Bankers Win

Legislation that would have allowed bankruptcy judges to renegotiate mortgages for homeowners was successfully filibustered yesterday.

So not only will mortgage bankers and neighborhoods (and the broader economy) have to deal with a new glut of foreclosed homes, but families will also be booted into the street while others will have to go through bankruptcy too, but still lose their homes.

Those Republicans (and 15 centrist Democrats) are all about family values, eh? Rat bastards.

Adding… Make no mistake. This was entirely about the influence of the mortgage banking lobby. And I can’t help but to think that if the tea party gang were really about The People and not just about making random loud noises, they would’ve stood up for working families over lobbyists and bankers who were partly responsible for this entire economic mess.

No one is suggesting that the 1.7 million or so homeowners would get free ride, either — but instead, they’d have a judge on their side to reconfigure some of these upside-down loans. This would’ve saved not just the homes themselves, but entire neighborhoods and the property values of the homes surrounding the potentially foreclosed ones. Senator Durbin’s reaction after the jump…


Senator Durbin:

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? [...]At the end of the day, this is a real test of where we’re going in this country. Next up, after mortgages, credit cards. Next week, the same bankers get to come in and see how much might and power they have in the Senate when it comes to credit card reform. And the question we’re going to face, is whether or not this Senate is going to listen to the families facing foreclosure, the families facing job loss and bills they can’t pay, or whether they’re going to listen to the American Bankers Association, which has folded its arms and walked out of the room. Well, I hope that we have the courage to stand up to them. I hope this is the beginning of a new day in the Senate, a new dialogue in the Senate, that says to the bankers across America that your business as usual has put us in a terrible mess, and we’re not going to allow that to continue. 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.

This entry was posted in Economy and tagged , , . Bookmark the permalink.
  • mattpddm03

    Banks do own the senate. I guess they are in favor of bailouts, excpet for when it is for their customers.I just downloaded a Woody Guthrie song “The Jolly Banker” released yesterday via the website of a band I like. Just as relevant now as it was when it was written in the 40s.

  • welmaker

    It’s not just republicans.Senator evan bayh is owned by the banking lobby. Every democratic rep that voted against this provision is owned by the banking lobby.This banking lobbyist buy-off of our representatives votes would never have happened if the democratic members had an ounce of courage. The democrats have the majority (A HUGE MAJORITY). They get passed whatever they want to get passed.Other than the banking lobby, there is no explanation to justify the elimination of the mortgage re-negotiation provision from being included in the bill.It would be great if there was a poll for each democratic member’s district on this very issue that we could hold up against the member’s vote.

  • welmaker

    I goofed on this one – I read senate but essentially commented about the house.Anyway, I think Jane Hamsher indicated that Evan Bayh’s and his wife’s (who is a super lobbyist) connections to special interests did not help his chances of getting the nod for vp.

  • Theghostsong

    Jesus, they used our own tax revenue to crush us.There has come a reckoning, blue dogs.

  • J

    Dear Dick Durbin: Marry me. kthxbai

  • Sierradrinker

    Welmaker,Seriously? Every Senator that voted against this is in the pocket of the bankers? Yes, it’s a big lobby, but please. We can’t have it both ways. The republicans can’t all be evil neo-cons who are in the pockets of all lobbyists and want legal machine guns and kill all criminals and make sure every embryo grows into a jesus loving patriot while all democrats are out for the middle class, except when it comes to banking laws.I didn’t read the law, but I can’t say I really disagree with the vote. If 15 dems and 40 repubs voted to fillibuster, it’s not likely to get a majority vote anyway. I’m ok with this. I don’t want a one party system. I have confidence that given unchecked power the dems can fuck up the country just as badly as Dubbya and the neo-cons (ok maybe not that bad, Bush set the bar pretty high on that one).They need to adjust the accounting rules that will allow the banks to reclassify these mortgages. My understanding is that now they are considered troubled assets with little to no fair value. Reduce enough assets to zero fair value and you trigger debt covenants with the bank’s bond holders (now I’m getting into finance geek speak). Banks get their bonds called, can’t make a payment, now they’re in bankruptcy and the fed needs to step in.There needs to be a third party negotiator, not a judge. Judges know law, not finance. The mortages should be renegotiated so that the people can stay in their homes and the bank can either turn the mortgage into a profit, or minimal loss. The blame here doesn’t lie with only one side. Those people signed those mortgages even if they didn’t fully understand them.

  • Elizabeth

    This is a tragedy. I hope that the Democrats that voted against this know that we have their names.Sierradrinker, bankruptcy judges know a lot about finance. There job, day in and day out, is to evaluate finances and come to a reasonable resolution.Not all of the folks that are in trouble deserve scorn.

  • vintagegoddess

    “Judges know law, not finance.”I would disagree. Bankruptcy judges know what they are doing and at the moment they are allowed to renegotiate the interest rates on 2nd homes, 3rd homes, boats, ect. Just not a petitioners primary home.I am beyond embarrassed and angry that my 2 Senators voted against this bill.

  • http://www.xkcd.com/ ∇ Silly Ratfaced Git ∇

    Come witness the heart of corporatism. It is a black and ugly thing. Filled only with the love of the almighty dollar there is no room for compassion, love, or hope.Take down the names. These people are traitors to humanity and have aligned themselves with unspeakable greed. Anyone that votes for these Judas goats is a fool.

  • Sierradrinker

    Anyone that votes for these Judas goats is a fool.

    Good god, we’re starting to sound like the wingnuts.

  • Sierradrinker

    Ok, maybe that’s a little harsh, but I’ve heard statements like that before usually coming from the other side. If you disagree with this one bill are you no longer liberal enough to be part of the Democratic party? I really don’t think becoming as absolute left as the neo-cons are right is a good idea. Dissent, even within your own party, is a good thing.

  • http://www.xkcd.com/ ∇ Silly Ratfaced Git ∇

    No Sierradrinker, you are simply wrong.They didn’t just vote this down because they believed in some abstract notion.They voted to make more of their constituents homeless. They voted to pretend that bankers were faultless in the current financial crisis. They voted that the banker’s profits are more important than citizens havinga home to live in.They not only are not liberal enough, we already knew that, they are judas goats selling their constituents to the highest bidder.I am an atheist and take offense that I may not use a well know literary illusion because it does not meet with your acceptance.If you would like to explain why you think that this outcome is good for anyone besides the greedy leeches in the banking industry, I am all ears.I doubt that you can. This was the corporatist perversion of our government that has been milking us like cows for the past several decades.Perhaps you can explain why our pharmaceuticals are twice the price of anywhere else on the planet. It is because these same corporatist have sold us to the highest bidder.I want the taxpayer’s money that was pured into the banks returned, right now. These greedy pricks are using our money to bribe our congressmen into making laws that fuck *us*. Our government provides corporate welfare while the corporations make people homeless.If you don’t see the tremendous injustice in this, then you must be blind.These corporatist criminals must be removed from congress.

  • http://www.xkcd.com/ ∇ Silly Ratfaced Git ∇

    BTW. I am a free market economist. Companies that make bad decisions should die. Why are we providing welfare to companies that were being run by obviously bad management? The failures should fail.This is what Santelli said about homeowners. Why are bankers getting special treatment? They are losers that should be out of a job. They made bad decisions, they should have to pay for it. Why should my taxes go to support a bunch of losers.Two can play this game.

  • Sierradrinker

    SRG,First, I didn’t mean to offend with the “good god” comment. I’m an atheist as well, and it’s just an expression. When I say “god dammit” or “jesus fucking christ,” I’m not praying, they too are just expressions, so chill out – Ramen.When you say “greedy leeches in the banking industry” do you mean those working in the banking industry, or the investors as well? My guess is that this is good for the investors. So there you go about who it’s good for.But, I don’t disagree with you that something needs to be done. We need mortgage relief. We need to stop blindly giving banks money. I never said I was against mortgage relief or that I agreed with that douchebag Santelli and the teabaggers. I simply do not believe that it should be at the sole discretion of a judge to renegotiate or reset the terms of a mortgage. I am not suggesting we simply throw out on the street everyone who can’t afford their mortgage. But, even Obama has acknowledged that some people got way in over their heads (yes I know that these are the exception not the rule) and purchased houses hundreds of thousands of dollars more than they could afford. If that is the case and there is no chance they will ever be able to repay that mortgage, then the bank has the right and should have the right to foreclose and evict.Pharmaceuticals have not one thing to do with this discussion, but… they are twice the price in the U.S. because the U.S. has the most fucked up healthcare system that will never be fixed until we go to a single-payor system. Yes, that’s socialized medicine and I am 100% for it.As far as removing the corporte criminalists from congress, this is where you sound like the mirror image of the right. If they start to govern for those twenty-odd percent of people who identify themselves as liberal, they will just as surely lose the house, the senate, and the white house as Dubbya and the neo-cons did the last two elections.Unlike you, I’m not a free market economist. I beleive in heavy regulation for industries that affect the general public to such a degree that the failure of one particular large institution or industry would through the entire country or world into a recession/depression.

  • Sierradrinker

    p.s. It’s not a game, it’s a discussion.