government oversight - Represent Consumers

For foreclosure relief, occupy the Legislature

Two years ago, California legislators bowed to bankers when they failed to pass legislation that would require mediation between a bank and borrower before banks could foreclose on the borrower’s home.

But a recent report by the U.S. Justice Department should cause the Legislature to take another crack at making a critical choice: Do they want to provide tools to reduce foreclosures, or do they want to keep kowtowing to bankers?

California remains among the hardest hit by foreclosures: third worst in the country.

While foreclosure rates are going down nationally, that’s more a reflection of the continuing mess in the foreclosure process itself rather than any fundamental restoration of health in the housing market.

So the problem hasn’t gone away by itself.

Federal efforts to help homeowners have been ineffective because they’re voluntary for the banks, with inadequate government oversight. For the feds, foreclosure reduction efforts have consisted mainly of offering banks modest incentives for loan modifications, incentives that are less than the profit the bank, in its role as loan servicer, makes from foreclosing on homes.

As demonstrated by the California legislators’ previous refusal to embrace mediation, government officials at all levels have so far lacked the political will to force banks to take the action needed to stem foreclosures. Two years ago, Assemblyman Pedro Nava spearheaded the foreclosure mediation effort, AB 1639, which passed the Assembly but died in the Senate under fierce banking opposition. Consultant on the bill was Los Angeles mediator Laurel Kaufer, chair of the State Bar's ADR committee.

Around the country, there have been a host of mediation programs around the country, with mixed results. ¶

Programs in Connecticut and Philadelphia successfully settled about three of every four cases, avoiding foreclosures. In Nevada, officials reported that about 42 percent of the cases in mediation settled without foreclosure. Nevada also reported another significant finding – the banks dropped many of the foreclosure attempts during the mediation process because there paperwork wasn’t in order.

But in late December, the Florida Supreme Court closed down its foreclosure mediation program after state officials determined it wasn’t working because so few cases eligible for mediation ended in settlement.

Then, just a couple of weeks later, the U.S. Justice Department issued a promising report calling for wider federal use of mediation in foreclosure and more research into how well it works.

The details of foreclosure mediation programs vary widely. The most successful programs, the Justice Department explained, are those that begin early in the foreclosure process, require mandatory participation, include some form of financial counseling for homeowners, are well publicized and require a high degree of transparency by the banks – meaning that banks have to disclose how their foreclosure process works, including the secretive, often confusing criteria by which they grant loan modifications.

Will the feds blow this opportunity to attack the foreclosure crisis, as they bungled their earlier efforts? Or will finally get a clue and start taking effective action?

In California, we shouldn’t wait to find out.

This Justice Department report should give a boost to a renewed effort to require mediation in California foreclosures, and offers some guidance to California in how to create a successful mediation program.

But it will only happen if people mobilize against the banking lobby, which is sure to oppose any attempt to weaken bankers’ complete control over the foreclosure process.

We keep hearing how the Occupy movement has changed the debate, how issues that couldn’t gain traction six months ago can now get a fuller hearing. We should seize the opportunity to give legislators the opportunity to get the bankers off our backs.

Foreclosures / Martin Column - 01/18/2012

Mr. President, Keep Your Promise

President Obama got generally high marks earlier this month for “getting it” after he struck a populist tone in his speech at Osawatomie, the Kansas town where he evoked the progressive spirit of former president Teddy Roosevelt.

But if he really wants to do something about the economic pain Americans continue to suffer, the president could start by keeping a campaign promise he made – to lead a fight to reform bankruptcy laws to allow judges to modify mortgage loans in their courts.

Under heavy pressure from bankers, the Senate defeated such a proposal in 2009, while the president and his administration remained silent on the sidelines.

At the time, Illinois Sen. Dick Durbin said bitterly, referring to Congress, the big banks “frankly own the place.”

The administration’s refusal to address the foreclosure crisis remains one of the sorriest aspects of its consistent underestimation of the depth of the economic crisis.

Earlier this month, the non-profit investigative journalism outfit Pro Publica filled in the details on how the administration pooped out on the president’s campaign promise. It turns out that many on the president’s bank-friendly economic team were never enthusiastic about cram-down.

The idea behind judicial cram-downs is to treat mortgage debt the same as other debts which bankruptcy judges are permitted to reduce as part of a bankruptcy.

The impact would be to encourage bankers to reduce principal on mortgages before they ever got to bankruptcy court. Judicial cram-down would be far more effective than the Obama administration’s previous failed programs intended to address the foreclosure crisis, which offered banks insufficient incentives to voluntarily modify loans with inadequate government oversight.

Part of the reason the president can’t hammer the Republicans for their lack of any plan to address foreclosures is that he hasn’t come up with a decent plan of his own – and that he didn’t fight hard enough for a solution like cram-down, which lost by six votes in the Senate, including 12 members of the president’s own party.

In addition, 11 Republicans who represent states among the hardest hit by the foreclosure crisis also voted against cram-down.

Couldn’t a tougher, savvier, more committed fight by the president come up with the seven or so votes needed to win this fight?

As the president takes on the big banks. he may take encouragement from these words from the predecessor he evoked so successfully at Osawatomie:

“The credit belongs to the man who is actually in the arena, whose face is marred by dust and sweat and blood; who strives valiantly; who errs, who comes short again and again, because there is no effort without error and shortcoming; but who does actually strive to do the deeds; who knows great enthusiasms, the great devotions; who spends himself in a worthy cause; who at the best knows in the end the triumph of high achievement, and who at the worst, if he fails, at least fails while daring greatly, so that his place shall never be with those cold and timid souls who neither know victory nor defeat.”

Foreclosure / Martin Column / President Barack Obama - 12/28/2011

Open Letters to Sens. Feinstein and Boxer

NO COMPROMISE TOP 10

As the debate over financial reform moves to the Senate I’ve written a couple of open letters to my senators. I’m not endorsing any particular legislative proposals but I do outline the items that shouldn’t be compromised.

Feel free to borrow my ideas for letters to your own senators, or to disagree. Whether you agree or disagree, I’d like to hear what you think.

What’s your bottom line on what financial reform should contain?

OPEN LETTER TO SEN. DIANNE FEINSTEIN

Dear Sen. Feinstein:

Throughout the economic crisis, you have continued to raise serious questions about whether the bailout was protecting the financial industry or the public. Now is the time to turn that skepticism into constructive action.

Sen. Feinstein, voters are counting on your continuing leadership to make sure Congress provides real financial reform to prevent future meltdowns and bailouts stemming from reckless practices and lack of government oversight.

Though you voted for the bailout, at the time, in September 2008, you compared the preparations for the so-called financial rescue to the build-up to the war in Iraq. "There is a great deal of cynicism among those of us who have to live with having voted to go into Iraq based on misinformation and intelligence that later turned out not to be truthful," you said.

On March 23 of this year, you were among a group of senators who met with President Obama to express concern that his administration’s proposals didn’t go far enough, and that his economic advisers were many of the same people who oversaw the deregulatory fever that played such a key role in our financial crisis.

Unfortunately, Sen. Feinstein, your concerns have been borne out.

Financial reform as passed by the House of Representatives is filled with loopholes. Lobbyists from financial firms recently rescued from ruin by taxpayers have mounted a fierce campaign to maintain a system in which “too big to fail” institutions” can manipulate the regulatory system.

The good news is that Sen. Chris. Dodd has proposed much stronger legislation, the Restoring American Financial Stability Act of 2009. By all accounts, his proposal faces a bruising battle as the financial industry gathers all its forces to protect its interests. Sen. Dodd has indicated that compromise is inevitable.

But Sen. Feinstein, the stakes are too high to compromise on the most important aspects of reform. Some of these are contained in Sen. Dodd’s proposal. Others are contained in other legislative proposals under consideration in the session about to begin.

Please help make sure that these key elements of reform are not the victims of compromise:

• Vote against the confirmation of Ben Bernanke to another term as Federal Reserve chair. He was at the center of the bubbles before the meltdown and also helped engineer a bailout that profited Wall Street while Main Street suffered.

•Reinstate a modern-day form of Glass-Steagal, as proposed by Sens. McCain and Cantwell.

•Audit the Federal Reserve, as proposed in legislation sponsored by Reps. Paul and Grayson, which would open up the operations of the institution to public scrutiny for the first time.

•Reconsider and approve judicial cram-downs, which would give bankruptcy judges the power to lower mortgage payments. This would put real teeth in the Obama Administration’s anti-foreclosure efforts.

In the Dodd bill:

• Support creation of a strong, independent Consumer Financial Protection Agency, with regulatory oversight of the Community Reinvestment Act (not provided in the House bill)

•Support creation of a an Agency for Financial Stability, responsible for identifying, monitoring and addressing systemic risks posed by large complex companies and their products, with the authority to break up firms if they pose a threat to the financial stability of the country

• Remove exemptions (contained in the House reform bill) for banks and credit unions with assets of less than $10 billion – about 98 percent of deposit-taking institutions in the country.

• Bar pre-emption (also allowed in the House bill), which would let states, if they choose, to pass tougher financial regulations for nationally chartered banks.

• Don’t exempt other consumer-financial businesses, such as auto dealers from oversight by the Consumer Financial Protection Agency (as the House bill does.)

• Give two agencies, the Commodities Futures Trading Commission and the Securities and Exchange Commission broad authority to force derivatives markets onto exchanges where they pose less risk.

I’m urging you to put everything you’ve got behind this fight to protect consumers and homeowners. Voters put their trust and faith in you to see that their interests are protected, not compromised away. We’re relying on you to convince your colleagues to put the public’s interests ahead of the private profits and the power of the financial giants.

Sen. Feinstein, your skeptical instincts have been right since the Bush administration tried ramrod through a 3-page $700 bailout. Now everyone in the country can plainly see how that bailout benefited the large financial institutions but did little for small business, consumers and homeowners. Thank you for your raising the right questions in the past. Thank you for helping us get back on the right track now.

Sincerely,

Martin Berg

Editor

WheresOurMoney.org

AN OPEN LETTER TO SEN. BARBARA BOXER

Dear Sen. Boxer:

Voters are counting on your continuing leadership to make sure the promise of real fundamental financial reform becomes a reality.

In 1989, you were one of a handful of senators to vote against repeal of the Glass-Steagall Act, the Depression-era law that had kept banks’ traditional business separate from their riskier speculative business.

Though you were in the small minority opposing the deregulatory fever sweeping Washington, your vote showed tremendous leadership, courage and prescience.

You withstood the pressures from financial industry lobbyists and contributors as well as the demands of your own party. As you know, then-President Clinton and his economic advisers, after initially opposing the repeal, eventually made a deal to sign off on the dismantling of Glass-Steagall.

We all know what happened over the last decade – record profits for financial institutions while the economic foundation for American families has gotten increasingly shaky. Voters have watched with dismay as the massive federal bailout has helped create even fewer financial institutions, with even greater wealth and wielding even more political power.

Neither the Obama administration’s proposals nor the bill passed by the House of Representatives offer sweeping reform, nor do they do anything to break up the power of the “too big to fail” institutions. They also don’t do enough to ease the threat these banks continue to pose to the rest of the economy.

Now Sen. Christopher Dodd has proposed much stronger legislation, the Restoring American Financial Stability. By all accounts, his proposal faces a bruising battle as the financial industry gathers all its forces to protect its interests. Sen. Dodd has indicated that compromise is inevitable.

But Sen. Boxer, the stakes are too high to compromise on the most important aspects of reform. Some of these are contained in Sen. Dodd’s proposal. Others are contained in other legislative proposals under consideration in the session about to begin.

Please help make sure that these key elements of reform are not the victims of compromise:

• Vote against the confirmation of Ben Bernanke to another term as Federal Reserve chair. He was at the center of the bubbles before the meltdown, helped engineer a bailout that profited Wall Street while Main Street suffered, and has fought increased transparency in the financial system.

• Reinstate a modern-day form of Glass-Steagall, proposed by Sens. McCain and Cantwell.

• Audit the Federal Reserve, as suggested in the proposal by Reps. Paul and Grayson, which would open up the operations of the institution to public scrutiny for the first time.

• Reconsider and approve judicial cram-downs, which would give bankruptcy judges the power to lower mortgage payments. This would put real teeth in the Obama Administration’s anti-foreclosure efforts.

In the Dodd bill:

• Support creation of a strong, independent Consumer Financial Protection Agency, with regulatory oversight of the Community Reinvestment Act (not provided in the House bill).

• Support creation of a an Agency for Financial Stability, responsible for identifying, monitoring and addressing systemic risks posed by large complex companies and their products, with the authority to break up firms if they pose a threat to the financial stability of the country.