Effor.com

This needs to be read by more people, so more people can contact congress to let them know what they think of it.  I’ll post the reasons for my own thoughts later (I think it sucks!) but for now, here’s the text of the proposed plan according to the NY TImes.  Please read it and let congress know what you think!

gk

LEGISLATIVE PROPOSAL FOR TREASURY AUTHORITY

TO PURCHASE MORTGAGE-RELATED ASSETS

Section 1. Short Title.

This Act may be cited as ____________________.

Sec. 2. Purchases of Mortgage-Related Assets.

(a) Authority to Purchase.–The Secretary is authorized to purchase, and to make and fund commitments to purchase, on such terms and conditions as determined by the Secretary, mortgage-related assets from any financial institution having its headquarters in the United States.

(b) Necessary Actions.–The Secretary is authorized to take such actions as the Secretary deems necessary to carry out the authorities in this Act, including, without limitation:

(1) appointing such employees as may be required to carry out the authorities in this Act and defining their duties;

(2) entering into contracts, including contracts for services authorized by section 3109 of title 5, United States Code, without regard to any other provision of law regarding public contracts;

(3) designating financial institutions as financial agents of the Government, and they shall perform all such reasonable duties related to this Act as financial agents of the Government as may be required of them;

(4) establishing vehicles that are authorized, subject to supervision by the Secretary, to purchase mortgage-related assets and issue obligations; and

(5) issuing such regulations and other guidance as may be necessary or appropriate to define terms or carry out the authorities of this Act.

Sec. 3. Considerations.

In exercising the authorities granted in this Act, the Secretary shall take into consideration means for–

(1) providing stability or preventing disruption to the financial markets or banking system; and

(2) protecting the taxpayer.

Sec. 4. Reports to Congress.

Within three months of the first exercise of the authority granted in section 2(a), and semiannually thereafter, the Secretary shall report to the Committees on the Budget, Financial Services, and Ways and Means of the House of Representatives and the Committees on the Budget, Finance, and Banking, Housing, and Urban Affairs of the Senate with respect to the authorities exercised under this Act and the considerations required by section 3.

Sec. 5. Rights; Management; Sale of Mortgage-Related Assets.

(a) Exercise of Rights.–The Secretary may, at any time, exercise any rights received in connection with mortgage-related assets purchased under this Act.

(b) Management of Mortgage-Related Assets.–The Secretary shall have authority to manage mortgage-related assets purchased under this Act, including revenues and portfolio risks therefrom.

(c) Sale of Mortgage-Related Assets.–The Secretary may, at any time, upon terms and conditions and at prices determined by the Secretary, sell, or enter into securities loans, repurchase transactions or other financial transactions in regard to, any mortgage-related asset purchased under this Act.

(d) Application of Sunset to Mortgage-Related Assets.–The authority of the Secretary to hold any mortgage-related asset purchased under this Act before the termination date in section 9, or to purchase or fund the purchase of a mortgage-related asset under a commitment entered into before the termination date in section 9, is not subject to the provisions of section 9.

Sec. 6. Maximum Amount of Authorized Purchases.

The Secretary’s authority to purchase mortgage-related assets under this Act shall be limited to $700,000,000,000 outstanding at any one time

Sec. 7. Funding.

For the purpose of the authorities granted in this Act, and for the costs of administering those authorities, the Secretary may use the proceeds of the sale of any securities issued under chapter 31 of title 31, United States Code, and the purposes for which securities may be issued under chapter 31 of title 31, United States Code, are extended to include actions authorized by this Act, including the payment of administrative expenses. Any funds expended for actions authorized by this Act, including the payment of administrative expenses, shall be deemed appropriated at the time of such expenditure.

Sec. 8. Review.

Decisions by the Secretary pursuant to the authority of this Act are non-reviewable and committed to agency discretion, and may not be reviewed by any court of law or any administrative agency.

Sec. 9. Termination of Authority.

The authorities under this Act, with the exception of authorities granted in sections 2(b)(5), 5 and 7, shall terminate two years from the date of enactment of this Act.

Sec. 10. Increase in Statutory Limit on the Public Debt.

Subsection (b) of section 3101 of title 31, United States Code, is amended by striking out the dollar limitation contained in such subsection and inserting in lieu thereof $11,315,000,000,000.

Sec. 11. Credit Reform.

The costs of purchases of mortgage-related assets made under section 2(a) of this Act shall be determined as provided under the Federal Credit Reform Act of 1990, as applicable.

Sec. 12. Definitions.

For purposes of this section, the following definitions shall apply:

(1) Mortgage-Related Assets.–The term “mortgage-related assets” means residential or commercial mortgages and any securities, obligations, or other instruments that are based on or related to such mortgages, that in each case was originated or issued on or before September 17, 2008.

(2) Secretary.–The term “Secretary” means the Secretary of the Treasury.

(3) United States.–The term “United States” means the States, territories, and possessions of the United States and the District of Columbia.

I was reading about Bank of America’s buyout of Countrywide this morning, and I happened upon this article at The Wall Street Journal:

http://blogs.wsj.com/marketbeat/2007/11/30/we-are-all-subprime-borrowers-now/?mod=sphere_ts

I normally read a lot of opinions and I can respectfully disagree with those who look at things from a different angle than me, but this really ticked me off.  The writer (David Gaffen) says: “Expect lots of talk of the moral hazard, particularly now as it extends its reach (as it’s no longer just dumb bankers being covered for their financial engineering through the creation of the Entity, but a lot of regular people), and even a bit of snide, boorish comments from those saying everyone should take responsibility for their own actions (remarks most likely to come from millionaire commentators who have personal assistants to manage their lives).“

Pardon me Mr. Gaffen, but I’m not a millionaire, I don’t have a personal assistant, and I don’t happen to think that people who believe in personal responsibility are “snide” or “boorish” - but I am going to comment on your article.  I’ve heard and read many comments on the subprime meltdown, but most leave out the role of the person who ASKED FOR the loan in the first place.  I’ll use myself as an example.

I had to relocate for my job in March, 2007.  I’m not a saver by nature (thankfully my wife is and she keeps my spending in line!) but we had managed to pay off our old house in about 15 years, so we had a good bit (about $140K) to use as a down payment on our new home.   I couldn’t find a decent house in the area we wanted for that, so I needed to get a loan.  I talked to Wells Fargo and Bank of America, and decided to go with Wells Fargo because they had a lower interest rate for a 15 year fixed rate mortgage.

Both Wells Fargo and Bank of America pre-qualified me for a loan of up to $200K on those terms.  Both encouraged me to get an adjustable rate loan with a low (teaser) interest rate fixed for the first three years - they said they could loan me up to $350K if went with an ARM.  “You can get a much nicer home” was a recurring phrase I heard.  The realtor was also pushing me to look at more expensive homes, and had to be persuaded that I really did want to live in a house that was less than I “can afford”.

I found a nice 30 year old home for about $190K, so I borrowed $50K on a 15 year fixed rate mortgage.  My house payments - including property taxes and insurance - are about $500/month, and I’m working on paying that off early, hopefully within about 7 or 8 years.  Had I listened to those selling me the mortgage and the house, I might be writing this from a very nice $450K house in Knoxville, TN - that’s a huge house here - with a payment of about $1500/month with the teaser %3 interest rate for the first 3 years.  I could afford it, so why didn’t I do it?

Because that teaser rate resets in 3 years.  I don’t know what interest rates will be 3 years from now, but I guarantee that they won’t be 3%.  Let’s just assume that it resets to 6% - which is probably on the low side.  That would make the payments go to over $2000/month.  I don’t know what I’ll be making in 3 years, but no matter what, paying an additional  $500/month won’t be fun.

So I’m in a decent house, with payments I can afford - anyone who can tell the difference between “a bottle in front of me” and a “frontal-lobotomy” could have done the same.  Am I supposed to feel sorry for the dumb asses who bought more house than they can afford?  Or for the dip shits that bought a house when they can’t keep a steady job and are surprised when the bank tells them they have to make payments?  And they expect me (via the government) to bail them out because they can’t do math?

Perhaps this is “boorish” and “snide”, but I don’t ask for money that I won’t be able to repay.  I expect the same responsible behavior from others.  When someone asking for a loan LIES about their income, expenses, debt load, or whatever in order to get money from someone else, they are committing a fraudulent act at the least - and plain stealing at the worst.   These home “owners” (perhaps squatters is a better term) are getting the least that they deserve - they should go to jail for fraud or theft.

And lest you think I’m one of the fortunate ones born with a silver spoon, I’ll add this: I left home in 1980 with $20 in my pocket and a change of underwear in a brown paper bag.  Everything I have today I’ve EARNED with my brain and muscles.  I’m tired of people saying they just can’t get ahead, or they weren’t as lucky, or they never had a chance because the convenience store or fast food restaurant owner (where they work) is greedy.  That’s bullshit.  Most of them are just too damn lazy to do what it takes to get out of their current position - they don’t expand their knowledge, they don’t go to school at night, they don’t work 2 jobs to pay off their cars, they can’t (or won’t!) do the math that says they can’t afford that big-screen TV, that new car, those designer jeans, purse, or sneakers. 

This type of person (you know who you are) habitually spends more than he/she makes - and then complains of bad luck when they lose a job or have a medical problem that prevents them from working and servicing the debt that they’ve accumulated.  Dave Ramsey says “act your wage” and it’s excellent advice.  If you spend less than you earn and put 5% or 10% of your take home pay into savings each month, you can ride out any temporary issues that come your way.  And you CAN’T be taken advantage of by hucksters promising you a great house for super low payments.

Because of jerks who didn’t think about the long term consequences of what they were doing, my house will be going down in value for the next few years as thousands of homes in this area go into foreclosure and are put on the market.  But guess what - because I bought less house than I could technically afford - I’ll still be ahead.  And maybe your stupidity will turn me into a millionaire when I buy your house at a rock bottom price because you can’t make the payments. 

Any questions? 

gk