Earlier this year, the House of Representatives passed a bill that would allow bankruptcy judges to modify the terms of loans on primary residences, the same way they can on secondary residences or yachts (no, really). The “cramdown” provision, seen by many liberal economists as the only way to deal with the foreclosure crisis, then ran aground in the Senate, as 12 Democrats voted against the measure. This inspired Dick Durbin’s infamous rant on the Senate floor, where he lit into the Senate for allowing the banks to “own the place.”
One other argument that I think takes the cake: “Senator, you understand the moral hazard here. People have to be held responsible for their wrongdoing. If you make a mistake, darn it, you’ve gotta pay the price. That’s what America is all about.” Really, Mr. Banker on Wall Street? That’s what America is all about? What price did Wall Street pay for their miserable decisions creating rotten portfolios, destroying the credit of America and its businesses? Oh, they paid a pretty heavy price. Hundreds of billions of dollars of taxpayer’s money sent to them to bail them out, to put them back in business, even to fund executive bonuses for those guilty of mismanaging. Moral hazard, huh? How can they argue that with a straight face? [...]
We want America to be strong, but if it’s going to be strong, you should be respectful, Mr. Banker, of the people who live in the communities where your banks are located. You should be respectful of those families who are doing their best to make ends meet in the toughest recession that they’ve ever seen. You should be respectful of the people that you want to sign up for checking accounts and savings accounts, and make sure that they have decent neighborhoods to live in. Show a little loyalty to this great nation instead of just your bottom line when it comes to profitability. Take a little consideration of what it takes to make America strong…
I’ll offer this Durbin amendment as I did last year. When I offered it last year, they said, “Not a big problem, only two million foreclosures coming up.” They were wrong. It turned out to be eight million. And if the bankers prevail today, and we can’t get something through conference committee to deal with this issue, I’ll be back. I’m not going to quit on this [...] At some point, the Senators in this chamber will decide, the bankers shouldn’t write the agenda in the United States Senate.
It looks like Durbin may get his opportunity sooner than expected. The House of Representatives will start consideration of the financial regulation bill today, and nine House Democrats will try to attach cramdown to the bill, led by Reps. John Conyers and Zoe Lofgren. This time, Blue Dog Jim Marshall and even Republican Mike Turner (OH) are on board as co-sponsors, and as the foreclosure crisis shows little sign of improvement, perhaps the prospects for passing cramdown will improve as well. Here’s some of Conyers’ statement:
“Over the past 3 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.”
The bottom line is that the Administration’s mortgage modification programs haven’t worked. As Conyers said, the terms of virtually every other thing of value can be modified by a bankruptcy judge, except a primary home mortgage, and this disempowers those borrowers who have no tools to fight the lenders on a level playing field. Ultimately, public policy should edge toward keeping people in homes rather than the converse – foreclosures cost roughly $250,000 a piece to the overall economy.
The question is whether this cramdown amendment will make it out of the Rules Committee and onto the House floor. CQ notes that it’s one of the 65 amendments to the financial regulations bill. However, Barney Frank said yesterday that there would be three two days of amendments, so it’s possible several of them could be included. Cramdown has already passed the House once, and given that the audit the Fed bill and other decent pieces like the Consumer Financial Protection Agency and leverage limits made it out of the relatively moderate Financial Services Committee, it should be able to pass again.
Other interesting amendments include Maurice Hinchey’s bill to reinstitute Glass-Steagall regulations which would split commercial and investment banking, and Paul Kanjorski’s amendment that would remove the gutting of Sarbanes-Oxley reporting requirements that appears in the bill.
Stay tuned, Dick Durbin, you might get to see if the banks still own the place…




10 Comments

Support this site!
Subscribe to the newsletter
Advertise on Firedoglake
Send
us your tips
Make us your homepage
About FDL News Desk
Go get ‘em, Richard!
the usual suspects, (plus Dorgan and Tester) who voted with the Banksters:
Max Baucus (Montana), Michael Bennet (Colorado), Robert Byrd (West Virginia), Thomas Carper (Delaware), Byron Dorgan (North Dakota), Tim Johnson (South Dakota), Mary Landrieu (Louisiana), Blanche Lincoln (Arkansas), Ben Nelson (Nebraska), Mark Pryor (Arkansas), Arlen Specter (Pennsylvania) and Jon Tester (Montana).
I’m betting Specter peels himself off this time
Cramdown was so obviously the solution right from the beginning that it begs logic why it wasn’t implemented right out of the gate.
Oh yeah, now I remember. Congress is corrupt right through to its core.
Which is why I’d be very surprised to see anything of real substance emerge from the cesspool miasma that is our legislative process…
Here’s an idea.
Just as he did regarding the war in Afghanistan, President Obama can go on prime time TV to inform the American people what is at stake in the debate over “cramdowning” foreclosures. He can bring together dozens of families who have lost their homes in order to illustrate the very real pain and suffering that tens of thousands are enduring without the bailout provided for those folks about to lose their yachts.
Come to think of it, how come Obama never seems to use the bully pulpit to further the cause of folks who actually voted him into office?
Is it a character flaw or is he just like all the other politicians in Washington attached at the hip to Wall Street.
I keep coming back to this: The finance industry contributed $6,000,000 to his festive inaugguration bash. More than any other industry. I suppose they wanted the start of his administration to be especially symbolic of things to come.
As usual there will be much talk-sound and fury-but when the time comes to actually vote on anything that would upset their paymasters, well you all know how that story goes. What we really need is a new form of govt. Say a unicameral ledge with a PM type leader. Imagine if you will, a govt that actually pays attention to voters rather than to lobbyists and paymasters. Imagine a gwb or an Obama up in front of said body answering all questions every week-like in England. What may have been a good idea for a mostly illiterate country with almost no means of mass communications has changed. But our govt remains in the horse and buggy era. When just 1 senator has the ability to bring everything to a stop-except of course if the dems use the same tactics that the rethugs used to pass laws back when the dems were a minority(but does reid have the spine to do it?, That is the question)-imagine if you will if the rethugs had passed the “nuclear option”, would the dems use it or not?
Just a thought but has congress reclaimed any of the powers that bush usurped? Or, has Obama given up any of the new powers that cheney got for bush? Once an executive gains power he or his successor is most loathe to give those added powers back to someone else.
Failure to reimpose Glass-Steagall, as well as to completely revamp reporting requirements and recognize that ‘too big to fail = too big to exist’ would be disastrous.
These banks have vastly more economic (and political) power than most states, given the revolving door between Wall Street (esp. Goldman Sachs) and DC. And also given the fact that Congress and the Fed have been allowing the Goldman Sachs ‘investment bankers’ to borrow against Grannie’s checking account in order to ‘leverage’ huge bets.
Can’t wait to see Durbin make headway on this ASAP.
This time around, it won’t just be lobbyists watching to see who votes on which amendments and bills — I think a whole lot of people are paying attention like they never have before.
Oh, CRAMDOWN, not Cramden, as in Ralph Cramden.
I know. The kids among us won’t know who he is, but he is a perfect foil for Congress. Famous line: “One of these days, one of these days, POW! Right in the kisser!”
Wow, 9 House members out of 435. That’s nearly a majority, right?
The reason that cramdowns haven’t happened is the same reason they won’t happen. They would force banks to revalue their assets downward. This would expose their underlying insolvency and trigger masses of CDSs. Not to mention showing that the Fed is holding a trillion dollars of crap.
Cramdowns and the zombie banking system can not exist together. We can only have cramdowns as part of a much larger restructuring of the whole financial system.
I sure hope enough Senators have come to their senses that Durbin’s amendment will now be acceptable to them, although stalling has cost millions their homes. In reality, this is the only thing that makes sense, since the actual market values of the homes truly has been downgraded due to the current financial atmosphere. The fact that the banks get to keep the original prices on their books is really misleading in cases where the bank is forced to foreclose. The bank then bears the legal expenses of foreclosure, they assume the liability of the home that is a prime target for all manner of crime, from being stripped down to the walls and foundation to squatters who live in the homes, running the risk of getting injured on the property and presenting the squatters with the possibility of a law suit “to compensate them for their misfortune.” At the very least, the bank assumes responsibility of taxes, insurance, maintenance, and management of the property.
The fact remains that they will not get the original price when they go to sell their REO anyway, unless they keep the house on their books for many years. I am thinking that the reason they are insisting on the higher prices is that if marking to market is the rule, then the mortgages that they hold that are in fact performing as they were supposed to would also have to be marked down.
I would say, however, that my own experience is becoming quite frustrating. I have gone to the government website, worked out their calculation tool, and discovered that I should be eligible for a modification of my mortgage because the mortgage payment exceeds 31% of my income (it is 36% of my income, an apx. $100 gap.) I have contacted my lender (originally Countrywide, now B of A) four separate times and received four different answered on my inquiry. The first time I checked, the fellow I talked to deemed me elibible and said the next step was for me to gather all my documentation and send it in to the modification dept. by fax. He implied I should do this within 10 days of talking to him. That was in August. However, I was missing some of the paperwork and needed more time to put it all together. Once I had that done, I called back and mistakenly asked for the Making Homes Affordable dept., and the guy I contacted was very negative about my eligibility. So much so, in fact, that I called back the next day and asked for the loan modification dept. The lady I talked to was much more amenable and she determined I may well be a candidate for loan modification. She said they’ve made this much easier, so they had already taken my application over the phone, so the next step is that I would receive something from them showing what my new “trial” mortgage rate would be. Meanwhile, the bank would be contacting me for whatever they needed by way of verification, paperwork, etc. Once a month had elapsed and I still heard nothing, I called the number back and used the extention number that the clerk I talked to gave me, and once again got some guy that determined that I was not eligible. I think that once again I had gotten the wrong dept. But there was no trace of what I had been told by the loan modification dept. on my file and the guy said they had been in the process of changing Countrywide accounts to BofA accts, so whatever “Britney” told me had not saved to the BofA file. However, he said if the modification people were still in the process of working on it, they would be getting back to me, but that they were at least 45 days behind due to so many, many inquiries. At this point, I still plan to pursue whatever I can in the way of mortgage relief for however long the program lasts. This all just confirms that one must be the squeakiest wheel if they are to get any grease at all. The meek will not inherit the earth if the banks have any choice in the matter.
Hate to go all Frank Luntz but can’t we come up with a more palatable, salable term than “cramdown?” Jeebus…
How about something positive, like ‘mortgage relief,’ ‘homeowner relief,’ something…