, warm and cozy for them living with mom and dad. If McCain, Obama never had those votes to begin with.

[Pastiche423]

87. Beleive it or not

There is actually a woman running for president.

[carla]

111. Sorry,

I had forgotten about Cynthia. I guess I wont waste my vote then.

[carla]

110. Obama

has just crossed the aisle and I consider this a slap in the face. Nader, anyone?

[Zhade]

104. We've heard too many empty promises of "wait until later" to fall for that shit again.

NT!

[Zhade]

105. dupe

dupe

[Waiting For Everyman]

34. The one thing that could've made it worthwhile.

[mbperrin]

35. We don't need a bailout to nowhere at all.

Please all the Congress critters just go home now. Every borrowed dime that we pour in here will absorb more credit, not create it. Every dollar we print to pour in here will fire up inflation.

The WAMU failure is an example of how things are supposed to work. Bad bank fails, depositors are protected, no federal money expended. Thank you, FDIC. This limousine king free lunch will simply give the next Congress and President reasons to do away with plans for universal health care, more education, infrastructure reform and anything else that costs money forever.

The whole thing's a trap. Why is that * and the Dems are the ones pushing this? So the Pukes can distance themselves from it when it turns out to be nothing more than a disastrous giveaway to the wealthiest. If ever there was a time for Congress to do nothing, now is the time. Haste got us the Patriot Act AND the Iraq War.

When will we ever learn?

[sarcasmo]

36. Bastards, it was never about Main st. Only about Wall st.

[madrchsod]

38. giving the judges the ability to rewrite loans

takes a lot more thought than what is being given now. there are no guidelines for a judge to follow in this bill.

i just had a review of the current bankruptcy laws concerning chapter 7 and 13. the judges are limited to what they can do in either 7 or 13 concerning homeowners ability to write off or keep their homes. there is also the willingness of the lender to accept the judges decision 7 and 13 have different remedies.

obama is right , this is not the bill to rewrite the bankruptcy laws.

[WriteDown]

57. Judges rewriting loans is almost impossible to accomplish....

Loans pretty much consist of two classes. Fee based and non-fee based or they are sometimes called risk-based and non-risked based. Fee based loans are the more common of the two. In basic terms they work like this. You have an investor and a servicer. The investor actually makes the loan, but the servicer is hired to take payments, make collection calls, etc. Kind of like a property management company and a rental home that you own. There is a pass through rate established so if the loan has a 5% interest rate. 4 of the 5% may go to the investor and the other to the servicer. If a judge were to lower the interest rate to 3% then the servicer would actually take a LOSS each month. Many people do not realize that this is in play and why it is not easy to just "reduce" an interest rate.

[Jacobin]

88. Incorrect. Bankruptcy judges restructure loans every day

In fact, the only loans they are currently prohibited from writing down to value and restructuring are mortgages on a residence. They can and do re-write the loans on every single other type of loan out there. Appraisers testify if the parties can't agree. The Judge fixes the rate at a reasonable rate and makes the term of the loan suit the property involved.

It needs to change and it needs to change now.

[carla]

112. Had Obama

stood strong on the principle of homeowner mortgage relief, he would have gained considerably in the polls. He has not explained anything to me by simply saying "it doesn't belong in this bill". So the middle-class can go suck eggs for all he cares. That is what his simple statement has done to me, one of his staunchest supporters since the beginning. I am severely disappointed and you can do your best to assuage my feelings, but I know when I have been handed a bowling ball and been told to go swimming...Barack McSame.:-(

[depakid]

39. These people are just plain self destructive on one side- and cowardly on the other

[JDPriestly]

40. The idea of giving that discretion to bankruptcy judges is bad.

It would not be exercised with fairness or consistency. You get a conservative judge, you don't get any help. You get a kindly judge, you get help.

The government should do work-outs on the mortgages directly.

[jayfish]

42. That's A Great Idea, But Guess What.

It aint in there either.

Jay

[madrchsod]

45. it`s bad on many levels

believe me mr biden is not well liked in the bankruptcy lawyers club. my lawyer said that the level of bankruptcies are going to increase next year and many people are not going to know what hit them...the middle class families in the usa are going to lose everything but the shirts off their backs. the credit card companies are going to own these people till the day they die.

[Lance_Boyle]

76. directly govt administered would be no better

I don't want any government entity making "you deserve it, you don't deserve it" decisions on this. If you're in default on the mortgage on your house, you don't deserve it (the house). I could POTENTIALLY get onboard with a plan that would turn defaulting "homeowners" into permanent renters in the same houses, but in no way should they ever be permitted to hold an equity stake in that property again - they've proven they can't afford it.

[Jacobin]

90. folks. bankruptcy judges re-structure loans every day

they do it based on appraisals.

The only type of loan they can't restructure is a mortgage loan on a home. That is what needs to change

[Faygo Kid]

43. Sadly, inevitable. Banking industry too strong.

It's awful, but inevitable. Don't kid yourselves. And don't think it will be revisited, once the bailout is approved.

[skyounkin]

44. Fuck fuck fuck fuck

WHY are you spineless fucks so godamm spineless?!!

[Neshanic]

49. So do the OH MY GOD! people get it now? Has it finally sunk in?

The people hand-wringing that OH NO!!!!! the plan has to be passed at all costs! Think of the HOMEOWNERS!

They never have and they never fucking did. That was obvious, and anyone with half a brain could see this was the way it was going down.

We have to have the agreement! We have to have the plan or people will be hurt! To let it fail would be hurting people. What about them?

Now you have your answer. Now you know.

[high density]

50. I'm so tired of my limp-dicked party

When will they get a clue?

[FreakinDJ]

51. Its also a "Deal Breaker" for your Democratic Base Nancy

Your not going to like the next election cycle Nancy

[closeupready]

53. Oh, so since Republicans tell you no, you say "okay, never mind." Nancy, you are such a pushover.

This is why they don't respect you. You don't fight for those who are the Dems traditional base, you just cave at the first sign of opposition. :mad:

[AngryOldDem]

58. That is just wrong. n/t

[amandabeech]

59. Then you have swing voters who don't want others who bought homes

well beyond their means to get a windfall.

Those that got in the farthest over their heads would get the biggest bailout because their loans might have to be written down by 50% in order for them to pay it off in 30-40 years at 6-7%.

In many cases, those written down loans support a valuation below market. Those who took the risky loans could then sell the property off in a couple years at the then market value, which probably would not be at current fire sale prices, and make a few cool thou.

A lot of people who bought properties that they could pay for or refrained from buying properties because they couldn't afford them will be royally pissed.

I don't know which group is more important politically this year, those that should not have purchased homes or those who don't want to see them get a windfall.

[GinaMaria]

60. Is it possible that once Obama become Prez

this could be passed as separate legislation? Maybe let it go now and make it happen in January? I hope there is a chance that this is the case. People who will foot the bill for the bailout may also lose their homes. This isn't right.

[bemildred]

61. What load of dishonest bullshit. Let them break the deal, it's their deal. nt

[Hawkowl]

62. Pelosi is a WHORE!!

Fucking useless corporate whore. Spineless piece of shit.

[cui bono]

63. Fuck them.

I think it's time to go to Boston and pull the tea back out of the water!

[Baby Snooks]

64. But she's the Democratic candidate so we must support her...

Skinner I do hope you make an exception to the rule where the Empress is concerned. No one should be expected to vote for her because she is the Democratic candidate since she not only doesn't represent the ideals of the Democratic Party but doesn't represent the ideals of most Americans who are appalled that the government would bail out a bunch of crooks and stick the taxpayers with the bill.

[superconnected]

65. there it is, our taxes, and the people get nothing.

[gopbuster]

67. SEC. 108. FORECLOSURE MITIGATION EFFORTS

Just something to mill over

http://banking.senate.gov/public/_files/LegislativeTextofChairmansDoddsproposalfortheTreasuryBailoutplanAYO08B68_xml.pdf


SEC. 108. FORECLOSURE MITIGATION EFFORTS.
16 (a) RESIDENTIAL MORTGAGE LOAN SERVICING
17 STANDARDS.—To the extent the Secretary acquires mort18
gages, mortgage backed securities, and other assets se19
cured by residential real estate, including multifamily
20 housing, the Secretary shall maximize assistance for
21 homeowners and use the Secretary’s authority as investor
22 to encourage the servicers of the underlying mortgages,
23 consistent with a reasonable return to the taxpayer, to
24 take advantage of the HOPE for Homeowners Program
25 under section 257 of the National Housing Act or other
23
O:\AYO\AYO08B68.xml
1 available programs to minimize foreclosures. In addition,
2 the Secretary may use loan guarantees and credit en3
hancements to facilitate loan modifications to prevent
4 avoidable foreclosures.
5 (b) COORDINATION.—The Secretary shall coordinate
6 with the Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation, the
7 Board, the Federal Housing Finance Agency, the Sec8
retary of Housing and Urban Development, and other
9 Federal Government entities that hold troubled assets to
10 attempt to identify opportunities for the acquisition of
11 classes of troubled assets that will improve the Secretary’s
12 ability to improve the loan modification and restructuring
13 process and, where permissible, to permit bona fide ten14
ants who are current on their rent to remain in their
15 homes under the terms of the lease.
16 (c) SYSTEMATIC APPROACH.—In carrying out this
17 section, the Secretary shall utilize a systematic approach
18 for preventing foreclosures and ensuring long-term, sus19
tainable homeownership through loan modifications and
20 the use of the HOPE for Homeowners Program estab21
lished under section 257 of the National Housing Act and
22 any other programs that may be available for such pur23
poses. In the case of a mortgage on a residential rental
24 property, the systematic approach required under this sub25
section shall include protecting Federal, State, and local
24
O:\AYO\AYO08B68.xml
1 rental subsidies and protections, and ensuring any modi2
fication takes into account the need for operating funds
3 to maintain decent and safe conditions at the property.
4 (d) CONSENT TO REASONABLE LOAN MODIFICATION
5 REQUESTS.—For residential mortgages underlying trou6
bled assets purchased under this Act, the Secretary shall
7 request loan servicers servicing the mortgage loans to
8 avoid preventable foreclosures, to the greatest extent pos9
sible, to the extent that the Secretary, as an investor, has
10 discretion to do so under existing investment contracts.
11 Upon any request arising under existing investment con12
tracts, the Secretary shall consent, where appropriate, to
13 reasonable requests for loss mitigation measures, includ14
ing term extensions, rate reductions, principal write
15 downs, increases in the proportion of loans within a trust
16 or other structure allowed to be modified, or removal of
17 other limitation on modifications.
18 SEC. 109. ASSISTANCE TO HOMEOWNERS AND LOCALITIES.
19 (a) DEFINITIONS.—As used in this section—
20 (1) the term ‘‘Federal property manager’’
21 means—
22 (A) the Federal Housing Finance Agency,
23 in its capacity as conservator of the Federal
24 National Mortgage Association and the Federal
25 Home Loan Mortgage Corporation;
25
O:\AYO\AYO08B68.xml
1 (B) the Corporation, in its capacity as con2
servator or receiver of an insured depository in3
stitution; and
4 (C) the Board, with respect to any mort5
gage or mortgage-backed securities or pool of
6 securities held, owned, or controlled by or on
7 behalf of a Federal reserve bank;
8 (2) the term ‘‘consumer’’ has the same meaning
9 as in section 103 of the Truth in Lending Act (15
10 U.S.C. 1602);
11 (3) the term ‘‘insured depository institution’’
12 has the same meaning as in section 3 of the Federal
13 Deposit Insurance Act (12 U.S.C. 1813); and
14 (4) the term ‘‘servicer’’ has the same meaning
15 as in section 6(i)(2) of the Real Estate Settlement
16 Procedures Act of 1974 (12 U.S.C. 2605(i)(2)).
17 (b) SYSTEMATIC HOMEOWNER ASSISTANCE BY
18 AGENCIES.—
19 (1) IN GENERAL.—Each Federal property man20
ager shall, with respect to any residential mortgage
21 loans and any mortgage-backed securities that it
22 holds, owns, or controls on or after the date of en23
actment of this Act, develop a program that is de24
signed to provide a systematic approach for pre25
venting foreclosure on the properties securing such
26
O:\AYO\AYO08B68.xml
1 loans and securities, and ensuring long-term, sus2
tainable homeownership through loan modifications
3 and use of the HOPE for Homeowners Program es4
tablished under section 257 of the National Housing
5 Act and any other programs that may be available
6 for such purposes.
7 (2) MODIFICATIONS.—In the case of a residen8
tial mortgage loan, modifications made under para9
graph (1) may include—
10 (A) reduction in interest rates;
11 (B) reduction of loan principal; and
12 (C) other similar modifications.
13 (3) TENANT PROTECTIONS.—In the case of
14 mortgages on residential rental properties, modifica15
tions made under paragraph (1) shall ensure—
16 (A) the continuation of any existing Fed17
eral, State, and local rental subsidies and pro18
tections; and
19 (B) that modifications take into account
20 the need for operating funds to maintain decent
21 and safe conditions at the property.
22 (4) TIMING.—Each Federal property manager
23 shall develop and begin implementation of the pro24
gram required by this subsection not later than 60
25 days after the date of enactment of this Act.
27
O:\AYO\AYO08B68.xml
1 (5) REPORTS TO CONGRESS.—Each Federal
2 property manager shall, 60 days after the date of
3 enactment of this Act and every 30 days thereafter,
4 report to Congress specific information on the num5
ber and types of loan modifications made and the
6 number of actual foreclosures occurring during the
7 reporting period in accordance with this section.
8 (6) CONSULTATION.—In developing the pro9
gram required by this subsection, the Federal prop10
erty managers shall consult with one another and, to
11 the extent possible, utilize consistent approaches to
12 implement the requirements of this subsection.
13 ø(c) AVAILABILITY OF FORECLOSED PROPERTIES TO
14 STATES AND LOCALITIES.—¿
15 ø(1) IN GENERAL.—Each Federal property
16 manager shall make available to any State or local
17 government that is receiving emergency assistance
18 under section 2301 of the Foreclosure Prevention
19 Act of 2008 (Public Law 110-289) for purchase, at
20 a discount, residential properties that it owns
21 through foreclosure in that State or locality, in order
22 to facilitate the sale of such properties and to sta23
bilize neighborhoods affected by foreclosures.¿
24 ø(2) INFORMATION CLEARINGHOUSE.—
28
O:\AYO\AYO08B68.xml
1 ø(A) PROVISION OF INFORMATION TO THE
2 SECRETARY.—Each Federal property manager
3 shall make available to the Secretary of Hous4
ing and Urban Development information on
5 properties available for purchase under this
6 subsection.¿
7 ø(B) CLEARINGHOUSE.—The Secretary of
8 Housing and Urban Development and the Fed9
eral property managers shall develop a clearing10
house for the information compiled under this
11 paragraph, and make such clearinghouse easily
12 accessible by States and local governments de13
scribed in paragraph (1).¿
14 (d) ACTIONS WITH RESPECT TO SERVICERS.—In any
15 case in which a Federal property manager is not the owner
16 of a residential mortgage loan, but holds an interest in
17 obligations or pools of obligations secured by residential
18 mortgage loans, the Federal property manager shall—
19 (1) encourage implementation by the loan
20 servicers of loan modifications developed under sub21
section (b);
22 (2) encourage the loan servicers to make fore23
closed properties available for sale to State and local
24 governments at a discount, as described in sub25
section (c); and
29
O:\AYO\AYO08B68.xml
1 (3) assist in facilitating any such modifications
2 or sales, to the extent possible.
3 (e) LIMITATION.—The requirements of this section
4 shall not supersede any other duty or requirement imposed
5 on the Federal property managers under otherwise appli6
cable law.

[and-justice-for-all]

68. Lets all go file for bankruptcy Monday. nt

[Joe Chi Minh]

69. Maybe it is a separate concession they have demanded from the agents of chaos and lords of misrule.

I very much hope so. They may rue it in unforeseen ways if they leave those people to the mercy of the elements - maybe literally.

[Yuugal]

70. If Pelosi gets this passed

I give up on this party. Its running 500-1 against and shes still fellating Bushco. Unreal.

[Waiting For Everyman]

72. Nothing they can do later will make up for the damage they're letting happen now.

Thanks for the draft bill above. I've read it, and I can't figure out how a homeowner is supposed to know whether or not the Treasury has bought our home's paper? Do we get a notice? If not, how would a request for relief be initiated? Or is this again, all up to a bank's workout department requesting it, or failing to do so? That isn't very good.

Frankly, I don't have a whole lot of faith in the Secretary making a voluntary effort to work out a mortgage. In any case, I still think it's necessary to give bankruptcy judges that option. It seems to me, that in a lot of cases the judges will have to coordinate with, or be informed about, what's happening with the bailout program anyway.

If these banks have nothing they're trying to get away with, why are they so afraid of the courts?

[Joe Steel]

73. This might not be so bad.

Dropping the mortgage rewrite will get the Republicans on-board so the House can pass the bill with bipartisan support which will eliminate it as a campaign issue. On the other hand, Democrats can use Republican resistance to the provision as a campaign issue against them.

Secondly, there's no reason why Speaker Pelosi, Majority Leader Reid and President Obama couldn't do whatever they want next January IF they can get themselves elected.

[carla]

113. This is a

BAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAD BILL. Don't allow them to pass it!!!!!!

[Javaman]

74. come on are we really all that surprised?

Nothing, not a thing is going to happen for the middle and low classes until moron* is gone.

[Jawja]

75. NOT including it should be the deal breaker for

Democrats. WHY are the Democrats working so hard to give George W. Bush and his criminal administration $$$$$?

I just don't understand this. Bush is demanding the money. The GOP in Congress ought to be the Party trying to get a deal out of the Democrats. I don't get it. :shrug:

[nolabels]

77. Because republicans are working with them and they feel like they are accomplishing something

What they are accomplishing is nada but they have been brainwashed like so many people so what would you expect.
I don't have much hope seeing how they have passed so many other things that look like crap.
Guess they all just want to have their names on the roster or something :shrug:

[mcollier]

80. If its such a deal breaker for the republicans

that should be enough to any thinking person, the republicans are not interested in helping struggling Americans dealing with home losses.


We must give the Dems credit for taking a Bullshit proposal "trick" imo, by the republicans and turning it into meaningful, accountable and responsible legislation.

Anyone paying attention to the finacial markets seeing several huge businesses failing in a matter of weeks, 10's of thousands of Americans lossing their job, almost 10,000 families losing their homes every day, and even more uncertainty ahead, would realize the seriousness of the times we are in. Oh and not to mention the retirement and 401k accounts that millions of Americans have seen drop 17 to 20% this year... I suppose if you don't need a job, don't have a home, don't have a 401k, and don't have family members to worry about, then every thing may be ok to you. But for the rest of us, We need major action and enforcible regulations in or financial markets.

The problem has been effecting main street for a while now and the bush admin has had a patch work approach to fixing wall street up to this point. I think it is incredible that after years of bullshit from the bush admin say how the fundamentals of the economy are strong, now admit the truth.

This is the main reason why Russia failed... How can you sustain a costly war and keep strong economically. Thanks to the republicans we are in this mess.

We have to get out of it. So please spare us your misdirected anger at the Democrats, they are our best hope of changing the direction and focus of our country.

[nolabels]

106. The problem is every time republicans create a problem the Dem's are willing to bail them out

That is not misguided, that is just the facts. They Dem's are afraid of getting branded as the party that sat on their hands. They seem to have this rescue mentality and it seems that every time a problem rises up the Dem's must find some way to fix it. That is not mark of leadership but more a mark of neediness. Somethings government can fix and other things it would be better if they stayed out of them until the citizenry sorted them out themselves. The idea of a nanny state seems alive and well i guess :shrug:


Nanny state
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nanny_state

[snappyturtle]

78. This tidbit for the homeowners was just a negotiating point....something

that could be x-ed out to promote forwarding an end result and make the Dems appear to be earnest in the process of working out a solution. SAD. Once again, pelosi has shown her colors. Sorry,the Dems are caving. Why won't our elected Dem leaders stand up for us?

[specialed]

79. Save it for the next bill.

That republicans will not given in on this simple point which proves their putting lobbyist first, not country. Bankruptcy judges can reset payment schedules on a vacation home but not your primary residence. Even my hard core republican friends think this is a ridiculous notion not to allow a judge the same latitude on a primary residence.

[IndianaGreen]

82. NO!!!!!!!! This is the time to push for this, when the bankers are in trouble and in need

of a bail out.

I would rather the be no deal, and let the whole house of cards collapse. We'll pick up the pieces later.

[mbperrin]

83. Absolutely right! Once they've got the $700 billion, what do we have

for leverage?

"We'll think bad thoughts about them" - ooooooooohhhhhhhh, that's gonna hurt!

I prefer no deal at all and no bailout at all. Don't fall for that "it will hurt us all" shit. All wealth comes from the bottom up, never the top down, and if you need an example, think of one of the world's biggest companies, like WalMart, and have them build a store right in the middle of Death Valley. Will wealth or income be created? Nope, gotta have folks coming in, and I don't mean Donald Trump on a once-a-year TV special.

That's why the bastards are trying to take it out of your hide and mine - don't let them do it! If the world really was gonna end, does no one think that the Chinese, for instance, with trillions of US dollars at their disposal, wouldn't do something to protect their own interests?

No bailout to nowhere! Congress go home right now! (This is one reason we only let the Texas legislature meet every OTHER year and ONLY for 140 days then - less damage done!)

[IndianaGreen]

81. The provision is a deal maker for the American people. Screw the bankers!

And screw those in Congress from both parties that have carrying the water for the bankers.

[Heywood J]

85. "Speaker Nancy Pelosi, D-Calif., told Democrats at a closed-door meeting Friday evening the

provision would be a deal-breaker for Republicans..."

Fuck you, Nancy. Everything that needs to be said about you has already been said, we all know what you are, what you do, and who you represent.

[ohio2007]

86. Nancy Pelosi, D-Calif., told Democrats at a closed-door meeting

That they were going to abandon ship, screw the little guy. They have to bail out their own personal wall street investments first

[AlphaCentauri]

89. Wow Republicans are getting what ever they want.

where is my Cyanure pill...

[Joanne98]

91. Pelosi! How do we get rid of her?

[ohio2007]

94. Your supposed to vote for Sheehan. Well, at least thats how it is supposed to work if Nancy's home

district doesn't get enough pork spoon fed to them next month. ;)

[lonestarnot]

92. Fucking hell a bouncing!

[MadrasT]

93. What Speaker Pelosi doesn't seem to understand is

that lack of the provision is a deal-breaker for the people of this country. Who elected you and all your little friends.

DO YOUR JOB, ASSHATS. YOU work for US. :grr:

[tom_paine]

95. Gosh...I am SOOOOOOOOOOOO shocked.

:rofl:

Government by the people and for the people, has perished, if not from the Earth, than from what was once known as the United States of America.

[Laelth]

96. Why are we giving up anything?

I assume our leadership has a good reason for what they are doing, but I see no reason to hurry on this. I say give the Treasury no more than is absolutely required to prevent an immediate financial collapse and agree to no comprehensive solution before January 2009. Then, let a unified Democratic government fix this mess when we won't have to accept any Republican demands. I see no need for compromise at the moment. Patience is what we need.

Am I missing something?

-Laelth

Edit:Laelth--sloppy editing.

[jkilvik]

97. Democrats cave again!!

Tell me again why taking control of the House was going to change anything...

[Zhade]

98. "Democratic presidential nominee Barack Obama had said earlier that the measure didn't belong"

Oh. I guess their votes don't belong to you, then.

I will say no more, except to condemn this heartless cowardice. THEY GAVE UP THIS MEASURE BECAUSE OTHERWISE REPUBLICANS WON'T VOTE FOR IT -- THAT WAS A *GOOD* THING!

[Waiting For Everyman]

107. The smart political move would be to put this back in and more, and

then publicize it to the whole country, so that these House Repubs' constituents will vote in Dems in a few weeks.

The hell with the Repubs' cooperation. Make it an all-Dem effort, but HEAVY on middle class relief. (Put in rewrites at 2% over prime for anyone who can make it - and no tranched securities sold from it, so that would be a good investment too. Add to that a foreclosure moratorium for 6 months while it's worked out.) Then see who gets the blowback from the public.

Nancy could have a 90% majority in a few weeks if she did that.

[olddad56]

108. If they are gonna bailout the lending institutions to the tune of 700 Bilion...

Why not just give the money to the taxpayers, and we will pay our debts, spend the money, or put it in the banks. The taxpayers would use it to bail out the economy. If 700 billion isn't enough, give us back the money that has been wasted on the illegal invasion of Iraq. Hell, we'll bail out the economy even more. We are here to help. I don't think giving our tax dollars to the the banks will help them, cause we are still too broke to stimulate the economy.

[droidamus2]

109. It appears...

The Democrats don't want to pass a bill with mostly Democrat votes because if it doesn't work or turns out to be the wrong thing to do they will get blamed. Personally I think the Democrats should just say they don't have the votes to pass it because the Republicans in the House aren't participating in good faith. The Republicans have pulled this game over and over they threaten the Democrats with filibuster or not voting and the Democrats capitulate. Stand fast Democrats. If the bailout is the right course then do it, if not take your time and come up with a better plan.