Let the people do what they want, you get Woodstock. Let the government do 
what it wants, you get WACO!....Mary.
--- On Tue, 9/30/08, JP Liggett <JP@ wrote:







Two weeks after this was published, Spitzer was forced to resign, based on 
compromising situations. Some discussions at the time discussed how it may have 
been an operation by an intelligence agency to create a situation to blackmail 
spitzer. Perhaps he should run for President, Since Clinton survived his 
compromising situation. 

Predatory Lenders' Partner in Crime
How the Bush Administration Stopped the States From Stepping In to Help 
Consumers
By Eliot Spitzer
Thursday, February 14, 2008; A25
Several years ago, state attorneys general and others involved in consumer 
protection began to notice a
marked increase in a range of predatory lending practices by mortgage lenders. 
Some were
misrepresenting the terms of loans, making loans without regard to consumers' 
ability to repay, making
loans with deceptive "teaser" rates that later ballooned astronomically, 
packing loans with undisclosed
charges and fees, or even paying illegal kickbacks. These and other practices, 
we noticed, were having a
devastating effect on home buyers. In addition, the widespread nature of these 
practices, if left
unchecked, threatened our financial markets.
Even though predatory lending was becoming a national problem, the Bush 
administration looked the
other way and did nothing to protect American homeowners. In fact, the 
government chose instead to
align itself with the banks that were victimizing consumers.
Predatory lending was widely understood to present a looming national crisis. 
This threat was so clear
that as New York attorney general, I joined with colleagues in the other 49 
states in attempting to fill the
void left by the federal government. Individually, and together, state 
attorneys general of both parties
brought litigation or entered into settlements with many subprime lenders that 
were engaged in
predatory lending practices. Several state legislatures, including New York's, 
enacted laws aimed at
curbing such practices.
What did the Bush administration do in response? Did it reverse course and 
decide to take action to halt
this burgeoning scourge? As Americans are now painfully aware, with hundreds of 
thousands of
homeowners facing foreclosure and our markets reeling, the answer is a 
resounding no.
Not only did the Bush administration do nothing to protect consumers, it 
embarked on an aggressive and
unprecedented campaign to prevent states from protecting their residents from 
the very problems to
which the federal government was turning a blind eye.
Let me explain: The administration accomplished this feat through an obscure 
federal agency called the
Office of the Comptroller of the Currency (OCC). The OCC has been in existence 
since the Civil War.
Its mission is to ensure the fiscal soundness of national banks. For 140 years, 
the OCC examined the
books of national banks to make sure they were balanced, an important but 
uncontroversial function. But
a few years ago, for the first time in its history, the OCC was used as a tool 
against consumers.
In 2003, during the height of the predatory lending crisis, the OCC invoked a 
clause from the 1863
National Bank Act to issue formal opinions preempting all state predatory 
lending laws, thereby
rendering them inoperative. The OCC also promulgated new rules that prevented 
states from enforcing
any of their own consumer protection laws against national banks. The federal 
government's actions
were so egregious and so unprecedented that all 50 state attorneys general, and 
all 50 state banking
superintendents, actively fought the new rules.
But the unanimous opposition of the 50 states did not deter, or even slow, the 
Bush administration in its
goal of protecting the banks. In fact, when my office opened an investigation 
of possible discrimination
Predatory Lenders' Partner in Crime Page 1 of 2
http://www.washingt onpost.com/ wp-dyn/content/ article/2008/ 02/13/AR20080213 
02783_p... 3/23/2008
in mortgage lending by a number of banks, the OCC filed a federal lawsuit to 
stop the investigation.
Throughout our battles with the OCC and the banks, the mantra of the banks and 
their defenders was
that efforts to curb predatory lending would deny access to credit to the very 
consumers the states were
trying to protect. But the curbs we sought on predatory and unfair lending 
would have in no way
jeopardized access to the legitimate credit market for appropriately priced 
loans. Instead, they would
have stopped the scourge of predatory lending practices that have resulted in 
countless thousands of
consumers losing their homes and put our economy in a precarious position.
When history tells the story of the subprime lending crisis and recounts its 
devastating effects on the
lives of so many innocent homeowners, the Bush administration will not be 
judged favorably. The tale is
still unfolding, but when the dust settles, it will be judged as a willing 
accomplice to the lenders who
went to any lengths in their quest for profits. So willing, in fact, that it 
used the power of the federal
government in an unprecedented assault on state legislatures, as well as on 
state attorneys general and
anyone else on the side of consumers.
The writer is governor of New York.
© 2008 The Washington Post Company

Predatory Lenders' Partner in Crime Page 2 of 2
http://www.washingt onpost.com/ wp-dyn/content/ article/2008/ 02/13/AR20080213 
02783_p... 3/23/2008
 














      __________________________________________________________________
Be smarter than spam. See how smart SpamGuard is at giving junk email the boot 
with the All-new Yahoo! Mail.  Click on Options in Mail and switch to New Mail 
today or register for free at http://mail.yahoo.ca

Reply via email to