Pressure On Hillary To Pick A Progressive Running Mate Mounts

Rosie would have been the better choice

Few people outside the Beltway and San Antonio, where he was mayor, have ever heard of Julián Castro, the centrist Democrat Clinton picked as her running mate over a year ago. (It's supposed to be a surprise so... shhhhhhhhh.) Anyway, once she settled on Castro she asked him to get a tutor and learn to speak passable español-- he already had one, a Jewish lady from Laredo-- and she told Obama to give him some cabinet position to raise his stature. (His twin brother, Joaquín, is a New Dem congressman and vigorous Hillary surrogate.) They figured he wouldn't be able to screw anything up if they made him Secretary of Housing and Urban Development. He's been told to stop telling reporters that "Joaquín and I got into Stanford because of affirmative action. I scored 1210 on my SATs, which was lower than the median matriculating student. But I did fine in college and in law school. So did Joaquín. I’m a strong supporter of affirmative action because I’ve seen it work in my own life." His appeal to fellow Hispanic voters may be limited by his own assimilation. He's the son of Rosie Castro, an inspiring activist who helped found La Raza but he supports "free" trade, including NAFTA, advocates an energy policy that includes fossil fuels, believes in balanced budgets and refers to David Souter as his ideal Supreme Court justice. Hillary's kind of Democrat.

Castro “has all the assets to become the next favorite son,” is how John A. Garcia, a political-science professor at the University of Arizona, puts it. “He has an elite education, which has given him a national network, and a quiet, serious public persona that appeals to a lot of younger Hispanic voters,” Garcia says. “People look at him and say, ‘Finally, we have somebody who won’t screw up.’ Of course, he’s still young, and he might be too good to be true, but if I were betting on the next national Hispanic political leader, I’d bet on Julián.”

In 1984, Mexican-American political activists were thrilled when Walter Mondale publicly considered Cisneros for the Democratic vice-presidential nomination. But second place no longer seems such a great prize. “In 1984, there were 20 million Hispanics in America,” according to the political activist Antonio Gonzalez, who heads the William C. Velasquez Institute. “Today, we are 50 million, and more and more people are registering to vote.” Who they will vote for and what issues will cement their party loyalty is one of the great questions of American politics. This year Democrats hope to exploit the ire among Hispanics over the new G.O.P.-inspired law in Arizona that empowers local police forces to crack down on illegal immigrants.

This week, progressive groups shined a different kind of light on Julian-boy-wonder than he's been used to. I got this from Rootstrikers, for example, yesterday:

Imagine if the federal government was helping big bankers on Wall Street profit off the foreclosure crisis they helped create.

Sadly, you don’t have to imagine.

Under Secretary Julian Castro, the federal housing department has operated an egregious Wall Street giveaway.

The program is supposed to stabilize communities by transferring overdue mortgage loans to institutions that will help homeowners avoid foreclosure-- instead, 98% of recent mortgage sales have gone straight to Wall Street, and at a HUGE discount.

Today, we’re launching a major campaign at DontSellOurHomesToWallStreet.org with partners representing some of the hardest hit communities. We’re demanding that Secretary Castro stops selling our communities to Wall Street and focuses on helping people stay in their homes.

Housing advocates have been advocating for fixes to this “Distressed Assets Stabilization Program” for years.

Big names have spoken up too-- last year, Sen. Elizabeth Warren called out the department for “lining up with the Wall Street speculators.”

Under pressure, last April Secretary Castro’s Department of Housing and Urban Development promised to reform the program and help homeowners avoid foreclosure by selling more overdue mortgage loans to nonprofit community organizations rather than Wall Street banks.

Those were empty promises. The two most recent sales under Secretary Castro have sent 98% of the mortgages straight to Wall Street-- and at rock-bottom prices.

A measly 1% got sold to nonprofit community organizations, which can better work with homeowners to figure out a plan to keep them in their homes.

Just last week, Progressive Caucus Co-Chair Raul Grijalva sent a letter to Secretary Castro calling for fundamental reforms of HUD’s mortgage sales.

Today, we’re joining that effort alongside a national coalition of 14 housing advocacy, civil rights, and progressive groups, from Presente.org to the Working Families Party to MoveOn.org.

And here’s another reason our pressure is likely to work:

Julian Castro is widely rumored to be a likely vice-presidential nominee. But becoming vice president will be tough if he doesn’t first prove he’s willing to take on Wall Street, and not just pad their profit margins.

Politico's Edward-Issac Dovere asserted yesterday that the dozen groups stirring the pot on Castro were sending a message to Hillary. "They’re just as open with their political aims," he wrote: "to publicly discredit Castro as a progressive, latching onto the mortgage issue to seed enough suspicion to keep him off Clinton’s shortlist.

“It’s a situation where the Clinton campaign wants Castro to be a major asset to her chances of winning the White House, and unless he changes his position related to foreclosures and loans, he’ll be a toxic asset to the Clinton campaign,” said Matt Nelson, the managing director for Presente.org, the nation’s largest Latino organizing group that focuses on social justice.

“All year, we’ve seen the candidates tripping over themselves to show how tough they’ll be on Wall Street,” said Kurt Walters, the campaign manager for Root Strikers, a 501(c4) group of Demand Progress and its 2 million affiliated activists, who is planning to deliver the petitions to Castro’s office when they’re ready. “Then to turn around and take a step backwards on that exact question, and put someone who has been doing the exact opposite-- I think it would be tough for a lot of people who care about Wall Street accountability to get excited about that pick.”

...“If Secretary Castro fails to create significant momentum in terms of stopping the sale of mortgages to Wall Street, then I do think it disqualifies him. But there’s time left on the clock,” said Jonathan Westin, the director of New York Communities for Change, which was formed out of the remains of the community activist group ACORN. “I think a lot of the progressive movement would not be in support of a Castro ticket if he fails to make traction here.”

...Maurice Weeks, an Atlanta-based organizer who works on housing justice in communities of color for the Center for Popular Democracy/CPD Action, said that Castro’s lack of action at HUD is breeding more gentrification and suffering in a way that should make blacks and Latinos pay attention.



...[Color of Change's Brandi] Collins said this complaint about Castro’s leadership is reflective of a whole range of issues her organization has had with what members say is the secretary’s closeness to Wall Street and lack of attention to black and brown communities.

“If he’s not showing up for our communities while the cameras aren’t there, we don’t know that he’ll show up when he’s on his way to the White House,” Collins said.

According to Julia Gordon, formerly at the Center for American Progress and currently an executive vice president at the National Community Stabilization Trust, the coalition may have a point-- if only because it is taking advantage of opaque accounting at HUD. Gordon said she’s met often with HUD about these issues but hasn’t seen the kind of progress she’d like or evidence that the program matches the claims that officials make.

“We know it’s been good for investors. According to HUD, it’s been good for the fund, although the level of detail that they release to account for it is minimal. We really don’t know how good it’s been for the homeowners, and that’s where this wave of protests is coming from,” Gordon said... “Both HUD and [the Federal Housing Finance Agency] have let down communities by not focusing on what they want the buyer to do with these,” Gordon said, arguing that they’ve been focused instead on offloading the debt. “They’re just like, ‘Get it away from me.’”

The idea that Castro would be the first Latino on a national ticket means something, Nelson said, though he argued that this only adds to the burden for the secretary to show leadership on the mortgage issue in the way progressives want at this moment of added attention to their concerns.

Nelson said that at Presente, they think of it like a parable-- it doesn’t make it any better to be hurt if the hurt is coming from one of their own.

There are two trees in a forest, Nelson said, and they see an ax coming to chop them down. “Don’t worry,” says one tree to the other, “the handle’s one of us.”

“Basically,” Nelson said, “we’re fighting to make sure Castro isn’t the handle.”

I'd guess Elizabeth Warren would be Bernie's first choice and that, given his age, she'd be the nominee for president in 2020. What a one-two punch that would be! Imagine a first woman president that is going to make voters think, we should get more like that!

Who Will Play Robin Hood To Rahm Emanuel's Sheriff Of Nottingham?

San Bernardino is at the vortex of the mortgage scandal crisis, a crisis caused by Wall Street greed and a crisis that Wall Street greed is keeping from being fixed. There are something like 150,000 homes in San Bernardino with mortgages worth less than what buyers paid for them (i.e., underwater). More than half of all homeowners countywide are underwater. If banksters were busy fighting to stay out of prison-- or, better, yet, to reduce their sentences or to be moved to federal prisons closer to home so their families could visit them more easily-- they wouldn't be threatening expensive legal action now against local governments trying to fix the problem. And when you see the kind of slime on the side of the banksters-- like wholly-owned Wall Street subsidiary Rahm Emanuel-- you get a pretty good idea that there's a clear path to solving the problem. It's called eminent domain and it's how San Bernardino and other municipalities could finally get Wall Street's mess behind them. Under the plan, cities would seize underwater mortgages through their power of eminent domain at a discounted price, and then reduce the principal owed on the homes, refinance them to lower homeowners' monthly payments and sell them back to the owners.

While Chicago's City Council met to consider using eminent domain to solve that city's foreclosure crisis, Emanuel was mouthing the words of the Wall Street titans who financed his entire political career and made him a multimillionaire. "The idea of using eminent domain is not one I support ... because I don't think it's the right way to address the problem," Emanuel said. "I don't think it is the power of the city to deal with the housing issue. We have a national issue. I think we have to address the issue. I just don't think that is the right instrument."

Ben Hallman reported on the battle between San Bernardino and Wall Street's mortgage industry criminals. Wall Street is hysterical and threatening dire consequences. "We believe using eminent domain would reduce access to credit for borrowers and would, at a minimum, result in lengthy and costly litigation," said Timothy Cameron, a managing director of the Securities Industry and Financial Markets Association.

Under the plan, Mortgage Resolution Partners would front money to local governments to purchase the loans at market value in exchange for a fixed fee of $4,500 each. Homeowners could then refinance at the lower value, potentially saving hundreds of thousands of dollars each month in mortgage payments-- while also injecting a shot of adrenaline into moribund local economies.

More than a dozen local governments, including those in Suffolk County, N.Y., in Berkeley, Calif., and in Chicago are considering the proposal. But government officials, including Chicago Mayor Rahm Emanuel and Edward DeMarco at the Federal Housing Finance Agency, have expressed skepticism of using eminent domain in this way, as has the mortgage and finance industry, which has not-so-subtly threatened an expensive legal fight should any governmental entity go forward with such a plan.

...Left unsaid by the mortgage industry is who, exactly, would mount a legal challenge, but it is likely that SIFMA, which represents hundreds of banks and asset managers, would lead the charge. Over the past few months the industry group has released a series of statements warning of dire consequences should San Bernardino-- or any of the dozen or so other local government groups considering an eminent domain measure -- pursue such a remedy.

SIFMA has described the proposal as unconstitutional, and claimed that using eminent domain in this fashion would harm everyday investors and pensioners and would undermine the U.S. mortgage market. Using eminent domain in such a fashion would actually "exacerbate the problem" of depressed property values, Cameron warned, because borrowers in any area that embraces eminent domain may find new mortgages and refinancings more costly and more difficult to obtain.

But homeowners who showed up at the meeting said they are skeptical of the mortgage finance industry's motives. "We've seen a bailout of the banking industry, but no bailout for homeowners," said Arie Giddens, a San Bernardino resident whose home is worth less than half the $300,000 she paid for it in 2005, according to an estimate by Zillow, a real estate website.

Giddens said she missed a few payments when she lost her job last year, and is now in a trial loan modification through her loan servicer, Citigroup. She has not been offered principal reduction by the bank, she said.

Giddens' loan is owned by a private investor, and thus would potentially qualify for a principal reduction under the Mortgage Resolution Partners plan-- but she lives in the city of San Bernardino, which is separate from the county now considering homeowner relief proposals. "I think it's time we got some help out here," she said

If only she lived in Spain instead of San Bernardino, more specifically in Marinaleda in Andalucia, she would, at least, get a more receptive hearing from government officials-- or one government official, Marinaleda Robin Hood mayor.

For Spain’s ruling politicians he is a criminal; for his supporters he is Robin Hood, stealing from supermarkets and redistributing the food to the poor.

Juan Manuel Sánchez Gordillo, the mayor of Marinaleda, a southern town with a population of 2,600, has been catapulted to cult hero status in Spain after setting out this week on an anti-austerity march across Andalucia-- occupying banks and stealing food, and enraging the government of Mariano Rajoy.

Earlier this month Mr Sánchez Gordillo stood outside a supermarket with cheering supporters as trade unionists piled food into shopping trolleys and left without paying, later donating the items to food banks for the poor. The raid resulted in seven arrests.

The 59-year-old is also a member of the regional parliament, and enjoys immunity from prosecution. He says he will forgo this right on the march, which began this week with about 500 supporters.

“We are fighting a war for the poor ... going to jail is not important for me, it would be an honour,” Mr Sánchez Gordillo told the Financial Times.

“We are going to occupy all of the banks and supermarkets we are able to in Andalucia. The robbers who have caused this crisis must pay the consequences for what they have done.”

Mr Sánchez Gordillo, who wears a large beard and often sports a keffiyeh-style scarf, said he was attacking banks for repossessing the homes of people unable to pay their mortgages, and supermarkets for damaging local farmers.

“The euro is a fraud that enriches some and impoverishes the rest ... There are families going hungry, and small farmers who are ruined. We are asking for a change of the political model.”

His actions have infuriated Spain’s ruling Popular party, which has called for him to be stripped of his seat for the United Left party in Andalucia’s parliament.

“One can’t be Robin Hood and at the same time earning a salary as the sheriff of Nottingham,” said Alfonso Alonso, parliamentary spokesman for the ruling PP in Spain’s parliament.

“This man is looking for publicity at the cost of everyone else, and above all at the cost of the image of Spain,” he said.

During its first seven months in power, Mr Rajoy’s government has implemented swinging austerity measures that have damaged his popularity and triggered waves of demonstrations by public workers.

Andalucia, Spain’s largest region by population, has 30 per cent unemployment-- the highest of any region within the European Union. It has become a focal point for the government’s drive to rein in regional spending, and earlier this month Madrid clashed with the southern region over new budget cuts.

“This could close 19 hospitals, all of the Andalucian health service, or get rid of 60,000 public workers, one in four of the local governments workforce,” José Antonio Griñán, the region’s leader, said earlier this month.

On Friday, the marchers, who plan to sleep in the open or in parks, occupied a branch of Banco Santander in the town of Mancha Real in the province of Jaén before leaving later in the day.

Diego Canamero, head of the Andalucian Workers Union, was in the branch on Friday. He said critics of the protests were politicians protecting their own interests.

“These are symbolic actions against an unsustainable economic situation,” he said. “The bankers rob us, and take our money to tax havens, and the political parties are corrupt. We live in a culture of robbery.”

Mr Canamero said the marchers were under tight police surveillance, but they would try and “redistribute food for the most needy” if they could. Only staple items such as sugar, olive oil, milk and rice were being taken.

I hope if this catches on here, people realize how unhealthy sugar is and decide to redistribute fresh fruits and vegetables instead. And I hope it's brown rice and not that nutrition-free white polished garbage.

Is A Crime Unpunished Not Really A Crime? Take The Disgraceful And Illegal Foreclosures Against Military Families

A week or so ago we featured the Doobie Brothers' complaint about banksters illegally foreclosing on active duty service members. The law is very clear-- each illegal foreclosure by J.P.MorganChase should have yielded one year in prison. Instead J.P.MorganChase said, "Oops; so sorry" and got off scott free-- no jail, just a slap on the wrist. Looks like the banksters at Well Fargo took this as a green light for them to start foreclosing on military families too.

While they are fighting for our nation overseas, some military personnel are losing their houses to foreclosure here at home.

In the thick of battle, in the heat of the fight, it's the last thing a GI should have to worry about.  While Coast Guardsman Keith Johnson was fighting for our country overseas, he was losing a battle here at home, for his home.  

A battle, he claims, he had no idea was being waged until the moment he got back and spoke to his wife.

"It just boggled my mind. I got back and she said 'the house is basically foreclosed' and I was like 'What do you mean?'" Johnson says.

At the same time, Johnson and his wife Alysia were negotiating with their lender, Wells Fargo, to modify the mortgage on their Clearwater home, the bank's lawyers were foreclosing on the property, getting a summary judgment, and auctioning it off.

That happens fairly often.  Banks negotiate loan modifications at the same time they move to foreclose. The difference here is that Johnson says no one ever informed him the bank was foreclosing.

If that's true, it would be an apparent violation of a federal law specifically designed to protect active duty military personnel.

The Servicemember Civil Relief Act requires active duty soldiers be informed of civil actions like foreclosure, and allows them to delay the process until they are home to defend themselves.

Attorney John Odom is a nationally known expert on the act, and says it also protects soldiers against default judgments because, "Active duty personnel are not free to come and go as they might need to defend themselves," Odom tells us.

The I-Team has uncovered case after case in the Tampa area, around Florida, and the nation where banks have foreclosed on the homes of active duty military personnel.

...“They really need to get themselves under control," said Johnson, referring to the banks. 

"They are really just bullying because they can."

And they can because they don't get punished for it. Our prisons are full and overflowing with every kind of criminal except the ones who have systematically stolen billions of dollars; they always seem to get away with it. I understand how that happens when Republicans are in control; it's what their party is all about. But what good are the Democrats if they're playing the same games?

“Forgive me,” began Charles Ferguson, the director of Inside Job, while accepting his 2011 Oscar for best documentary. “I must start by pointing out that three years after a horrific financial crisis caused by massive fraud, not a single financial executive has gone to jail, and that’s wrong.”

The audience erupted in applause.

Ferguson isn’t the first to express outrage over the lack of criminal cases to spring from the financial crisis, and his speech triggered a wave of similarly prosecutorial sentiments, Bloomberg Businessweek reports in May 16 issue.

Since that February night, financial journalists, bloggers and who knows how many dinner party guests have debated the trillion-dollar question: When will a Wall Street executive be sent to jail?

There are those who have implied that prosecutors are either too cozy with Wall Street or too incompetent to bring cases to court.

Thus, in a measured piece that assessed the guilt of various financial executives, New York Times columnist Joe Nocera lamented that “Wall Street bigwigs whose firms took unconscionable risks... aren’t even on Justice’s radar screen.”

A news story in the Times about a mortgage executive who was convicted of criminal fraud observed, “The Justice Department has yet to bring charges against an executive who ran a major Wall Street firm leading up to the disaster.”

In the same dispassionate tone, National Public Radio’s All Things Considered chimed in, “Some of the most publicly reviled figures in the mortgage mess won’t face any public accounting.”

New York magazine saw fit to print the estimable opinion of Bernie Madoff, who observed that the dearth of criminal convictions is “unbelievable.” Rolling Stone, which has been beating this drum the longest and with the heaviest hand, reductively asked, Why isn’t Wall Street in jail?

Taken from the top, these sentiments imply that the financial crisis was caused by fraud; that people who take big risks should be subject to a criminal investigation; that executives of large financial firms should be criminal suspects after a crash; that public revulsion indicates likely culpability; that it is inconceivable (to Madoff, anyway) that people could lose so much money absent a conspiracy; and that Wall Street bears collective guilt for which a large part of it should be incarcerated.

The swinish Wall Street apologist who wrote the piece then goes on the claim that because there have been no criminal prosecutions, they were probably no crimes. That's part of the fabric of our political system. Those who aided and abetted the Nazis before, during and after World War II-- including J.P. Morgan, Rockefellers, Bushs, duPonts, Fords, the Dulles Brothers-- were never punished and went on to continue pushing dangerous, anti-American fascist agendas for decades unmolested. Those agendas are now, basically, the platform of the Republican Party. Big Business and Big Banks ripping off the public are part of the Republican platform as well.



UPDATE: Of Course, The Banksters Aren't ONLY Ripping Off Military Families

Anyone's family is a target for their greed and corruption. The Department of Housing and Urban Development’s inspector general examined Bank of America, JPMorgan Chase, Wells Fargo, Citigroup and Ally Financial and found them all to be defrauding taxpayers in their handling of foreclosures on homes purchased with government-backed loans.

The audits conclude that the banks effectively cheated taxpayers by presenting the Federal Housing Administration with false claims: They filed for federal reimbursement on foreclosed homes that sold for less than the outstanding loan balance using defective and faulty documents.

There's A Reason I'm Posting Two Doobie Brothers Videos On My Blog

The videos below are the title track and a new single, "Far From Home," from the newest Doobie Brother's album, World Gone Crazy and the two songs, taken together, pay respect to everyone trying to make their home payments and rent against all odds and predatory Wall Street's Banksters-- particularly military families. The Doobie Brothers aren't especially well known in liberal political circles as activists. If they have a cause they're front and center for, it's military families, not the military per se, but the families of our men and women struggling to keep it together while service members are away protecting the country's security. The fact that the struggle for those families has recently gotten much tougher through the machinations of greed-obsessed, out-of-control banksters has pissed off a lot of Americans, including the Doobies. More than 28% of U.S. homeowners owe more than their properties were worth and banksters have been illegally starting to foreclose of the homes of active duty servicemembers.

In the 1930s J.P. Morgan was a violent union-busting fascist with pro-Nazi sympathies and no one paying attention could have ever accused him of being a patriotic American. In 1933, along with fellow fascist Irénée du Pont, he helped finance an unsuccessful coup d'etat against Franklin Roosevelt. Today the bank named for him is one that routinely violates the Servicemembers Civil Relief Act, which made it illegal to foreclose on properties owned by active-duty military personnel. It's gotten worse since then but back in January it first started coming out that Wall Street banksters were looking at military families as potential prey.

JP Morgan Chase overcharged roughly 4,000 troops on their mortgage and improperly foreclosed on 14 of the families, a spokesperson for the bank said Monday.

Under the Servicemembers Civil Relief Act last amended in 2003, lenders can be required to lower mortgage rates for active-duty military personnel to 6% and cannot pursue a foreclosure, but according to the report, Chase was slow to make the change for many of the families, charging Marine Capt. Jonathan Rowles as much as 10% and hounding him with debt collection calls for as much as $15,000 in arrears, according to NBC news.

Last month USAToday made it clear that servicemembers deployed overseas are coming under increasing pressure from banksters trying to illegally foreclose on their homes. In March the NY Times reported on an inquiry into the scandal, which has been kept hush-hush to prevent Americans from lynching prominent Wall Street banksters.

The Justice Department is investigating allegations that a mortgage subsidiary of Morgan Stanley foreclosed on almost two dozen military families from 2006 to 2008 in violation of a longstanding law aimed at preventing such action.

A department spokeswoman confirmed on Friday that the Morgan Stanley unit, Saxon Mortgage Services, is one of several mortgage and lending companies being investigated by its civil rights division. The inquiry is focused on possible violations of a federal law that bars lenders from foreclosing on active-duty service members without a court hearing.

...Sergeant Hurley was one of the service members affected by a violation of the act. He returned from duty as a power generator mechanic in Iraq in December 2005 to find that Saxon had foreclosed on his riverside home outside Hartford, Mich., and sold it to someone else. He sued Saxon and two co-defendants, Orlans Associates, the law firm in Troy, Mich., that handled the foreclosure paperwork, and Deutsche Bank Trust Company Americas, the trustee for the mortgage involved in the foreclosure.

That the systematic fraud that banks and mortgage companies have subjected American homeowners to, has spared military families caught the attention of one of America's most classic rock'n'roll bands who have made the well-being of the country's military families their shared cause.

Tom Johnston, singer, guitarist and co-founder of the band, wrote "World Gone Crazy." He says "it's a story about a guy who grew up in the streets, pulled himself up and now has a government job. The place is New Orleans, the time is post Katrina and the lament is that he's hoping to make enough money to pay the rent so that the same government doesn't let his house get taken away. When you hear this song you hear a feel good tune but the lyrics are kind of dark and somehow the juxtaposition works. The message from this man's point of view is that although this is a world gone crazy, somehow I am going to win and make a living and the hope is that life will be good again."

Stopping Illegal Foreclosures By Banksters

God damn YouTube removed my favorite video of all the ones I ever made, a simple slide show for Mojo Nixon's classic, I Hate Banks. Marsoupeel, who did the version above, didn't get quite as worked up with his version as I did when Mojo sings a couple of his most bloodthirsty classic lines:

Well I hate banks
Just can't stand 'em
Gimme a shovel and, man, I'll plant 'em
Six feet under
That's where they belong
I hate banks is the same of the song

...Financial institutions
Think they're so high falutin'
Just a buncha fruits in three-piece suits
Tryin' to steal all my loot

...Steal from the poor and give to the rich
I want to make a bank president twitch in a ditch...

Gotta have a trial first though. We can't condone vigilante justice, even if banksters are, by having their paid thugs break into peoples' houses. And that brings us to H.R. 3808, the Interstate Recognition of Notarizations Act of 2009, which looks like it's going to be Obama's first veto! Yesterday Dan Pfeiffer explained on the White House blog why the President has decided not to sign it:

Today, the White House announced that President Obama will not sign H.R. 3808, the Interstate Recognition of Notarizations Act of 2010, and will return the bill to the House of Representatives. The Interstate Recognition of Notarizations Act of 2010 was designed to remove impediments to interstate commerce. While we share this goal, we believe it is necessary to have further deliberations about the intended and unintended impact of this bill on consumer protections, including those for mortgages, before this bill can be finalized.

Notarizations are important for a large range of documents, including financial documents. As the President has made clear, consumer financial protections are incredibly important, and he has made this one of his top priorities, including signing into law the strongest consumer protections in history in the Wall Street Reform and Consumer Protection Act. That is why we need to think through the intended and unintended consequences of this bill on consumer protections, especially in light of the recent developments with mortgage processors.

The authors of this bill no doubt had the best intentions in mind when trying to remove impediments to interstate commerce. We will work with them and other leaders in Congress to explore the best ways to achieve this goal going forward.

The problem is foreclosure "fraud factories" that are making it possible for banksters to trick people out of their homes. The worry is that the bill could make it more difficult for homeowners to fight fraudulent foreclosures. Yesterday both John Conyers and Pat Leahy announced that they agree with the veto. Conyers: "I support the President’s decision not to sign the Interstate Recognition of Notarizations Act of 2009. Although I believe the bill was originally well intentioned, I now believe this issue requires more careful review and discussion before the law is changed. There is substantial concern that this legislation may exacerbate the problems we are seeing with improprieties in the foreclosure documents being processed by mortgage lenders. We have not held a hearing on this matter since 2006 and I think it is worth our time to take another look at this issue before we consider legislation to ensure it does not harm consumers. At a time when three of the nation’s largest mortgage companies-- Ally Financial, JP Morgan Chase, and Bank of America-- have suspended legal proceedings in 23 states due to document flaws, we need to be very careful not to pass legislation that could allow increased deficiencies."

Meanwhile, Rep. Alan Grayson is keeping the pressure up-- high. He sent the following letter to Geithner and the other members of the new Financial Stability Oversight Council calling for a foreclosure freeze pending an investigation into the systemic implications of foreclosure fraud. Remember, when lenders-- many of whom are now out of business-- originally lent money to borrowers, they often did so knowing that the terms of the loans could not possibly be honored. They sought fees-- which were tied to bonus schedules-- not repayment as part of a long-term, responsible business model. These lenders put people in predatory loans, induced massive amounts of fraud, and Wall Street banks misrepresented the loans to investors when they moved through the securitization chain. They were stealing money from investors, and from homeowners. They belong in prison.

Dear Secretary Geithner and members of the Financial Stability Oversight Council (FSOC),

The FSOC is tasked with ensuring the financial stability of the United States, which includes identifying and addressing possible systemic risks. There is a well-documented wave of foreclosure fraud sweeping the country that presents such a risk. Bank of America and JP Morgan Chase have both suspended foreclosures in 23 states where that fraud could be uncovered and stopped by the courts. Connecticut has suspended foreclosures.

I write to encourage the FSOC to appoint an emergency task force on foreclosure fraud as a potential systemic risk. I am also writing to ask the members of the FSOC to use their regulatory authority to impose a foreclosure moratorium on all mortgages originated and securitized between 2005-2008, until this task force is able to understand and mitigate the systemic risk posed by the foreclosure fraud crisis.

So far, banks are claiming that the many forged documents uncovered by courts and attorneys represent a simple 'technical problem' with foreclosure processes. This is not true. What is happening is fraud to cover up fraud.

The mortgage lending boom saw the proliferation of predatory lending and mortgage fraud, what the FBI called at the time 'an epidemic of mortgage fraud.' Much of this was lender-induced.

When lenders-- many of whom are now out of business-- originally lent money to borrowers, they often did so knowing that the terms of the loans could not possibly be honored. They sought fees, not repayment. These lenders put people in predatory loans, they induced massive amounts of fraud, and Wall Street banks misrepresented these loans to investors when they moved through the securitization chain. They were stealing money from investors, and from homeowners.

Obviously these originators and servicers didn't keep good records of who owed what to whom because the point was never about getting paid back, it was about moving as much loan volume as possible as quickly and as cheaply as possible. The banks didn't keep good records, and there is good reason to believe in many if not virtually all cases during this period, failed to transfer the notes, which is the borrower IOUs in accordance with the requirements of their own pooling and servicing agreements. As a result, the notes may be put out of eligibility for the trust under New York law, which governs these securitizations. Potential cures for the note may, according to certain legal experts, be contrary to IRS rules governing REMICs. As a result, loan servicers and trusts simply lack standing to foreclose. The remedy has been foreclosure fraud, including the widespread fabrication of documents.

There are now trillions of dollars of securitizations of these loans in the hands of investors. The trusts holding these loans are in a legal gray area, as the mortgage titles were never officially transferred to the trusts. The result of this is foreclosure fraud on a massive scale, including foreclosures on people without mortgages or who are on time with their payments.

The liability here for the major banks is potentially enormous, and can lead to a systemic risk. Fortunately, the Dodd-Frank financial reform legislation includes a resolution process for these banks. More importantly, these foreclosures are devastating neighborhoods, families, and cities all over the country. Each foreclosure costs tens of thousands of dollars to a municipality, lowers property values, and makes bank failures more likely.

I appreciate your willingness to assess possible systemic risks to the country, and would again encourage you to suspend foreclosures until this problem is understood and its ramifications dealt with.

This is when it really counts having someone like Grayson in office.

It's not as good as making them twitch in a ditch, but the FDIC is making noises about seeking $1 billion from failed or crooked banksters. I'll believe it when I see it.

The Federal Deposit Insurance Corp. has authorized lawsuits against more than 50 officers and directors of failed banks as the agency aims to recoup more than $1 billion in losses stemming from the credit crisis.

The lawsuits were authorized during closed sessions of the FDIC board and haven’t been made public. The agency, which has shuttered 294 lenders since the start of 2008, has held off court action while conducting settlement talks with executives whose actions may have led to bank collapses, Richard Osterman, the FDIC’s acting general counsel, said in an interview.

... The recently authorized lawsuits, if filed by the agency and not settled, would claim damages of more than $1 billion, according to FDIC spokesman David Barr. Osterman said the goal is to reach as many settlements as possible.

“It’s in both our interest and theirs to try and settle this matter before it gets into the court and we get into expensive litigation,” he said.

If the savings-and-loan crisis is any guide, more lawsuits are coming. During that period, the FDIC sued executives from more than 24 percent of the 1,813 lenders that failed.

“The process went on 20 years ago and is happening again now,” Thomas Vartanian, a partner at law firm Dechert LLP in Washington, said in an interview. “This is the way it’s going to go over the next few years as they catch up with doing these investigations and doing claims.”

FDIC Chairman Sheila Bair has said 2010 will be the peak year for failures, and the agency’s list of so-called problem lenders suggests banks will keep collapsing at an accelerated rate in coming months. The confidential list had 829 banks with $403 billion in assets at the end of the second quarter.

Ahhh... So THAT'S Why They Call Him Taliban Dan!

See, it wasn't just because of the schmatta on his head; Daniel Webster actually takes anti-women teachings from the bizarre cult he belongs to and tries turning that poison into laws for normal people... just like the Taliban does. Webster is still refusing to sit down and tell the people of central Florida about his relationship with the radical millionaire preacher, Bill Gothard, whose anti-women/anti-gay screed he follows with such devotion. Taliban Dan may look silly, but he's a real danger to American families.



And while Webster is attempting to bring his medieval beliefs into the lawmaking process again, Alan Grayson is fighting the big banks-- which, of course, are helping to fund Webster's campaign-- and trying to stop them from illegally foreclosing on Florida homeowners. The latest twist in this tragedy, as Digby pointed out yesterday afternoon, has banksters hiring thugs to break into peoples' homes. The first prominent national voice on this scandal was Grayson, who has been able to pressure the Florida Attorney General's office to start cracking down on illegal foreclosures. This morning Grayson issued this statement:

"First we see systemic fraud in the foreclosure process. Now we're literally seeing banks breaking into people’s homes and terrifying homeowners. The big banks claim these confrontations are a result of innocent errors. Come on! How many times are we going to force a woman to cower in her bathroom for fifteen minutes and dial 911 while a man breaks into a home, before we do something about it?

Breaking and entering does not become legal just because a big bank does it. The rule of law must apply equally to everyone. It's long past time to halt this blatantly illegal activity. We need investigation and law enforcement, not coddling of failed institutions. We need justice for all."

This is the kind of thing that has infuriated Grayson and moved him into action:

A contractor for JPMorgan Chase changed the front door lock on a woman's home in Orange County, Florida, as she hid out of fear in her bathroom, Eyewitness News reports. The woman, Nancy Jacobini, was reportedly three months behind on her mortgage and her home was reportedly in foreclosure, but, according to Eyewitness News, the bank isn't legally allowed to change the locks on an occupied home.

The lock-changing strategy is intended to protect a property's value, since owners experiencing foreclosure often abandon their homes, leaving them vulnerable, notes Sarasota's Herald Tribune. To Jacobini, the bank representative seemed like an intruder, and she called the police.

"I'm locked in my bathroom," she said on a 911 call. "Somebody broke into my house!"

And her house was not in foreclosure after all. It was a mistake. That could have been your mother or sister or grandmother or daughter cowering in the bathroom, desperately calling 911. It really is past time for some of these bank presidents to-- in lieu of Mojo Nixon's solution-- go to prison.

Will Taliban Dan Protect Florida Families From Illegal Foreclosures? Does He Even Know What They Are?

 

Last week we learned that, under intense pressure from Congressman Alan Grayson and other determined congressional and executive watchdogs, Bank of America decided to join banksters JPMorgan Chase and GMAC in suspending foreclosure processes in 23 states that "weren't reviewed properly." How many illegal foreclosures have already forced families out of their homes? It's why Marcy Kaptur (D-OH), early in 2009, told her constituents to stay put in their homes if some crooked bankster tried to force them out.

In the video above, Rep. Grayson explains, in layman's terms-- and with horrifying details-- what kind of unconscionable fraud the banks have been up to. Even the staid old NY Times has taken note of the scandal this week.

The foreclosure machinery that has forced millions of Americans out of their homes is beginning to seize up as some lenders and their lawyers are accused of cutting corners in their pursuit of rapid home repossessions.

Evictions are expected to slow sharply, housing analysts said, as state and national law enforcement officials shine a light on questionable foreclosure methods revealed by two of the country’s biggest home lenders in the last two weeks.

Even lenders with no known problems are expected to approach defaulting homeowners more cautiously and look more aggressively for resolutions short of outright eviction.

Despite the turmoil, some economists said the breakdown could ultimately lay the groundwork for a real estate recovery.

Stricken neighborhoods across the country, for example, could benefit. One big factor undermining home sales is fear of a large number of foreclosed homes coming to the market. If the foreclosures are delayed or never happen, housing prices might find a floor.

...As more defaulting homeowners become aware of the lenders’ problems, they are expected to hire lawyers and challenge the proceedings against them. And if completed foreclosures were not properly done, families who bought the troubled homes could be vulnerable to claims by the former owners.

Apparently alarmed about such a possibility, one of the major title insurance companies, Old Republic National Title, has sent a bulletin to agents saying that “until further notice” it would not insure title to properties foreclosed upon by GMAC Mortgage, the country’s fourth-largest home lender and one of the two big lenders at the center of the current controversy.

GMAC declined to comment, and Old Republic representatives did not return calls.

GMAC has acknowledged legal missteps in processing mortgages, and JPMorgan Chase has acknowledged the possibility of missteps, and both have suspended all foreclosures in the 23 states where they need a court’s approval. That’s 56,000 in the case of Chase alone; GMAC declined to provide a number.

Attorneys general in half a dozen states are demanding action or opening investigations. The Treasury Department said Thursday it was asking regulators to look into “these troubling developments.”

“We’re seeing a fundamental breakdown in the system, because no one cared that much about getting things right,” said Representative Alan Grayson, a Democrat of Florida, who unsuccessfully asked the Florida Supreme Court to halt all foreclosures in that state.

Grayson, of course, was maligned and viciously slandered again and again by Fox News for having the temerity to interfere. However, after Grayson got Florida to act, other states did likewise. Friday Connecticut Attorney General Richard Blumenthal ordered a moratorium on all foreclosures by all banks for two months and California Attorney General Jerry Brown ordered J.P. Morgan to prove it is following the law before it continues foreclosures in California.

[I]n Connecticut, Blumenthal said in a statement that he is investigating J.P. Morgan Chase and Ally, formerly GMAC, which is the recipient of a $17 billion federal bailout and majority-owned by the U.S. Treasury, as well as other lenders.

He said the actions of J.P. Morgan and Ally are a "possible fraud on the court undermining the integrity of the legal process and consumers' ability to fight foreclosures.

"This freeze should stop a foreclosure steamroller based on defective documents and enable effective remedies," Blumenthal said.

It's worth noting that Michael Moore, in a kind of open letter to the fractured and bumbling Democrats, laying out a roadmap for salvaging the midterms and turning them into a landslide victory instead of what pundits are predicting, calls for just this kind of action in the 3rd of 5 suggestions:

3. Announce a Moratorium on All Family Home Foreclosures.
Last month (August) there were more home foreclosures than in any month in U.S. history. Worse than any month in the worst year ever, 2009. The bleeding hasn't stopped-- it's only gotten worse. And now, this week, two of the largest crime organizations who are throwing hundreds of thousands of people out of their homes (GMAC and JPMorgan Chase) have been forced to momentarily stop doing this. It turns out, they don't really have the paperwork to prove they actually own these houses! It's madness. So if you do one thing for the middle class this week, do this. It will take an hour of your time to draw up the decree and issue it. We'd rather watch It's a Wonderful Life than Poltergeist.

Obviously, with corporate shills like Steny Hoyer and his collection of mangy, bribe-hungry Blue Dogs, having so much say in the Democratic Party, this is never going to happen. It's Sunday, a very good time to get Grayson's back; he about all we've got standing between us and what Frank Rich referred to today as "the billionaires and corporate interests that have been steadily annexing the Tea Party movement and busily plotting to cash in their chips if the G.O.P. prevails... Wall Street potentates and corporate titans."


UPDATE: Of course there's a simpler way of dealing with this... as Donald Duck can easily explain:

Raúl Grijalva Discusses The Right-To-Rent Bill With Blue America

On June 30th we hosted Rep. Raúl Grijalva (D-AZ) over at C&L for an open ended discussion that started with the immigration reform debate. Rep. Grijalva has graciously agreed to keep us up to date on what's going on in Congress and in the Progressive Caucus he chairs once a month. He'll be visiting with us again today (in the C&L comments forum) and I've asked him to talk with us about a new bill he and Marcy Kaptur introduced in April, the Right-To-Rent Act, H.R. 5028. The Obama Administration's somewhat tepid HAMP program isn't working and millions of families are still facing foreclosures by avaricious bankers. Rep. Grijalva's bill would let foreclosed families stay in their homes as renters at a fair market rate set by a judge. If banks don't want to become landlords, they would have incentives to renegotiate the terms of the mortgage. The foreclosure crisis needs exactly this kind of creative, common-sense solution, and the Congressman has been out in front on this issue from the beginning. Dean Baker's Center for Economic and Policy Research called the bill "one of the most efficient and simple ways to help millions of families facing foreclosure remain in their homes."

It would increase the bargaining power and security of homeowners by temporarily changing the rules on foreclosure and allowing homeowners to remain in their homes as renters for a substantial period or time.  During this time, homeowners would pay the market rent for the home as determined by an independent assessment.

"Right to Rent immediately gives the homeowner security in their home. They will be allowed to stay there for a substantial period of time, allowing their children to stay in their schools and families to prepare for and plan their future moves," said Baker in his testimony on Wednesday. "Right to Rent also would make foreclosure much less attractive to investors. This gives investors more incentive to modify loans on their own, without the involvement of the government."

The GOP is going after Congressman Grijalva's seat like they never have before. They're trying to stir up divisiveness based on the immigration issue in his southern Arizona district. Blue America has a donation page specifically for his campaign One America and we're hoping you'll visit and leave a little token of your appreciation for his leadership and courage. There's an alternative though-- a memorabilia auction on eBay! We love all of these items, but are particularly fond of the “doodles.” No two are ever alike, and the two that we are auctioning are particularly exceptional, both for their intricate detail (look for the faces and eyes!), as well as for the setting in which they were drawn (Natural Resources Committee hearings concerning Deepwater Horizon).

Check them out!

Our favorites are the CLEAR Act Markup "Doodle” and the Deepwater Horizon & MMS Hearing "Doodle”. There's also a high quality, union made, perfectly tacky Grijalva bowling shirt and a couple of exceptionally cool bumper stickers.

Will The Foreclosure Crisis Turn Into A New HGTV Program?

Timothy Egan's OpEd in Wednesday's NY Times, Slumburbia focuses in on one specific "foreclosure alley" in Northern California, Lathrop in the San Joaquin Valley, an area where local political shysters-- former and possibly future Congressman Dick Pombo calls immediately to mind-- have been in cahoots with unregulated, greed obsessed developers all through the disastrous Bush bubble years. But Egan could have been just as easily been talking about the Inland Empire in Southern California or about the housing crisis in Arizona, Nevada, or, worst of all, Florida. Egan is the author of The Worst Hard Time which won a National Book Award for his recounting of the history of the Dust Bowl; he knows what he's talking about. In fact, if it was government-encouraged over planting of crops in the Great Plains states during World War I that laid the groundwork for the Great Dust Bowl, it was government encouragement of over-planting of suburbs that laid the groundwork for the Great Recession. Ironically, many of those families worst hit by the Dust Bowl in Oklahoma, Iowa, Texas and Kansas fled to California and Florida where their grandchildren are among the hardest hit victims of the housing crisis. Egan points to the calamity these people are going through as "what happens when people gamble with houses instead of casino chips."

Dirty flags advertise rock-bottom discounts on empty starter mansions. On the ground, foreclosure signs are tagged with gang graffiti. Empty lots are untended, cratered with mud puddles from the winter storms that have hammered California’s San Joaquin Valley.

Nobody is home in the cities of the future.

In a decade, they saw real property defy reality in real time in these insta-neighborhoods that sprouted in what had been some of the world’s most productive farmland.

In places like Lathrop, Manteca and Tracy, population nearly doubled in 10 years, and home prices tripled. After inhaling all this real estate helium, some developers and their apologists in urban planning circles hailed the boom as the new America at the far exurban fringe. Every citizen a homeowner! Half-acre lots for all! No credit, no problem!

Others saw it as the residential embodiment of the Edward Abbey line that “growth for the sake of growth is the ideology of the cancer cell.”

Now median home prices have fallen from $500,000 to $150,000-- among the most precipitous drops in the nation-- and still the houses sit empty, spooky and see-through, waiting on demography and psychology to catch up.

In strip malls where tenants seem to last no longer than the life cycle of a gold fish, the bottom-feeders have moved in. “Coming soon: Cigarette City,” reads one sign here in Lathrop, near a “Cash Advance” outlet.

Take a pulse: How can a community possibly be healthy when one in eight houses are in some stage of foreclosure? How can a town attract new people when the crime rate has spiked well above the national average? How can a family dream, or even save, when unemployment hovers around 16 percent?

In the last year a record 2.8 million homes received foreclosure notices and something like 5 million homeowners are "underwater" on their mortgages. When these people walk away these insta-suburbs there is every chance that they are condemning them to turn into insta-slums.


A year ago, when the House passed the Helping Families Save Their Homes Act not a single California Republican-- not even those representing the districts with the worst avalanches of foreclosures-- voted for the bill-- a bill specifically designed to keep families in their homes. In some cases the districts are so reflexively reactionary that the gamble that it won't matter will probably pay off-- like for lunatic fringe reactionaries like George Radanovich, Jerry Lewis and Devin Nunes. But several Republican obstructionists in California may well have just sealed their electoral fates by sticking with the banksters and abandoning their own constituents. And in none of these districts can they put forward the Republican claim that only African-Americans get foreclosed on; in these districts it's almost all white people who are losing their homes, often because African-Americans have been carefully gerrymandered out of the districts!

The worst hit district in California is CA-03 way up north, very close to Tim Egan's "foreclosure alley." Only 4% of the population is black. The district has the 15th highest foreclosure rate in America, nearly 18,000 families out on the streets, and their representative is one of California's craziest extremists, Dan Lungren. With ZERO help from the DCCC, he came close to defeat in 2008 (he was re-elected with 50% of the vote, while Obama and McCain were tied). Another far right ideologue who was nearly defeated by a political unknown at that time is the GOP's corrupt screwball Ken Calvert in CA-44, the 21st hardest hit district in America (second worst in California), with 16,043 foreclosures so far and 53,411 projected over the next 4 years. Obama beat McCain in the formerly solid-red Inland Empire district and Calvert's winning percentage was 52%. The guy who nearly beat him, Bill Hedrick is running again-- and this time is very likely to win. Polling this week shows that most people in the district think it's time for Calvert to go. The district is 5.5% African-American, so the Republican racist mantra about who gets foreclosed on won't fly there either.

This afternoon Hedrick talked with me about how devastated the inland California home market has been by multiple financial shocks. "And much like our renowned earthquakes," he pointed out, "the reverberations continue to ripple through our towns and cities forcing more and more residents into foreclosure through a brutal 'shakedown.' If the earth slips, it is an 'act of God.'  The financial and government elites have acted as if the mortgage ‘shakedown' should also be laid at the Lord’s feet-- rather than hung around the necks of the predators who provoked the crash in residential values.

"Residents of the 44th Congressional District and across the inland valleys were not infected by greed. They were, however, afflicted by the scourge of an unregulated financial sector, predatory lenders collecting huge fees for pushing risky loans, and adjustable rates predicated on an ever-rising market value. Now, the combination of depressed values and bailed out banks that refuse to lend or modify loans, leave homeowners hanging by a prayer and in need of substantive mortgage relief. 

"Our nation has rightly rushed to aid quake-ravaged Haiti. In Riverside County and inland California, hard pressed working families need help to dig from the financial rubble left from the economic tremors caused, not by God, but a lawless lending industry. We cannot wait any longer."

Replacing Calvert with Hedrick in November will certainly help but, meanwhile, I wonder if Obama can trap the GOP into helping families caught up in the foreclosure crisis the same way he's "managing" to trap them in regard to health care.

The Daily Show With Jon Stewart	Mon - Thurs 11p / 10c
The Apparent Trap
www.thedailyshow.com
Daily Show Full Episodes Political Humor Health Care Crisis

Why Did Jane Harman And So Many Other Corporate Shills Flip Flop And Vote Against Foreclosure Reform?

Jane Harman represents the status quo

Funny that Obama was willing to posture against the Wall Street banksters and their nefarious lobbyists in his radio address this morning, but stopped short at going after the shamelessly corrupt Democrats who weakened the bill so badly and the 27 who voted with the Republicans against it.

While applauding House passage Friday of overhaul legislation and urging quick Senate action, Obama expressed frustration with banks that were helped by a taxpayer bailout and now are "fighting tooth and nail with their lobbyists" against new government controls... The president also told CBS' 60 Minutes that "the people on Wall Street still don't get it. ... They're still puzzled why it is that people are mad at the banks. Well, let's see. You guys are drawing down $10, $20 million bonuses after America went through the worst economic year ... in decades and you guys caused the problem," Obama said in an excerpt released in advance of Sunday night's broadcast of his interview.

...No House Republicans voted for the bill, and 27 Democrats voted against it. Opponents argue that the broad legislation overreaches and would institutionalize bailouts for the financial industry.

The Senate, Housing and Urban Affairs Committee is working on its own version of the package.
In his address, Obama contended that the worst economic downturn since the Depression wouldn't have happened if the rules governing Wall Street been clearer and enforcement tougher.

Obama singled out Republicans and industry lobbyists for trying to block the changes.

Last week, top House Republicans urged more than 100 financial industry lobbyists to work harder to defeat the bill. Lobbyists have spent more than $300 million this year trying to scuttle the bill.

As we reported over the course of Thursday and yesterday, the House passed, 223-202-- without a single Republican vote-- a package of reforms to prevent the kinds of abuses that would have inevitably led to another Wall Street meltdown. A coalition of corrupt, conservative Democrats in thrall to the banking industry, primarily Blue Dogs, formed a coalition with the Republicans to water down the legislation significantly. And one of their most insidious accomplishments was their ability to strip "cramdown" out of the bill entirely.

Cramdown (the Helping Families Save Their Homes Act of 2009 had passed the House last March-- only to be defeated a month later in what Dick Durbin famously called the bank-owned Senate. A dozen conservative Democrats like Blanche Lincoln, Mark Pryor, Arlen Specter, Mary Landrieu, Tom Carper and, of course, Ben Nelson had joined with the entire GOP to defeat the Obama-backed House legislation that was meant to allow bankruptcy court judges to reset some mortgage terms to help families save their homes from foreclosure. At the time of the House vote we tried to show why even some Republicans in foreclosure-plagued districts broke ranks with their party's obstructionist leadership to vote for the bill. Joined by unlikely new convert Ron Paul, three of them were still onboard Friday, Ileana Ros-Lehtinen (R-FL), Walter Jones (R-NC) and Mike Turner (R-OH), one of 9 co-sponsors of the amendment. Mario Diaz-Balart was back to his comfort zone/default position of rubber stamping GOP leadership decisions, while his brother Lincoln ducked the vote altogether. Mike Castle (R-DE), now in a tough race for the GOP nomination for an open Senate seat in Delaware-- and under attack by teabaggers for being too "moderate"-- flip-flopped, and voted against the provision this time.

Among the Democrats my first surprise came that the amendment was actually introduced by arch-Blue Dog Jim Marshall of Georgia. True, his own constituents have been catastrophically hit by mortgage foreclosures but he rarely lets little things like that get in his way of opposing the aspirations of working families. This time he actually sounded almost as much like a Democrat as his two colleagues who pushed it most aggressively, progressives John Conyers and Zoe Lofgren. Marshall:

“This amendment strikes an appropriate balance that is good for debtors, creditors, taxpayers, financial institutions along with all of the innocent homeowners that have been dragged into this mess. And it will not increase the future cost of home credit. It’s a rare win, win, win.

Lofgren sounded a more populist note by pointing out that "the only people who have not been helped in this economic crisis are homeowners. This legislation would finally give American homeowners the same protection that large corporations enjoy.” But, predictably is was Conyers who gave voice to the full scope of why America needs this legislation:

“Over the past three years, millions of Americans have lost their homes through foreclosure and millions more are at risk of losing their homes. Relying solely on taxpayer-financed incentives to encourage the lending industry to voluntarily resolve our nation’s foreclosure crisis has proven to be woefully inadequate. Thankfully there is an answer. Today, several of my colleagues and I have introduced an amendment to H.R. 4173, the “Wall Street Reform and Consumer Protection Act of 2009,” that will give American families facing foreclosure a critical lifeline by which to save their homes. Our amendment-- which won’t cost taxpayers a single penny-- will allow a homeowner under the supervision of a bankruptcy judge to extend a mortgage’s repayment term; reduce excessive high interest rates and exorbitant hidden fees; and, under certain limited circumstances, allow the principal amount of the mortgage to be adjusted to the home’s fair market value.

Our amendment rectifies an anomaly in current law that allows virtually every other type of secured obligation to be modified, except for home mortgages. Most importantly, my amendment will help stop the endless cycle of foreclosures that lead to abandoned homes in communities across our nation and that, in turn, cause neighborhood property values and tax revenues to further decline. I am hopeful that passing this amendment will send the signal that the House feels strongly that this provision must be passed into law to help resolve the ongoing mortgage crisis.”

Alas, though, in March only 24 conservative Democrats voted with the GOP against working families, Yesterday it was a staggering 71! Let's look at one particularly slimy flip-flopper: California Blue Dog Jane Harman.

Harman, through a marriage to a rich, elderly industrialist, is one of the two or three wealthiest members of Congress. Her Los Angeles district, CA-36, includes some very wealthy neighborhoods-- and some very poor ones. There have been 7,526 foreclosures so far and it is estimated that within the next 4 years that number will rise to 25,053. Yesterday, on the same day she joined the Republicans to vote against mortgage reform, Harman-- who is in a battle of political survival with grassroots reformer Marcy Winograd-- sent this expression of compassion and faux empathy to her constituents:

I am well aware of the anxiety many constituents feel when out of work and unable to find a job. There’s the scramble to cover the month’s rent, provide food and make tuition or car payments-- and for some, feelings of depression and questions of self worth. There are currently 2.3 million jobless Californians-- 620,000 in Los Angeles County-- more than at any time in the past three decades. Getting people back to work is urgent-- and vital if what is at present only an “asset” recovery is to become a true economic recovery.

Recall where the economy was at the start of this year: foreclosures were at record levels, bank lending was frozen, and nearly $10 trillion in wealth had been lost as the stock market spiraled out of control. In just three months, 2 million Americans lost their jobs.

While some economic indicators are improving, South Bay residents have certainly felt the pinch. Trade at the Ports of LA and Long Beach is down 21 percent, idling 20,000 longshore workers, truckers and warehouse workers. And across the board, our local communities have seen unemployment rates shoot dramatically upwards.

...Though it wasn’t the only cause of the economic crisis, inadequate financial regulation also contributed to the problem. This week the House voted on H.R. 4173, the Wall Street Reform and Consumer Protection Act, which is intended to overhaul the financial regulatory system. For the first time, credit default swaps will be regulated, many predatory lending practices will be outlawed and credit rating agencies will be held accountable. The government will increase the reserves big banks must set aside, monitor firms that are so large and interconnected that their collapse would endanger the financial system and establish a process for reorganizing and dismantling failing institutions. These changes are critical safeguards against the kind of irresponsible business practices that helped trigger the credit crisis. This legislation also establishes a new federal consumer agency, which to me is problematic. I worry that another government reorganization will not work.

She forgot to mention that she voted against the "cramdown" legislation that Obama said he needed to address the predatory mortgage abuses. But she did tell voters that she has a jobs bulletin board on her website and that if you can't find work you can always volunteer for something!

I managed to track down Marcy Winograd this morning and ask her if she would be a different kind of representative for the South Bay than Harman. (I admit that I have an idea that she will be but I wanted to hear it in her own words.)

We want representatives who truly represent us, working men and women-- not Wall Street or million-dollar CEOs spending weekends on their yachts. Once again, however, my Blue Dog opponent, who also voted for the mean-spirited bankruptcy bill, sides with big corporations against the people of our district. While thousands of homeowners from West Los Angeles to San Pedro face foreclosure, not only on their home but of the American Dream, Harman votes to slam the door in their face, to essentially kick them out of their living room. Why should banks receive billions in bail-out money, refuse to renegotiate home loans, and then get a pass in bankruptcy court? In Congress I will work to strengthen the Progressive Caucus, to work with progressive caucuses in each state party, so that together we can create the political will to successfully reintroduce the amendment.   I want to ensure working families, the American middle class, can renegotiate their home loans to enjoy a stable and secure future in their living room.

Everything Marcy has done in her life leads me to believe that that statement represents the kind of congressmember she will be-- way up at the top of the foodchain with principled and effective fighters like Alan Grayson, Donna Edwards, Dennis Kucinich, Jerry Nadler, Raul Grijalva and Barbara Lee. That's why I never hesitate in asking DWT readers to go to the Bad Dogs page and donate to Marcy's grassroots campaign to dislodge the most beatable Blue Dog in California.

How Serious Are Kentucky Republicans About Health care Reform?

Jim Bunning (R-KY), poor thing, looked so very, very old today, snoozing away at the Senate health care debate. It doesn't matter; he hasn't had anything constructive to say in half a dozen years. But his loud snoring was bothering other members who were actually trying to get something done. Funny thing about Kentucky; it's one of the hardest hit states economically-- last Saturday we looked at KY-05, the second poorest district in the U.S. and how it's congressman, Republican Hal Rogers, is helping obstruct meaningful health care reform-- and yet both senators from there are adamantly opposed, and aggressively so, to any of the proposals that would benefit ordinary Kentucky working families. This is especially chilling when you consider that:

• 21 percent of children in Kentucky are obese.

• 22 percent of women over the age of 50 in Kentucky have not received a mammogram in the past two years.

• 36 percent of men over the age of 50 in Kentucky have never had a colorectal cancer screening.

Perhaps that goes a ways towards explaining why both McConnell and Bunning have such abysmal approval ratings from their constituents, 17% of whom report not visiting a doctor due to high costs.

And, remember, the whole state isn't Hal Rogers' poverty-stricken. While KY-05 has a 22% rate of uninsured people, Kentucky's as a whole is "just" 16.1%. According to HealthReform.gov, "the number of uninsured in Kentucky has increased from 458,000 in 2001 to 682,000 in 2008," a real catastrophe for a state that voted overwhelmingly for George Bush in 2000 and 2004 and for McConnell and Bunning at every opportunity. "The percent of non-elderly adults without insurance increased from 14.6% to 21.6%. And this number only considers people who are uninsured for an entire year-- it does not include people in Kentucky who have more recently lost coverage through the recession, or who had shorter gaps in their coverage." That's probably a very significant number. And meanwhile, "the percentage of people with employer-based coverage decreased from 71.3% of the population in 2001 to 63.5% in 2008... "and the proportion of workers from Kentucky without insurance has increased, from 13.2% in 2001 to 19.4% in 2008." These figures includes more than just poor people and more than just a rapidly growing number of middle class individuals. "An additional 22,000 people from high-income households are now uninsured."

The health care reform bills that Bunning and McConnell are threatening to filibuster to death-- the one that put Bunning so soundly to sleep yesterday-- would be far more beneficial to Kentuckians than to most people. First of all, it means lower costs for the state's residents-- not that either McConnell or Bunning gives a hoot about that; both live Inside the Beltway world of make believe and both have the best government-administered health care plan available-- although not available to Kentuckians.

• Ending the Hidden Tax-- Saving You Money: Right now, providers in Kentucky lose over $1.0 billion in bad debt which often gets passed along to families in the form of a hidden premium “tax." Health insurance reform will tackle this financial burden by improving our health care system and covering the uninsured, allowing the 104 hospitals and the 11,318 physicians in Kentucky to better care for their patients.

• Health Insurance Premium Relief: Premiums for residents of Kentucky have risen 61% since 2000. Through health insurance reform, 621,300 to 692,400 middle class Kentucky residents will be eligible for premium credits to ease the burden of these high costs.

• Strengthening Small Businesses: 55,229 employers in Kentucky are small businesses.  With tax credits and a health insurance exchange where they can shop for health plans, insurance coverage will become more affordable for them.

• Reforms that Reduce Your Costs: Under health insurance reform, insurance companies will be prevented from placing annual or lifetime caps on the coverage you receive.  Insurance companies will also have to abide by yearly limits on how much they can charge for out-of-pocket expenses, helping 45,900 households in Kentucky struggling under the burden of high health care expenses.

• Insurance Stability and Security: Health insurance reform will strengthen our system of employer-based health insurance, with an additional 41,200 people in Kentucky potentially getting insurance through their work. Health insurance reform will also ensure that you will always have guaranteed choices of quality, affordable health insurance if you lose your job, switch jobs, move or get sick.

• Eliminating Discrimination for Pre-Existing Conditions, Health Status or Gender: 10% of people in Kentucky have diabetes, and 30% have high blood pressure-- two conditions that insurance companies could use as a reason to deny you health insurance. Health insurance reform will prevent insurance companies from denying coverage based on your health, and it will end discrimination that charges you more if you’re sick or a woman.

• One-Stop Shopping-- Putting Families in Charge: With the new health insurance exchange, you can easily and simply compare insurance prices and health plans and decide which quality affordable option is right for you and your family. These proposals will help the 604,900 residents of Kentucky who currently do not have health insurance to obtain needed coverage, and it will also help the 171,900 Kentucky residents who currently purchase insurance in the individual insurance market.
 
• Guaranteeing Choices: The largest health insurer in Kentucky holds 51% of the market, which limits the choices that you have for finding coverage. With a competitive public insurance option, you will have more choices and increased competition that holds insurance companies accountable.

• Preventive Care for Better Health: 36% of Kentucky residents have not had a colorectal cancer screening, and 22% of women have not had a mammogram in the past 2 years. By requiring health plans to cover preventive services for everyone, investing in prevention and wellness, and promoting primary care, health insurance reform will work to create a system that prevents illness and disease instead of just treating it when it’s too late and costs more.

• Improving Care for Children and Seniors: 22% of children in Kentucky have not visited a dentist in the past year, and 27% of seniors did not receive a flu vaccine. Health reform will ensure coverage for kids’ dental, vision, and hearing needs, and will promote quality coverage for America’s seniors, including recommended immunizations.

Kentucky Republicans have a history of voting against their constituents interests to please the special interests that fund their campaigns. Let's take a look at the state's six congressional districts' home foreclosure rates over the next four years.

KY-01, the south-central and western part of the state (Ed Whitfield, R)- 6,883 foreclosures
KY-02, the center of the state south of Louisville (Brett Guthrie, R)- 10,601 foreclosures
KY-03, Louisville (John Yarmuth, D)- 15,784 foreclosures
KY-04, the northeast along the Ohio River (Geoff Davis, R)- 13,315 foreclosures
KY-05, the southeast Appalachian district (Hal Rogers, R)- 3,412 foreclosures
KY-06, the heart of Blue Grass country near Lexington (Ben Chandler, D)- 10,123 foreclosures

So what's the commonality here and why bring it up? Last March 5 the House passed legislation, the Helping Families Save Their Homes Act, 234-191. Both the Kentucky Democrats voted for it and all four Kentucky Republicans voted against it. All indications are that that is precisely what will happen when the House votes on a meaningful health care reform bill. Regardless of how much the bill will ameliorate the problems faced by the constituents who vote in Rogers, Whitfield, Davis and Guthrie-- not to mention the two awful senators-- the entire Kentucky congressional delegation is working to obstruct passage of legislation. (Except Bunning, who's sleeping through the whole mess, and plans to vote no regardless of what's proposed.)

Ironically-- or maybe not-- the Senate candidate for Bunning's seat most likely to walk in complete lockstep with the other anti-family Republicans, Trey Grayson, is leading Ron Paul's son Rand for the Republican nomination-- and is looking like a likely winner against either Democrat! More irony: slightly more Kentuckians support a public option than oppose it! Go figure.