T-P:
Last minute opposition from the Bush administration stalled legislation to create a federal corporation that would buy homes damaged or destroyed by Hurricanes Katrina and Rita, according to the bill's sponsor.
...
DJ Nordquist, spokesman for federal Katrina recovery coordinator Don Powell, was less direct when asked about the latest White House position on the Baker bill.
"We share the goal of expediting the recovery of the Gulf Coast region and will continue to work with Congressman Baker and other leaders to come up with the best solutions to revitalize and rebuild the community for the long-term," Nordquist said.
On Saturday afternoon, Baker thought he had achieved the breakthrough needed to pass his bill during a hastily called meeting with Senate Banking Committee Chairman Richard Shelby, R-Ala. Baker sold his bill as the best way to avert thousands of mortgage foreclosures in Louisiana .
Although staffers on the Senate Banking Committee had been raising questions about the bill, Shelby assured Baker and Sen. Mary Landrieu, D-La., who helped set up the meeting, that he wouldn't stand in the way if top GOP leaders signed off.
"In our minds, that was the last obstacle and we were ready to pop the champagne," said a Baker aide.
But the Senate GOP leaders wanted the White House's okay.
Despite a carefully orchestrated effort, which included frantic weekend e-mails and phone calls to the White House from long-time Bush supporters Joseph Canizaro, developer and leader of Mayor Ray Nagin's Bring New Orleans Back Commission and Donald "Boysie" Bollinger, president and CEO of Bollinger Shipyards, as well as former Democratic Sen. John Breaux, White House officials balked.
Congressional staffers said too many questions were unresolved about the overall costs of the housing buyouts.
---
To recap:
Canizaro, I believe, is the only Bush "Pioneer" level fundraiser in Louisiana.
Boysie recently said that Bush is Louisiana's "best friend."
Yeah, right. Why is our "best friend" always working so hard behind the scenes to kill legislation helpful to the Pelican State? Why is cost always an obstacle when it comes to "the gret stet", but never when it comes to Iraq, Big Pharma, KBR... etc?
How many times does this have to happen before Bush supporters in this state see a pattern? How did these guys succeed in business if they can be played like yo-yo's so consistently, and come back for more?
So: After waiting nearly four months to declare that the Bush administration will honor levee commitments made to this state forty years ago, the President has the chutzpah to say that his belated commitment to Category 3 protection will help businesses return to the area. (No joke, Buckwheat!) Many thousands of area businesses have already left the state because of the extended silence from Washington on this matter.
And then the Bushies went out of their way to subvert a bill which would have given so many Louisianans hope during the holidays. Now they will only receive harrassment from their mortgage companies. (Hint to Homeowners: use your situation to your advantage during negotiations).
Happy Holidays, Louisiana!
Wednesday, December 21, 2005
Scrooged
7 comments
DiggIt!
Del.icio.us
7 Comments:
Baker's bill is probably not dead... just delayed. Although I tend to share the suspicions Schroeder aluded to in comments to the previous post.
We'll see.
It is certain that this delay will mean financial "death" for many homeowners, just as Bush's delay in announcing support for levees meant "death" for many LA businesses.
"How many times does this have to happen before Bush supporters in this state see a pattern?"
They'll never learn. The Bush administration has been administering the living shit out of this state from the moment he took office, but all we care about are "values." You can also see evidence of a craino-rectal inversion in the constant bleating of people like C.B. and the "Lousiana Political News Service" who can see no further issue than an opportunity to attack democrats. There's no vision among rethugs, here or in DC, and being so strongly reluctant to embrace change, there probably never will be. REPUBLICANS OFF EARTH NOW.
By 
Suspect Device, at
11:11 AM
craino-rectal inversion
HA.
By jonnybutter, at
8:01 PM
I haven't had the emotional energy left to finish a post I was working on about the Baker bill. But I'll speak up here. Do you really like a bill that turns property over to developers after giving homeowners and banks 60 percent equity -- so they can retain the right to buy back their property at a higher value? Remember, Baker made his money as a developer. Who would benefit? It always looked to me like this was a publicly financed get-rich-quick scheme for developers, paid for on the backs of hard-working New Orleanian homeowners. Okay, so I'm not in the real estate business -- I may not know what I'm talking about -- but why hasn't anyone else asked this question? I don't disagree that homeowners need some help -- like, YESTERDAY -- but I never thought this was the right approach -- not at 60 percent equity. How about trading homeowner equity for shares in developer companies? Why not just buy out people's homes outright? Why not help finance their reconstruction? Why should they lose 40 percent equity? You can do the math -- 200,000 homes at an average of $200,000 per home = $40,000,000,000. That's $40 billion to buy those homes outright, but Republicans in Congress were trying to limit spending on the Louisiana Recovery Corporation to $30 billion (if I remember correctly). Why would Congress need to allocate any money to a plan that turns over equity to developers?
Obviously, I don't know enough about the bill to answer any of these questions, but the fact that I'm not hearing anyone else ask these questions really makes me wonder about the investigatory skills of reporters covering the bill, and the intentions of the bill's sponsors.
I know that time is critical. I know that the 90-day mortgage-payment grace period has passed. I suspect that the better mortgage companies would rather negotiate with homeowners than foreclose their homes -- especially if, with all of the present uncertainty, the future value of those homes is uncertain.
Alright, there it is. Maybe I'll do that post after all.
I like some aspects of the Baker bill at least insofar as it is a realistic option that might pass in the next year or two. Please consider it within the context of the available legislative alternatives.
Homeowners receiving 60% of equity that (in most cases) no longer exists seems like a good deal to me. (Or, at least as good a deall as their gonna get from this Congress.)
You're absolutely right about this being a potential boondoggle for (out of state) developers. But, the homeowner can refuse to participate and the community is suppposed to direct how the development proceeds-- for whatever those assurances are worth.
The ones who get screwed are the banks. Settling for under 60% on a first mortgage is pretty rough, although they avoid the expenses of mass foreclosures.
Now, as I've alluded to earlier, the rather rigid constraints within this bill open up a window for enterprising real estate investors.
nike air max 90
nike air max 95
nike shoes
nike air
nike air shoes
nike air max tn
nike air rift
nike shox r4
sports shoes
nike air rifts
nike air rift trainer
nike air max 360
nike shox nz
puma cat
air max trainers
mens nike air max
nike air
puma mens shoes
puma shoes
puma speed
nike shoes air max
nike shoes shox
air shoes
Lucyliu IS Lucyliu
nike shoe cart
puma future
levis jeans
nike rift shoes
cheap nike air rifts
bape shoes
cheap puma
nike rift
jeans shop
diesel jeans