Home > Mortgages > Say Something Already! Obama & Romney’s Housing Crisis

Comments 2 Comments

Obama RomneyPresident Obama, Governor Romney and their backers may be spending hundreds of millions of dollars to live in the most expensive and exclusive house in the nation, but they aren’t saying enough about the fact that housing in America is broken. Despite what the media and candidates might have you believe, real estate, home ownership and mortgages are the most important issues of the coming presidential election. No one, however, is really talking about how it broke, who is responsible or what should be done with them. Worst of all, they’re not talking about how to fix it. Really fix it.

[Credit Calculator: Use Credit.com’s Free Credit Report Card]

Across this nation there is marked frustration with the persistent and toxic residue of the Great Recession. Some 12 million Americans find themselves $700 billion under water—their homes threatened by foreclosure. There is a general sense that the $26 billion settlement by which the five major mortgage-servicing banks escaped further liability on some issues was more a victory for the banks than it was for the government or the public. And, just last week another settlement in a class-action suit against Bank of America was challenged, after its $20 million award was agreed to by the lawyers in New York.

That litigation was brought by pension funds seeking redress for nondisclosure of Merrill Lynch’s disastrous financial condition at the time that it was purchased by B of A—a condition that resulted from Merrill’s real estate and mortgage investments.  Lawyers in a collateral case that would be extinguished by such a settlement raised several objections—two of which revolved around charges of collusion, and the fact that the New York settlement involved no payment by individuals.

Those plaintiffs are frustrated—like everyone else. There’s a general feeling that people who should be on opposite sides of a barbed wire fence are actually winking and nodding at each other. With all the lawsuits and settlements that have already occurred, and are ongoing at this moment, there are precious few individuals who have been called to account by a civil court, and virtually no one has been prosecuted criminally. Instead, for the most part there have been a number of settlements and fines paid by institutions rather than individuals. Those payments have generally been infinitesimal in comparison to the magnitude of the collapse, have had very little effect on the problem itself, and in most cases were made by financial institutions that benefited directly or indirectly from the taxpayer bailouts of 2008 and 2009.


Credit.com’s Credit Report Card
Check your credit bureau profile for free with this great tool. See your detailed credit evaluation, expert advice on managing your credit, and unlimited free updates every 30 days.
Get Started Here »

[Featured Article: What’s a Credit Score? Really.]

In other words, everyone can hear the piper but only the taxpayers are paying him. It sure seems like the bad guys are slithering away yet again.

And that’s the real issue. It seems like the people who looted our nation and took away the American dream are getting away with it. And we all know it… including the presidential candidates. It’s the elephant in the room. OK, it’s the donkey in the room, too.

Last week there was a ripple in the media about the new Task Force set up within the United States Department of Justice, and populated by personnel from several federal government agencies and many of the more irate state attorneys general who were dragged kicking and screaming into a $26 billion settlement they felt was both premature and inadequate. There were conflicting reports of pathetic inaction on the one hand, and stories of vigorous organization and investigation being conducted very quietly on the other. If the latter is true, it might suggest that the principal priority of the Task Force is to unearth and prosecute criminal conduct.

I say, “Bravo!” I want to see a pound of flesh extracted from those who ripped the flesh off the backs of beguiled borrowers, but I want much more. A perp walk might be satisfying on one level but it must be combined with more widespread principal and rate reductions, as well as far more meaningful reparations to those who were wronged as a result of the securitization feeding frenzy than the $5 billion cash fund that is on the table in the Settlement of 26. Frankly, in America, bloodlust rarely makes you money, or solves the problem of your $400,000 home that carries a $600,000 mortgage.

[Featured Products: Research and Compare Mortgage Rates at Credit.com]

Indeed, we may not get the perp walk we all deserve, or sufficient prison time to quench our thirst for justice, but both the president and the governor owe the voters more than platitudes about holding people to account, or letting the foreclosure process run its course.

I understand why they are reluctant to do it. The truth hurts.

It’s hard not to look back and see that the problem was, in a way, the result of a vast conspiracy of the willing: willing investment banks who could sell all of the securitized mortgages they could get, and make a lot of money doing it; willing mortgage originators and brokers, who marketed these ridiculous products and cut many corners in order to make a fast buck; and willing borrowers who were quite happy to believe that, only two years later, their house would be worth twice what they paid for it and didn’t really care or think about their ability to repay in the face of that nice lump of green created by a cash-out refi.

How much of this was the result of a deregulated mortgage system that could be exploited to make a very few people a lot of money, and how much of it was due to old fashioned law breaking? Until we sort that out, I fear this housing crisis will linger, or worse, happen again down the road. How many times? Well, your guess is as good as mine.

So, Mr. Obama & Mr. Romney, it’s time to answer some questions: Do we need a complete overhaul of the way home lending in America works, or just better enforcement of the laws that exist? Is securitization a flawed strategy? Is it time to redefine the American dream of home ownership that results in fewer dreamers getting homes?

Given what’s happened over the past four years, you’d think our presidential candidates would have clear positions on these issues.

You better speak up soon guys, or the American people just might assume that you don’t understand, or worse, don’t care about the problem. And either would be unbefitting the President of the United States.

[Related: Read more columns by Adam Levin]

Image: Ars Skeptica, via Flickr

Comments on articles and responses to those comments are not provided or commissioned by a bank advertiser. Responses have not been reviewed, approved or otherwise endorsed by a bank advertiser. It is not a bank advertiser's responsibility to ensure all posts and/or questions are answered.

Please note that our comments are moderated, so it may take a little time before you see them on the page. Thanks for your patience.

  • Pingback: Say Something Already! Obama & Romney’s Housing Crisis | Debt & Credit Blog | Free Online Tips and Resourses()

  • Jim Benedick

    To me, the simple fix is to reduce the principal of all under water mortgages to today’s values and let the banks and their bailout money, along with the government, fund it.

  • Pingback: Say Something Already! Obama & Romney’s Housing Crisis | Debt & Credit Blog| Free Online Tips and Resourses()

  • Sad American

    Crooked Banks…
    I think President Obama is asleep. The government gives money to the banks to help people with their mortgages. The banks refuse to help in the hope of taking the homes away from people. One example, a couple applied for a loan modification after losing their jobs. IndyMac Mortgage Services a division of OneWest Bank ® denied the modification on the basis of no full time employment. The modification should have been granted because these people needed help. If they have a job they don’t need a modification. If the couple still can’t pay the monthly payments after the modification then the bank can take their home. The people who lost their home after their modification was denied should be able to sue the banks. Since IndyMac denied the modification two years ago the couple continued to make their payments at a high rate without any help from neither the bank nor the government. They are still unemployed and working part time jobs with four children. Their diet is mostly potato chips. Who can help these people and this country? When can these people take a vacation and start creating jobs for other people? I have seen too many people lose their homes. Wake up Obama the banks are crooks!

Certain credit cards and other financial products mentioned in this and other sponsored content on Credit.com are Partners with Credit.com. Credit.com receives compensation if our users apply for and ultimately sign up for any financial products or cards offered.

Hello, Reader!

Thanks for checking out Credit.com. We hope you find the site and the journalism we produce useful. We wanted to take some time to tell you a bit about ourselves.

Our People

The Credit.com editorial team is staffed by a team of editors and reporters, each with many years of financial reporting experience. We’ve worked for places like the New York Times, American Banker, Frontline, TheStreet.com, Business Insider, ABC News, NBC News, CNBC and many others. We also employ a few freelancers and more than 50 contributors (these are typically subject matter experts from the worlds of finance, academia, politics, business and elsewhere).

Our Reporting

We take great pains to ensure that the articles, video and graphics you see on Credit.com are thoroughly reported and fact-checked. Each story is read by two separate editors, and we adhere to the highest editorial standards. We’re not perfect, however, and if you see something that you think is wrong, please email us at editorial team [at] credit [dot] com,

The Credit.com editorial team is committed to providing our readers and viewers with sound, well-reported and understandable information designed to inform and empower. We won’t tell you what to do. We will, however, do our best to explain the consequences of various actions, thereby arming you with the information you need to make decisions that are in your best interests. We also write about things relating to money and finance we think are interesting and want to share.

In addition to appearing on Credit.com, our articles are syndicated to dozens of other news sites. We have more than 100 partners, including MSN, ABC News, CBS News, Yahoo, Marketwatch, Scripps, Money Magazine and many others. This network operates similarly to the Associated Press or Reuters, except we focus almost exclusively on issues relating to personal finance. These are not advertorial or paid placements, rather we provide these articles to our partners in most cases for free. These relationships create more awareness of Credit.com in general and they result in more traffic to us as well.

Our Business Model

Credit.com’s journalism is largely supported by an e-commerce business model. Rather than rely on revenue from display ad impressions, Credit.com maintains a financial marketplace separate from its editorial pages. When someone navigates to those pages, and applies for a credit card, for example, Credit.com will get paid what is essentially a finder’s fee if that person ends up getting the card. That doesn’t mean, however, that our editorial decisions are informed by the products available in our marketplace. The editorial team chooses what to write about and how to write about it independently of the decisions and priorities of the business side of the company. In fact, we maintain a strict and important firewall between the editorial and business departments. Our mission as journalists is to serve the reader, not the advertiser. In that sense, we are no different from any other news organization that is supported by ad revenue.

Visitors to Credit.com are also able to register for a free Credit.com account, which gives them access to a tool called The Credit Report Card. This tool provides users with two free credit scores and a breakdown of the information in their Experian credit report, updated twice monthly. Again, this tool is entirely free, and we mention that frequently in our articles, because we think that it’s a good thing for users to have access to data like this. Separate from its educational value, there is also a business angle to the Credit Report Card. Registered users can be matched with products and services for which they are most likely to qualify. In other words, if you register and you find that your credit is less than stellar, Credit.com won’t recommend a high-end platinum credit card that requires an excellent credit score You’d likely get rejected, and that’s no good for you or Credit.com. You’d be no closer to getting a product you need, there’d be a wasted inquiry on your credit report, and Credit.com wouldn’t get paid. These are essentially what are commonly referred to as "targeted ads" in the world of the Internet. Despite all of this, however, even if you never apply for any product, the Credit Report Card will remain free, and none of this will impact how the editorial team reports on credit and credit scores.

Your Stories

Lastly, much of what we do is informed by our own experiences as well as the experiences of our readers. We want to tell your stories if you’re interested in sharing them. Please email us at story ideas [at] credit [dot] com with ideas or visit us on Facebook or Twitter.

Thanks for stopping by.

- The Credit.com Editorial Team