Skip to main content

Krugman goes there, and a lot of others are starting to, as well...

The President Is Missing
New York Times
April 11, 2011

What have they done with President Obama? What happened to the inspirational figure his supporters thought they elected? Who is this bland, timid guy who doesn’t seem to stand for anything in particular?

I realize that with hostile Republicans controlling the House, there’s not much Mr. Obama can get done in the way of concrete policy. Arguably, all he has left is the bully pulpit. But he isn’t even using that — or, rather, he’s using it to reinforce his enemies’ narrative.

His remarks after last week’s budget deal were a case in point.

Maybe that terrible deal, in which Republicans ended up getting more than their opening bid, was the best he could achieve — although it looks from here as if the president’s idea of how to bargain is to start by negotiating with himself, making pre-emptive concessions, then pursue a second round of negotiation with the G.O.P., leading to further concessions...

As he also notes, this is only the first of many times over the next few days and weeks where the GOP will hold the budget hostage. Krugman tells us the White House has "completely" caved in on "the first round." And, we're now being setup "... for even bigger concessions over the next few months."

Krugman points out that the budget deal "wipes out" any gains achieved via the temporary extension of his 2009 tax cuts for the middle and lower classes.

From his vantage point, Krugman tells us that, philosophically, as is the zeitgeist inside the Beltway at the moment, "...the poor must accept big cuts in Medicaid and food stamps; the middle class must accept big cuts in Medicare (actually a dismantling of the whole program); and corporations and the rich must accept big cuts in the taxes they have to pay. Shared sacrifice!"

The Professor leaves the money quote for the last sentence...

...the nation wants — and more important, the nation needs — a president who believes in something, and is willing to take a stand. And that’s not what we’re seeing.  

Read the whole column, right HERE.

#            #            #

Then again, just last week, I was asking "Where was the President?" Yes, when everyone was focusing upon events in Wisconsin, and a mere $70-$80 billion in budget cuts proposed inside the Beltway, even greater, record levels of stripmining on Main Street were occurring over at the Treasury Department with regard to the 50 attorneys general's mortgage/foreclosure fraud settlement talks, which ended up evaporating at the final hour as everyone picked-up their toys and went home.

(Diarist's Note: Naked Capitalism Publisher Yves Smith has provided written authorization to the diarist to reprint her blogs' posts in their entirety for the benefit of the DKos community.)

Banks Win Again: Weak Mortgage Settlement Proposal Undermined by Phony Consent Decrees
Yves Smith
Naked Capitalism
April 6, 2011

Wow, the Obama administration has openly negotiated against itself on behalf of the banks. I don’t think I’ve ever seen anything so craven heretofore.

As readers may recall, we weren’t terribly impressed with the so-called mortgage settlement talks. It started out as a 50 state action in the wake of the robosigning scandal, and was problematic from the outset. Some state AGs who were philosophically opposed to the entire exercise joined at the last minute, presumably to undermine it. Not that they needed to expend much effort in that direction, since plenty of Quislings have signed up for the job.

The supposed leader of the effort, Tom MIller of Iowa, promised criminal prosecutions, then promptly reneged. His next move was to get cozy with the Treasury, presumably out of his interest in heading the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau. Federal regulators, such as the OCC and the Fed, who do not like being upstaged by states, were similarly keen to exert “leadership”, which really meant “lead a hasty retreat from anything that might inconvenience the banks.” So Miller, who was supposed to be representing the interests of the states, was instead working with the Treasury et al. to beat the state AGs into line (and separately, since the state and Federal legal issues are very different, the idea of having a joint effort was questionable from the outset). Not only have some Republicans (predictably) rebelled, but so to have the more aggressive Democrats, such as Eric Schneiderman of New York, Lisa Madigan of Illinois, and Catherine Masto of Nevada.

The first sighting of what this group might come up with was a bizarre 27 page proposal. It was bizarre because it represented an incomplete set of demands. You never do that in a negotiating context, you make a complete offer and see what other side’s counter.

The proposal was incomplete because it failed to describe the sort of release the banks would get (would they be released from claims by the state AGs on robosigning, or broader areas of liability?) and there was no section for penalties, despite press rumors and Congressional tooth gnashing about $20 billion and up sanctions. We dissed it not only for those reasons but also because it was largely a recitation of existing law, with only two new provisions: one was the end of dual track (in which servicers keep the foreclosure process moving ahead even as mod evaluation and approvals are also in progress) and single point of contact, in which the borrower has a dedicated person to deal with on his case. We deemed single point of contact to be undoable and unnecessary (as in if servicers straightened out their procedures and trained their staff adequately, they wouldn’t have the screw-ups that led to demands for single point of contact). Yet despite the obvious shortcomings of this deal, the bank lobbyist masquerading as a bank regulator known as the Office of the Comptroller of the Currency has absented itself from this effort in an apparent show of pique.

Given how underwhelming the 27 page leaked proposal was, it was predictable that the banks’ counteroffer verged on being a joke. As we noted last week:

It should really be no surprise that the banksters have the temerity to take a weak mortgage fraud settlement proposal, advanced by the 50 state attorneys general and various Federal agencies, and water it down to drivel. Since March 2009, when the Obama administration cast its lot with them, major financial firms have become increasingly intransigent. And this has proven to be a winning strategy, since Obama’s pattern over his entire political career has been to offer proposals that don’t live up to their billing, then eagerly trade away what little substance was there in the interest of having bragging rights for yet another “achievement”….

What’s striking is the utter lack of any teeth or any procedural requirements. The banks’ position is that they are to be trusted after having demonstrated again and again that they’ll take anything that is not nailed down. It is drafted wherever possible to make current practices fall within the “settlement”, which means the “settlement” is a total whitewash.

We then had wild card enter the picture. American Banker reported that “federal regulators” were about to issue cease and desist orders to force the servicers to take the negotiations seriously. Normally, that would be a potent threat. But the leaked version that American Banker posted didn’t even qualify as a slap on the wrist. As Adam Levitin explained:

The C&D order basically tells banks to set up lots of internal procedures and controls within the next few months and then to tell their regulators what they have done…. The result, I suspect, is that in a few months the bank regulators will declare that everything is fine.

(Even if the regulators think the internal controls are inadequate, it’s not clear what the consequence would be. My guess is that it just results in the bank regulator telling the bank to revise and resubmit.)…

(I was struck in some places by the linguistic similarities between the proposed C&D order and the banks’ counterproposal to the AGs. It’s impossible to know who was cribbing from whom, but the similar language is revealing.)

So here’s what’s going down. The bank regulators are going to provide cover for the banks by pretending to discipline them very hard, but not really doing anything. The public will see a stern C&D order, but there won’t be any action beyond that. It’s as if the regulators are saying so all the neighbors can hear, “Banky, you’ve been a bad boy! Come inside the house right now because I’m going to give you a spanking!” And then once the door to the house closes, the instead of a spanking, there’s a snuggle. But the neighbors are none the wiser. The result will be to make it look like the real cops (the AGs and CFPB) are engaged in an overzealous vendetta if they pursue further action.

Tonight, a story in the New York Times lends credence to the American Banker account:

The nation’s top mortgage servicers are expected to sign legal agreements by the end of this week compelling them to change their foreclosure procedures, regulatory officials said Tuesday.

The servicers, which violated state and local laws and regulations governing foreclosures, are agreeing to improve their methods in numerous ways. They will be required to have more layers of oversight and proper training of their foreclosure staff. The oversight will extend to third party groups, including the law firms that do much of the actual work of eviction.

The New York Times, however, seems to be buying bank/Adminisration PR hook, line and sinker. For instance:

Under the new rules, every homeowner in default will have a single point of contact with the servicer.

“Single point of contact” does NOT mean a dedicated person. A phone number with a live person answering it would do. This is basically the same level of service as provided with credit cards, minus the prompts to, say, get to the “lost or stolen card” person versus the “balance transfer” person. So it’s better than what servicers provide now, but it is an Orwellian defining down of what “single point of contact” originally meant.

Another Times misconstruction:

One of the most significant measures in the consent agreement will require servicers to hire an independent consultant to review foreclosures done over the last two years. If owners were improperly foreclosed on or paid excessive fees, they will be compensated.

If you read the consent decree the review is NOT comprehensive, as the Times erroneously implies. And as Levitin noted:

By far the most interesting bit in the draft C&D order is the bit requiring the banks to engage independent foreclosure review consultants to review “certain” foreclosures that took place in 2009-2010. There is no specification as to which foreclosures are to be reviewed or precisely what the standards for review are. But that’s all kind of irrelevant. Who do you think the banks are going to engage to do these reviews? Someone like me? Not a chance. They’re going to find firms that signal loud and clear that if they get the job, they won’t find anything wrong. It’s just recreating the auditor selection problem, but without even the possibility of liability for a crony audit.

Frankly, this sort of regulatory outsourcing is pretty astounding–the OCC has resident examiner teams at the major servicer banks. Shouldn’t they be the ones auditing the internal controls and performance, not a third-party compensated by the bank? (Oh wait, I forgot that the OCC is paid by the banks–it’s budget comes from chartering fees and assessments on the banks is regulates.)

However, the Times does confirm what I suspected last week, that this move was to end the Federal push for monetary damages which would be used for principal reductions:

The attorneys general have larger goals than the regulators. They are seeking to make the banks to cut the debt of delinquent owners. The servicers are balking at this.

The part I am puzzled by is who is behind this rearguard action. It clearly guts the Federal part of the settlement negotiations. If you pull out your supposed big gun (ex having done a real exam to find real problems, and it’s weaker than your negotiating demands, you’ve just demonstrated you have no threat. Now obviously, a much more aggressive cease and desist order could have been presented; it’s blindingly obvious that the only reason for putting this one forward was not to pressure the banks, as American Banker incorrectly argued, but to undermine the AGs and whatever banking/housing regulators stood with them (HUD and the DoJ were parties to the first face to face talks).

So the only part that I’d still love to know was who exactly is behind the C&D order? Is it just the OCC? I have a sneaking suspicion that Treasury has been playing both sides of the street on this one, and that the Fed either aligned with the OCC or pretending to sit it out, which has the effect of supporting the OCC. The only regulator certain to have been keen to take action against the banks was the FDIC (despite the Administration having put a target on Elizabeth Warren’s back, she is a mere advisor and the CFPB is merely a regulator in waiting).

But on another level, having the talks come to naught is a good outcome. It makes it easier for the AGs that believe in the rule of law to build and launch cases against servicers, and for the courts to continue to pile up examples of miscreant servicing and botched chain of title (these Potemkin reforms are going to change virtually nothing on the ground). So once a new set of abuses generates more lawsuits (fee pyramiding? force placed insurance? or just plain old “can’t find the note/chain of title”) the Federal banking regulators will again be scrambling to try to get ahead of a mob and call it a parade.

#            #            #

One little sentence Yves didn't blockquote was the very last line of David Streitfeld's article in the April 6th NYT...

The servicers will probably be assessed fines at a later point.

As Sunday's (yesterday's) NYT editorial notes, fat chance, indeed!

How about: Forget the entire concept of reimbursing Main Street for foreclosure transgressions by Wall Street and its mortgage servicers! Nada. Zip. Zero. Zilch. Nothing! That's what the banks might end up "paying" in damages to those seeking a mortgage modification on Main Street, and to those in the loan servicing industry concerning their usurpation of the rule of law with regard to their steamrolling of U.S. foreclosure victims over the past few years!

Banks Are Off the Hook Again
New York Times
April 10, 2011

Americans know that banks have mistreated borrowers in many ways in foreclosure cases. Among other things, they habitually filed false court documents. There were investigations. We’ve been waiting for federal and state regulators to crack down.

Prepare for a disappointment. As early as this week, federal bank regulators and the nation’s big banks are expected to close a deal that is supposed to address and correct the scandalous abuses. If these agreements are anything like the draft agreement recently published by the American Banker — and we believe they will be — they will be a wrist slap, at best. At worst, they are an attempt to preclude other efforts to hold banks accountable. They are unlikely to ease the foreclosure crisis.

All homeowners will suffer as a result. Some 6.7 million homes have already been lost in the housing bust, and another 3.3 million will be lost through 2012. The plunge in home equity — $5.6 trillion so far — hits everyone because foreclosures are a drag on all house prices.

The draft does not call for tough new rules to end those abuses. Or for ramped-up loan modifications. Or for penalties for past violations. Instead, it requires banks to improve the management of their foreclosure processes, including such reforms as “measures to ensure that staff are trained specifically” for their jobs. The banks will also have to adhere to a few new common-sense rules like halting foreclosures while borrowers seek loan modifications and establishing a phone number at which a person will take questions from delinquent borrowers. Some regulators have reportedly said that fines may be imposed later...

But, you see, this doesn't just stop there.

While Yves (up above) is optimistic that at least some state AG's will return home to attempt to get their pound of flesh from these too-big-to-fail pigs at the state level, as the NYT editorial points out, the reality is this may well end up being, literally, preempted by a federal, Wall-Street-centric strategy to claim nationally-chartered banks and their servicers may assert the national deal as trumping state-level efforts to support Main Street in coming weeks and months, too. It is an end-run in the making, writ large. And, in this instance, we're talking about hundreds of billions having been stripmined on Main Street over the past few years as far as our nation's foreclosure fraud and mortgage fraud crises are concerned.

Just a couple of weeks ago, the President was supposedly supporting Elizabeth Warren and the CFPB as they led this supposed foreclosure fraud fight against the Wall Street mortgage servicers in efforts to obtain a paltry $20- to $30-billion in damages via additonal mortgage modifications for the hundreds of billions, if not trillions of dollars in harm Wall Street had wrought over homeowners throughout the country over the past few years. But, when push came to shove, at the eleventh hour, everyone just walked away from the table and turned their backs on Main Street, too.

One more time, with emphasis, from the last sentence in Krugman's column, today...

...the nation wants — and more important, the nation needs — a president who believes in something, and is willing to take a stand. And that’s not what we’re seeing.  

What I'm seeing is a giant quid pro quo--or, should I say, "squid pro quo"--for Wall Street and the rightwing status quo, once again. Nice press release. Great oratory. But, at the end of the day, when it comes time to stand up for Main Street and get some results coming our way, just fodder for the apologists and not much else.

Again and again and again.

Or, is it just another example, as Yves phrased it up above, of someone just "scrambling to try to get ahead of a mob and call it a parade?"

What are you seeing?

Originally posted to on Mon Apr 11, 2011 at 12:52 AM PDT.

Also republished by ClassWarfare Newsletter: WallStreet VS Working Class Global Occupy movement and The Amateur Left.

Your Email has been sent.
You must add at least one tag to this diary before publishing it.

Add keywords that describe this diary. Separate multiple keywords with commas.
Tagging tips - Search For Tags - Browse For Tags


More Tagging tips:

A tag is a way to search for this diary. If someone is searching for "Barack Obama," is this a diary they'd be trying to find?

Use a person's full name, without any title. Senator Obama may become President Obama, and Michelle Obama might run for office.

If your diary covers an election or elected official, use election tags, which are generally the state abbreviation followed by the office. CA-01 is the first district House seat. CA-Sen covers both senate races. NY-GOV covers the New York governor's race.

Tags do not compound: that is, "education reform" is a completely different tag from "education". A tag like "reform" alone is probably not meaningful.

Consider if one or more of these tags fits your diary: Civil Rights, Community, Congress, Culture, Economy, Education, Elections, Energy, Environment, Health Care, International, Labor, Law, Media, Meta, National Security, Science, Transportation, or White House. If your diary is specific to a state, consider adding the state (California, Texas, etc). Keep in mind, though, that there are many wonderful and important diaries that don't fit in any of these tags. Don't worry if yours doesn't.

You can add a private note to this diary when hotlisting it:
Are you sure you want to remove this diary from your hotlist?
Are you sure you want to remove your recommendation? You can only recommend a diary once, so you will not be able to re-recommend it afterwards.
Rescue this diary, and add a note:
Are you sure you want to remove this diary from Rescue?
Choose where to republish this diary. The diary will be added to the queue for that group. Publish it from the queue to make it appear.

You must be a member of a group to use this feature.

Add a quick update to your diary without changing the diary itself:
Are you sure you want to remove this diary?
(The diary will be removed from the site and returned to your drafts for further editing.)
(The diary will be removed.)
Are you sure you want to save these changes to the published diary?

Comment Preferences

grytpype, Paolo, Ottoe, Thumb, Tookish, JekyllnHyde, Alumbrados, paradox, Ed in Montana, cdreid, Angie in WA State, buffalo soldier, cslewis, chuck utzman, nofundy, Marek, jec, LeislerNYC, Paleo, PrahaPartizan, PhilK, filkertom, jotter, hester, grollen, slinkerwink, Timaeus, El Zmuenga, Subterranean, glitterscale, No Preference, Detlef, Tod Westlake, madmsf, BigOkie, theboz, emal, pelican, sphealey, Shockwave, Dave B, tacet, CupaJoe, markd, LEP, Aspe4, Mnemosyne, Pompatus, polecat, route66, Voodoo, SallyCat, hubcap, Heart of the Rockies, rasbobbo, opinionated, Disgusted in St Louis, TheMomCat, bronte17, TracieLynn, kfractal, dionys1, CalvinV, fishwars, muledriver, buckhorn okie, barath, JuliaAnn, ovals49, Clues, Nate Roberts, ctsteve, revsue, Braindead, tomephil, Eric Blair, Joe Bacon, Ryvr, hangingchad, businessdem, pat bunny, 2laneIA, gmb, kdrivel, JimWilson, BMarshall, Chirons apprentice, On The Bus, defluxion10, RuralLiberal, bmor, wordwraith, riverlover, deantv, alizard, clarknyc, barbwires, dkmich, Matt Esler, zerelda, mungley, Deward Hastings, Mosquito Pilot, Steven D, poemworld, SadieB, Virginia Liberal, vacantlook, Josiah Bartlett, gsbadj, greeseyparrot, BoogieMama, sawgrass727, nehark, Massman, tovan, mediaprisoner, historys mysteries, sandblaster, marina, 3goldens, Farlfoto, NoMoreLies, Hoomai29, Jeffersonian Democrat, LarisaW, JanetT in MD, CTPatriot, Independent Musings, democracy inaction, Philoguy, willibro, run around, frandor55, dewtx, ChemBob, stitchmd, drewfromct, stagemom, Brooke In Seattle, YucatanMan, trinityfly, Annalize5, teknofyl, Dem Beans, EdlinUser, jimreyn, jcitybone, SJerseyIndy, cassidy3, Sandino, LucyandByron, Isara, The Eyewitness Muse, Savvy813, WisePiper, lone star liberal, mph2005, neroden, deepsouthdoug, bunsk, Cory Bantic, Rogneid, Brian B, Detroit Mark, the fan man, doe, SocioSam, Land of Enchantment, RainyDay, big spoiled baby, jay23, xaxnar, splashoil, CJnyc, Jim P, SoulCatcher, Showman, esquimaux, Nance, MissInformation, Medium Head Boy, ainwa, vigilant meerkat, sherlyle, Clytemnestra, BlueInARedState, trentinca, cardboardurinal, tonyahky, HoundDog, Yellow Canary, Hear Our Voices, sleipner, The Wizard, fromer, Son of a Cat, blueoasis, Blue Wind, NBBooks, triv33, praenomen, eglantine, aloevera, gpoutney, gooderservice, thegood thebad thedumb, JVolvo, joe shikspack, Sagebrush Bob, Preston S, sceptical observer, dirtfarmer, anninla, IL clb, CA Nana, profh, Timothy J, Clive all hat no horse Rodeo, means are the ends, blueoregon, kurt, ethanthej, zedaker, shaharazade, crystal eyes, kurious, Picot verde, Johnathan Ivan, Friend of the court, markthshark, sasher, OHdog, Grannus, cpresley, seabos84, ammasdarling, lams712, One Pissed Off Liberal, old wobbly, Noor B, pgm 01, nathguy, bluicebank, DorothyT, dotsright, Habitat Vic, Cat Whisperer, SpecialKinFlag, FWIW, Debs2, MikeTheLiberal, DvCM, LillithMc, david mizner, noofsh, daveygodigaditch, terabytes, Calvin Jones and the 13th Apostle, anagram, ilex, DWG, truckystiv, Unbozo, aliasalias, newpioneer, Strabo, bnasley, Kentucky Kid, HCKAD, jayden, mcc777c2, Uberbah, Moderation, Bridge Master, carpunder, Librarianmom, GeorgeXVIII, LWelsch, JML9999, Badabing, cloudbustingkid, Don midwest, Vinnie Vegas, oxon, rmonroe, Michael91, Corporate Dog, Art Tric, Fossil, Involuntary Exile, dadadata, elwior, theunreasonableHUman, treesrock, DCBlue, KJG52, jakebob, jamess, MrJayTee, icebergslim, Quicksilver2723, Thought Crime, alnep, Seamus D, banger, Horsefeathers, dmnyct, costello7, wyldraven, DixieDishrag, Uncle Bob, BYw, Executive Odor, Robobagpiper, David Futurama, squarewheel, LaFeminista, madtowntj, dreamghost, Bule Betawi, Rhysling, McGahee220, cybrestrike, J M F, DontTaseMeBro, arendt, Rick Aucoin, aufklaerer, ARS, lostinamerica, ewmorr, banjolele, Nebraskablue, dark daze, Partisan Progressive, moira, IndyRobin, JesseCW, DefendOurConstitution, aunt blabby, zaka1, obiterdictum, JustJennifer, winkk, Northern Light, Andhakari, Enzo Valenzetti, ohmyheck, angel d, Tommymac, Randtntx, ruscle, cassandraX, Razorblade, FogCityJohn, roadbear, jethrock, biggiefries, yellowdogsal, wvmom, XajaX, Eddie L, Klaus, DavidHeart, ctlrick, gulfgal98, ItsSimpleSimon, NJtom, Kristina40, Earth Ling, melfunction, Muggsy, orlbucfan, elengul, Floande, slice, tgrshark13, renbear, Colorado is the Shiznit, Bluefin, allenjo, Acktiv, Matthew D Jones, ozsea1, sostos, croyal, vahana, Suprk, m00finsan, southernmapper, Teiresias70, ca union goon, shaktidurga, gongee, Ace Nelson, Wolf10, dle2GA, Idgie Threadgoode, Gabriel D, Vtdblue, peregrine kate, Crider, Marihilda, Democrats Ramshield, daveusf, Oilwellian, Book of Hearts, Ezekial 23 20, jadt65, DRo, Regina in a Sears Kit House, DEMonrat ankle biter, PrometheusUnbound, No one gets out alive, A Runner, Only Needs a Beat, Tentwenty, Patric Juillet, ursoklevar, greenbastard, anarchyintheusa, Joieau, Ultranaut, Ginger1, drnononono, Celtic Pugilist, Graff, Mr Robert, SlightKC, geraldlaslo, BobSmith415, supercereal, absolute beginner, thehoch, Revy, miningcityguy, Dr Bud, Maikeru Ronin, Purplehead, WestTexasLiberal, ProfessorWho

Subscribe or Donate to support Daily Kos.

Click here for the mobile view of the site