Democratic Underground Latest Greatest Lobby Journals Search Options Help Login
Google

Durbin Considers Cramdown-Related Amendment As Part Of Wall Street Reform

Printer-friendly format Printer-friendly format
Printer-friendly format Email this thread to a friend
Printer-friendly format Bookmark this thread
This topic is archived.
Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion (1/22-2007 thru 12/14/2010) Donate to DU
 
laughingliberal Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu May-06-10 12:15 AM
Original message
Durbin Considers Cramdown-Related Amendment As Part Of Wall Street Reform
Senate Majority Whip Dick Durbin (D-Ill.) is considering amending Wall Street reform legislation to allow something similar to judicial modification of mortgages, a process known informally as "cramdown."

"We are looking at variations on that theme that might achieve that same result and I haven't made a final decision on whether we'll offer it on this bill yet," Durbin said on a conference call with reporters Monday. "We are considering some variations on that but they haven't been solidified as of today. I just want to see if the support is there."

A Durbin staffer said Wednesday that if Durbin does in fact offer a cramdown amendment, it will be different from a previous version of cramdown that failed spectacularly last year in a Senate vote after passing the House.

It was after that vote that Durbin famously said of the Senate that banks "frankly own the place." <snip>

More at link: http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2010/05/05/durbin-considers-cramdown_n_564283.html

I would welcome an amendment for this.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
SoCalDem Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu May-06-10 12:31 AM
Response to Original message
1. Cramdowns instead of bailouts could have solved a LOT of problems
Edited on Thu May-06-10 12:32 AM by SoCalDem
Everyone with a mortgage underwater (and who actually could afford the home they were buying) could have leveled things out , and done it cheaper too..

The way they chose to do it, only allowed the banks to keep their bogus mortgages, and left people on the hook for hyper-inflated mortgages, and then dumped millions of foreclosed houses onto the market.

All this stuff is computerized.. It's not rocket science. There was a way to evaluate what percentage particular markets were overrated. and to just reduce the principle amounts by the percentage. People could have suddenly afforded payments, and banks would not be siting on loads of bogus loans on empty houses..

This could have easily been limited to homes worth no more than a specified amount (to keep the Richie Rich types from scamming the system)
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
laughingliberal Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu May-06-10 12:40 AM
Response to Reply #1
3. +1 nt
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
JDPriestly Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu May-06-10 01:16 AM
Response to Reply #1
4. You are so right. They could have done this in various ways.
For example, they could have extended mortgages over a longer period of time -- a 30-year mortgage into a 60-year. Essentially, people would have been paying rent for their homes. But the social upheaval would have been avoided.

The way this was handled is just shameful.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
dmr Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu May-06-10 04:47 AM
Response to Reply #1
5. Yes, & the added plus would have kept the much needed tax base in tact.
:hi:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
chill_wind Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu May-06-10 12:36 AM
Response to Original message
2. K & R. n/t
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
DU AdBot (1000+ posts) Click to send private message to this author Click to view 
this author's profile Click to add 
this author to your buddy list Click to add 
this author to your Ignore list Mon May 13th 2024, 04:40 AM
Response to Original message
Advertisements [?]
 Top

Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion (1/22-2007 thru 12/14/2010) Donate to DU

Powered by DCForum+ Version 1.1 Copyright 1997-2002 DCScripts.com
Software has been extensively modified by the DU administrators


Important Notices: By participating on this discussion board, visitors agree to abide by the rules outlined on our Rules page. Messages posted on the Democratic Underground Discussion Forums are the opinions of the individuals who post them, and do not necessarily represent the opinions of Democratic Underground, LLC.

Home  |  Discussion Forums  |  Journals |  Store  |  Donate

About DU  |  Contact Us  |  Privacy Policy

Got a message for Democratic Underground? Click here to send us a message.

© 2001 - 2011 Democratic Underground, LLC