Baker’s relief bill deserves try

Ford to City: Drop Dead,” a legendary headline screamed in 1975, when a president refused to bail out New York City from financial disaster.

Change the president and the locale, and Louisiana hurricane victims might be forgiven for thinking the same thing.

After hemming and hawing for months about U.S. Rep. Richard Baker’s home-buyout bill, and never really saying what he had against it, Bush brushed it aside last week.

Only after aides revealed his opposition did Bush grant a one-paragraph explanation. It amounted to three things: Don’t create more bureaucracy; we already gave you people lots of money; and Louisiana doesn’t have a plan.

Baker and Gov. Kathleen Blanco countered the Baker bill is so important it amounts to “the plan.”

Blanco said she only really controls $6.2 billion in recovery money that will be stretched far too thin to aid owners of 200,000 destroyed or damaged homes.

She said opposing bureaucracy is an odd argument for any federal officials to make.

What she should argue is that Baker’s bill is a plan for people, not politicians.

Yes, the bill would set up a new bureaucracy called the Louisiana Recovery Corp., but this is not an open-ended promise to hand out money to politicians or write checks to the idle.

The LRC is supposed to be a hard-nosed business proposition. It would pay willing homeowners some, but not all, of the equity in their homes.

If they have a mortgage, the agency would pay it off, giving lenders back some, but not all, of their investment.

The agency would clean up the property and, working with local interests, market it to investors for redevelopment.

The LRC should take some decisions from politicians and give them to homeowners. They could take less and get on with their lives or keep their property in hopes of working out a better deal some other way. The agency would not take land against the owners’ will.

The corporation could transform many homeowners from helpless victims to people with some hope for the future. It could block a wave of foreclosures that might wipe out tens of thousands of families’ finances.

It could help head off statewide economic stagnation and spur speedy, organized recovery for communities that must come back for the state to recover.

Baker said he’s not giving up. He sees support in both chambers of Congress and says he has passed significant legislation over Bush’s objection before. But the opposition of a president whose party controls Congress is a major setback.

In fairness to Bush, Louisiana leaders made it easy for him to so casually shrug off the bill.

Our U.S. senators tried to grab $250 billion on sympathy instead of catalogued needs. The governor and Legislature found money for political projects during the crisis and so far have done little to adjust state government to the vastly different needs. New Orleans Mayor Ray Nagin famously made blackness, not prosperity, his top goal.

Some Louisiana leaders also exude an air of entitlement, even arrogance, demanding Washington immediately turn over as much taxpayer money as the state demands.

The Baker bill is not another toy for Louisiana politicians to play with or a well-intentioned program for them to screw up. It should actually bypass the politicians by dealing mostly with residents and bankers and developers.

Bush would appoint the managers of the agency, with Blanco suggesting only two. The U.S. treasury secretary would have final say over how much money the agency can borrow.

The bill is founded in Baker’s long expertise in the complexities of housing finance and the federal government’s long interest in affordable homes as a big part of the American dream.

Baker’s bill also is complex and in some ways unprecedented, and who knows how wily politicians, lawyers or speculators might try to abuse it?

Baker says he is willing to compromise. He should be. Louisiana is asking the nation to take a huge risk by borrowing up to $30 billion. Limits and controls are appropriate to minimize the chance of abuse.

The idea is worth more than months of foot-shuffling and a sudden brush-off by the president.

The 200,000 families that might directly benefit from it, and the 4.5 million Louisiana residents affected by their state’s continued crisis, deserve a hearing.

And if you insist on "blackmailing" the rest of us to rebuild your state,

Let them try.

They had better remember all those sugar subsidies Landrieu screwed the "American People" over with, just to get re-elected. It's not as if any of those damn politicians had Louisiana's best interest in mind in the first place. What makes them think they do now?!

******

We can start here.

******

Sen. Landrieu, like many Louisiana politicians, opposes a recent move to phase out import quotas on sugar.

Landrieu's efforts to "protect" sugar

American farmers no longer can earn sufficient profit from sugar. But rather than switch to more profitable crops, these farmers lobby Congress to restrict imports from foreign countries or levy tariffs to make foreign sugar uneconomical. As a result, they prolong their precarious positions, and Americans pay two to three times what the rest of the world pays for sugar.

Louisiana sugar producers have been protected by tariffs almost continuously since 1816. Import quotas on sugar have existed since 1934, except for one eight-year break that ended when President Reagan re-established them in 1982.

Sen. Landrieu -- and almost every other Louisiana politician -- opposes the Central American Free Trade Agreement, a plan that would double import quotas for sugar but take 15 more years to do it.

Howlin, are you blind or have you noticed the abject hatred, insults, ignorance and abuse being shoved down our throats here in Louisiana? We don't deserve this. Lots of your fellow freepers need our help and understanding. No one is looking for a hand-out. This proposal is not a hand-out, but a loan. It will not be administered by those 'corrupt" politicians everyone seems to think we're over run with. Almost all of the loans will go to homeowners and property owners who are currently in a state of flux. No one is getting anything from their insurance policies right now, at least very few are getting settlments that are acceptable. The insurance companies know these folks can't take forever to restart their lives and they are taking advantage of them big-time with low ball offers.

This bill, if put into action would help these normal (just like you and me) folks buy time for themselves and free them from what they are dealing with. You won't be paying the bill for this, the ones who redevelop the property will. What's wrong with this?

BTW, on the subject of self-help, what's wrong with Louisiana financing it's own recovery through taxation on oil and gas use of our coastline? Do you want oil and gas rigs off the coast of North Carolina?

What does this proposed bill have to do with Nagin? He's not getting any of the money. It's not even a gift, but a loan to be repaid.

If we are talking about House bill 4100, I don't think the bill talks about a loan. It buys the property, fixes it up, then sells it. An excerpt from HB 4100 on how it will acquire property (including the first right of refusal)

SEC. 6. PROPERTY ACQUISITION AUTHORITY AND METHODOLOGY.
(a) IN GENERAL.—Pursuant to section 5(b), the Corporation shall negotiate to acquire title to real property and compensate any property owner, mortgagee or primary lien holder with an interest in such real property.
(b) PURCHASE OFFER FOR REAL PROPERTY SECURED BY A LIEN.—The Corporation shall take into consideration the following in constructing offers of compensation for the acquisition of real property secured by a lien:
      (1) The Corporation’s expenses to improve the property for sale and development.
      (2) The Corporation’s anticipated return upon the property’s disposition.
      (3) The post-event fair market value of the property.
      (4) The remaining principle balance of any outstanding mortgage.
      (5) The potential for economic recovery of the mortgagee.
(c) PURCHASE FROM OWNER.—The Corporation shall take into consideration the following in constructing offers of compensation for any real property where no lien secures such real property:
      (1) The Corporation’s expenses to improve the property for sale and development.
      (2) The Corporation’s anticipated return upon the property’s disposition.
      (3) The post-event fair market value of the property.
      (4) The potential for economic recovery of the property owner.
(d) RIGHT OF FIRST REFUSAL AND OPTION TO RE-PURCHASE REAL PROPERTY.—
     (1) IN GENERAL.—Subject to paragraph (2), the Corporation shall ensure that any entity awarded a contract under Section 7 shall grant a right of first refusal and option to obtain an interest in real property of comparable size and location in redeveloped areas to any party previously holding title.
     (2) GUIDELINES FOR EXERCISE.—The Corporation shall—
          (A) ensure that the right of first refusal and option to obtain an interest in real property that are granted pursuant to paragraph (1) are granted before the real property is listed for public sale; and
           (B) shall establish guidelines to provide that any party receiving the option to obtain an interest in real property is given adequate time to consider and exercise such option.
(e) RIGHT TO RETAIN AN INTEREST IN REAL PROPERTY.—
     (1) PROPERTY OWNER OR MORTGAGEE RIGHT TO RETAIN INTEREST.—The Corporation shall offer any property owner or mortgagee an option to retain an interest in real property of comparable size and location, subject to the following conditions:
          (A) The Corporation shall pay no compensation to the property owner or mortgagee.
          (B) The property owner or mortgagee shall compensate the Corporation for expenses to improve the property for sale and development when such property owner or mortgagee obtains construction financing for development of property.
     (2) REQUIREMENT TO DEVELOP PROPERTY. Any property owner or mortgagee exercising a right to retain interest in a property shall—
          (A) obtain construction financing within 90 days of notification by the Corporation that the area in which the property owner or mortgagee retains an interest is available for development; and
          (B) complete construction of a replacement residential or commercial structure, as applicable, within 2 years of a notification pursuant to subparagraph (A).
     (3) FAILURE TO DEVELOP.—If the Corporation certifies in writing that a property owner or mortgagee has failed to comply with the requirements of paragraph (2), the Corporation shall exercise its authority pursuant to Section 8(c).
(f) LIMITATION ON PAYMENT AND PROHIBITION AGAINST WINDFALL.—In general, in constructing and extending offers to acquire real property under this section, the Corporation shall ensure that—
     (1) in no case may the cumulative payment by the Corporation to any individual for the purposes of acquiring real property exceed $500,000; and
     (2) in no case may any person be the beneficiary of a windfall gain as a result of any purchase offer extended by the Corporation.

I think my biggest problem with the bill is how is it actually going to determine the amount to be paid for each property. It is too general for my tastes. The less specific it is the more chance of abuse.

I am not saying that I don't want to help my fellow citizens, I am saying this bill is a good place to start, but I need more information on cost and more detail on the guidelines for how it is going to be implemented.

I believe wholeheartedly there was and is corruption on the Levy Commission that needs to be cleaned up immediately. However, I believe there was and is a lack of Federal oversight for that commission. And this is the crux........Must the citizens of the Metropolitan area of New Orleans suffer because the Federal Government lacked oversight for the building of our levy protection system. Where does the buck stop? It always stops at the Federal level.

This has to be the most idiotic statement I've read on this thread. The state of Louisiana is responsible itself. Most things DON'T ALWAYS stop at the federal level, they stop at the state level. Thats why states have their own laws, courts and constitution. Maybe if the good citizens of Louisiana knew this before Katrina hit, they wouldn't be in the shape they are now - one hand sticking out looking for a handout, the other hand with a gun to the head of the US taxpayers demanding a handout, while Mr. Chocolate and the Edith Bunker look-alike run around clueless.

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.