Today, President Obama took a stand against the banks, against foreclosure, and against the Democratic leadership of both houses of Congress, torpedoing a stealth-legislation package that would have neatly bailed the banks out of the emerging document-gate scandal.
Chris Smith carries out his family's belongings during eviction from his foreclosed home in Adams County, Colorado, 02/02/09. (photo: John Moore/Getty Images)
Obama's Courageous Stand on Foreclosure
07 October 10
Reader Supported News | Perspective
resident Barack Obama today made good his pledge to use the power of the Oval Office to help American homeowners. Obama refused to sign legislation specifically crafted to protect lenders involved in record numbers of home foreclosures, and stymie efforts by homeowners and their attorneys to challenge documents in those foreclosure actions.
While public attention and media coverage has been drawn in recent days to the issue of foreclosure document-doctoring by mortgage lenders, including some of the nation's largest, Congress was quietly crafting legislation that would have given the protection of federal law to the very documents at the center of the storm.
The "Interstate Recognition of Notarizations Act," first passed by the House in April of this year, sat quietly in the Senate Judiciary Committee until the day before Congress recessed for their midterm-election break. On September 27, with little media coverage, public attention or public debate in the Senate, the bill was unexpectedly brought to the floor and passed.
Reminiscent of modifications made in 2008 to the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act that provided retroactive immunity to giant American telecommunications companies for their participation in Bush-era domestic electronic surveillance, the Interstate Recognition of Notarizations Act appears custom-crafted to validate retroactively mortgage foreclosure documents that many states' attorneys general fear may be fraudulent.
At the center of the recent firestorm are what are alleged to be flawed foreclosure documents. Challenges to those documents are the basis for foreclosure defense actions in many states. The Interstate Recognition of Notarizations Act would have forced state courts to ignore many of the most commonly cited flaws in foreclosure documents, potentially streamlining and accelerating the already record pace of US families' home foreclosures.
Flawed documents, experts say, may only be a symptom of the larger, more tangled web of so-called "securitized mortgages," mortgage notes bundled into Wall Street investments - the very investments at the heart of the nation's economic crisis.
In refusing to sign the Interstate Recognition of Notarizations Act, President Obama broke with his own party's leadership on legislation successfully passed by both Democratic-controlled houses of Congress. It was a bold and principled stand by a president often maligned by party activists for failing to act forcefully enough on issues of passionate concern to the party's base, and often touted by the president himself.
For Obama, locked in a pitched battle to preserve congressional majorities for his party and his agenda, this decisive stand is sure to resonate with homeowners across the nation, regardless of party affiliation. For a presidency struggling to define itself, Mr. Obama's demur is a gauntlet thrown down.
Marc Ash is the founder and director of Reader Supported News, as well as Truthout.
Reader Supported News is the Publication of Origin for this work. Permission to republish is freely granted with credit and a link back to Reader Supported News.
|
THE NEW STREAMLINED RSN LOGIN PROCESS: Register once, then login and you are ready to comment. All you need is a Username and a Password of your choosing and you are free to comment whenever you like! Welcome to the Reader Supported News community. |
 22 May 2012
|
 21 May 2012
|
 21 May 2012
|
 21 May 2012
|
 21 May 2012
|
 23 May 2012
|
 22 May 2012
|
 22 May 2012
|
 22 May 2012
|
Comments
We are concerned about a recent drift towards vitriol in the RSN Reader comments section. There is a fine line between moderation and censorship. No one likes a harsh or confrontational forum atmosphere. At the same time everyone wants to be able to express themselves freely. We'll start by encouraging good judgment. If that doesn't work we'll have to ramp up the moderation.
General guidelines: Avoid personal attacks on other forum members; Avoid remarks that are ethnically derogatory; Do not advocate violence, or any illegal activity.
Remember that making the world better begins with responsible action.
- The RSN Team
Finally ordinary Americans will get a break. We are very grateful.
This was SO out of character for Obama I simply couldn't BELIEVE it was true. Maybe Rahm's leaving is actually going to change things, in which case, I wish he had left 2 years ago.
We are very happy to see ordinary Americans getting a break---finally.
Must disagree with Ash we have been waiting for his so-called bravery for two years-
-where is his real courage--which is when you do something with real risk?
Moore's rules for Democrats asking that you and other
members of Congress who are Democrats start taking stands
about issues that effect many middle class Americans. When
you do this..The Tea Party becomes weaker and you and what
you can do as President become stronger
giant step....
I could not have said it better myself.
His first big mistake was appointing Emanual, a more-corporate oriented person than a progressive/populist, as his Chief of Staff. Then his refusal to come to terms with the fact that the Republican'ts (who even told him so, according to his interview with Rolling Stone) had no intention of working with him in his bi-partisan efforts to help the middle class. At that point, he should have stepped into the fray and dragged the Congress kicking and screaming into working his agenda. At least he would have shown the real leadership that I and many others had been looking for from the beginning. (sorry... out of space)
Mr. Obama still has a slim chance of salvaging his Presidency. But he is still taking tentative steps as the leader he showed so much potential to be. I guess the prospect of a real progressive challenger to him in 2012 is, whether from the Democratic Party or a good third party (fat chance), the best I can hope for at this time.
He has finally done something good for the people, if he should suddenly turn bright orange...........so what!!!!!!!!!!! !
everyone who pays attention to color over substance should get over it, appearances may or may not be deceptive whether its clothes, color of skin, sex, height..........get it?????????
WATCH WHAT THEY DO NOT WHAT THEY SAY!!!!
Thank you. More please!
I just hope this does not get rescinded after the upcoming election. If this turns out to be a ploy to curry favor for political gain, then all bets are off. I've seen this movie before and I am skeptical. One positive move does not a trend make. Ten positive moves in a row will get me back. Until then, I'll be watching.
I agree completely AngryMan...let's wait and see what direction he takes after November.
Very interesting!
Now THAT's a great policy proposal. Indeed, revalue all mortgages to current market values. Why shouldn't the banks have to take it in the shorts just like the rest of us, especially since they are a cause of so much of this grief.
Not at all correct. He has always had executive authority sufficient to force many issues with or without Congress approving. At the stroke of a pen he could nullify many of the policies of the prior administration and has so far done very little of that.
NY Times Republican leaning???
LA Times Republican Leaning???
Washington Post Republican leaning???
Huffington Post Republican leaning???
Chicago Any of them???
If this were REALLY a courageous act by the "Pres.", he would have Vetoed it directly and not just let it die by not signing it. NOT saying anything is NOT the same as making a courageous statement or stand against it!!!
Obama's "demur" is simply political showmanship. He has done absolutely nothing -- repeat, nothing -- to stem foreclosures, or to rein in Wall Street excess. Just follow the money: $4.7 trillion for the banks, a mere $75 billion in a flawed, ineffective program for Main Street.
Many thousands of loan brokers, underwriters and lenders profited mightily by granting loans that should have never been written. So far their collusion in this crime is being swept under the rug. At a minimum they should be banned from their profession and forced to pay back commissions. A complete audit of every loan file should be prerequisite to foreclosure.
Both houses can now go to their financial sector money sources and say they voted for it. But they knew he was going to veto so it was a free vote.
Obama gets to veto a bill that the congressional leadership never would have let come to his desk unless he wanted the chance to veto.
Everyday kind of politics.
answer as to what you will do about this problem. I was in hopes that you would put a ban on Foreclosures thru 2011, and that would give the homeowners, a little room to work something out. You would also have the time to come up with the solution to this problem. Maybe the voters in this country will realize that you have no intention of ruining our system of Government and that you are working hard to solve these horrendous problems hat you inherited from the previous administration. Keep up the Good Work. But, let the voters know what you are doing. Don't keep it a secret. I am in earnest hope that you will obtain
a second term in the election of 2012.. For sure you have my vote....
But as happy as I am to see my President in action on behalf of the people, it disgusts me to note that this bill sailed through both houses of Congress, where the so-called "Party of the People" has control. Shame on all of you. You can bet I will be reviewing the voting records of all the representatives from my state, and I will vote accordingly.
Check it out.
How's that for a conspiracy?
"The latest of these court decisions came down in California on May 20, 2010, in a bankruptcy case called In re Walker, Case no. 10-21656-E–11. The court held that MERS could not foreclose because it was a mere nominee; and that as a result, plaintiff Citibank could not collect on its claim.
.. no evidence of MERS’ ownership of the underlying note (is)offered,.. other courts have concluded that MERS does not own the underlying notes, this court is convinced that MERS had no interest it could transfer to Citibank. .. without ownership of the underlying note is void under California law."
Wall Street manipulation of legalized gambling cannot record the PROPER documents in thousands of courthouses across America and prevent citizens from growing awareness of the importance of owning politicians. Hooray for Obama!
Goldman Sachs
Litton Loan Servicing
HSBC
Fremont Reorganizing
LPS Title Company
The Wolf Firm, A Law Corp
Marti Noriega
Debra Lyman
John Crandall
Brenda Mckinzy
Leigh Blackwell
Daniella Marie Garrett
Melissa Bell
Go to the link below:
https://fdaaccount.box.net/shared/a1pjz9sz5c
RSS feed for comments to this post.