FACT SHEET: A Better Bargain for the Middle Class: Housing

[ProSense]

Freddie and Fannie were privatized from 1968 to 1970. They were private organizations that were bailed out in 2008.

http://realestate.aol.com/blog/2010/12/24/the-rise-and-fall-of-fannie-mae-a-timeline/

President Obama is proposing ending the private entities, ending bailouts, and have a public agency provide government-insured mortgages.

FACT SHEET: A Better Bargain for the Middle Class: Housing

When President Obama took office, our housing market was in free-fall, leaving many families feeling trapped and anxious about their mortgages. The President took immediate action to stabilize our housing market and protect the middle class. These steps helped millions of middle class families stay in their homes, save money on their mortgages, and turn their communities around.

Working together we need to build a more durable and fair system that promotes the American Dream of homeownership, while preventing the nightmare of another crisis. Today, our housing market is coming back. Home values are rising, foreclosures are at the lowest levels since 2006, home sales have increased at double digit rates, and American families are on pace to purchase over 5 million homes this year. In part because of President Obama's tough regulations that cracked down on the most reckless practices from the housing crisis, responsible Americans can feel more confident and secure when they borrow money to purchase their own home. But the job is not done, and restoring security to homeownership is one of the President’s top economic priorities.

In today’s speech, the President laid out his ideas to help more responsible homeowners refinance, to cut red tape, to increase home values by fixing our broken immigration system, to help the hardest hit communities rebuild, and to ensure those who rent have decent and affordable options. The President also made it clear that going back to the same bubble-and-bust housing system that caused the financial crisis is not acceptable. We need a rock-solid foundation for financing homeownership with a bigger role for the private sector, where taxpayers aren’t on the hook for the irresponsible behavior or bad decisions of financial institutions and we finally put an end to an era where Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac could expect a bailout for risky behavior in pursuit of profits. These bipartisan solutions will help build on the progress we’ve made over the last four years, and together we can make owning a home a symbol of responsibility and a source of security for generations to come.

A Better Bargain for the Middle Class: Housing

A Better Bargain for Responsible, Middle Class Homeowners:

• Help responsible families save $3,000 a year by refinancing while mortgage rates are still low
  
  
• Take executive action to cut red tape so responsible families can get a mortgage
  
  
• Fix our broken immigration system to increase home values
  
  
• Rebuild communities hit hardest by foreclosure
  
  
• Create and preserve affordable rental housing by passing a bipartisan Senate proposal

Core Principles for Durable, Fair Housing Finance (GSE) Reform:

• Put private capital at the center of the housing finance system
  
  
• End Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac’s failed business model so taxpayers are never again on the hook for bad loans and bailouts
  
  
• Ensure widespread access to safe, responsible financing like the 30-year fixed rate mortgage
  
  
• Support affordability and access for renters and homeownership for first-time buyers, in part by continuing the historic affordability role of Federal Housing Administration (FHA)

Making Families’ Most Important Financial Decision Safe and Simple:

• Ensure all prospective homeowners receive a single, simple three-page mortgage disclosure form
  
  
• Increase incentives for lenders to deliver high quality loans and products
  
  
• Level the playing field for financial institutions of all sizes so borrowers can work with the lender right for them

Confirming Mel Watt Will Provide Certainty and Leadership During This Key Phase:

• Congress should swiftly confirm the President’s FHFA Director nominee Mel Watt to further accelerate efforts toward common sense housing finance reform

A Better Bargain for Responsible, Middle Class Homeowners

There are several additional steps – including legislative proposals – that could immediately work to further strengthen the housing market and ensure that the middle class can secure affordable mortgages, refinance their loans at today’s low rates, and build housing wealth while ensuring that no communities or homeowners are left behind by the housing recovery.

• Help Responsible Families Save $3,000 a Year by Refinancing While Mortgage Rates are Still Low: President Obama has set the goal of eliminating all barriers to refinancing for responsible borrowers. The Administration worked with housing regulators to implement key changes to the government’s refinancing program (HARP) that nearly tripled the number of families who received refinancings from 400,000 in 2011 to 1.1 million in 2012, bringing the HARP program total to more than 2.6 million. To complete the task of providing refinancing options for all responsible borrowers, the President has proposed the following three steps:
  
  
  • Streamline refinancing for borrowers with government-insured mortgages.
    
    
  • Waive closing costs for borrowers who refinance into shorter term loans to more rapidly rebuild equity in their homes.
    
    
  • Expand eligibility for refinancing to many hundreds of thousands of eligible borrowers who do not have government-backed mortgages by creating special programs through the Federal Housing Administration (FHA) or Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac.

These steps could help a typical family save $3,000 or more per year.

• Cut Red Tape so Responsible Families Can Get a Mortgage: There are still millions of families with strong enough credit profiles to qualify for a mortgage but who are nonetheless being denied loans. According to the Federal Reserve, from 2007 to 2012, mortgage lending to borrowers with credit scores above 780 fell by a third, while lending to borrowers with credit scores between 620-680 declined by roughly 90%. For many of these borrowers, they are denied a loan because lenders are unclear of the rules of the road for lending and are protecting themselves by only lending to those with the most pristine credit. The Administration is continuing to work with housing regulators and stakeholders on reasonable approaches to clarify rules and reduce overlapping regulations, in order to expand access to credit for qualifying families. The CFPB’s recently finalized Qualified Mortgage (QM) rule is an important step forward in providing certainty while protecting consumers. The FHA is completing its own QM rule to align with the CFPB and ensure access for the wide-range of responsible borrowers that the agency has historically served. In other cases, temporary unemployment or other hardships that borrowers have overcome still stand in the way of getting a mortgage, even though these borrowers may have strong pay histories and have gotten back on their feet. Going forward:
  
  
  • Regulators should implement mortgage related rules in a way that encourages the clarity and certainty that leads to broad access to credit and a safe and sound system.
    
    
  • We need to establish more certain, brighter-line rules for when government will rescind its guarantees, to give lenders greater clarity and encourage more lending to creditworthy borrowers. HUD is working to update its rules along these lines, and will work with FHFA and other federal agencies to institute a common framework for government guarantees across the market.
    
    
  • FHA is also working on additional lending flexibilities through an initiative called "Back to Work" that will make certain that creditworthy re-employed borrowers with strong recent pay histories are not unfairly excluded from access to FHA lending, while doing so in a responsible manner that protects the FHA Mutual Mortgage Insurance Fund (MMIF).
  <…>

- more -

http://www.whitehouse.gov/the-press-office/2013/08/05/fact-sheet-better-bargain-middle-class-housing

[Old and In the Way]

1. Sounds damn reasonable to me.

Is Obama, the tyrant, aware of this socialist legislation?

[ProSense]

7. Yeah, but

spin sells and facts aren't worth anything.

Fannie, Freddie execs score $100 million payday
http://money.cnn.com/2011/11/15/news/companies/fannie_freddie_executive_pay/


Here is the current CEO:

Timothy J. Mayopoulos is Fannie Mae's president and chief executive officer (CEO), and a member of the company's Board of Directors.

As President and CEO, Mr. Mayopoulos is focused on ensuring that the company continues to manage its legacy issues effectively, while driving the company’s contributions to creating a better housing finance system for the future. Under his leadership, Fannie Mae will continue to play an essential role in funding the market, assisting troubled homeowners, strengthening communities, and repaying taxpayers’ investment in the company.

Mr. Mayopoulos brings more than 25 years of experience to his leadership post. He joined Fannie Mae in April 2009 as executive vice president, general counsel, and corporate secretary and was appointed chief administrative officer in 2010. Prior to joining Fannie Mae, Mr. Mayopoulos was executive vice president and general counsel of Bank of America Corporation. Previously, he served in senior management roles at Deutsche Bank AG, Credit Suisse First Boston, and Donaldson, Lufkin & Jenrette, Inc. Earlier in his career, Mr. Mayopoulos was in private practice. He is a graduate of Cornell University and the New York University School of Law.

http://www.fanniemae.com/portal/about-us/company-overview/leadership/mayopoulos.html#

[PowerToThePeople]

2. won't make me want to buy a home.

Where I live, house prices are still 200% inflated to salaries. But, this area was not hit as hard during the housing crisis. So, either my salary triples or housing drops by 66% before I will think of buying. If you overextend yourself that much, one stint of unemployment and you lose everything.

[TBF]

3. Privatize everything - Reagan would be proud. nt

[ProSense]

5. They were

"Privatize everything - Reagan would be proud."

...privatized more than a decade before Reagan.

This plan removes the government from that scheme and reestablishes government-insured mortgages through a public agency.

Eff Reagan!

[TBF]

9. Don't even try -

we all see through your crappy right-wing nonsense (btw, I didn't think a sarcasm tag was necessary but apparently for some it is).

And I love this particular quote from the president: "“We encourage the pursuit of profit – but the era of expecting a bailout after your pursuit of profit puts the whole country at risk is over.”

The banks, Mr. President? Any thoughts of reining in the banks and wall street? I didn't think so.

Now that we've sent all the jobs overseas, are spending most of our time pushing no minimum wage & the privatization of social security, we have gotten to the point where there will no longer be ownership of homes for the vast majority of this country.

I don't care which party/president does it - it is still a race to the bottom.

"Middle Class" ---->

Own it.

[ProSense]

10. Who the fuck are you calling "right-wing"?

And who the fuck is "we"?

Your post is drivel.

[TBF]

12. An idea stand on it's face -

destruction of the two agencies that actually made home ownership possible in this country is just additional destruction of the safety net. That is not a leftist position.

Do you have your talking points ready for destroying, uh, "privatizing" social security?

[ProSense]

13. "destruction of the two agencies that actually made home ownership possible in this country "

They are private companies that allowed the banks to destroy people's lives.

Don't believe me:

Fannie and Freddie wanted to make money off mortgages just like the big banks. Except they knew they were protected and guaranteed by the taxpayers. They bought up the bad mortgages of the big banks. That is where their debt came from. It was a win-win for the banks and a lose-lose for the taxpayers. This does absolutely nothing if the big banks are still protected by the taxpayers. Nothing has changed. It is a scam.

http://www.democraticunderground.com/10023418389#post7

Like I said, a lot of people have no idea what's going on: http://www.democraticunderground.com/10023418389#post7

By your description, you're clearly in that category.

[TBF]

14. How about a public solution?

These agencies made it possible for many folks to have homes - many who wouldn't have a chance.

If they need reform then let's do it. Once it's privatized then it's game over - more folks thrown to the wolves of private finance.

You can hurl all the insults you want but it doesn't change the fact that this country is being turned into a third world cesspool.

It's the (income) inequality, stupid (to borrow a heading from Mother Jones): http://www.motherjones.com/politics/2011/02/income-inequality-in-america-chart-graph

Capitalism has to go.

[ProSense]

15. Did you even read the information? The President proposed a public solution.

He specifically laid out a plan to have government-insured mortgages administered by a public agency.

[TBF]

16. Where is the part about the government-insured mortgages?

I've gone through this a couple of times -- http://www.whitehouse.gov/the-press-office/2013/08/05/fact-sheet-better-bargain-middle-class-housing

I must be missing it.

After watching my own mother struggle with Bank of America (thankfully we finally got it straightened out and she is re-financed in her home) - things like the hotline are a bigger deal than folks may realize. But the part about turning it all over to private finance is where you are going to find argument. We know the banks like BOA are ruthless and yet we are turning it all over to them? Makes no sense.

This ---

Core Principles for Durable, Fair Housing Finance (GSE) Reform:

Put private capital at the center of the housing finance system
End Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac’s failed business model so taxpayers are never again on the hook for bad loans and bailouts
Ensure widespread access to safe, responsible financing like the 30-year fixed rate mortgage
Support affordability and access for renters and homeownership for first-time buyers, in part by continuing the historic affordability role of Federal Housing Administration (FHA)

Why not expand the role of the FHA program rather than turning it all over to predators?

[ProSense]

17. It's there, and if you can't find it, that's on you. n/t

[TBF]

18. All that blue ink and you can't answer a simple question.

I'm not at all surprised. The only thing in that entire paper that even comes close to a public solution is the fact that they haven't axed the FHA program yet. I'm sure that will be next.

[ProSense]

20. Go to the "blue ink" and read until you find it. n/t

[1StrongBlackMan]

36. You do know …

That FannieMae and FreddieMac are already PRIVATE enterprises, right? They already do what you supposedly oppose … they privatize profits, while socializing loses; when the mortgages that they purchase make good, the profit goes to F&F’s investors; but when the mortgages they purchase go bad, the government (read: you and I) bails them out through the loan guarantees.

The changes the President is proposing will mean banks, and their investors in mortgages, can continue gambling; but if they want Federal-backing (guarantees) on the mortgages, they must pay a fee (much like buying insurance on the mortgage).

[TBF]

38. And paying that fee will mean it's harder

and more expensive for families to get houses.

I don't object to replacing them - but I do object to replacing them with private banks.

[kentuck]

4. As I recall...

Much of the debt of Fannie and Freddie was from the bad mortgages they took over from the big banks because they had the federal guarantee. The big banks had nothing to lose - just give it up to Fannie and Freddie. I'm not sure this accomplishes anything at all, frankly.

[ProSense]

6. The fact that

"As I recall...Much of the debt of Fannie and Freddie was from the bad mortgages they took over from the big banks because they had the federal guarantee. The big banks had nothing to lose - just give it up to Fannie and Freddie. I'm not sure this accomplishes anything at all, frankly. "

...they dumped it on those organizations and their status as private entities made the bailouts significant. They are still private.

The FHFA will have a big hand in the new structure, and this is why confirming Mel Watt is important.

Progressive Caucus Applauds the Nomination of Rep. Mel Watt to Head the Federal Housing Finance Agency

Washington, D.C. – Congressional Progressive Caucus Co-Chairs Reps. Raúl M. Grijalva (D-AZ) and Keith Ellison (D-MN) released the following statement today after President Obama nominated Rep. Mel Watt (D-NC) to head the Federal Housing Finance Agency (FHFA):

“The president’s nomination of Rep. Mel Watt to head the FHFA should provide hope to millions of Americans struggling to stay in their homes. Rep. Watt has advocated common-sense policies to help homeowners and stop the foreclosure crisis hurting our recovery. He’s a consistent and passionate defender of homeowners and working families, and he’s the right person for the job.

“The housing market lost half its value during the recession. Ten million Americans still owe more on their mortgage than their home is worth. On Edward DeMarco’s watch, the FHFA has refused to provide relief by either cost-effectively reducing the principal on underwater homes or funding the National Housing Trust Fund. He has chosen to leave homeowners behind.

“We encourage our colleagues in the Senate to confirm Rep. Watt as head of the FHFA as soon as possible. If Senate Republicans choose to filibuster his nomination, as they have with several recent qualified nominees, the president should appoint him during a congressional recess. We need a true champion of working Americans on the job immediately.”

http://cpc.grijalva.house.gov/index.cfm?sectionid=61&itemid=708

[Old and In the Way]

8. I trust Grijalva and Ellison...

the Obama haters will need talking points to avoid this one....

[ProSense]

11. Really, it has become absurd. n/t

[woo me with science]

19. A "better bargain"......dare we say, a GRAND BARGAIN.

Privatization. Austerity. Spying. Militarization.

A GRAND BARGAIN for the proles. Again.

[ProSense]

21. Are Fannie and Freddie private entities?

Is this true, and do you think the government should continue funneling money into these entities:

Fannie, Freddie execs score $100 million payday
http://money.cnn.com/2011/11/15/news/companies/fannie_freddie_executive_pay/

Here is the current CEO:

Timothy J. Mayopoulos is Fannie Mae's president and chief executive officer (CEO), and a member of the company's Board of Directors.

As President and CEO, Mr. Mayopoulos is focused on ensuring that the company continues to manage its legacy issues effectively, while driving the company’s contributions to creating a better housing finance system for the future. Under his leadership, Fannie Mae will continue to play an essential role in funding the market, assisting troubled homeowners, strengthening communities, and repaying taxpayers’ investment in the company.

Mr. Mayopoulos brings more than 25 years of experience to his leadership post. He joined Fannie Mae in April 2009 as executive vice president, general counsel, and corporate secretary and was appointed chief administrative officer in 2010. Prior to joining Fannie Mae, Mr. Mayopoulos was executive vice president and general counsel of Bank of America Corporation. Previously, he served in senior management roles at Deutsche Bank AG, Credit Suisse First Boston, and Donaldson, Lufkin & Jenrette, Inc. Earlier in his career, Mr. Mayopoulos was in private practice. He is a graduate of Cornell University and the New York University School of Law.

http://www.fanniemae.com/portal/about-us/company-overview/leadership/mayopoulos.html#

[sufrommich]

22. The knee jerk bashing of this plan is idiotic.

But totally unsurprising.

[TBF]

23. Your enthusiasm for privatization is noted.

[ProSense]

24. No, it's not surprising. n/t

[1StrongBlackMan]

37. Can we just save some time …

President Obama = Bad. Period. Next topic.

[Xyzse]

25. If formulated well, maybe I can see that working

Given current realities however, I don't see this going anywhere.

Besides, I don't trust the ability to be able to get everything down properly for it to actually work. More likely than not, it would introduce a new method hampered by concessions that would make it hurt more than not.

Also, much like credit reform and so forth, even though quite a few things made sense the implementation was a failure.
What credit card companies did in anticipation of it passing as to jack up the rates immediately and sticked it to the consumers before the law came in to effect.

My fear in privatization is that it would just do the same thing.

•Put private capital at the center of the housing finance system
--Things like this has a chance of being grossly under-funded. Sounds similar to how pension plans used to work, where companies took care of the funding and kept dipped in to them. It also makes it much easier to leverage taking advantage of it by the larger companies. Unless this is iron tight, some cracker-jack would find loop holes on this and we'll be more than likely worse off.

•End Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac’s failed business model so taxpayers are never again on the hook for bad loans and bailouts
--The reason they failed is due to private entities like Lehman brothers.

•Ensure widespread access to safe, responsible financing like the 30-year fixed rate mortgage
--I call BS on this one. There is no way to ensure such a thing through the Privatized industry. Since it is very much dependent on mortgage rates and so forth. The core on this thing is the idea that Mortgage rates are still low. How high would mortgage rates go up quickly when this is being debated in Congress and Senate?

Any how, them tying immigration in this debate pretty much ensures that this will be even more contentious.

I still need to read more in to this, but that is my initial take away.

[ProSense]

27. To all your points, Fannie and Freddie are private.

"•Put private capital at the center of the housing finance system "

That's to end bailouts.

"•End Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac’s failed business model so taxpayers are never again on the hook for bad loans and bailouts
--The reason they failed is due to private entities like Lehman brothers. "

Fannie and Freddie are private. So all parties involved were private.

"•Ensure widespread access to safe, responsible financing like the 30-year fixed rate mortgage
--I call BS on this one. There is no way to ensure such a thing through the Privatized industry."

Again, Fannie and Freddie are private. So all parties involved were private.

The President is proposing a public agency for government-insured mortgages. Also, these changes aren't happening in a vacuum. The President mentioned the CFPB mortgage rules, which are aimed at ending the abuses.

[Xyzse]

30. Not quite

Fannie and Freddie are private entities with a twist. They are like the US Postal Service, a Public Service that became privatized while still being under the purview of the government.

Saying that, just putting "All Parties Involed were private" over simplifies matters and is besides the point.

Just by saying that does not answer the ability of finding a loop hole on that system and underfunding the supposed "private capital center". Which if it is, will still end up having the government do the bail out, particularly if the entity becomes too big to fail. Which they are as is.

That "Private capital center", also becomes another area they can dip their hands in to. More likely than not for more consolidation, which won't be good.

The thing about Fannie and Freddie, their charters limit what they can do in regards to their products and investments. It limits the type of bundling that can happen.

Also, this does not address the other point in my post as to how much of what is proposed is dependent on the current low rates. That can change pretty quickly, especially while this is going on.

And also, the proposal of another public agency for government insured mortgages is pretty much what Fannie and Freddie was. This is basically creating a new department that would take years... years to roll out properly.

It may work if:
1 - This was passed quickly enough
2 - Formulated properly as to ensure that those banks can not touch that capital.
3 - Mortgage rates stay low for another few years after such a thing is rolled out.

[ProSense]

32. No,

"Fannie and Freddie are private entities with a twist. They are like the US Postal Service, a Public Service that became privatized while still being under the purview of the government."

...they're nothing like the USPS.

They are completely private enterprises that are federally regulated. They are listed on the stock market.

[Xyzse]

33. You're still just focusing on that part

I'll give you that they are Private enterprises that are federally regulated and are listed in the stock market.

Saying that they are like the USPS is valid that they were initially a Public entity that were privatized.
Fannie and Freddie are also limited in what they can do if they want to keep their standing. That is unlike any other bank, they have increased regulations that make them special.

I understand focusing on just saying that they are Private since that isn't the actual issue. Again not addressing the actual concerns on the post.

So here again:
----
Where is the guarantee that the US Tax Payers won't have to bail them out again?
--It is in that proposal that says : "Private capital must be wiped out before the government pays out on catastrophic guarantees provided through government reinsurance of private-market loans."
This means that if they underfund that Private Capital which does NOT show any method of enforcing that they fully fund this. It is also another pool of money that THEY will lobby to be able to use for their own play. Unless there is a guarantee that this is done properly it will just be used for more consolidation and acquisition. This can be put in without taking out Fannie and Freddie. Instead, they are thinking of creating a new agency to take care of Government backed mortgages.

How can they guarantee that the mortgage rates won't sky rocket as this proposal is being done?
--Much like what happened with credit cards and bank fees, these banks immediately put out all the stops in placing more fees and upticking their rates in anticipation of new legislation. This will also happen during the gap of time between passing and implementation.

Why tie the immigration debate in this proposal?
--It feels like they don't want to pass it with this added in. With this added in, it guarantees that this becomes contentious and will allow banks to do the prior point.

As per mentioned, I am still trying to figure this thing out. Merely saying they are a private entity does not diminish other concerns. Much of that is assuming that rates are going to stay low.

[ProSense]

34. The USPS

"Saying that they are like the USPS is valid that they were initially a Public entity that were privatized"

...has not been privatized.

You're asking a lot of questions about process, and like I said, these changes aren't happening in a vacuum. The President mentioned the CFPB mortgage rules, which are aimed at ending the abuses.

The Consumer Financial Protection Bureau gets busy
http://www.democraticunderground.com/10023372682

"... it really is a big fucking deal. Elizabeth Warren is beaming."
http://www.democraticunderground.com/10023281141

[Xyzse]

35. Thanks for finally adding a few links that mention

First one deals with consumer financial protection which relates by focusing on the agents and companies that are incentivized towards making variable and higher rate loans. Which does not in any way guarantee that rates remain this low.
The second one is in regards to Richard Cordray being confirmed, which is also part of the first link.

I agree those are important, however as mentioned it still does not answer the three bolded questions.
Just because they are finally doing some consumer protection, it is still dealing with the smaller agents.

It mentions loan officers with higher rates, but they are not the ones that sets the rates. It is the aggregators. Loan officers merely pick whatever rates are given to a particular product. It is still based on banks and how they formulate it through risk and the secondary market. This however is not completely transparent either.
http://money.howstuffworks.com/personal-finance/financial-planning/mortgage-rates-determined.htm

So no, that doesn't quite answer the three major bolded parts.

There is no guarantee that the Tax Payers will not bail out the banks out again. I agree however that it is good to create a that Private Capital pool to defray the cost. However, again that can be lobbied to be used for other things instead. I think this may be a decent idea, if only to be some extra padding before the US tax payers are hit, even if it becomes massively defunded.

They are also creating a new agency in regards to Government backed loans, which is another layer of administration.

I sure hope that Mortgage rates don't sky rocket, or that they would include new processing fees, particularly to say that they have new administrative costs. I don't see that becoming illegal.

Lastly, they still tied this to immigration. All it says in the proposal is "•Fix our broken immigration system to increase home values". Even if that is true, it should not be included in the proposal, as it should be separate and confuses the issue.

Any how, it is worth looking at. There are things like the first one that is definitely worth doing as long as it does not get used for consolidation when the time comes.

There are too many things up to chance in this, particularly "Congress needs to pass a bipartisan budget".

Don't get me wrong. I may support this in the end if it is done well. However, after the bank bail out and how they are now even bigger than before... makes me pretty skeptical.

[leftstreet]

26. He can't guarantee any of this shit

Ensure widespread access to safe, responsible financing like the 30-year fixed rate mortgage

How would he 'ensure' this? Is that like 'ensuring' everyone could get 'affordable' health care...while letting states opt out of Medicare expansion? By not forcing cost controls on insurance companies?

[Safetykitten]

28. Obama wants his own "Glass Steagall" to call his own. When he is gone, we will all sit around and...

say "wow! Who woulda thought?"

He wants his own, very own contribution to a future fucking nightmare all his own. Other than his epic clusterfuck ACA.

[ProSense]

29. But

"He can't guarantee any of this shit"

...if he could, wouldn't that be great?

The Consumer Financial Protection Bureau gets busy
http://www.democraticunderground.com/10023372682

"... it really is a big fucking deal. Elizabeth Warren is beaming."
http://www.democraticunderground.com/10023281141

[Bunnahabhain]

31. Watching people talk past each other in this thread

is funny but very sad.

[Scurrilous]

39. K & R