Signing of Homeowners Bill of Rights Three Years Late Anda $1 Trillion Short
By: Patrick Porgans
Planetary Solutionaries
Planetary Solutionaries
On
Wednesday, California Gov, Jerry Brown, signed the “Homeowner Bill of Rights”
into law (SB 900 and AB 278. This bill purportedly will curtail banks from
fraudulent foreclosures.
Reportedly,
Brown tweeted that “this law will stop banks from foreclosing on Californians
who are trying in good faith to renegotiate their mortgages.”
State
Attorney General Kamala Harris campaigned for the legislation, and added a
presentation on her website on how it will benefit California families.
Critics
point out that the bill does not take effect until the beginning of the year
and servicers aren’t obligated to consider applications for loan modifications
or appeals submitted before Jan 1, 2013. Occupy Fights Foreclosures, a
subcommittee of Occupy LA, is calling for an immediate moratorium on foreclosures to protect the
thousands of families facing foreclosures right now.
In
the meantime, there are many among the millions of foreclosure victims of the
bank-induced subprime-mortgage crisis, robo-signing; derivatives-hedge betting,
Wall Street bailout and fraud view it as more political grandstanding, years
late and, according to some estimates, $1,000,000,000,000.
In
California alone, the total cost of the foreclosure crisis to homeowners, the
property tax base, and local governments could add up to at least $650 billion
and possibly reach as much as $1 trillion? That’s just
one of the major findings of a report, released by a coalition of faith,
community and labor groups in California that are demanding that Wall Street
pay its fair share to helping California recover from this devastating crisis.
Many
are questioning the government’s ability to use or enforce existing laws
designed to protect victims of crime. Others question the need for such a law
so late in the game; after all, it is estimated that by year’s end two-million
foreclosures would have taken place in the Golden State.
Government
insiders contend the new law is a clever way to promote the illusion of
protection and accountability. They may have a point, the fact that the state’s
Constitution, Article I, already provides protection for victims of crime.
Supporters of the bill point to the positive benefits contained in the bill.
Critics
question why make new laws when existing ones are not being enforced. Although
the banks have agreed to a multibillion dollar settlement, and have paid
hundreds of millions of dollars in fines levied by the Security Exchange Commission; all this has
been without an admission of guilt.
A
ranking Congressman recently summed it up like this during a hearing attended
by the major bank executives testifying before Congress. He said, members of
his constituency have and continue to rob banks, should we grant them the same
prosecutorial discretion and/or immunity as the banks’ are presently seeking?
The
Rule of Law, in its most
basic form, is the principle that no one is above the law. The rule follows
logically from the idea that truth, and therefore law, is based upon fundamental
principles which can be discovered, but which cannot be created through an act
of will.
Political
insiders recognize that Brown and state’s attorney general Kamala Harris can
make a lot of political “hey” out of the enactment of this new victims’ rights
law, which, coincidentally, came out after the signing of the attorneys
generals settlement with the five major banks involved in the subprime mortgage
crisis.
The
promises made by five of the nation's largest banks under the much-ballyhooed $25 billion mortgage
settlement have a surprisingly short shelf life. Read
more
