Holy Impatience and the Foreclosure Prevention Act (by Andrew Wilkes)
Impatience can be destructive. But it can also be a catalyst to work for social change. In this sense, one could argue that impatience can be holy in some respects. As a Sojourners intern, this summer is my introduction to Capitol Hill, to the rich landscape of D.C., and, yes, to the bewilderingly slow grind of Washington politics.
For the last month or so, I have been tracking the progress of proposals to address the housing crisis. The Foreclosure Prevention Act of 2008, which was introduced more than a year ago, may indeed become law next week. The president withdrew his veto, the bill passed the House, and the Senate should pass it to the president for his signature. But it may not; the hopeful wind of swift enactment has carried this bill before -- only to leave with members of Congress for the July 4 recess.
After witnessing more than 2 million foreclosures, plummeting stock prices, and an increasingly beaten path from foreclosure to homelessness, I hope that this time the proposal will become policy. Call me impatient, but one would think that broad bipartisan support in the House and the Senate, a measured endorsement from the White House, and the plight of millions of Americans would have given birth to a law by now. Nope. The wheels keep turning, and at long last, something may come out.
I am tired of waiting. Millions of lives are looking to Washington for action. I cannot help but feel impatient. No, I choose to be impatient. And perhaps the Holy Spirit is stirring -- maybe even causing -- this impatience to move me to action. If you are willing to consider the possibility that a holy impatience occasionally summons us to act, and further willing to entertain the possibility that this impatience is calling us to act on the housing bill, I urge you to do something. Call your congressperson. Organize in the streets. Inform your faith community about the crisis. Maybe do all three.
Andrew Wilkes is a policy and organizing intern at Sojourners. He is currently pursuing a Masters of Divinity degree at Princeton Theological Seminary.
Add to Del.icio.us
Add to Technorati
Add to Digg
Add to Newsvine
Comments
I think we should all be glad that the process for creating a 12-figure program is slow. The president's beef with the original bill, that it funnelled billions of dollars to irresponsible lenders like Countrywide, seems perfectly reasonable.
Honestly, that's still more or less what this is. But I suppose impatience trumps wisdom when it comes to crises such as these.
Posted by: kevin s. | July 25, 2008 4:57 PM
For at least once I agree with Kevin S.
There's no doubt that people are suffering.
But there was a wave of irresponsibility and greed, and the solution is to devalue the dollar, inflate the currency and bail out financial manipulators - as well as perhaps try to keep people in homes that were purchased in an unwise manner - all at taxpayer expense, while supposedly not having to have any tax increases.
I suppose that's where the illusion of free money through the irresponsible and cowardly method of inflation comes in.
Posted by: Sojourner Truth | July 25, 2008 10:46 PM
Talk about manipulating the market. Greenspan created the housing bubble with politically inspires low interest, politicians coerced banks to lend to the unlendable, and when housing prices skyrocketed the fed raised interest rates and many were caught in the bear trap. It is interesting that Indy Mac, Freddie Mac, Fannie Mae, have the greatest regulatory and political oversight and are still the largest financial disasters. Now like a drunk driver the fed and treasury are reversing their manipulation. Like mom said, a little lie grows when new lies try to cover the last one.
Posted by: Phil | July 26, 2008 6:13 PM
I like the idea of protecting renters from the foreclosures. I don't thin that someone should have to pay for the financial mistakes of their landlord, although should a new landlord come and purchase the property they might have to deal with such changes.
Still though, as tragic as homelessness-from-foreclosed home is, I can't see such individuals as mere victims of greedy financial empires. Greed from those who manipulated the market is one thing, but I can't pretend that someone who tried to purchase more home than they can afford (say, by lying about their income on a sisa-loan?) are any less greedy.
Posted by: Joel G | July 27, 2008 5:39 PM
"Action"! Spoken like a true progressive! I'm actually perfectly happy that significant legislation can't be passed in a matter of weeks. That's the whole point of the governmemtal system that was set up in the U.S.
When legislation is pushed through quickly that certain people don't like they complain about how we need more time for debate and consideration. When legislation is being considered that they support those same people complain that we need less debate and more action! There's people suffering, don't you know!
As for this bill, it's far from ideal. Should we really be bailing out banks and people who made dumb lending and borrowing decisions? Is there any attempt to seperate the people who didn't do their homework before they bought a home (interest rates never go up, right?!) from the people who got a loan from a lender who broke the law?
Why is there no consideration given to the intelligent (or just plain lucky) people who didn't buy a home and can now actually afford one because of the forclosures?
It just irks me that my wife and I did lots of research about loans and buying a home before doing so a little over a year ago and now our tax dollars are going to bailout people, for the most part, who chose not to do the same research. The only reason these particular people are getting bailouts now is that they're politically important.
Posted by: Eric | July 27, 2008 8:43 PM
"Still though, as tragic as homelessness-from-foreclosed home is, I can't see such individuals as mere victims of greedy financial empires. "
Not mere victims, no. But in many instances, they were victims of fraud at the hands of unscrupulous brokers. And that is where this legislation drops the ball. The FBI, Departments of Commerce, and local authorities are scrambling to prosecute the worst offenders.
This is where the legislation, as presently constituted, drops the ball. Many banks are forgoing third party brokerage altogether, which robs homebuyers of the ability to have a broker shop rates. Beyond that, there is a (very reasonable) fear that the same scumbags are still out there.
Directing a substantial amount to law enforcement would send the message that the coast is clear in this regard. It would also ensure justice for those who were legitimately bilked out of their money.
Posted by: kevin s. | July 27, 2008 11:01 PM
Ok -- but another criminal in all this is how the prices of homes got so inflated in the first place. I don't really know who to blame for that, but couldn't something have been done to stop it?
I just heard this morning that the median home price in my city requires the home income be 86,000 per year, when the actual median income per household is 65,000 per year.
We want the government to step in and keep gas prices from going through the roof, but no one really wanted to stop the over-inflated prices in real estate. I guess too many had too much to lose. As a nation we've been through these trends before, don't you think we could start figuring some of this stuff out?
Easy loans contributed to higher home prices (if people can't qualify for the loans, the houses don't sell.) Once homes go into foreclosure, everyone in the neighborhood suffers -- and if it's a nice new neighborhood where lots of people got bad loans -- you just lost your investment too.
Posted by: frankie | July 28, 2008 11:40 AM
What the bill really lacks is legislation that would put these finacial companies under the same restrictions that traditional banks (that is, ones subject to FDIC regulations) have. I think the legislators were too cowardly to confront such powerful interests.
Paul Krugman had a good column in today's NY times about that.
Posted by: I and I | July 28, 2008 1:19 PM
In reading the comments here, I see a previously divided group coming together and finding some common ground. It is refreshing.
Posted by: JamesM | July 28, 2008 6:24 PM
We have this current housing financial crises because conservatives have been busy for some years now in getting rid of banking and financial safeguards which have been in place since the Great Depression to "free" the money and mortgage market as it were. Just another example of unfettered capitalism run wild!
Posted by: George, Jr. | July 28, 2008 10:31 PM
It is interesting that the same voices yelling loudest for less regulation of the financial industry are also the same voices yelling (demanding) a government bailout.
Of course, we Americans have a short memory. When this blows over and we are out of danger, then the call will go out again for less regulation - let the market work. If it wasn't for innocent and 'the least of these' getting hurt, I would say let the f*^&(*^&g market work and sink all the stupid banks and brokerage houses that made such risky (read stupid) moves.
Radical Moderate
Posted by: Radical Moderate | July 29, 2008 2:09 AM
George,
I'm glad you boiled it down to such a simple answer. I knew it had to be those evil conservatives again. Thanks for the insight.
Posted by: Eric | July 29, 2008 4:01 PM
To say we should be glad about the slowness of this and, yet, not comment on the blinding speed with which an investment bank was bailed out over the course of the weekend with the guarantee of U.S. taxpayer dollars is terribly shallow. While this bill has jostled and jerked it's way through the legislative sausage grinder, we have committed billions of taxpayer dollars in bailout programs and corporate welfare to America's mega-banks. Bear-Stearns gets corporate welfare and everybody stands up to praise the "decisive" action of the government to forestall a financial crisis. But the plight of a working family losing its home doesn't seem to merit such "decisive" action but rather requires "deliberation." The laws that put this mess in place didn't get nearly this level of "deliberation" and look where they put us. When the plight of America's families merit the same "decisive" action as large corporations who've played craps with money that wasn't their, then we'll have family values in American politics.
Posted by: Richard | July 30, 2008 11:32 PM
This Bill is passed and way past due. It survived with some major alterations, some good, some not so good. But it is passed!
Now we have lots of work yet to be done to make sure the appropriations funnel to where they can do the most good and that the funds are wisely administered on the State level.
I just hope and pray that the poorest are not forgotten in all this. We have a great opportunity to make this Bill actually make a difference. Let's go to work!
Posted by: tree | August 1, 2008 3:07 PM
Sadly, the reason this bill finally passed has more to do with the bailout of Fannie and Freddie than with helping homeowners.
This will have little or no impact on most families who are about to lose their homes. The provisions that might help them won't really be working until spring. People in trouble now will have long since lost the battle by then.
And the fact that it's entirely at the lender's discretion means that for those who are hurting the worst there's less incentive for the banks to help. I've heard 300,000-400,000 might be helped by this. Those are pathetically low numbers. I suspect it's even worse.
And, the bailout of Fannie and Freddie is simply another step in making sure no long term lessons are learned by those who helped lead us down this path.
Posted by: Julie Emery | August 6, 2008 9:24 PM
Post a Comment
Are you aware of our Rules of Conduct?