Last week, I noted that House Republicans had introduced a motion to penalize strategic defaulters — underwater homeowners who simply stop paying their mortgages and surrender their homes to the bank — by barring them from obtaining Federal Housing Administration-backed loans in the future. I hadn’t noticed until now, but the House ended up passing its FHA Reform Act with the penalization for strategic defaulters in the bill. (The act now needs Senate approval before it becomes law.) Rep. Chris Lee (R-N.Y.) got the provision in there on an unopposed unanimous consent motion.
Rep. Barney Frank (D-Mass.) supported the strategic-defaulter provision, if crankily: “I am going to urge people to vote for it. I will say that it might need a word or two of improvement. If it had, in fact, been offered at the Financial Services Committee, either provision, we could have accepted it then, but then members wouldn’t have had a chance to make dramatic speeches on the floor, so I suppose that explains why we had to go through this.”
Here is Lee on the motion:
According to a study by Experian and management consulting firm Oliver Wyman, from 2007 to 2008, the number of strategic defaults more than doubled to 588,000, and a separate 2009 survey found that more than a quarter of all existing defaults were strategic.
Meanwhile, there are lawyers, scam artists and opportunists touting the financial benefits of walking away from a mortgage and offering to help you do that for a fee. Not a day goes by that we don’t read another news article about folks who are making calculated decisions to stop paying their mortgages even though they still have the ability to pay. We are not talking about those families who have fallen on hard times or who simply can no longer afford to make their payments. We are talking about this new trend of people who voluntarily choose to stop paying their mortgages even though they still have the ability to pay.
While these decisions should ultimately be left to the individual, we should put in place more stringent penalties to discourage this irresponsible behavior. If borrowers make decisions to strategically default on their loans, they certainly should not be allowed to benefit from a government-subsidized program.
This motion makes it clear: if you can afford to pay your mortgage and choose not to, you will no longer be eligible to secure an FHA mortgage. This motion calls on the Secretary of HUD to define strategic default and to work with lenders to identify and to prevent borrowers from participating in the FHA program.
The language prohibits the FHA from “newly [insuring] any mortgage under this title that is secured by a 1- to 4-family dwelling unless the mortgagee has determined, in accordance with such standards and requirements established by the Secretary, that the mortgagor under such mortgage has not previously engaged in any strategic default with respect to any residential mortgage loan.” It says that the FHA needs to figure out what an “intentional default” is in the first place.
Here is what I wrote on this topic last week:
[Republicans argue] that strategic default needs to be legislated away, and its perpetrators punished. But strategic defaulters are not committing some felony or crime. They are not even really breaching their contracts. Every mortgage contract spells out what happens if the homeowner does not pay: The bank evicts them and takes the home.Furthermore, the Republican letter does not spell out *how *the government would designate someone as a strategic defaulter anyway. Strategic defaulters are people who *could *continue to pay their mortgages but choose not to. Defaulters are people who *cannot *continue to pay their mortgages. But does the government really want to stipulate that homeowners have to hand over, say, up to their last $2,000 of savings to the bank before they can walk away from their home? Up to their last five percent of annual income? What if those people need the money to move, or to pay medical bills, or to buy shoes for their kids? Since when have Republicans advocated telling Americans how they can and cannot spend their money?
The way to tackle this problem is to … lower the number of strategic defaults. The best way to do that is to make sure that the recovery is strong, employment is growing and that homeowners are not underwater. Improving the Home Affordable Modification Program and “cramdown” provisions would go a long way to reducing homeowners’ monthly payments and principal, helping to keep them in their homes.
I repeat the point. There are better ways to deal with this problem than to have the FHA attempt to identify and punish strategic defaulters, particularly if Congress does nothing to ameliorate the underlying issue of homeowners being underwater on their mortgages.
E-Verify Mandate Begins Today
The Obama administration today begins implementation of a new mandate to require all federal contractors to check the legal status of their employees to confirm
EPA Administrator Addresses Concerns About Oil Spill Waste Management
At a hearing of the national oil spill commission today, Environmental Protection Agency Administrator Lisa Jackson addressed concerns about waste disposal from
EPA administrator defends allowing Florida to write its own water pollution rules
The EPA seal (Pic via sentryjournal.com) The Environmental Protection Agency has come under fire for its decision to allow the state of Florida to write its own water pollution rules (known as “numeric nutrient criteria”). EPA Regional Administrator Gwendolyn Keyes Fleming is now firing back, writing that the Agency commends the state Department of Environmental Protection for its draft of a proposed standard. A host of environmental groups filed suit in 2008, seeking to compel the EPA to implement a strict set of water pollution standards in Florida, arguing that the state was in violation of the Clean Water Act.
EPA administrator fires back at critics in op-ed
EPA Administrator Lisa Jackson (Pic by USACEpublicaffairs, via Flickr) EPA Administrator Lisa Jackson penned a new op-ed for the Los Angeles Times , criticizing House Republicans desperately seeking to undermine the authority of the agency they have dubbed a “job killer.” Arguing that the environment affects red states and blue states alike, Jackson writes that “it is time for House Republicans to stop politicizing our air and water.” As head of the Environmental Protection Agency, Jackson has faced harsh criticism from House Republicans and GOP presidential candidates who say the agency’s regulations are an undue burden on businesses that have to cut jobs simply to comply with clean water and air rules. Presidential hopeful Michele Bachmann has pledged to end the EPA if she takes office. “Since the beginning of this year, Republicans in the House have averaged roughly a vote every day the chamber has been in session to undermine the Environmental Protection Agency and our nation’s environmental laws,” writes Jackson.
EPA administrator says federal nutrient criteria is a ‘myth’
In testimony given late last week, EPA Administrator Lisa Jackson said that false accusations about her agency’s numeric nutrient criteria to govern Florida waterways are proving to be a detriment to their implementation. # Testifying before the House Agriculture Committee, Jackson said her agency’s work was often “mischaracterized” and addressed several myths surrounding its work
EPA Analysis Says Climate Bill’s Cost for Households Would Be ‘Modest’
All the attention on the energy front today is going to the BP spill, but the Environmental Protection Agency quietly released its long-anticipated analysis of
EPA announces hold on nutrient standards if Florida can come up with own criteria
The EPA announced today that it is now prepared to withdraw a portion of its proposed numeric nutrient criteria (a set of standards governing water pollution in inland waters) and delay the portion related to estuarine waters, to allow the state Department of Environmental Protection to develop its own criteria. # From a statement released by the EPA earlier today: # EPA recognizes that states have the primary role in establishing and implementing water quality standards for their waters. Therefore, EPA is prepared to withdraw the federal inland standards and delay the estuarine standards if FDEP adopts, and EPA approves, their own protective and scientifically sound numeric standards
EPA biologist says fracking may be partly to blame for West Virginia fish kill
New documents obtained by an environmental news service show that an EPA analyst believes that wastewater from fracking may be partly responsible for a fish kill in a West Virginia river. Scientific American reports : U.S
EPA: BP Has 24 Hours to Find a Less Toxic Chemical Dispersant
Thought the massive quantities of oil pouring into the Gulf of Mexico were the only major threat to the country’s southeast coastal waters right now? Think
EPA and California Near Deal on Fuel Efficiency Standards
Two weeks ago, the Obama administration raised fuel efficiency standards by an average of two miles per gallon -- a modest change that disappointed some