Blog

Mitt Romney says corporations are people and no one should intervene to stop foreclosures. He says we shouldn’t talk about income inequality except in “quiet rooms” — not in public.

On Tuesday, the GOP presidential contenders squared off for a debate in Nevada, the state with both the highest unemployment and highest foreclosure rates in the country. More than 80 percent of Nevada homeowners are underwater, owing more on their mortgage than their home is worth.

But before the debate, Mitt Romney told the Las Vegas Review Journal that he doesn’t have a plan to help homeowners struggling to keep their homes. Government, he said, should not “try and stop the foreclosure process. Let it run its course and hit the bottom.” (more…)

As the Occupy Wall Street movement spread across the nation last week, politicians in D.C. flipped the bird at protesters – including those camping in Washington’s McPherson Square.

Here’s how: While occupiers sought political focus on the unemployment, impoverishment and foreclosures suffered by the nation’s non-rich 99 percent, politicians considered three major pieces of legislation and passed only the one that will help the wealthiest 1 percent and hurt the remaining 99 percent.

Senate Republicans murdered-by-filibuster the American Jobs Act, which would surtax the 1 percent to provide jobs for the 99 percent. The Senate did pass the currency manipulation bill, but House GOP leaders refused to schedule a vote on the measure that would protect jobs for the 99 percent by punishing countries that undervalue their currencies to artificially lower prices on their exports.

By contrast, both houses of Congress adopted the so-called Free Trade Agreements with Panama, Colombia and Korea, which will, just like their predecessor NAFTA, destroy jobs held by the 99 percent.

It’s incredible. Inexplicable. Inexcusable. In a country where joblessness is a painful 9.1 percent. Where one in five children lives in poverty. Where foreclosures rose again last month. Where a whole movement is growing to protest the appeasement of the rich at the cost of the middle class. In that place, Congress chose to walk backwards. It didn’t take two steps forward – which it could have by passing the currency bill and jobs act. No. It just took a giant step backward by embracing job-killing trade agreements.

It all forces the 99 percent to demand even more loudly: Where’s the jobs?

WHERE’S THE JOBS? (more…)

By James Parks
AFL-CIO Senior Writer

Across the country late last week, hundreds of union members, religious leaders, community activists, farm workers and victims of bank home foreclosures protested at 200 JPMorgan Chase branches to demand the bank respect the basic human rights of people to have decent places to live and work.

Large banks such as Chase are flush with cash and protestors demanded the bank declare a one-year moratorium on home foreclosures. The Wall Street Journal reports that Chase has $19.5 billion worth of home loans in foreclosure—nearly 7.5 percent of its mortgage portfolio and more than any other big bank.

“Foreclosures are a plague on families and communities,” said the Rev. Charles Williams, a leader in Detroit’s anti-foreclosure coalition, People Before Banks.

It cannot be in any bank’s best interest to pursue a policy that leaves so many people and communities in ruins—and for a bank like Chase that professes to be a good citizen, tearing families and communities apart is morally indefensible.

The protestors also called on Chase to use its influence as the lead banker for Reynolds American Inc. (RAI) to promote talks that could lead to improved conditions in America’s tobacco fields and farm labor camps.

(more…)

By Zach Carter
Economics Editor, AlterNet; Fellow, Campaign for America’s Future

Several key House Democrats are circulating a letter urging support for new regulations that would crack down on what critics say are rampant foreclosure abuses in the nation’s banking system.

The letter, authored by Rep. Brad Miller (D-N.C.) encourages federal banking regulators to rein in practices at bank divisions called “mortgage servicers.” Servicers are responsible for collecting and processing payments, charging late fees, negotiating with troubled borrowers and implementing the foreclosure process. Servicers have been criticized for committing widespread fraud in recent months, charging improper fees and incorrectly evicting borrowers.

The three House Democrats have already signed the letter, including House Financial Services Committee Chairman Barney Frank (D-Mass.), House Judiciary Committee Chairman John Conyers (D-Mich.), Rep. Maxine Waters (D-Calif.), Rep. Keith Ellison (D-Minn.) and Rep. Laura Richardson (D-Calif.).

The letter from lawmakers comes one day after more than fifty economists, consumer advocates and banking experts urged regulators to take action on mortgage servicers. Federal Regulators are currently divided over whether or not to use new powers to regulate mortgage securities granted by this year’s Wall Street reform bill to crack down on servicing abuses. The FDIC wants to take the opportunity to rein in servicers, but the Federal Reserve and the Office of the Comptroller of the Currency are resisting the new rules, although spokespeople for both agency say they support stronger standards for mortgage servicing. (more…)

By Zach Carter
Economics Editor, AlterNet; Fellow, Campaign for America’s Future

And

By Ryan Grim
Senior congressional correspondent for the Huffington Post

WASHINGTON — Despite mounting evidence of big banks committing serious fraud in the foreclosure process, the U.S. Senate eliminated $35 million in legal aid to homeowners trying to keep their homes.

The fund was wiped out in order to meet government spending caps advocated by Sens. Jeff Sessions (R-Ala.) and Claire McCaskill (D-Mo.), but will likely end up costing taxpayers much more in the long run, as wrongful foreclosures burn through the balance sheets of Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac. The slashing of the foreclosure-assistance fund is just one casualty of Washington’s increasing bipartisan push to cut spending across the board.

The $35 million fund was created by the Wall Street reform bill signed into law by President Barack Obama in July, but the Senate never took the additional necessary step of appropriating the money. Even if it had been appropriated, Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid (D-Nev.) last week gave up on passing a budget for next year in the face of Republican opposition to earmarks.

Although the dollar amount is tiny in comparison with other federal housing programs, legal aid funding is a critical to the foreclosure relief effort. Without hiring a good lawyer, it is extremely difficult for borrowers to successfully defend their homes against banks — even when banks are committing clear-cut violations.

Recent reports suggest severe, nationwide problems with the mortgage system. A survey of 96 attorneys found that banks started foreclosure proceedings on 2,500 borrowers who were negotiating a loan modification. The survey was conducted by the National Association of Consumer Advocates and the National Consumer Law Center. (more…)

Zach Carter
Economics Editor, AlterNet; Fellow, Campaign for America’s Future

Despite escalating outrage over rampant foreclosure fraud, the Federal Reserve now appears ready to eviscerate a key mortgage regulation in an effort to spare banks the losses from their own wrongdoing. Even as bank executives preposterously claim to have wronged nobody in the foreclosure process, they’re pushing hard to unwind the only serious federal rule that protects borrowers from predatory loans and improper foreclosures. As if the last decade of abuse wasn’t bad enough, banks are once again mobilizing to screw borrowers in the pursuit of epic bonuses. And once again, it appears that the Federal Reserve has become an accomplice to this nationwide mortgage scam.

This week, top mortgage officers from the nation’s largest banks are telling the Senate Banking Committee that they aren’t kicking the wrong people out of their homes. This is simply false. Problems at mortgage servicers have been going on for years, long before banks got into trouble for illegally robo-signing foreclosure documents. People are kicked out of their homes without cause in the United States every day. If the top executives at America’s largest banks don’t know this fact, they lack the competence needed to run their organizations.

Law firms that work with troubled borrowers are jam-packed with horror stories about foreclosures caused entirely by banks, not borrowers. Families who never miss a payment come home to an eviction notice, or a thug breaking down their door.

But it’s even more common for borrowers to find themselves in trouble because their bank engaged in blatantly predatory lending. There is only one serious federal remedy for predatory lending, and the Fed is now knowingly trying to gut that remedy in order to help banks avoid losses from their own fraud. The remedy is called rescission, and it works like this:

If a bank failed to make key consumer protection disclosures about a mortgage, the borrower can demand that all of the interest and closing costs on the loan be refunded. Equally important, the bank must also stop all foreclosure proceedings and give up its right to foreclose. Once the bank gives up its right to foreclose, the full amount of the mortgage, minus interest and closing costs, becomes due. This isn’t a free lunch for the borrower, especially when the value of her home has declined dramatically, but it’s better than nothing, and it does impose real costs on banks. (more…)

By Mike Lux
Author, “The Progressive Revolution: How the Best in America Came to Be”

There’s all the usual post-election palaver that happens after a Democratic loss: Republican and right-wing triumphalism, the pro-corporate wing of the Democratic party and conventional wisdom pundits arguing that Democrats should “turn to the center” (by which they mean the Washington center — cutting Social Security, doing more trade deals, not antagonizing Wall Street — as opposed to what the center is for voters), and progressives arguing that Obama should stand strong on Democratic values and not cave to the Republican agenda. There’s also a classic dynamic where some Democrats are urgently calling on people not to attack each other or the president, to try to keep the party from looking like it is in disarray, and others wanting to really engage in that old centrist versus left debate and critique.

I have been thinking hard about all this in part because it’s the obvious thing everyone is thinking and talking about and in part because I am doing a lot of panels and media interviews right now — the latest one yesterday at Harvard where I did left-right panel with Bill Kristol on analyzing the elections. Interestingly, while Kristol and I naturally disagreed on the substance and political dynamics on many key issues — Afghanistan, tax cuts for the rich, health care among the big ones that came up — we agreed on the essential point that Obama can only survive by reconnecting with both the Democratic base and working class swing voters by being more populist on jobs, banking issues, and Social Security/Medicare (Republicans get honest while speaking academically in the weeks immediately after the elections — like Lee Atwater, also speaking at Harvard after the 1988 election, Kristol agreed that the swing vote in national elections is a working class populist vote).

At the end of the day, though, I keep coming back to one thing. Political positioning is significant, and I continue to believe populist rhetoric and substance on issues helps. Energizing the base and doing more to turn out Democratic base voters in 2012 will be important. But ultimately there will be only one way for Obama and the Democrats to come back in 2012, and that is for the economy to be substantially better. The thing Washington insiders always seem to glide over is the level of economic pain that is out there. The real unemployment rate is far higher than the official numbers because they don’t include part-time and temporary workers still looking for full time jobs as well as those who are too discouraged to look for work. Incomes have been flat while a lot of everyday costs for things like groceries, gas and utilities, health care, and college tuition are a lot higher than they were a few years ago. Pensions and savings wiped out by the stock market collapse still haven’t recovered for most people. And the housing crisis — 25 percent or more of homeowners are in real trouble, and housing prices are staying down — looms like a massive New York skyscraper towering over everything else. (more…)

Zach Carter

Zach Carter
Economics Editor, AlterNet; Fellow, Campaign for America’s Future

Foreclosure fraud is ruffling a lot of feathers on Wall Street, and while the full scope of losses remains unclear, even major banks are now acknowledging that this is a multibillion-dollar disaster, not just a set of minor paperwork headaches.

So how bad will it get for Wall Street? There are several disaster scenarios in which the housing market simply shuts down, where the potential losses for Wall Street are simply incalculable. But even situations that do not directly rip apart the basic functioning of the mortgage system could be enough to shut down one or more big banks, creating serious trouble for the financial system, and a major test of the recent Wall Street reform bill.

JPMorgan Chase loves using its research department to push its political agenda, and the bank is currently characterizing the foreclosure fraud outbreak as a set of “process-oriented problems that can be fixed.” That puts them in the rosy optimist camp for this crisis, and they’re projecting a total of $55 billion to $120 billion in losses for the entire industry, spread out over a few years.

But take a look at the analysts’ methodology. The actual scope of losses gets drastically larger if you just change a few arbitrary assumptions.

JPMorgan’s analysts look at about $6 trillion in mortgages issued between 2005 and 2007 — this is the height of the bubble, but it excludes plenty of lousy loans issued in 2003, 2004 and 2008. They then estimate defaults of $2 trillion and losses of $1.1 trillion on those defaults. (more…)

By Zach Carter
Economics Editor, AlterNet; Fellow, Campaign for America’s Future

A lot of frequently credible publications have been pumping out drivel lately blaming borrowers for the ever-widening foreclosure fraud scandal. Fortune Magazine has the latest of these blame-the-borrower narratives. It would be nice to be able to dismiss this kind of nonsense as mere journalistic laziness, but at this point in the crisis, blaming the borrowers is an act of willful ignorance.

The Fortune scribe resorting to this grotesque journalistic vice is Fortune’s Duff McDonald. McDonald’s argument? Pretty lousy. He openly acknowledges that he hasn’t done his homework:

“I find it very hard to process the notion that the onslaught of foreclosures in this country does not have more to do with a failure of conservative financial planning than with some insidious criminality by lenders . . . . I’m amazed that the country has congealed into the belief that every single borrower who signed a mortgage document has an escape hatch that somehow puts blame on their lender when they can’t pay their debts . . . . I am at a loss to understand how so many individual homeowners signing loan documents for debt they could ultimately not afford were somehow the victims of a crime.”

Four years after the subprime meltdown began, Duff McDonald still hasn’t bothered to investigate fraud in the selling of mortgages. I’m getting pretty tired of writing this statement: In 2004, the FBI warned of an “epidemic” in mortgage fraud, 80 percent of which is committed by lenders. There was an entire Congressional hearing devoted to fraud at Washington Mutual. Loan officers and mortgage brokers are perfectly capable of falsifying a borrower’s loan application, and they’re perfectly capable of telling a borrower they’re getting a great 30-year fixed-rate mortgage while selling them a subprime mortgage with exploding payments, adding a zero to the value of the house, or anything else. That’s fraud, it’s illegal, it happened all the time, and it was perpetrated by handsomely paid financial professionals. (more…)