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.

U.S. Rep. Barney Frank, D-Massachusetts and Chairman of the House Financial Services Committee, Thursday introduced legislation to enable the Federal Housing Administration to insure and guarantee mortgages that have been written down banks and other mortgage holders, Rep. Frank announced in a statement.

Rep. Frank's proposal would permit the FHA to provide up to $300 billion in loan guarantees which could potentially result in the refinance of 1-2 million at-risk mortgages, preventing foreclosures, "protecting neighborhoods and help stabilize the housing market."

With home foreclosures expected to increase in 2008 as the second wave of variable interest rate mortgages reset, an influential member of Congress is expected to introduce legislation that would enable the Federal Housing Administration to buy at-risk loans, enabling them to be refinanced and preventing homeowners from being foreclosed upon, The Financial Times reported Wednesday.

U.S. Congressman Barney Frank, D-Massachusetts and chairman of the House Financial Services Committee, is floating a $15 billion initiative that would authorize the FHA to buy as many as 1 million at-risk mortgages, The FT reported. Some loans, such as those for investment properties and vacation homes, would not be eligible for the program.

The overlooked FHA

Overlooked during the "Roaring 1990s" economic expansion and this decade's housing boom, the Federal Housing Administration is a Depression-era agency that insures loans made to borrowers with poor credit.

Democratic congressional leaders do not think the Fed's new mortgage rules go far enough and have indicated that they are considering taking power away from the Fed when it comes to protecting consumers, according to a story in today's Wall Street Journal. Senator Chris Dodd, Chairman of the Senate Banking Committee and one of the key leaders on this issue, told the Journal that the Fed's moves are a "clear signal that legislation is necessary to help protect homeowners from abusive and predatory lending practices." He also indicated that he is considering reexamining legislation he introduced last week to take power away from the central bank when it comes to consumer protection.

Rep. Barney Frank, who is chairman of the House Banking Committee, wasn't any happier with what he heard form the Fed. He told the Journal, "We now have confirmation of two facts we have known for some time. One, the Federal Reserve System is not a strong advocate for consumers, and two, there is no Santa Claus. People who are surprised by the one are presumably surprised by the other."

Bankers, seeing the writing on the wall and hoping that the Fed's changes will pacify critics, primarily supported the new rules. According to the Journal, the American Financial Services Association called the Fed's rules "measured" and the Independent Community Bankers of America said it was "an important step." But, the powerful American Bankers Association still hopes it can sway the Fed to ease the rules. It said some parts of the proposal were too rigid and "could make it harder for bankers to tailor products for their customers."

There's a disturbing trend among home lenders, and it may gain the exposure that it deserves in the wake of the subprime fiasco. Minorities are more likely to hold these so-called toxic mortgages, even when comparing neighborhoods with similar housing prices. According to The New York Times:

Consider two neighborhoods in the Detroit area. One, located in the working-class suburb of Plymouth, is 97 percent white with a median income of $51,000 in 2000. To the east, a census tract in Detroit just inside Eight Mile Road has a very similar median income, $49,000, but the population there is 97 percent black.

Last year, about 70 percent of the loans made in the Detroit neighborhood carried a high interest rate -- defined as 3 percentage points more than the yield on a comparable Treasury note -- while in Plymouth just 17 percent did.

It's hard to attribute that to luck of the draw. It appears that, at least in some areas, minorities are being systematically denied access to mortgages, and that's unforgivable in this country. There are a variety of explanations for this phenomenon: traditional banks are less likely to have branches in areas with large numbers of minorities, and thus borrowers in those areas may gravitate to the subprime lenders that set up shop there.

In any case, this is definitely something that merits congressional investigation. Congressman Barney Frank has been taking a hard look at subprime, and hopefully he will add this issue to the stack of questions he plans to ask industry leaders.

Poker fans rejoice! House Financial Services Committee Chairman, Barney Frank, introduced a bill on Thursday that would allow Americans to gamble online once again. The bill would allow online gambling companies to apply for licenses to accept bets from U.S. citizens. Frank referred to the ban on gambling as "an inappropriate interference on the personal freedom of Americans" and called internet gambling a victimless crime. The WTO has previously declared the U.S. ban illegal.

Congratulations to Mr. Frank for standing up on this issue. I will give a piece of pie to anyone who can make a compelling case as to why it isn't hypocritical for states to offer lotteries while simultaneously cracking down on people who play online poker. How can you muster up moral outrage when you're selling the same product? This is like Hostess accusing McDonald's of marketing unhealthy foods.

If you're a political junkie closely following this issue and counting probable votes, here are a couple stocks that could be affected:

Cryptologic (NASDAQ: CRYP) - This company provides the software platforms for numerous online gambling ventures. The stock took a beating when Americans were banned from internet gambling, but has since recovered and is close to its 52-week high.

World Poker Tour Enterprises (NASDAQ: WPTE) - This company produces the World Poker Tour Series on the Travel Channel (soon to be moving to the Game Show Network) and also operates an online gambling site. While the company hasn't targeted U.S. consumers in the past, that could possibly change.