Why Elliot Spitzer was politically assassinated. ?:

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 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 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.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2008/02/13/AR2008021302783_pf.html









--~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups 
"ShadowGovernment" group.
To post to this group, send email to [email protected]
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For more options, visit this group at 
http://groups.google.com/group/ShadowGovernment
-~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---

Reply via email to