Senate Dems squabble over which homeowners to help

AP on Yahoo ^ | 3/13/09 | Julie Hirschfeld Davis - ap

[NormsRevenge]

WASHINGTON – Disagreement among Senate Democrats over how many struggling homeowners should qualify for court-ordered mortgage relief has stalled a key part of President Barack Obama's foreclosure prevention plan on Capitol Hill.

Behind the scenes, top Democrats are offering banks and credit unions sweeteners to drop their opposition to the plan, hoping that even tepid support from lenders might win a few vital votes from skeptical Democrats and Republicans. The bill would give judges new power to lower the interest rate and principal on a primary home loan as part of a bankruptcy settlement.

The measure passed the House last week — but only after a mini-revolt by moderates forced Democrats to narrow who might qualify.

They made sure the help was restricted to people who couldn't afford their mortgages without a court-ordered rewrite to lower their monthly payments, and those who had already tried to work out more affordable terms with their mortgage company.

[MrB]

Simple, using standard liberalism,

you “help out” those that acted irresponsibly and are facing consequence

with money confiscated from those who acted responsibly.

Controversy solved.

[NormsRevenge]

I guess they done run out of Homeowners Helper , now it’s more Porkusboard of proposals, maybe they could just give us po’ folk some gubamint cheese instead of all the melodrama..

[Tolerance Sucks Rocks]

This bill will (hopefully) self-destruct in 3...2...1...

[longtermmemmory]

it is really easy, in a bankruptcy can the debtor afford the house at fair market price +$1? If it is the identical price the bank was going to get ANYWAYS then that is reasonable. It does not matter who gets the house just that is is priced at the free market price.

If the debtor can not afford fair market price then they are out ANYWAYS.

[RedDogzRule]

I’m pretty sure that active membership in the Demonrat Party will be an indicator of homeowner bailout eligibility. Hey, the Soviets thought that method was effective in doling out favors!

[Kolokotronis]

For the life of me I can’t see how this law, even as rewritten, can be constitutional.

Frankly, this idea is more a benefit to greedy lenders than it is to improvident borrowers. The “lenders”, like lets say GMAC or better yet Quicken and Ditech ought to take a page out of the books of small local banks which are cutting deals to reduce interest rates and extend the terms of troubled mortgages. The banks look good, the borrowers get to stay in their houses and the banks have a better shot at at least recovering their principal and maybe even a little interest.

[oldbill]

CONTRACT - An agreement between two or more competent parties in which an offer is made and accepted, and each party benefits.

There it is, you idiot politicians, most of whom are lawyers.

Nobody forces a contract (that nullifies it) so both parties have to agree to it. So what's the problem about living up to the terms you agree to? Obama likes to talk about "responsibility", but it doesn't seem to apply to Democrats and their core constituencies.

[NutCrackerBoy]

Senate Dems squabble over which homeowners to help bribe

[Vigilanteman]

Yeah, but if there are more people who acted irresponsibly than there are funds which can be extrated from the people who acted responsibly, then you need to start making a heiarchy of victimhood. The jackasses have a super majority because they convinced so many groups they were victims.

Now, they are going to have to make some victims more equal than others. It ain't going to be pretty!

[fightinJAG]

“Help” them all, across-the-board with massive tax relief. Duh.