Clinton Takes on Predatory Lenders

[Karmadillo]

http://www.guardian.co.uk/worldlatest/story/0,,-6832050,00.html

Tuesday August 7, 2007 5:16 AM

By PHILIP ELLIOTT

Associated Press Writer

CONCORD, N.H. (AP) - Presidential hopeful Hillary Rodham Clinton was calling Tuesday for a crackdown on ``unscrupulous mortgage brokers,'' proposing penalties on those who engage in predatory lending.

She was also proposing funds to help at-risk homeowners dodge foreclosures along with an increase in affordable housing options.

``Everybody wants these (lending) organizations to be successful, but not at the cost of taking advantage of the consumer,'' Clinton told The Associated Press in advance of the policy speech. ``And the unfortunate fact is, many people have gotten into the mortgage market who are being exploited and abused by boiler-room mortgage-lending operations that are just like selling phony penny stocks or the old traveling salesmen with the snake oil.''

Clinton has been critical of subprime mortgages, loans given to people with blemished credit histories or low incomes. Weak home prices and rising interest rates have made it increasingly difficult for borrowers to keep up with their payments; delinquencies and foreclosures are sharply rising.

more...

[snowbear]

1. Dayum... she's taking that one straight outta Edwards handbook..

He's been talking about cracking down on predatory lenders even back when HRC was claiming she "may run".

What took so long?

[ThomCat]

3. I wonder if there is any substance to her proposal

and if she'll really battle to push it through. Where has she been on this issue for the past few years?
x(

[Ethelk2044]

15. You are correct. She has been in the Senate for two terms now. If she wa serious what didn't

she go after them her first term in office. Why wait until now? Bull Shit.

[Karmadillo]

19. She did go after them in her first term in office. See post #5.

nt

[Karmadillo]

5. Maybe not. She co-sponsored the Predatory Lending Consumer Protection Act in 2002.

http://www.allbusiness.com/personal-finance/real-estate-mortgage-loans/199994-1.html

ON MAY 1, 2002, SENATOR PAUL S. SARbanes (D-Maryland), chairman of the Senate Banking, Housing and Urban Affairs Committee, introduced the Predatory Lending Consumer Protection Act of 2002 (S. 2438), a bill to amend the Truth in Lending Act (TILA). The legislation is designed to restrict abusive predatory lending practices, expand consumer protections and strengthen enforcement of existing protections in current law by enhancing civil remedies and statutory penalties.

Predatory lenders, the bill's sponsors say, typically target vulnerable people with equity in their homes, underwriting the property without establishing a borrower's ability to repay the loan. Predatory lenders typically make their money by charging extremely high points and origination fees, and by "packing" other products into the loan, including upfront premiums for credit insurance. The financing of these fees greatly increases the balance of the loan and leaves the borrower with high monthly payments, in some instances leading to the loss of the home. "The predatory lending industry plays on these hopes and dreams to cynically cheat people out of their wealth," Sarbanes said in introducing the bill. "These lenders target lower-income, elderly and, often, uneducated homeowners for their abusive practices. And, as a study released ... by the Center for Community Change so clearly indicates, they target minorities, driving a wedge between these families and the hope of a productive life in the economic and financial mainstream of America. We owe it to these hardworking families to provide protections against these unscrupulous pirates."

Joining Sarbanes in sponsoring the legislation were 14 of his colleagues, all Democrats: Senators Christopher Dodd (Connecticut), Charles Schumer (New York), Debbie Stabenow (Michigan), Jon Corzine (New Jersey), Edward Kennedy (Massachusetts), John Kerry (Massachusetts), Barbara Mikulski (Maryland), Richard Durbin (Illinois), Barbara Boxer (California), Paul Wellstone (Minnesota), Robert Torricelli (New Jersey), Hillary Rodham Clinton (New York), Mark Dayton (Minnesota) and Carl Levin (Michigan).

more...

[Clintonista2]

7. Why do you need to take something postive, and turn it negative?

I've noticed you seem to do this alot. Clinton is (falsely) labelled as the most "pro-business" candidate, yet when she does something outside of this preconcieved label, she's still attacked for it in some way. Threatened much?

[ThomCat]

10. She is the most pro-business candidate.

She favors "free trade," NAFTA and it's various spawns, bankrupsy "reform," and welfare "reform." She defends and supports all the worst things that Bill did as President, that favor corporations in ways that decimate this country.

Anyone who thinks she doesn't favor corporations hasn't been paying attention.

[killbotfactory]

11. She's throwing us scraps

I think going after these lenders, and the possibility of some type of universal health care by the end of her second term are the only good things I can hope for under a Clinton presidency.

[Karmadillo]

21. What do you object to in the legislation she cosponsored? Seems a lot better

than what we have now.

[Rabrrrrrr]

2. Good - someone sure as hell needs to. Then go after the credit card industry.

That service that Gary Coleman is hawking charges - I noticed while reading the fine print on the TV - an interest rate of 99.9%.

That's fucking outrageous.

On the one hand, if someone is dumb enough to pay it, then screw 'em.

But on the other hand, we all know that those services are ONLY being used by the poor and/or poor money managers and/or people who are extremely desperate; and those services only fuck the people even more than they were already fucked.

[ThomCat]

4. The credit and insurance industries both desperately need to be

put on leashes. Restraining those two industries would do a world of good for a hell of a lot of people.

[Lerkfish]

17. I wonder what Clinton's voting record is regarding credit cards?

[Lydia Leftcoast]

9. There used to be an ad on TV telling people they could own a

computer for only $35 a week--for a full year!

Let's see, that's more than twice as much as a desktop computer actually costs in your average retail store.

[Bryn]

6. Good!

Actually I remember Edward talking about predatory lending while back.

This happened to me. When I bought a manufactured home near the Keys in Florida financed by a subprime mortgage, but back then I didn't know better so when I joined a group against Greentree Mortgage yahoo group I learned a lot more. Then I learned that the dealer that sold me that house had received a kickback from Greentree which was illegal. I finally sold that house last year and got rid of Greentree. Be careful with a mortgage co. and make sure it is not a subprime mortgage. I learned a lot the hard way. Greentree would add bogus charges, etc. That's when I suspected that something was wrong with them. Also they forced their own insurance on me even though I had already got one of my own and I had to fight them off. If you missed just one payment, they threatened to foreclose and would not listen to you, didn't care if you had a problem. They could call and call people at where I worked!

[avrdream]

8. You go girl!

As I keep saying (away from DU), pay attention to the ISSUES. Hillary has been on my side of the issues for many, many years and that's why she'll get my support.

[w4rma]

12. Nipping at the edges rather than going after the problem, as usual for Hillary. (nt)

[bedpanartist]

13. Predatory lenders shouldn't be gone after

the rules of the game should be changed. If someone is making predatory loans, and it's 100 percent legal, who in the hell is going to go after who?

What a bunch of bullshit.

Until strict laws are passed on interest, nothing is going to change. And I'm sure that as usual, if any kind of law does change, it will be the bankers writing all of the small print.

[Lerkfish]

14. you make a very valid point. The system is at fault, not individual lenders.

[bedpanartist]

16. yep, they are only doing what the law allows

and trust me, I know all about it. I live in Dayton, Ohio the home of one of the highest foreclosure rates in the country.

We have over 10,000 abandoned structures here, and would give Detroit a run for their money were we a little bigger.

[bedpanartist]

18. Check out some of her phony responses, it'll lead you to the core of her support for corporate evil

"Always, in a market the consumer or the borrower has to be responsible,'' Clinton said. "But on the other side, we don't want to have such an imbalance where the lender and the broker can take advantage of the consumer."

This is where she is taking the corporate line held that eventually, no matter how devious, unscrupulous the lending practice (mind you, legal lending practices - these people have lawyers and follow the corrupt legislation and regulations to the tee), eventually, all responsibility falls upon the individual schlep who took the loan out to begin with.

Notice how the article ends: "It's part of the American ethos that if you can pay off your debts, you should be encouraged to do it,'' she said."

This is code for a life of indentured serfdom to the corporate state.

Who is willing to tell the truth and state that ballooning interest practices should be illegal? Clinton said nothing of substance, and 1 billion is a tiny amount that will achieve nothing to the total scope of the problem.

Personally, I believe the practice of interest on loans should be illegal, as it is certainly immoral in the eyes of the almighty, and his minions of representatives sent in his name over the ages.

[Karmadillo]

20. Look at the legislation she supported (post #5). It would end balloon payments.

It doesn't end interest on loans, but Calvin embraced that on behalf of the almighty if that's any consolation. I doubt we're going to put that particular genie back in the bottle at this point.

[JPZenger]

22. Ban Early Payment Penalties

There are some people in predatory mortgages who can't switch to an alternative because of high early payment penalties. The Federal government should ban all early payment penalties in mortgages. If you can find a better deal, great.

It is amazing that so many agencies washed their hands of these problems for so many years.

The trick today is to find some way to help the innocent victims without financially bailing out the immoral lenders.

[flamin lib]

23. She's a little late. The sub-prime market has collapsed and

there won't be any more predatory lending because nobody will exist to lend to that market.