Home > Mortgages > Obama or Romney: Who’s Better for Homeowners?

Comments 1 Comment

When it comes to housing policy, Mitt Romney should have many supporters among Credit.com readers. Every week we receive emails and comments complaining about HAMP and HARP, President Obama’s signature programs to alleviate the mortgage crisis. They include Nima Russell, who calls the government’s rules for modifying her mortgage “very frustrating and unfair!”

After getting invited to apply for a refinanced mortgage under the revamped version of the HARP program, a reader named Sherri was denied at the last minute because, unbeknownst to her, Wells Fargo had recently sold her loan to a different company. “HARP is apparently one big joke on us,” she wrote.

All this pent-up frustration at Obama’s policies could leave him vulnerable to attacks from Romney. But in speeches, on his campaign website and in a recent white paper on housing policy, Romney never takes the swing. Besides criticizing Obama for creating “an alphabet soup” of housing programs, Romney has not said whether he would tweak these unpopular programs, or replace them with something better.

However, here are places where Obama and Romney appear to disagree on housing policy, and perhaps more surprisingly, the many places where their plans are virtually identical.

Who Will Help Struggling Homeowners?

It’s not just Mitt Romney who calls President Obama’s housing policy a failure. Independent studies from the Federal Housing Finance Agency to the TARP program’s inspector general to a bipartisan Senate panel confirm that despite lofty goals of preventing millions of American homeowners from slipping into foreclosure, Obama Administration programs including HAMP (for homeowners facing foreclosure) and HARP (for homeowners still current on their mortgage payments) have done little to rescue consumers or turn the nation’s housing market around. Much of the blame went to the structure of the programs themselves, which went too easy on major banks by making participation voluntary instead of mandatory, according to the Senate report. Given such issues, “many of the problems now plaguing HAMP are inherent in its design and cannot be resolved,” the report found.

While not moving to disband either program, Obama can argue that he tried to improve matters by proposing legislation that would refinance mortgages using $5 billion to $10 billion raised from new fees charged to large banks. “No more red tape. No more runaround from the banks,” the President said of the plan at a rally in Falls Church, VA. His proposal has been blocked by House Republicans.

Mitt Romney has not said specifically what he would do to either improve or replace the administration’s failed programs, but he has given some hints that he might end both programs. “The Romney-Ryan plan will reduce the outsized role of the government and revitalize the private sector’s role in the housing market to end the housing crisis,” according to his campaign’s white paper on housing policy. “A Romney-Ryan Administration will make it easier for homeowners to get alternatives to foreclosure, such as short sales, deed-in-lieu-of-foreclosure and shared appreciation.”

So, which is better for homeowners: Keeping programs that failed because they gave too much power to banks, or diminishing those programs to give more power to the banks? On the outside, a Romney administration may look quite different from the Obama administration when it comes to housing policy. But some experts wonder whether either candidate has a plan to turn the housing market around.

“I haven’t heard a Republican proposal that would stabilize the American housing market,” says Gerri Detweiler, Credit.com’s consumer credit expert.

Who Will Protect Homeowners From Scams?

President Obama supported the controversial Dodd-Frank Wall Street reform act, which created the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau. In its first year of existence, the bureau has proposed new rules to help homebuyers compare mortgages, force lenders to create simplified forms summarizing mortgage terms, and protect homeowners from mistakes by mortgage servicers that often make it harder for consumers to qualify for loan modifications.

“We have a responsibility to make sure that the economy we are rebuilding is one in which middle-class families can feel like they’re getting ahead again,” the President said when he visited the bureau’s new offices in January.

If Romney wins, it appears that he would move to close the bureau. Romney has said he opposes the bureau, calling it the “most powerful and unaccountable bureaucracy in the history of our nation.” And he has vowed to repeal the Dodd-Frank Wall Street reform act, which created the agency. His specific plan remains somewhat unclear, however, because in recent weeks Romney has sounded more open to compromise on the matter, as when he said during the first Presidential debate that “there are some parts of Dodd-Frank that make all the sense in the world,” and “You need transparency….”

Who Will Reform the Mortgage Market?

Conservatives blame Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac, the taxpayer-owned mortgage giants, for causing the mortgage crash partly by forcing banks to write mortgages for people who couldn’t afford them. Liberals blame the two companies for helping to cause the crash by buying millions of mortgages that the banks knew were defective, primarily to keep the banks’ pipeline of mortgage fee profits flowing.

Either way, most people agree that Fannie and Freddie played a big role in the mortgage boom, and now they are major impediments to a housing recovery. Perhaps this explains the remarkable similarity between Obama and Romney’s plans for what to do with the companies. The Obama administration proposed to let the companies offer debt forgiveness to borrowers, and in August announced plans to accelerate the process of selling off Fannie and Freddie’s giant portfolios of homes.

Romney has announced similar plans to “Protect taxpayers from additional risk in the future by reforming Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac” and “Responsibly sell the 200,000 vacant foreclosed homes owned by the government,” according to his white paper on housing policy.

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.

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