You are currently browsing the daily archive for March 28, 2009.

Remember how when the financial crisis started the irresponsible homeowners were blamed?

Since then, I found out a few more details about people who get more say so than homeowners

So basically AIG bet money it didn’t have and lost, and all the bailout money we gave it (and any more that we give it) will go to pay off the bookies.

And why the renewed furor at the homeowners? Because the House bill was featuring cram downs.

The provision would allow a bankruptcy judge to reduce a homeowner’s mortgage principal.

That bill also was washed up to make concessions to bankers beholden moderates

At a closed-door meeting of House Democrats last week, Rep. Tauscher voiced strong concerns about the legislation, warning that the initial House bill didn’t go far enough to ensure homeowners try to work with banks

but the banks didn’t like it, and now interestingly Harry Reid doesn’t like it either

Senate Majority Leader Reid said today he would drop a cram-down provision from a House-passed banking bill if the language threatened to keep the Senate from passing the overall bill.

Apparently, besides the republicans bankers got to Evan Bayh and other democrats.

Sen. Evan Bayh, D-Ind., and others that the cram-down bill cannot pass due to opposition from Republicans and some Democratic moderates.

I got my cramdown learning at The Confluence

The bottom line is that the possibility of the cram down being used to restructure principal residence mortgages is one of the most valuable “sticks” society can have to put a check on lender stupidity, negligence and down-right thievery.

As for the blue dogs in the House and Evan Bayah’s group in the senate being called “moderates” here’s a good argument that they are way extremists instead

Again, nearly 2/3 of the American public supports giving assistance to homeowners struggling with their mortgage payments and facing foreclosure. Two-thirds.

So obviously, the Senators who oppose 2/3 of the electorate are… “moderates.”

But they prevail, because they represent Wall Street’s hold on the government – and so far this worked like a charm. They seem to hold all the pieces in the chess game to trump anyone else’s needs: the White House, the Treasury and enough people in Congress.

In other news, The Economist, which endorsed Obama, looks back at Hillary’s quip about on the job training and sees why she was right

His performance has been weaker than those who endorsed his candidacy, including this newspaper, had hoped. Many of his strongest supporters—liberal columnists, prominent donors, Democratic Party stalwarts—have started to question him. As for those not so beholden, polls show that independent voters again prefer Republicans to Democrats, a startling reversal of fortune in just a few weeks.

HILLARY CLINTON’S most effective quip, in her long struggle with Barack Obama for the Democratic nomination last year, was that the Oval Office is no place for on-the-job training. It went to the heart of the nagging worry about the silver-tongued young senator from Illinois: that he lacked even the slightest executive experience, and that in his brief career he had never really stood up to powerful interests, whether in his home city of Chicago or in the wider world. Might Mrs Clinton have been right about her foe?

Geez, Economist, who would have thunk it?

  1. puma.gif picture by Robbedvoter

Not Your Sweetie

March 2009