Senate dems sell us out -- again

(sigh) Why did we bother working so hard to elect allegedly progressive Senators? I hate these b******s. They've srewed us yet again.

A few weeks ago I wrote a blog praising the Senate Bankruptcy reform act of 2008, caling it one of the few pieces of housing related legislation that had some merit.

Most importantly, it would have restored to Bankruptcy judges the power they had before 2005 to force down the amount of a debtor's mortgage. Well, the Senate republicans did one of their faux filibusters and the bill failed.
So now, our erstwhile progressive democratic senators have caucused with the Republicans and what do we get? A complete cave-in as to debtors, and huge dollops of gifties for homebuilders. In other words, "our" Senators are reaching into our tax pockets and have actually succeeded in making matters worse.

From the Washington Post story:

"Housing Accord Puts Builders First," 4/3/2008

"Senate Democratic and Republican leaders rushing to address the nation's housing crisis reached agreement yesterday on a package that would provide billions of dollars in tax rebates to the slumping home-building industry while offering little to homeowners threatened with foreclosure.

"After working through Tuesday night to flesh out a bipartisan agreement, lawmakers unveiled a bill that rejects the most ambitious plans for aiding distressed homeowners, including a Democratic proposal to permit bankruptcy judges to modify the mortgage on a person's primary residence.

"Instead, lawmakers settled on a sharply scaled-back array of measures that would provide $4 billion in grants for cities to buy foreclosed properties, temporary tax breaks worth up to $7,000 for home buyers who purchase foreclosed properties, and new tax deductions for almost every American who owns a home. The package, which would cost about $15 billion over the next 10 years, also would jump-start stalled legislation to streamline the Federal Housing Administration, one of the top priorities of the Bush administration.

"Families who cannot afford to repay their home loans -- the group at the heart of the mortgage meltdown -- would benefit mainly from $100 million to expand foreclosure counseling services and greater latitude for local housing authorities to use tax-exempt bonds in refinancing subprime loans.

So, homebuilders get tax breaks, the Bush administration gets "one of its top priorities" and Joe consumer gets it in the chops.

Nice work, Senate dems.

Somebody please tell me again: Why do we bother?

Meta: 

Comments

Sell out

I posted it in the forum and I agree and yeah, let's make it the front page. All of that very hard work, trying to elect representatives actually interested in representing the American people and this is what we get and such an obvious royal screw job.

And everyone wonders why the Obama-Clinton split is in essence, 50-50. Well trying to yank out an epsilon of policy that just might be in the national interest, working America's interest when it's like looking for a needle in a haystack is a very tough call!

I feel your pain I try to keep emotionalism off of here normally but in this case I just wanted to scream.

Sell out bastards.

You must have Javascript enabled to use this form.

Sell out

Why would a city need money to buy foreclosed properties?

In the case of an abandonment or disrepair they bulldoze the improvements and add the cost to the tax levy.

In most States, mortgages are dismissed against homes that are delinquent on property tax payments. This makes me wonder what else is in the Bill.

You must have Javascript enabled to use this form.

no tax revenues

they lost their tax base to do anything about it, so they are just sitting there, turning into crack/meth houses, rat infestations and so on.

I would prefer they turn them into public housing for people in need. There are millions of homeless out there.

You must have Javascript enabled to use this form.

no regulation and Stephen Colbert clip

Why is it Colbert's comedy makes more economic sense than most news shows? Has a reference to Jim Cramer in this clip.

Basically Paulson in an obscure 218 report is not going to have any more regulation of the financial sector.

You must have Javascript enabled to use this form.