Hillary's $1 billion foreclosure bailout

Good morning, again. Hillary Clinton today is rolling out a series of housing proposals, including a crackdown on unscrupulous mortgage brokers and a $1 billion fund to help homeowners avoid foreclosure. Highlights from the AP:

--"Presidential hopeful Hillary Rodham Clinton is calling for penalties on unscrupulous mortgage brokers who engage in predatory lending and a $1 billion federal fund to help homeowners avoid foreclosure."
--Clinton: "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 also will propose a $1 billion federal fund for local and state programs that help at-risk homeowners avoid foreclosures. She said those programs could help the 'unsuspecting families' linked to unfair mortgages."
--"And she also planned to demand lenders remove early payment penalties attached to some mortgages."

Thoughts? Insights? Questions? Comments?
Photo Credit: AP

Comments

[Dr. JwB]

So, let me get this straight: If I go out and buy a house I cannot afford, then the government will give me money so I can pay for it? Sweet!

[xtine]

Exactly. My husband and I stayed out of the housing market because, even at 6-figure combined salaries we knew we could not afford a $600,000 house. Now we are forced to pay for some other pinhead's stupidity. Yet again, taxpayers with a head on their shoulders are forced to pay for people who can't do simple math. If she intends to go through with this she will lose my vote.

[F. R.]

Here we go. God forbid that we put some of the blame on buyers who didn't bother to take an hour or two to read the contract on the biggest investment of their lives.

Let the housing market crash already! Most of these people won't be able to save their homes, even after federal aid.

How are we supposed to supplement a $4,000.00/month mortgage for millions of SoCal buyers. That's what they get for trying to live beyond their means.

[mm]

Hurry up and get in line -- Hillary's giving out more and more entitlements for votes ... Once again, Hillary is pandering to social bloodsuckers.

I'm tired of paying for people who want freebies. I'm still trying to save up for my first house!

[Mike in SoCal]

People should not have taken out mortgages that they couldn't afford. Let the market correct itself already. Hillary is convincing me NOT to vote for her with this ridiculous bailout she's proposing.

[Chris in Sacramento]

So HRC thinks that middle-class families like mine that held off buying homes these past few years should subsidize the gamblers who went all-in? There aren't many things that would make me consider voting Republican, but a Democratic-led bailout of the housing market's risk-takers is one.

[Rob]

TAX and Spend, TAX and Spend, TAX and Spend. God help us in November...

[Cal]

The whole housing episode is going to be very seductive for stupid people, you get to bail out big business and registered voters with taxpayer money and look like you are doing everyone a favor.

What could possibly... possibly... be wrong with that.

[Bubbles]

wanna help working families? overturn the new bankruptcy laws, lets these people walk away from their over-priced homes paid for with liar loans ... offer incentives to families and working people who want to buy these REO or abandoned homes, don't help the people who caused this mess, help those left out of home ownership by all this nonsense

[Jim D.]

When did Democrats give up on personal responsibility?
Why should those of us who have made conservative financial decisions be burdened with paying for those who have not?
Has Hillary determined when we will stop paying for the financial mistakes of irresponsible people?
Perhaps Hillary will next propose that we setup a fund to reimburse people for their gambling losses!

[jemarqu]

This is why I am voting for Ron Paul. Like others leaving comments, I am trying to save for my first house. I am also waiting for prices to correct so that I can borrow an amount of money that I intend on repaying.

There should be consequence to making poor decisions. My parents lost their house in the 90s and no one was there to bail them out. We survived and I learned a lot from their choices. Even though I'm in a position to buy now I am going to wait until things have corrected.

[jt]

As if our welfare system is not enough to panhandlers, we are going to give more of OUR tax $$$s for those can't be responsible for their own decisions?? THAT is vote buying at her best.. I guess I am going quit my job and get in line with them.

[Matt]

what a joke!!!! talk about a waste of tax payer $$$, throw good money over bad!!! Use that money for the poor, much better used.

[albert]

Not a single comment here in support of stupid Hillary proposal. And they call us lefty liberals. LOL.
This leaves me in the bind. I do not to vote Republican , because they have changed so much , started 1 trillion dollars war , killed 4000 of your soldiers and how many people of Iraq, God only knows.
Obama ? I dont think so.
Housing market should crash, and our goverment will have to learn how to manage without ridiculously high property taxes income, due to the boxes from hell being purchased for 750k.

[RZ]

It's hard enough for a member of the middle class to buy a decent home in a decent area these days with the ridiculously sky-high prices. All this plan would do is make it even harder by reducing the number of foreclosures. I agree that something should be done about predatory lending, but I also think that people should take responsibility for their decisions, including the dumb ones.

[AKK]

I wasn't stupid enough to get suckered into a mortgage I couldn't afford. Like other commenters, I'm saving my pennies so that one day I can afford a home.

VOTE RON PAUL 2008!

[Christine]

It will be easy to pay for the bailout, all we need to do is stop giving money to oil companies making record profits with $3/gallon gasoline and subsidies to billionaire farmers. Better yet, she can give some of that money to me so I can buy my first house.

[Mike]

You folks just don't get it.....she's a tax and spend Democrat....your taxes and she'll decide on how she spends it....

This woman has no honor, in her personal life or public life. Is this a person who should be "commander in chief". I don't think so.

I can't stand thinking about another 8 years of Bush-Clinton-Bush-Clinton.

God help us.

[www.BetterVillage.com, XYZ, PDq.]

She certainly caused a ruckus. The strategists are probably not dumb (probably)... so if they knew the issue would be divisive, and they'd lose the don't-bail-em-out voters... maybe their intention was just to pump the Clinton brand out under the assumption that no press is bad press? That they would do this on a highly anticipated Bernanke day could be significant as well. Oh Bernanke, let us pray you don't have a gas pain today that causes you to wince gently and drive us into a frenzy of renewed belly-button contemplation.

[Roger Moore]

In addition to being blatant pandering, Hillary's proposal is also completely inadequate to accomplish its goals. The S&L crisis cost over $100 billion to bail out, and the current mortgage mess would probably be more expensive still. A $1 billion program is nothing but a feel good proposal that will have no real impact on anything.

[Renée]

We are Los Angles homeowners with a disproportionate paper profit due to the escalation of prices in recent years. Our daughter and son-in-law have been struggling to purchase a first home and we have been urging them to wait until and unless they can reasonably afford a mortgage.

The government's interference with the housing market will punish them for their self-discipline and reinforce what we consider the wrong lesson: Indulge your wants at any cost; if you get in over your head, a genie will appear to pay your debts.

I currently favor Hillary as the Democratic candidate, but would not vote for anyone who supports a bailout for borrowers who took risks in the real estate market.

[Sheryl]

So now working Americans are not only supposed to pay the DOCTOR BILLS of everybody else in the country, WE'RE SUPPOSED TO MAKE THEIR HOUSE PAYMENTS???

This kind of bull**** is why I NEVER vote for Democrats. Because they all listen to Karl Marx loving boneheads like Hilary Clinton.

[Alma M]

For several years now I have thought people were crazy for buying these OBVIOUS over-priced homes. However people get too wrapped up & let their emotions make their decisions in making purchases they could not afford.

Why should we the tax payers that didnt get wrapped up in this buying frenzy have to bail out the others?

I have never ben a Hillary supporter.....this is just a reminder why!

[Seymour]

Don't be fooled. This move is not simply to protect the stupid home buyer but to protect the stupid banks who bought the stupid mortgages. It's a move to prop up the economy, not merely a socialist move to protect the voters.

All that said, I don't think it would work and in no way do I support it (or Clinton, for that matter).

And to the "tax and spend" guy . . . at least the democrats try to raise funds before they spend money. Republicans overspend with nothing in the bank.

[jg]

I have always voted for Democrats. When Chuck Schumer first mentioned something about a bailout for foreclosed homeowners, I wrote him a letter saying that I am 31 years old, I have saved money and spent wisely my entire life, I did not buy a house I could not afford and I am proud of all of that. I pay 52% of my income in taxes because I have no tax deductions. Last year I paid about 60% of the federal and state taxes that George W. and Laura Bush did, despite the fact that they made 5 times what I do. I have played by all of the rules.

And now the government is going to go ahead and reward irresponsible people? With my tax money? I have had it. Hillary just lost my vote, and if the Democrats are serious about this, I'm going to be serious about voting for somebody else this time around... Iraq or no Iraq.

[Kathryn]

Here goes the Dems shooting themselves in the foot. No wonder Bush got elected twice when the alternative are Democrats who want to reward those tried to cheat to get ahead and got burned. Most people knew the housing bubble was going to burst, most people knew that teaser arms and negative amortization were bad ideas. Bailing out these morons just reinforces the nanny state where no one is responsible for their actions. That's what the Democrats don't get. Voters are sympathetic until it affects their pocketbook. I'm not paying for some moron who bought too much house and is now in foreclosure. If Hilary campains on this, she'll loose. Sure foreclosure is affecting some, maybe 5%, but that means there's 95% who don't want to pay for the other idiots' mistakes.

[Dan Moran]

It's a ridiculous proposal, and, as noted, much too small to make a difference.

As to "TAX and Spend" above ... probably wouldn't interest you any to know which party has grown the government more during your lifetime? No, I didn't think so. I want to find one conservative who'll decry BORROW and Spend as thoroughly as they decry TAX and Spend ... I guess taxing my children instead is OK with them.

[Mary G.]

What Hillary is proposing is not handing out money to people to pay their mortgages, but giving money to various community and credit repair groups to help people see if they can find ways to negotiate with lenders or use other means to hang onto their houses. Think about it: $1 billion dollars would not save many houses if it were free money for mortgage payments/buyouts, because people are on the hook for hundreds of billion, if not trillions, of dollars for their shaky mortgages. People need to calm down and see what Hillary is actually saying here; whether it's a good idea even for what it is (and maybe could be done for less than $1 billion), I'm not sure. I'm not a Hillary fan, and won't vote for her in the primaries, but I don't think she needs to have her intentions misrepresented.

[Ben Brown]

Not nearly enough money. I mean, get real, $1 bln would cover 50,000 troubled mortgages to the tune of $2k. Now if She came up with a comprehensive $1 trillion mortgage and debt re-structuring package I'd be impressed. But that would take a team of economists and corporate experts. As it is, She just deals in serious sounding yet warm-fuzzy sound bites.

[Rob]

"TAX and Spend". It rings as true as the Jimmy Carter bell curve. "Borrow and Spend" my clueless friend? I think in that bag of sarcasm were reaching for "Invest and Spend". One can only hope.

[Ragnar]

Yet another reason why I will not be voting for Hillary Clinton. If she wanted to appear socially responsible, at least she could peddle some programs to help the poor or help poorly-funded schools or something. People need to understand that there is always risk in borrowing to own a home. Taking out a larger mortagage than one should just because one can is rarely a good idea.

[Cal]

Ben,

Even if your math is wrong, your point is right. But its still a billion dollar bailout, if ineffectual (which it would be) it makes it even worse.

[JK]

While I appreciate Hillary's concerns for people that are about to lose their homes, I am more bitter and resentful of the fact that I make nearly 100k and cannot afford a home in California. Using my tax dollars to help irresponsible people keep homes they can't afford, while at the same time keeping me out of the market, will be enough to send me over the edge, community credit repair groups or not.

The mortgage industry is a house of cards, let it collaspe and let prices return to normal.

[Katie]

Ok, seriously, what happened to consequences?? People should be wise in their home buying process. It is really frustrating that those of us that are careful with our money and resources are punished, while people that are irresponsible get bailed out by the government ONCE AGAIN. The whole "steal from the rich and middle class and give to the poor" mentality is not the way to really help the poor. It isn't the government's responsibility. That is the responsibility of nonprofits/churches/temples/mosques...orgs that are put in place to have compassion on the poor. That is why I will never be a democrat. I'm tired of paying taxes to people who use their welfare money on drugs and sex, and totally ignore their kids. Now I get more of my tax money going to people that suck at common sense. Great. Anyone know of a good place to move...because we're gonna be just like Canada and Europe, and that is not a good thing.

[Pop]

"When did Democrats give up on personal responsibility?"

1962?

[rick danger]

How about the people who lied on their loan application, don't they have any accountability?

"the information provided in this applicationis true and correct as of the date set forth opposite my signature and that any intentional or negligent misrepresentationof this information contained in this application may result in civil liability, including monetary damages, to any person who may suffer any loss due to reliance upon any misrepresentation on that I have made on this application, and/or criminal penalties including but not limited to fine or imprisonment or both under the provisions of title 18, United States Code......" I guess she thinks there are more votes with a bailout.

[Eric W.]

I really want to believe that some value is added by these user comments, but honestly, all that's happening here is that people are responding to statements that Senator Clinton did not make. The blogger, Mr. Viles, referred in his title to a "$1 billion bailout," so people -- without even reading the AP article (!) -- are mistakenly enraged that Senator Clinton has proposed bailing out struggling homeowners.

That's ludicrous. As some have noted, $1 billion wouldn't even be enough to make a drop in the bucket. What she has proposed is spending $1 billion in federal funds to better educate homeowners and potential homeowners as to how mortgages work, their options when facing foreclosure, etc. A noble goal is these unsettled times, when the alternative is more uncertainty, which benefits no one.

I realize there are sourpusses out there (most of them seem to spend a lot of time on blogs) who think any education programs are a waste of money, since gosh darn it, the recipients should have read their mortgage docs cover to cover. But we live in the real world. If we want a more stable economy, if we want continued health in the housing market, if we want long-term growth without wild whipsaws, we owe it to ourselves to educate those entering the market, so they can make good choices.

[CeW]

This is not about a right-left agenda but about common sense. Yes there was stupidity (the sub-prime suckers) but there was also greed (the whole real estate industry). Lets not forget that any bail-out would help the lenders too which I don't think is on any leftist agenda. Have HRC and her advisors really thought this through? Guess what- us lefties want to buy homes too and a market shake-out is desperately needed now to bring homes (which are 10X the median income right now acording to LATimes article on Sunday) into the realm of affordability.

[Angela]

I think the title of this blog is unfair and misrepresents what Hillary is trying to do. She is proposing to fund non-profit credit counseling centers to help homeowners avoid foreclosure. She is not proposing a bail out, period.

[Pete Viles]

Thanks, Eric. Just to be clear, here is Sen. Clinton's policy proposal regarding the $1 billion foreclosure prevention fund. It's certainly sounds like some of this money would be given directly to homeowners who have fallen behind on their loans. That may be a "small" bailout, or a "partial" bailout, or a "token" bailout, but it is, by my definition, a form of bailing people out:

• Establish a $1 billion fund to assist state programs that help at-risk borrowers avoid foreclosure. Hillary will establish a $1 billion fund to support state programs that help at-risk borrowers avoid foreclosure. Some state programs help borrowers make the single payment necessary to become current on their loans; others help borrowers renegotiate their loan terms, or simply provide financial counseling. These foreclosure mitigation efforts are more important than ever right now. Federal assistance for state programs that assist at-risk borrowers supplements Hillary's call earlier in the year for "foreclosure timeout." At-risk borrowers and lenders should be encouraged to work out alternatives to foreclosure.

[Johnny C.]

CA gets 500,000 new residents every year, but only builds housing for 250,000. So we get problems like two-income households that are competing with each other to buy a crappy $700,000 house, or 12 day laborers living in one rental unit. Home ownership went up to almost 70% from 65% in 1995, but many of those last marginal buyers shouldn't have been in the market and they ALREADY cost the rest of us by bidding up prices. Let this unwind naturally, not with a preemptive government bailout that will simply transfer the pain.

[Nova]

Mary G. is correct. Ms. Clinton is not proposing a bailout of homeowners who irresponsably purchased loans that were eventually to become above their means to repay. She is offering federal assistance to state and local credit bureaus to assist homeowners who made bad decisions and now face losing everything.

[Nova]

(continued) Lenders who offered "liar loans" are more culpable than the homeowners. They should be slapped down. Do you think for one minute that any of them thought, ' this person doesn't see the potential risks; I should not offer him/her this loan"? Restructured loans would be a very big help, not only to the homeowners themselves but also to the real estate/lending industry and the U.S. economy in general.

[Nova]

(continued) Just to provide context, I am 52 years old and rented most of my life but purchased my first house one year ago. I couldn't afford it until my Mom passed and I received some life insurance money. Still, I work in WLA, live in Moreno Valley, and commute 170 miles round-trip per day in order to pay my mortgage. I had relatively good training in personal finance from my parents and knew not to go for an apr loan. However, I understand that not all U.S. citizens have had the same upbringing as I have. Isn't America about helping those less fortunate than yourself? Clinton's proposal sure beats the various benefit-the-billionnaires policy of the Bush White House including the nightmare of Iraq, even if Dick Cheney didn't profit big-time from Halliburton's no-bid gift of gajillions of taxpayers' bucks to work on Iraq's infrastructure.

[Massimo]

Hillary gets elected, I'm moving to Canada!

[albert]

Hey , if we can afford a trillion dollar war , we sure can gather up half of that to help *troubled* house owners ! LOL .

[Michelle L.]

The goverment or non-profit should not bail out the people that are being forclosed. People like Roland Arnall (Owner of Ameriquest) leaders of predatory lenders should be forced to use their profits to bail these people out. They're lucky enough not to go to jail, they should atleast clean up some of the mess that they created.

[Melissa]

First of all, I obviously don't support Hilary's housing proposal, but to all the people saying "tax and spend", give me a break. Maybe we should borrow money from other countries to pay for problems in the US just like we did for the last 7 years.

Or, maybe someday our Gov't can properly manage the budget/deficit and set a good example for its home buying citizens.

[homeowner inneed]

I can't wait. I got ripped off by my loan officer. He really took advantage of us. Hopefully I can get some aid so I can still live in my house. It seems like most people don't have any compassion for those of us that got taken advantage of. The government should be giving aid to people like myself.

[yvonne]

I don't even think the mortgage education program using our tax$ is a good idea.
Those who made irresiposible decisions are not children.
They should already know how to spend money.
It's just that there are some people who can learn only from their mistakes.
They should learn lessons through the experience of losing their homes.
So should the lenders.
This county cannot afford such a generous program anyway, having such huge debt as a country.
There are so many other issues that need to be solved.

[JR]

I agree with Eric. Your title misrepresents the proposed program's intent, in fact, it comes across as shrill.

[johnmac]

This represents a proposal for a taxpayer funded bailout/windfall for the stupid.
While suicide loans are setting up the riskiest of situation: putting up the worst credit risks with the worst financial package, they are clearly documented and any due diligence should give the borrower notice of the kind of risk they are about to take.
When things go wrong, the responsibility should rest squarely on the shoulders of the borrower, not the general taxpayer base. Rewarding stupid risky behavior is wrong and Hillary just lost my vote as a result.

[pugtv]

I would have voted for her ... she just lost my vote.

[problemWithcaring]

This is Team Obama - to be sure - but on behalf of the policy wonk inside me, I feel forced to correct this obvious red herring.

Yes, HRC was pandering. No - there shouldn't be a "bailout" of greedy folks who lied and cheated on their mortgage documents.

It seems though, what she is actually purposing (again, for pandering sake)is a modest allocation for people caught up in real estate transactions where they were obviously misled and let -down by the so-called professionals and banks who are complicity in this mess.

Its a small price to pay for some financial counseling services for the least among us to keep their homes. WHO EVER IS ELECTED WILL BE FORCED TO TAKE SIMILAR ACTIONS TO MITIGATE WIDESPREAD DAMAGE. Besides, we spent $1 billion in some desert in Middle East last week. Did anyone miss it??

For all those bitter and pissed off about missing out on the housing speculation, waiting with cash in hand to pounce when prices drop (like me) -- trust me, a billion won't make a dent in this nation-wide fiasco.

http://problemwithcaring.blogspot.com/search/label/Financial%20Aid

[Pat sucher]

So she thinks that a government bail-out is needed to allow people to keep homes that should not afforded in the first place (and probably will not be able to anyway)?

Let the markets shake themselves out. It needs to happen.

[lefty]

what about a cost/benefit analysis of her idea?

it is possible we all will be better off by letting some of these silly borrowers keep their houses. perhaps crime will be reduced and their children will have a better environment.

[Marlene Munoz]

Hillary shows herself more and more to be a communist. Why the hell should I have to pay for someone's stupid choices. I stayed out of the housing market because I COULD NOT AFFORD to buy - I should have been a flake and then get a government hand out.

Also, alot of Illegal Aliens bought homes using ARM's

[Houston]

Let's see, Democrats are tax and spend, but which party, pray tell, has gotten us into a war at a cost of HALF A TRILLION dollars? HALF A TRILLION! It boggles my mind.

Do you have any idea about the kind of infrastructure we could build with half a trillion dollars? Oh, but wait. The Government Accounting Office says that before we're through with the war in Iraq, it's going to cost us a TRILLION dollars. Oh wow. I can hardly wait.

You would begrudge a billion to help out suckers, but say nothing with Ted Stevens slips in a quarter of a billion to build a bridge to nowhere. Some of you people have some strange priorities.

[CS]

There is no practical way to separate the true victims of fraud or deceptive business practices, from the buyers who were stupid or greedy, IN TIME to help any of them. By the time anything is done, if ever, the real victims will have already lost their houses and suffered lasting credit damage. That has already begun. The crooks--the industry insiders who knew very well what they were doing when they created the housing bubble--will probably get off scott free, like they usually do. The industry is NOT the victim, that's for sure. Bailing out the industry and/or letting the crooks go will just exacerbate the problem. Bailing out homeowners who don't deserve it will punish people who had nothing to do with creating the housing bubble. If anyone deserves a bail out it's the home buyers who were victims of fraud.

[Nony Mouse]

Hillary a communist? I highly doubt that-- believe me if she were anywhere near a socialist democratic candidate it would be a bonus. No Hillary's a person that's trying to find a satisfying algorithm for everyone's needs.

[Steve]

Thanks Hillary I have 3 ARMs due this year and will need the bail out by then. I am a Republican and thanks to Bush ineptness there is a high probability she will win. What is worse dropping 3 trillion on a war that is a complete debacle or a trillion spent in America.

[Joseph D. Phillips]

Greedy borrowers are the predators, not the lenders. I'm with the majority here. The borrowers deserve no help or pity. Let them crash and burn.

[AnotherWay]

Do you people scream when the government gives subsidies to drug companies? Oil companies? Toxic agriculture? Why the vitriol against the little guy? Have the past 7 years twisted your souls that much?

[AH]

"I got ripped off by my loan officer."

Then he should go to jail and you should loose your home for being so stupid.

HRC lost my vote.

[Lynn]

I'm no HRC fan, but I'm reserving judgement on the $1billion bailout until I read it. If it helps people avoid foreclosure by restructuring really bad loans, without being a "bailout" I'd probably be for it. I bought a house five years ago and waiting much longer than I wanted to and still worried I hadn't saved enough. But I still have some sympathy for people who bought houses they thought they could afford with mortgages they didn't understand. Were they stupid? Maybe, but I'd rather spend $1 billion dollars to help keep people who deserve it in their homes than $5 billion to support them on welfare/food stamps/subsidized housing. I heard HRC interviewed this morning on the other aspects of her lending proposals and they sounded quite reasoned and fair.

She does need to stop letting herself be painted into a corner about "new" taxes. Everyone paying a fair rate only seems like new taxes to rich people because they aren't used to paying their fair share.

[Rhonda Stanton]

As a real estate broker specializing in pre-foreclosures and short sales, I believe that we should be able to prosecute these unscrupulous mortgage brokers. Not only can these buyers no longer afford their payments, but if they lose their home to foreclosure, their credit is destroyed and it will be years before they can buy a home again. But then again, people have to practice personal responsiblity, and stop living in the moment and look at their long term financial situation. If your payment is going to go up 20-30% in two years, is your salary? Parents need to educate their children regarding financial responsibiity. Through my own financial experiences, I teach my college-age daughters about establishing credit, FICO scores, and living on LESS than what you make. Like the old addage says, "If you think education is expensive, try ignorance."

[AJK]

-Just lost my vote...and I liked a lot of her ideas. But this is one topic that I will not budge on, I will NOT vote for anyone who endorses a bailout. Even $1 of my tax money to help anything that has to do with housing in CA just makes my blood boil! I don't care if it is going to help troubled buyers, lenders, counseling, whatever – I don’t approve.

When only 10 % of your residence can currently afford to purchase a home, the prices need to come way down. The only way for that to happen is to let the market adjust naturally. As with another poster, I make 6 digits per year but cannot afford to buy a home. That is how ridiculous housing is in CA.

[obie72]

If Hillary Clinton is seriously considering doing this, then she just lost my vote.

[AnnS]

(1) You folks just don't get it.....she's a tax and spend Democrat....your taxes and she'll decide on how she spends it....

No – she is a Repocrat or a Depublican. She is whatever it takes to get power for herself and prove she can do whatever her husband did. She will pander to ANY group if it benefits her.

(2) “can't wait. I got ripped off by my loan officer. He really took advantage of us. Hopefully I can get some aid so I can still live in my house. It seems like most people don't have any compassion for those of us that got taken advantage of. The government should be giving aid to people like myself. Posted by: homeowner inneed “

Yeah right. It is all someone else’s fault that you didn’t get competent advice on what the loan documents meant. Bet you were to cheap to take the loan terms and have a lawyer review them.

(3) can't wait. I got ripped off by my loan officer. He really took advantage of us. Hopefully I can get some aid so I can still live in my house. It seems like most people don't have any compassion for those of us that got taken advantage of. The government should be giving aid to people like myself. Posted by: homeowner inneed

Oh come on. No one but no one could possible be so stupid as to have taken out 3ARMs. You must be trying to be funny but you don’t write parody very well. Go back to the keyboard. If you aren’t trying to be funny, then you caused your own problems and deserve to get burned.

(4) Do you people scream when the government gives subsidies to drug companies? Oil companies? Toxic agriculture? Why the vitriol against the little guy? Have the past 7 years twisted your souls that much? Posted by: AnotherWay

Yes, I do object to such subsidies. The “little guy” will be a whole let better off when the inflated real estate market collapses and housing prices drop to a level the median income can actually afford. Propping up the paper equity for people who were greedy and bought more than they could actually afford doesn’t help anyone.

[jimjim]

for those that consider themselves "conservative" - don't be hatin'.
Just because you missed out on the boom don't get mad at those that took a risk. LA is running out of space and that is why housing is skyrocketing...did your financially sound parents teach you supply and demand? probably not.

[jemarqu]

"for those that consider themselves "conservative" - don't be hatin'.
Just because you missed out on the boom don't get mad at those that took a risk. LA is running out of space and that is why housing is skyrocketing...did your financially sound parents teach you supply and demand? probably not. "

There is one part of the equation that people forget when they talk about "supply and demand" and that is demand. People like me who can afford a house are going to wait until the market chokes like the 90s.

[Lionel]

A whole billion?! Wow,that should, uh, do absolutely nothing.

[shudgetajobbut]

I don't doubt there's a bunch of sleazy mortgage brokers out there, but the real culprit behind the housing mess is Alan Greenspan. He tried to eliminate the consequences of the dot.com bubble by printing money. Debt became a virtue. It didn't work for long. Now HRC wants to do essentially the same for the housing bubble. Don't be surprised-- she really believes it takes a village.

[travelingman]

there are 70 posts and about 50+ posters

who knew the LA land had so many readers! ha

On HRC, at first, I was angry - the idea of bailing out these folks who were irresponsible - completely don't make sense - but as I read the article, it's just pandering for sound bites. Funding to bureaus and credit repair agencies - this is no S&L size bail out - If people choose to not vote for her for this but think bush and his cronies are better, then you're delusional.

giving a small amount (yes, $1b) relative to the disaster is small. it won't be a drop in the bucket and more homeowners are voters than renters. this is political pandering

I do think it's a political error on her part. She's very cautious, practical - quite boring in comparison to her husband - just not sexy - that in of itself will mean she likely won't win - americans, espcially american women are too immature to vote for a woman who's practical - they need some pizzazz - and they'll find some excuses (like tax and spend liberal verbiage) to support the view - how lame (and I'm kinda chauvinistic myself) - it'll be worse under Guliani - it's be worse than bush.

I do agree with most posters, a bail out is a bad idea. Let the market play itself out. I think the intent of HRC is not some massive bail-out and what she's proposing won't make a difference -- her communication on this is getting lost in the details - i guess as it did with the health care fiasco when she was 1st lady - too many details but not enough punch

I like the idea of going after predatory lenders - they deserve jail some of these jerks

and eliminating pre-pay penalites -wow, power to the consumer - what a horrible idea

[Silverlake Guy]

When I first read this post it ruffled my feathers a bit. Why the hell should my taxes pay to assist homeowners when I can't even afford a home myself? I sympathize with anyone who bought in the last couple years, because I think they got taken to the cleaners. I sold my first house over 7 years ago, and I've been watching prices leap into the stratosphere ever since. In that time I've been renting of course. And you know what... it's been great! I've saved nearly a years' salary, have no credit card debt and paid off my truck. Plus, I've been able to travel and experience more with my family and friends. I honestly don't care about owning a house anymore. I'm saving, experiencing more in life, and not living on credit. You can't experience much if you go home all the time and are straddled with debt. Plus, houses are a maintenance nuisance. Forget the "American Dream"... it's a load of marketing crap fed to us by Realtors, mortgage companies, and politicians. Let's boycott real estate for a few more years... that'll shoot down those home prices. Oh... as for the poor souls that need government bailouts... that's fine. We don't need more homeless on the streets. It will take years for them to repair their credit, and that will be punishment enough. Also, if you honestly think the government can pull this off... LOL!!!

[Thomas Johnson]

Q: "When did Democrats give up on personal responsibility?"
A: The New Deal

There are ample opportunities for my friends in SoCal to purchase their own home in Houston! Having had this discussion many times in the past few years, the issue always comes down to your weather and our housing affordability.

Let me submit a suggestion: 3000 sq ft in a gated, restricted community for $280,000. We have no income tax here in Texas. With the difference in housing costs and taxes, you can buy all the airfare back to LAX for your weather fix anytime you please, stay in a 5 star hotel, and still come out dollars ahead.

[JR]

To Thomas Johnson,
While you're enjoying life inside your 3000 sq ft compound, probably in the basement avoiding tornados, I'll be at the at beach in 72 degree weather looking at pretty girls in bikinis.
If you promise to please stay in Texas, I'll promise not to mess with you. Thanks, tough guy.

[buz algood]

Government sponsored foreclosure bailout? Say What? A more idiotic use of taxpayer money I cannot fathom. But not unexpected from a politician who wrote a book entitled "I takes a village." This is a preview of someone (HRC)who firmly believes that government should intervene, at taxpayer expense, into any and everything.

[Financial Reset]

How about we save our $1B and change the laws to SPEED the foreclosure process instead of trying to slow it down? That's less heartless than it sounds. It takes several years to put your financial life back together after a foreclosure or bankruptcy, so why not give these folks a head start?

[keith]

I'm still trying to figure out "unscrupulous brokers", the vast majority of the people I know who bought homes were planning on covering their retirement in 5 years or already beginning to dream of their next home purchase because of the never ending tale of equity appreciation. It was the entire real estate industry that soaked people in this. Anyone who foretold of a problem was scoffed at or shouted down. People knew good and well that the low teaser rate would end. New cars, boats, 2nd homes all came spilling out of refinancing. And you blame brokers? EVERYONE who danced this tango is to "blame" if you want to call it that. Well, the music stopped. What is the big surprise here? What's the panic? Hillary plans to credit counsel, cover a payment or two? Before you get all misty eyed, remember that will be reserved for "the most deserving and vulnerable" - that reads in plain english, it's not for you or me, middle incomers, you're screwed. Get real, it's hangover time. No one's riding to the rescue, there's no need to. Apartments are affordable and plentiful. To think this rides on the heels of the dot.com supernova, people just don't learn. Watch a few episodes of "Flip That House" and remember the good times.

[Windu]

I recently read that the average delinquency is $11,000. So that huge $1billion of taxpayers' (including renters') money will only help 90,000 people. HUD Secretary Jackson said in an interviewwith Bloomberg that 20% of subprime could reasonably be expected to default. Don't bother Ms. Clinton. There will still be a surplus of toast. Burnt toast.

[Jax]

Bailing out irresponsible, people who knew exactly what they were doing when they took out these loans with one billion dollars in aid wouldn't solve a thing.
*I think we're talking more like in the 50 trillion dollar range
*And, they get to keep their big shiny house that isn't worth what they paid for it? Do you think they would even continue to make the same payments that they had been making if they couldn't use the house like a credit card by refinancing it every year or two. Do you think they would continue to make the same payments that they had been making before their ARM increased if the house is now only worth 50-60% of what they paid for it?
I don't think so. Most of these houses were bought strictly with the thought that they would increase in value into infinity (very naive thinking) by people who have little to no foresight. ( I have a grown son who thinks this way). The only way to handle this problem is to let the market seek it's real value and let the chips fall where they may. The politicians need to stay out of the fray: They have NO business becoming involved in this. Bill & Hillary Clinton are both semi-closeted Socialists...............and I say that as someone who no longer has ZERO use for the Republican Party after the mess they have made over the last 12+ years.

[willie]

While I don't agree to a bail out, many things are promised by politicians that never come to fruition, this should be one of those of things. However, don't come and say that she just lost your vote, since you never planned to vote for her anyway. You are republicans, claiming to be democrats trying to disuade the public discourse to support the right wing conspiracy.

[Inland Empire]

We simply can't afford to do this. After all, we have a WAR to pay for!

[Rob]

HILLARY IS NOT A COMMUNIST!

She is a Socialist; there is a difference...

so·cial·ism (sō'shə-lĭz'əm) Pronunciation Key n. 1.Any of various theories or systems of social organization in which the means of producing and distributing goods is owned collectively or by a centralized government that often plans and controls the economy. 2.The stage in Marxist-Leninist theory intermediate between capitalism and communism, in which collective ownership of the economy under the dictatorship of the proletariat has not yet been successfully achieved.

Guilty by definition...

[DILBERT DOGBERT]

Barrow spend, barrow spend, barrow spend, barrow spend. Whose government does that?
The only folks who are going to get bailed out are the Wall Street folks – the Investment Banks and the Hedge Funds. All the talk is window dressing.
Money rides and the rest of us walk.

[www.BetterVillage.com, XYZ, PDq.]

Barrow spend... like when people were pushing wheelbarrows full of cash down to the market to buy bread.

[Thomas Johnson]

To JR: We have no basements in Houston. We do have affordable homes to buy, where the payment is cheaper than renting. As I said in my post: in my discussions with those from SoCal, it always comes down to weather vs equity.

I promise not to come to SoCal. I am too busy selling affordable homes to my clients, tough guy. ;-)

[Kathi]

This proposal just adds insult to injury. Like many others, my husband and I have sat on the sidelines waiting for the housing market to re-enter the realm of reality. We could easily have qualified for an outrageous loan, to pay for an outrageously overpriced home but knew it was not the logical thing to do. We rented, saved money and waited. And waited. And waited. Now, to reward us for our prudent thinking, we get to pay for all those who jumped into ridiculous loans so they could get the bigger house and use the equity to buy shiny new cars and are now crying that it's just not fair! Hello -- did we just enter the Twilight Zone?

[Tim]

Looks like if Hillary Clinton is elected, we'll all have FREE housing, FREE healthcare and FREE higher education! And nobody will have to pay for it! Woo Hoo! I love COMMUNISM! Soon thereafter, we can all sit in bread lines for food and wait months for a much needed medical operation. And don't think about rising up against the government, because Hillary is going to protect children to by disarming every law abiding citizen... well, that is protecting every child that is actually born. If you are in the womb from 6 months to 9 months, you will have no rights. I can't wait to register as a COMMIE!!! No more personal responsibilty... it's all about social respobsibility now. Because HILLARY IS LEADING BY 22% IN THE LATEST POLL!!!! Woo Hoo! Embrace Communism because it is coming!

[GAry]

my wife & I make a combined six fig salary, I have no dept, perfect credit, money in the bank....and I have never felt so broke in my life before because it doest buy you anything. Bail out all those greedy & stupid people!....what about me!?. Experts said that the rest of us were "sitting on the side-lines waiting to see what was going on in the housing market" we weremt sitting & waiting, we just couldnt play! We needed somewhere to live not some place to flip!...... isnt what all this price increase was about?, we didnt just grow in population....lenders were just giving credit away, now you want me to pay!....... F&^&^$% that!...and after I have to pay for everyone else I still cant get a home for myself, what other investment is there that if it doesnt go your way the government will reimburse you?

[Jive Dadson]

There's a man running for president who understands exactly what is happening. He also knew what would happen in Iraq, back in 2003. The unending turmoil and civil war - everything. When Hillary was voting to give Bush the go-ahead, he was arguing before congress trying to stop it. But no. We have another easy money, inflation-financed war, and a boom-bust in the lending market.

His name is Ron Paul. Listen to him rake Bernanke over the coals in the House Committee for Financial Services several months ago. "Is this sustainable?"

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AaXG402Kejg

[howard]

Is there some way of punishing or stopping predatory lenders without bailing everyone out?

Last week, Mr. Viles said something very interesting. He said, "Why should government favor today's owners over tomorrow's buyers?" Sounds fine to me. But a lot of people believe that city governments, homeowners associations, and to some extent even county governments have as their main purpose "favor[ing] today's owners over tomorrow's buyers." It's generally called, however, "protecting property values."

[Bob A]

You all love to scream "tax and spend" over 1 billion dollars to bailout Americans..but you don't even blink when GWB is asking for 600 billion for an unjust war. Money that will never again circulate in the hands of our country.

I don't support Hillary, and would never vote for her..but as Americans..get your god damn priorities straight!!

[Diane Johnson]

The executive branch and congress knew exactly what was happening in the mortgage industry ..a free market with no regulations ..they allowed it to happen because it took attention away and helped hold up the economy of the country while they outsourced our manufacturing, broke the caps on immigrants and left our borders open for more cheap labor.

[Mark]

Sen. Clinton is focused on solving our economic problems, while yet Sen. Obama sun baths in St. Thomas. I'm sure he is writing a fine speech.

Hillary is trying to give away free houses (you bunch of knuckle-heads) but a way for people to avoid foreclosures. We would have time for the details of the issues and ideas if there weren't so much mass media appeal and bias toward the ignorant and low-brow masses.

[Jenni Lock]

Why is everyone so mean? So what if we put the money in a pot and decide to spend it to save some stupid people who made mistakes with mortgages? Some of us owned our homes for years and got swindled by unethical mortgage brokers.

Some people were coerced to buy homes without understanding the process fully and were lied to by real estate sales people and mortgage brokers.

Some could not even read the ridiculous purchase agreements, and were totally coerced by the whole home-owning propaganda.

Home stagers made the homes so inviting. Cities were giving low income people downpayments, and allowing brokers and lenders to take advantage with upside down loans.

What do you expect. What else are we going to use the money in the pot for? IS IT BETTER TO USE IT FOR "WAR?"

WE ARE ALL GOING TO DIE SOMEDAY...AND WE CANNOT TAKE THE MONEY OR ANYTHING ON THIS PLANET WITH US WHEN WE DIE.

YES WE CAN PASS IT ON TO OUR CHILDREN..BUT WHOSE TO SAY THEY WILL USE IT WISELY?

STOP YWITH THE MEAN THOUGHTS..WE CAN TAKE CARE OF EACH OTHER ON THIS VERY MINUTE PLANET. ITS SPINS ALL DAY AND NIGHT, AND WE CANNOT GET OFF...SO WE MIGHT AS WELL TAKE CARE OF EACH OTHER...EVEN WHEN WE MAKE MISTAKES!

THINK ABOUT IT! HILLARY'S IDEA IS NOT SO BAD. DO WE NEED MORE HOMELESS PEOPLE ON THE STREETS?