My Ph.D. adviser David E. RePass, professor emeritus at the University of Connecticut, used to frequently recite an axiom about the U.S. Congress that rings true, regardless of era, or circumstance.
"Congress does not react, unless not reacting will result in the wrath of the American voter."
Well, concerning housing, it looks like Congress sees the wrath of the American voter ahead because the legislative body is starting to react.
Two measures working their way through Congress may ease the housing crisis. The first, a bipartisan Senate measure, is a modest step to address the rise in home foreclosures, The New York Times reported Friday.
The bill, which has bipartisan Senate support, includes a new, standard property tax deduction for up to $1,000/$500 for all couples/individuals who file taxes, not merely those who itemize their deductions, and provides $10 billion in tax-exempt bonds for local housing agencies to refinance loans and provide mortgages for first-time buyers, among other provisions, The Times reported.
Meanwhile, in the U.S. House of Representatives, where the Senate bill is headed, U.S. Rep. Barney Frank, D-Massachusetts and chairman of the Financial Services Committee, will hold hearings on a plan to provide up to $300 billion in federally-guaranteed loans to help up to 1.5 million homeowners at risk of default, The Wall Street Journal reported (subscription required).
Under Frank's proposal, borrowers would have to certify that they are truly in danger of default and not intentionally defaulting when a default could be avoided, simply to take advantage of more-favorable mortgage terms that the Federal Housing Administration would guarantee, The Journal reported.
Political Analysis: If Democratic Party history and case study is any precedent, look for Rep. Frank, et al., to win concessions from the Senate to broaden eligibility assistance beyond what the Senate bill provides. However, it's highly unlikely Rep. Frank will be able to secure a $300 billion FHA guarantee provision. A $125-150 billion guarantee -- $62.5-75 billion each year for 2008 and 2009, with a more-rigorous means test to identify those homeowners truly in danger of default, is more likely. Initially, the talk inside the beltway was that President Bush would oppose the FHA guarantee. But given the deepening housing slump -- and the electoral pressure incumbent Congressional Republicans are likely to face in the 2008 election absent an assistance program -- Bush may very well sign the measure.











Reader Comments (Page 1 of 1)
4-04-2008 @ 6:45PM
william lindblad said...
No Closing Cost Refi. No Points. No Credit Report or Processing Fees.
www.Countrywide.com
I copied the above from the AOL finance main. The concept of nothing down, 100% financing, no credit check, etc. is what started everying going down hill. As a taxpayer I find the idea of our government bailing out those that do not deserve it revolting and that is just what they are going to do. As Franklin said - we agree to disagree in this reference to the august body. They only time they agree is when their respective (both parties) butts are up against the wrath of the voter and this time they are apt to find plenty to go around. By summer, the economic problems created by 15% will have worked there way into the lives of at least 60%. That 45% did not have a damn thing to do with sub-prime and greed, but they will feel the pain and they won't be happy. This might be a very interesting election year as voter apathy is likely to get replaced with ire. What is being proposed is too broad based and is a candidate for fraud and corruption. While some assistance will surely go to those in need, the bulk will go to those who do not, nor deserve. It will happen as it always does and when the media gets hold of it, so will John Q. Public. Congress should not act in a hasty manner and think these bills over with great care - especially if you are seated there and planning on remaining.
5-14-2008 @ 10:52AM
Roberta said...
I agree with William above. Since when it is the governments business to take money from me and give it to someone who doesn't pay their bills? And then set up a system, (costing more money) to monitor and dole out the money? If you don't pay your mortgage, you lose your house. Isn't that what this people agreed to? They signed the papers. Not taxpayers job to fix their mistakes.