Achievements! Congress Passes Bill To Make Foreclosures Easier

By Big Tent Democrat, Section Other Politics
Posted on Thu Oct 07, 2010 at 07:27:23 AM EST
Tags: (all tags)

Share This: Digg!

The Beltway Bloggers can add this to the list of achievements by this Congress, via Eschaton, fast track foreclosures:

A bill that homeowners advocates warn will make it more difficult to challenge improper foreclosure attempts by big mortgage processors is awaiting President Barack Obama's signature after it quietly zoomed through the Senate last week. The bill, passed without public debate in a way that even surprised its main sponsor, Republican Representative Robert Aderholt, requires courts to accept as valid document notarizations made out of state, making it harder to challenge the authenticity of foreclosure and other legal documents.

[. . .] The legislation could protect bank and mortgage processors from liability for false or improperly prepared documents. The White House said it is reviewing the legislation.

(Emphasis supplied.) This is a disgraceful outrage and I would like to hear from Nancy Pelosi and Harry Reid how in the f*ck this happened. And I want to hear from President Barack Obama what exactly he needs to consider about this bill. It should be vetoed immediately.

The Banks own this Congress.

FULL DISCLOSURE: This affects cases I am involved in. Speaking for me only

< Negative Campaign Ads Move Into Overdrive | The Interstate Recognition Of Notarizations Act >

Legal

Nothing on this site should be construed as legal advice. TalkLeft does not give legal advice.

TalkLeft is not responsible for and often disagrees with material posted in the comments section. Read at your own risk.

Achievements! Congress Passes Bill To Make Foreclosures Easier | 27 comments (27 topical)

Readers Must Login or Create an Account to Comment

Most Progressive Achievements (5.00 / 4) (#2)
by MO Blue on Thu Oct 07, 2010 at 07:47:03 AM EST

in 60 years. No make that EVAH. Go Dems Go.

Everyone be sure to vote Dem. They have your back . It is fun sleeping in your car and their policies along with the Republican's (same thing really) will help bring families back together again. 4 or 5 generations living in one small house. Now that is togetherness. Rah, Rah, Rah. Can't you feel how magical it is.

And I want to hear from President Barack Obama what exactly he needs to consider about this bill.

Simple answer: Campaign contributions.

and I can't wait to see usual suspects defend this (none / 0) (#12)
by kempis on Thu Oct 07, 2010 at 08:48:45 AM EST

They will. In their world, "good Democrats" defend anything Obama supports.


: This will be placed on the list of (none / 0) (#17)
by MO Blue on Thu Oct 07, 2010 at 09:02:14 AM EST

"most progressive achievements" evah. Remember Obama and his legislation is purely "magical." If you happen to be one of the many lucky people who quickly lose their home even as the result of fraud, you need to be grateful for all the great things Obama and the Dem controlled congress has done for you. Clap louder, work harder to elect Dems, especially "Blue Dogs" and most of all send money. Because if you don't, those scary Republicans will win and they will prop up the insurance, pharma and medical industries at your expense, cut Social Security and Medicare and give the banksters and Wall Street the ability to rape and pillage at will.
Oh wait. Never mind. Bank to the prerecorded message. Sarah Palin - John Boehner are coming. Hide under the bed (that is if you still have one).

From BTD's moneynews link (5.00 / 2) (#5)
by MO Blue on Thu Oct 07, 2010 at 08:00:28 AM EST

Democratic Senator Robert Casey, shepherding last-minute legislation on behalf of the Senate leadership, had the bill taken away from the Senate Judiciary committee, which hadn't acted on it.
The full Senate then immediately passed the bill without debate, by unanimous consent. The House had passed the bill in April.
...
But shortly before the Senate's recess, Judiciary Committee Chairman Patrick Leahy pressed to have the bill rushed through the special procedure, after Leahy "constituents" called him and pressed for passage.

Hey, finally some real bipartisanship:

These staffers said that, in an unusual display of bipartisanship, Senator Jeff Sessions, the committee's senior Republican, also helped to engineer the Senate's unanimous consent for the bill.

Amazing how fast they can bypass committees, etc (5.00 / 4) (#11)
by ruffian on Thu Oct 07, 2010 at 08:48:22 AM EST

for their real constituents.


I went name hunting too (none / 0) (#6)
by Militarytracy on Thu Oct 07, 2010 at 08:28:37 AM EST

Jeff Sessions and Patrick Leahy....BFF. The judicial committee has had some version of this bill handed to them three times now and it made no progress because of the probable chaos that it will cause in other realms. I was trying to understand specifically why it is supposedly hard to make use of a deposition notarized in Alamba in something happening out of state.


Democratic Bipartisanship (none / 0) (#23)
by Dakinikat on Thu Oct 07, 2010 at 12:10:50 PM EST

means the entire party rolls over and plays dead and the Republicans get their way.

I really don't know how these folks can look at their Democratic base and tell us to buck up when everything they pass recently is so Republican. What's worse, I can't even imagine an Eisenhower or a Nixon supporting this kind of legislation in their days. It's not even Republican lite. It's full throttle Reaganomics.

Their donor base is obviously more important their their voting base.


It was sponsored/introduced by (none / 0) (#24)
by BTAL on Thu Oct 07, 2010 at 12:17:22 PM EST

Sen. Robert Casey (D-PA), not a Republican.


Says who? (none / 0) (#25)
by Yman on Thu Oct 07, 2010 at 04:38:51 PM EST

"The bill, passed without public debate in a way that even surprised its main sponsor, Republican Representative Robert Aderholt, requires courts ..."

That would be the House version (none / 0) (#26)
by cawaltz on Thu Oct 07, 2010 at 05:17:13 PM EST

Casey could very well have been the corresponding Senate version's sponsor.

I do know that at least 2 co sponsors in the House had Ds after their name


: Yeah, I saw that (none / 0) (#27)
by Yman on Thu Oct 07, 2010 at 07:51:50 PM EST

Can't find a corresponding Senate bill - maybe because it was passed by unanimous consent.

Okay...so let me get this straight: (5.00 / 2) (#9)
by Anne on Thu Oct 07, 2010 at 08:35:19 AM EST

while the media have been highlighting the decision by numerous banks to put a moratorium on foreclosures because of fraud issues, and efforts have been undertaken by various states to enact their own moratoria, legislation has been surreptitiously moving through the Congress that would make it easier to foreclose on people's homes.

And this explains a lot (from the moneynews link):

The timing raised eyebrows, coming during a rising furor over improper affidavits and other filings in foreclosure actions by large mortgage processors such as GMAC, JPMorgan and Bank of America.
Questions about improper notarizations have figured prominently in challenges to the validity of these court documents, and led to widespread halts of foreclosure proceedings.
The legislation could protect bank and mortgage processors from liability for false or improperly prepared documents.

So, I guess the whole moratorium on foreclosures was really about waiting for this stealth bill to be passed and signed, so as to maximize the number of foreclosures without having to worry about those pesky notarizations...

Jesus.

: Raised eyebrows indeed (5.00 / 1) (#14)
by ruffian on Thu Oct 07, 2010 at 08:52:10 AM EST

I really should have known. Every time it looks like the powers that be are doing something that makes sense for the little guy, like a moratorium on foreclosures until the banks get their ducks in a row, it turns out they have ulterior motives, like waiting for a law that says their ducks don't have to be in a row.
Thoroughly disgusted.

: This just made my heart sink (none / 0) (#16)
by sj on Thu Oct 07, 2010 at 08:57:05 AM EST

So, I guess the whole moratorium on foreclosures was really about waiting for this stealth bill to be passed and signed, so as to maximize the number of foreclosures without having to worry about those pesky notarizations...
How did we get here?

Wow (none / 0) (#1)
by Militarytracy on Thu Oct 07, 2010 at 07:45:59 AM EST

I'm speechless and outraged. I can't believe it.

Send 'em your cash (none / 0) (#3)
by Rojas on Thu Oct 07, 2010 at 07:53:32 AM EST

The banks own the parent company... (none / 0) (#4)
by kdog on Thu Oct 07, 2010 at 07:53:38 AM EST

too, the whole kit and kaboodle. I'm just suprised there is no "return of debtors prisons" provision on page 666...Reid & Co. must be holding out for more cash/favors.

If this puppy gets signed, the people will just have to fight foreclosure more aggressively, which we should be doing more of already. You're nuts to surrender your home to common thieves without a fight...sh*t we should all be on a mortgage strike in solidarity with our foreclosed brothers and sisters...thats what our forefathers & foremothers woulda done. Where have ya gone Emma Goldman?

Speeding up the process (none / 0) (#7)
by kdm251 on Thu Oct 07, 2010 at 08:30:42 AM EST

I wonder if this bill will help get houses back on the market. I live in an area that has quite a few vacant houses, they aren't for sale, they are just sort of sitting there, maybe this bill was meant to fix that.

: Don't need a bill... (none / 0) (#8)
by kdog on Thu Oct 07, 2010 at 08:34:42 AM EST

to fix that...ya only need some squatters.

I'd like to hear form my new interim director (none / 0) (#10)
by ruffian on Thu Oct 07, 2010 at 08:46:06 AM EST

of the Office of Consumer Protection as well.

Out of curiosity, (none / 0) (#13)
by Farmboy on Thu Oct 07, 2010 at 08:49:15 AM EST

when did Newsmax become a credible source? 'Cause if they are, I'm gonna check out that ad on the site that's telling me to invest in "Zion Oil and Gas."

Today, only (none / 0) (#15)
by me only on Thu Oct 07, 2010 at 08:55:27 AM EST

like a blue light special.


Reuters story (none / 0) (#18)
by Big Tent Democrat on Thu Oct 07, 2010 at 09:26:05 AM EST

Not a NewsMax story.


And See Also (none / 0) (#19)
by The Maven on Thu Oct 07, 2010 at 09:42:07 AM EST

the excellent continuing coverage of mortgage foreclosure fraud issues at Naked Capitalism, including this post yesterday which noted the concerns of Ohio's Secretary of State, Jennifer Brunner, regarding the serious consequences of the bill.

So, yeah, this goes, way, way beyond any story that a Newsmax operation happened to pick up from other sources.


: I missed Brunner's diary (none / 0) (#20)
by Big Tent Democrat on Thu Oct 07, 2010 at 10:08:43 AM EST

I never heard about this until this morning.

Your link goes to a newsmax.com site (none / 0) (#21)
by Farmboy on Thu Oct 07, 2010 at 10:10:02 AM EST

The black-helicopter, conspiracy theory, tin-foil hat ads made me laugh out loud.

I'm not disputing the bill's wording nor the ramifications it may have if signed (although I live in a state where notaries are regulated). I guess it's more of a "even a busted clock can be right twice a day" type reaction to your link choice.


: I got it from Atrios (none / 0) (#22)
by Big Tent Democrat on Thu Oct 07, 2010 at 10:12:01 AM EST

as my post clearly denotes.
Now, do you have anything of substance to add?