Repubs blocking bailout due to 20% poison pill put in by Dems

Anyone bitching about the Republicans and McCain blocking this can go suck an egg.

http://hotair.com/archives/2008/09/2...acorn-bailout/

Quote:

---

And this deal that’s on the table now is not a very good deal. Twenty percent of the money that should go to retire debt that will be created to solve this problem winds up in a housing organization called ACORN that is an absolute ill-run enterprise, and I can’t believe we would take money away from debt retirement to put it in a housing program that doesn’t work.

---

Quote:

---

Just heard from several readers that Lindsay Grahamnesty told Fox that the Mother of All Bailouts includes a reported $100 million more in funding for the left-wing housing entitlement thugs and heavily tax-subsidized fraudsters at ACORN. Under the original bailout proposal, apparently, a large portion of any repayment of the $700 billion would go to Barack Obama’s good friends at ACORN with a smaller allocation to debt repayment. Readers heard him say it was 20 percent.

---

Quote:

---

That being said, this section proves that the Democrats in Congress have learned nothing from this financial collapse. They still want to game the market to pick winners and losers by funding programs for unqualified and marginally-qualified borrowers to buy houses they may not be able to afford — and that’s the innocent explanation for this clause.

The real purpose of section D is to send more funds to La Raza and ACORN through housing welfare, via the slush fund of the HTF. They want to float their political efforts on behalf of Democrats with public money, which was always the purpose behind the HTF. They did the same thing in April in the first bailout bill, setting aside $100 million in “counseling” that went in large part to ACORN and La Raza, and at least in the former case, providing taxpayer funding for a group facing criminal charges in more than a dozen states for fraud.

It’s bad enough that taxpayers have to pay the price for Congress’ decade-long distortions of the lending and investment markets. If we realize a profit from the bailout, that money should go to pay down the debt or get returned to taxpayers as dividends from their investment — not to organizations committing voter fraud, and not to restarting the entire cycle of government meddling in lending markets. I’d support a rational bailout package, but anything that funds the HTF needs to get stopped.

---

ACORN, hmmmm, where has that come up before?

This pisses me off to no end. Not a single fucking dime of any return on the bailout (which is even questionable as to whether there will be) should go to any PAC. Period.

If anything any profit should go towards paying down the national debt.

The Dems can go fuck themselves on this one, and I'm proud of anyone in D.C. right now standing up to this bullshit.

So Michelle Malkin readers are breaking this story? I think I'll wait for a better source

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by MichelleMalkin.com

Just heard from several readers that Lindsay Grahamnesty told Fox that the Mother of All Bailouts includes a reported $100 million more in funding for the left-wing housing entitlement thugs and heavily tax-subsidized fraudsters at ACORN. Under the original bailout proposal, apparently, a large portion of any repayment of the $700 billion would go to Barack Obama’s good friends at ACORN with a smaller allocation to debt repayment. Readers heard him say it was 20 percent.

---

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Mr. Peabody

So Michelle Malkin readers are breaking this story? I think I'll wait for a better source

---

Or, until Democrats yank it and say it never existed...

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Mr. Peabody

So Michelle Malkin readers are breaking this story? I think I'll wait for a better source

---

Yeah, maybe it will be legit for you Dems when it makes it to DailyKOS or some shit.

If you go to the link, they have an interview with Lindsey Graham from SC (Senator), if you go to the end of the video link, he mentions the details.

So are you calling him a liar?

Go to the 2:30 mark and start watching. Graham details the 20% kicker.

This message not brought to you by Michelle Matkin.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Aggie Hoopsfan

Yeah, maybe it will be legit for you Dems when it makes it to DailyKOS or some shit.

If you go to the link, they have an interview with Lindsey Graham from SC (Senator), if you go to the end of the video link, he mentions the details.

So are you calling him a liar?

---

Yes.:rolleyes I'm calling him a liar for not giving immediate credence to commentators on a right wing blog.:rolleyes:lol:rolleyes

Yeah...saw that when he cam on last night. Pelosi, Dodd, Frank...they truly disgust me.

This is bullshit considering the House GOP is floating around a bill that is ENTIRELY different and pretty fucking horrible. LOL @ a capital gains repeal. No.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Mr. Peabody

Yes.:rolleyes I'm calling him a liar for not giving immediate credence to commentators on a right wing blog.:rolleyes:lol:rolleyes

---

You clearly didn't go to the original link posted, as it had the video. Kinda lame to pop off without at least reading it. All I'm sayin'...

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by MannyIsGod

This is bullshit considering the House GOP is floating around a bill that is ENTIRELY different and pretty fucking horrible. LOL @ a capital gains repeal. No.

---

So we should give 20% to ACORN so they can give money to more people who can't afford homes and buy votes (i.e., the same shit that helped get us to this point we're at now)?

I'm not a huge fan of the Republican proposal, but that doesn't mean we should go with this Democratic financial windfall for ACORN and La Raza.

In fact, it sounds like if they just removed that poison pill they'd probably have more support. I'm thrilled with anyone standing up to anyone trying to toss a financial bone to special interests on this one.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by MannyIsGod

This is bullshit considering the House GOP is floating around a bill that is ENTIRELY different and pretty fucking horrible. LOL @ a capital gains repeal. No.

---

Repealing the capital gains tax would really stimulate the economy!

I"ve seen nothing of this ACORN shit up until now. I agree it shouldn't be in there, and I'm not convinced it is or ever was.

Prove me wrong though. Find something tangible not a circle of republican people pointing to each other and saying the other saw it.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Wild Cobra

Repealing the capital gains tax would really stimulate the economy!

---

Sure, cut some fucking government programs first please. Do you quit working before you make sure your bills are paid?

I knew dem would put bullshit in bill then blame repubilcans and bush bill is not passed

No one is blaming Bush.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by MannyIsGod

Sure, cut some fucking government programs first please. Do you quit working before you make sure your bills are paid?

---

Here we agree. Maybe not on the programs, but yes. Cut most social programs dramatically!

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Wild Cobra

Here we agree. Maybe not on the programs, but yes. Cut most social programs dramatically!

---

Well until that is done forget this repeal the capital gains tax bullshit.

Fact check:

A provision that would require the Treasury to take a 65 percent portion of 20 percent any profits it makes from the newly purchased assets and put it into the federal government's HOPE program, an affordable housing program.


-------------------------------------------------

Hope program is NOT ACORN.

ACORN is a recipient of grant money from the program, initiated by Bush:

The HOPE legislation created this:

Self-help Homeownership Opportunity Program (SHOP)
http://www.hud.gov/offices/cpd/affor...programs/shop/

Quote:

---

SHOP provides funds for eligible national and regional non-profit organizations and consortia to purchase home sites and develop or improve the infrastructure needed to set the stage for sweat equity and volunteer-based homeownership programs for low-income persons and families. SHOP funds are used for eligible expenses to develop decent, safe and sanitary non-luxury housing for low-income persons and families who otherwise would not become homeowners. Homebuyers must be willing to contribute significant amounts of their own sweat equity toward the construction of the housing units. Eligible homebuyers must apply through current SHOP grantees and their affiliates

---

Quote:

---

Eligible Activities:
SHOP funds may be used for only land acquisition, infrastructure improvements,and administrative costs. Total land acquisition and infrastructure improvement costs together may not exceed an average of $15,000 in SHOP assistance per home. Administrative costs (program administration, planning and management development costs) may not exceed 20% of the grant amount.

---

ACORN is indeed one of the Grantees:


Current Grantees:
ACORN Housing Corporation
Contact: Martin Shalloo
Telephone: (312) 939-1611
(Service Area: Chicago, IL; Phoenix, AZ; Little Rock and Pine Bluff, AR; New York City, NY;
New Orleans, LA; and, Houston, TX)


Community Frameworks
Contact: Christina Mejia
Telephone: (360) 377-7738 x24
(Service Area: Washington, Oregon, Idaho, and Montana)


Habitat for Humanity International
Contact: Christine Ta
Telephone: (229) 410-7514
(Service Area: Nationwide)


Housing Assistance Council
Contact: Joe Belden
Telephone: (202) 842-8600
(Service Area: Nationwide)


PPEP Microbusiness and Housing Development Corporation
Contact: Joni Soriano
Telephone: (520) 889-4203 x2003
(Service Area: Arizona, Colorado, and New Mexico)

... although I would assume that Habitat for Humanity probably gets more money, having a larger organization and a larger coverage area.

It is misleading to say that ACORN would be the sole, or even primary beneficiary of such funds.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by MannyIsGod

No one is blaming Bush.

---

donkeys are saying it is bush responisble to get republicans to get this bill passed after it stalled

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by MannyIsGod

I"ve seen nothing of this ACORN shit up until now. I agree it shouldn't be in there, and I'm not convinced it is or ever was.

Prove me wrong though. Find something tangible not a circle of republican people pointing to each other and saying the other saw it.

---

Are you calling Lindsey Graham or the good posters at MichelleMalkin.com liars....?

http://publicmarkup.org/bill/dodds-l...tment-aut/1/5/

Quote:

---

TRANSFER OF A PERCENTAGE OF PROFITS.

1.

DEPOSITS.Not less than 20 percent of any profit realized on the sale of each troubled asset purchased under this Act shall be deposited as provided in paragraph (2).
2.

USE OF DEPOSITS.Of the amount referred to in paragraph (1)
1.

65 percent shall be deposited into the Housing Trust Fund established under section 1338 of the Federal Housing Enterprises Regulatory Reform Act of 1992 (12 U.S.C. 4568); and
2.

35 percent shall be deposited into the Capital Magnet Fund established under section 1339 of that Act (12 U.S.C. 4569).
3.

REMAINDER DEPOSITED IN THE TREASURY.All amounts remaining after payments under paragraph (1) shall be paid into the General Fund of the Treasury for reduction of the public debt.

---

http://blog.heritage.org/2008/05/28/...form-hostages/

Quote:

---

The Holy Grail for ACORN has been the establishment of a National Housing Trust Fund. During the brief economic downturn in 2001, ACORN pushed the fund as an economic stimulus. From 2003 through 2006 it pushed the fund as a solution to housing prices that were too high. Now liberals in Congress have included the National Housing Trust Fund in the latest housing bailout bill, arguing it’s needed because housing prices are too low.

In 2006, liberals in Congress held much-needed reform of Freddie Mac and Fannie Mae hostage in exchange for the creation of ACORN’s permanent housing slush fund. They are doing the same exact thing with the housing bailout bill. In fact, it is inaccurate to even describe the current bill as a housing bailout. From the beginning, Rep. Barney Frank (D-Mass.) admitted it was irrelevant how many people the bill actually helped. Now Sen. Chris Dodd (D-Conn.) even pegs that number at a measly 500,000 over three years. Considering how long it would take to actually implement the program, and that home sales are up as home prices are returning to reality, this bill will do nothing to help currently distressed home buyers.

---

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by RandomGuy

... although I would assume that Habitat for Humanity probably gets more money, having a larger organization and a larger coverage area.

It is misleading to say that ACORN would be the sole, or even primary beneficiary of such funds.

---

ACORN is the leading lobbyist group for the National Housing Trust Fund, off the top of my head something like 1/3 of all lobbying on behalf of that fund.

Pretty ignorant to pretend they wouldn't benefit from this.

Whether or not you think that they would be the sole or 'even primary' beneficiary, the point is NONE of the profits should go to prop up any funding for low income house purchases. Lending to people who did not have the assets to afford living in a home is what helped get us in this predicament in the first place.

Because, as we all know, helping poor people build their own homes using their own labor is a "poison pill" for Republicans.

Right?

Read it and tell me why this unlikely to even be an issue AHF.

Secondly, to say this is a poison pill is fucking ridiculous, DUCY?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by RandomGuy

Because, as we all know, helping poor people build their own homes using their own labor is a "poison pill" for Republicans.

Right?

---

Wow, nice straw man. Where is the National Housing Trust helping people build their own homes? Everything I've read about them is basically providing either financial assistance or helping broker high risk mortgages (read: subprime loans).

Typical liberal though. Fuck Americans in general as long we get our income redistribution.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by MannyIsGod

Read it and tell me why this unlikely to even be an issue AHF.

Secondly, to say this is a poison pill is fucking ridiculous, DUCY?

---

Slushing off 20% of any profits for any special interest groups or special trust is a poison pill.

Weren't we hearing from Dems that no special interests should benefit from this and we should get it done for the good of the nation?

I must have missed the part where they care about the good of the nation, but only if they can hook up some special interests in the process.

Eh, fuck it. No one's going to change their minds anyway.

I agree these aren't the best places to be sending money to, but considering it would be PROFITS that are never going to come then I could give a fuck. Might as well put a section of the bill that if I shit a golden egg today Dems get to build a hot tub with the profit cause its not going to happen.

AHF I'm with you on it. I don't like it and I know first hand how horrible ACORN is at running shit, but we're not going to see a profit from securities we're overpaying for so its a provision that means shit but Dems can point to and say look i helped you here. Who fucking cares? Thats why its stupid to call it a poison pill.

the GOP are floating an entirely different bill, they didn't say this is whats holding things up. They went out and rewrote the entire fucking bill.

The House GOP apparently missed what happened with AIG in the not so distant past and their insurance on these securities because they're proposing we rebuild that house of cards as a provision of this bill.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Aggie Hoopsfan

http://publicmarkup.org/bill/dodds-l...tment-aut/1/5/

Background

Title IV of Division A of the Housing and Economic Recovery Act of

Quote:

---

2008 (Pub. L. 110-289, 122 Stat. 2654, approved July 30, 2008) (Act)
amended Title II of the National Housing Act (NHA) to add a new section
257. This section established the Program as a temporary Federal
Housing Administration (FHA) program that offers voluntary
participation on the part of homeowners and existing loan holders (or
servicers acting on their behalf) to insure refinanced loans for
distressed borrowers to support long-term sustainable homeownership,
including among other things, allowing homeowners to avoid foreclosure.
Under the Program, a qualified mortgage borrower may refinance his or
her existing mortgage into a new mortgage loan insured by the FHA,
subject to conditions and restrictions specified in the Act. The
Program authorizes FHA to insure such eligible mortgages commencing no
earlier than October 1, 2008, and the authority to insure expires
September 30, 2011.

---

There we go, much better. Thanks for the link to the original language. It made it much easier to find.

---

Quote:

---

Under the “HOPE for Homeowners Act of 2008," new mortgages that are offered by FHA-approved lenders will refinance abusive loans at a significant discount for homeowners facing difficulty meeting their mortgage payments.


“Property values decline sharply when a home in the neighborhood is foreclosed upon. In order to stabilize neighborhoods, we must take actions to prevent foreclosures. This proposal will help provide much-needed relief for people on the brink of foreclosure, keeping families in their houses and neighborhoods financially stable.”

---

I don't see how ACORN benefits from this.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Aggie Hoopsfan

Slushing off 20% of any profits for any special interest groups or special trust is a poison pill.

Weren't we hearing from Dems that no special interests should benefit from this and we should get it done for the good of the nation?

I must have missed the part where they care about the good of the nation, but only if they can hook up some special interests in the process.

Eh, fuck it. No one's going to change their minds anyway.

---

It didn't go to ACORN. It went to this:

Quote:

---

A summary of the legislation is below:



The “HOPE for Homeowners Act of 2008" creates a new program within FHA to back FHA-insured mortgages to distressed borrowers. The new mortgages offered by FHA-approved lenders will refinance abusive loans at a significant discount for homeowners facing difficulty meeting their mortgage payments.



The program is built on five principles:

Long-term Affordability. The program is built on the idea, expressed by Federal Reserve Chairman Bernanke, that creating new equity for troubled homeowners is likely to be a more effective way to avoid foreclosures. New loans will be based on a family’s ability to repay the loan, ensuring affordability and sustainable homeownership.
No investor or lender bailout. Investors and/or lenders will have to take significant losses in order to benefit from the proceeds of the loans refinanced with government insurance. However, these losses would be less than the losses associated with foreclosure.
No windfall for borrowers. Borrowers will share their new equity and future appreciation equally with FHA. Borrowers will pay for the FHA insurance.
Voluntary Participation. This will be a voluntary program. No servicers will be compelled to participate.
Restore confidence, liquidity, and transparency. Credit markets are fearful and frozen in part because banks and other financial institutions do not know what their subprime mortgages and related securities are worth. The uncertainty is forcing lenders to hoard capital and stop the lending necessary for economic growth. This program will create certainty and get markets flowing again.


Program Administration. The new program will be overseen by a Board made up of the Secretary of HUD, the Secretary of the Treasury, and the Chairman of the Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation (FDIC). The Board will have the authority to develop standards within the framework of the legislation.



Eligible Borrowers. Only owner-occupants will be eligible for the new FHA-insured mortgage. No investors or investor properties will qualify. The Board will establish other eligibility criteria, including criteria designed to determine whether borrowers can afford their existing loans.



New Loan Amount. The size of the new FHA-insured loan will be determined by:

The lesser of the amount the borrower can afford to repay, as determined by the current affordability requirements of FHA, taking into account the amount of income available to the family after basic expenses are paid (residual income); or,
The amount of the existing loan minus a discount established through an auction process established by the Board. The auction process will allow for bulk refinances, at a discount, of eligible loans. The federal government will not take possession of the mortgages.
The Board will have flexibility to change the affordability standards to suit circumstances.
In either case, FHA will not insure more than 90% of the current value of the home. Loans must be 30-year, fixed rate loans.


Equity Sharing. In order to avoid a windfall to the borrower created by the new 90% loan-to-value FHA-insured mortgage, the borrower must share the newly-created equity and future appreciation equally with FHA. This obligation will continue until the borrower sells the home or refinances the FHA-insured mortgage. Moreover, the homeowner’s access to the newly created equity will be phased-in over 5 years.



Existing Subordinate Liens. Before participating in this program, all subordinate liens must be extinguished. This will have to be done through negotiation with the first lien holder.



Qualified Safe Harbor. The legislation provides servicers with an incentive to participate in the program by offering a safe harbor against legal liability.



Funding. The Act provides for $20 billion in credit subsidy, which is expected to insure new, affordable loans that refinance approximately $400 billion in troubled mortgages.



Program Sunset. The program sunsets at the end of 2012. Any remaining funds, and future collections resulting from appreciation of FHA-insured mortgages made under this program, will be returned to the government.



New Foreclosure Prevention Affordable Housing Goal for Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac. In addition to the FHA option, the legislation requires the Secretary of HUD, together with the Secretary of the Treasury and the Director of OFHEO, to establish a new Foreclosure Prevention goal for Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac. The two enterprises would be required to purchase eligible loans at a discount, and write down those mortgages to help the families keep their homes. Mortgages would have to be written down according to the same criteria as loans eligible for FHA insurance under this legislation – based on ability to pay, taking residual income into account. OFHEO would be given the authority to require the enterprises to raise additional capital commensurate with the additional risk this new goal may pose.

---

Please tell me how these funds will end up in ACORN's pocket.

I don't see it.

Oh I get it, Aggie Hoopsfan is relying on an unsubstiated, biased blog to tell him the money went to ACORN, instead of first looking it up.

It's all so clear to me now.

Uncritical acceptence of biased sources explains so much. ;)

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by RandomGuy

It didn't go to ACORN. It went to this:




Please tell me how these funds will end up in ACORN's pocket.

I don't see it.

---

ACORN receives a ton of funding out of the National Housing Trust Fund. I'm sorry you're apparently blind.


Manny, I agree with you. Like I said, I'm not enthused about the Republican bill. As to the profits, here's my problem: if there are any, they shouldn't be going to any special interest groups. Any and all profits should be applied towards our national debt (agreed it's a drop in the bucket, but we've got to start somewhere).

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by RandomGuy

Oh I get it, Aggie Hoopsfan is relying on an unsubstiated, biased blog to tell him the money went to ACORN, instead of first looking it up.

It's all so clear to me now.

Uncritical acceptence of biased sources explains so much. ;)

---

I've got to go back to work, but a quick google showed ACORN receiving several large grants from the Housing Trust Fund.

And unlike you, I don't have my head in the sand about ACORN. They're a shitty organization and are under investigation in several states for fraud, particularly using federal funds for things other than housing assistance programs and also double registering people to vote.

But hey, I'm sure they could come out and say 10% of the profits would be going to Ahmedinidumbass in Iran and you'd still defend the Dems for it.

In your original post, you quote the following....

Quote:

---

Twenty percent of the money that should go to retire debt that will be created to solve this problem winds up in a housing organization called ACORN that is an absolute ill-run enterprise, and I can’t believe we would take money away from debt retirement to put it in a housing program that doesn’t work.

---

That's not true according to the bill you posted.

Quote:

---

1.

DEPOSITS.Not less than 20 percent of any profit realized on the sale of each troubled asset purchased under this Act shall be deposited as provided in paragraph (2).
2.

USE OF DEPOSITS.Of the amount referred to in paragraph (1)
1.

65 percent shall be deposited into the Housing Trust Fund established under section 1338 of the Federal Housing Enterprises Regulatory Reform Act of 1992 (12 U.S.C. 4568); and
2.

---

Sixty-five percent of twenty-percent of the profits (a total of 13% of the profits, NOT the money allocated for the bailout) goes to the National Housing Trust Fund. And unless every penny of the National Housing Trust Fund, plus an additional seven percent of profit that's not included in this bill, goes to ACORN, your post is substantially misleading.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by MannyIsGod

This is bullshit considering the House GOP is floating around a bill that is ENTIRELY different and pretty fucking horrible. LOL @ a capital gains repeal. No.

---

You seriously want to give 20% of this bailout to ACORN?? This and other groups like it are the ones that got us into the mess in the first place...They aren't bankers but they were shoving loans down the throat of the mortgage industry with little/no paperwork. If you notice, it was the companies like Countrywide, WaMu, Fannie, and Freddie that were tight with ACORN are all going under...but companies like Wells Fargo who fought against them as much as they could are doing OK.

http://www.lvbusinesspress.com/artic...ews/news03.txt

Quote:

---

Mortgage Programs
Through ACORN Housing, homebuyers can gain access to mortgage programs with lower interest rates, lower down payments, flexible underwriting guidelines and lower origination fees. With AHC, you can refinance for better terms through the innovative agreements we've formed with lenders.
With AHC you get:

• Lower down payments and closing costs.
• No Private Mortage Insurance.
• Banks generally require 3 months of mortgage payments in the bank at settlement.
• With our program, they don't, which allows you to buy a home sooner.
• Most banks won't count public assistance or voluntarily child support in determining if you'll qualify for a mortgage.
• With our program, all steady income counts.

---

http://acornhousing.org/TEXT/homebuying1.php

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by KenMcCoy

You seriously want to give 20% of this bailout to ACORN?? This and other groups like it are the ones that got us into the mess in the first place...They aren't bankers but they were shoving loans down the throat of the mortgage industry with little/no paperwork. If you notice, it was the companies like Countrywide, WaMu, Fannie, and Freddie that were tight with ACORN are all going under...but companies like Wells Fargo who fought against them as much as they could are doing OK.

http://www.lvbusinesspress.com/artic...ews/news03.txt


http://acornhousing.org/TEXT/homebuying1.php

---

Read the post directly above yours.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Aggie Hoopsfan

ACORN is the leading lobbyist group for the National Housing Trust Fund, off the top of my head something like 1/3 of all lobbying on behalf of that fund.

Pretty ignorant to pretend they wouldn't benefit from this.

Whether or not you think that they would be the sole or 'even primary' beneficiary, the point is NONE of the profits should go to prop up any funding for low income house purchases. Lending to people who did not have the assets to afford living in a home is what helped get us in this predicament in the first place.

---

I didn't say that a group that advocates for housing issues for the poor wouldn't benefit at all. I am saying that they stand to benefit a sight less than you seem to think.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Mr. Peabody

In your original post, you quote the following....



That's not true according to the bill you posted.


Sixty-five percent of twenty-percent of the profits (a total of 13% of the profits, NOT the money allocated for the bailout) goes to the National Housing Trust Fund. And unless every penny of the National Housing Trust Fund, plus an additional seven percent of profit that's not included in this bill, goes to ACORN, your post is substantially misleading.

---

You beat me to it.

No profits= no help.

Quote:

---

The Housing Trust Fund’s most important features are:

--It is a permanent program with a dedicated source of funding not subject to the annual appropriations process.

--At least 90% of the funds must be used for the production, preservation, rehabilitation, or operation of rental housing. Up to 10% can be used for the following homeownership activities for first-time homebuyers: production, preservation, and rehabilitation; down payment assistance, closing cost assistance, and assistance for interest rate buy-downs.

--At least 75% of the funds for rental housing must benefit extremely low income households and all funds must benefit very low income households.

---

Here is where ACORN probably enters the picture, with the paired Capital Magnet Fund as well.

35% of 20% of the profits, and a maximum of 15% of that.

Quote:

---

Capital Magnet Fund

Establishes a Capital Magnet Fund (CMF), which will be an account within the Community Development Financial Institutions (CDFI) Fund at the Department of Treasury, which is also allowed to receive additional funding from other sources.

Eligible recipients are Treasury-certified Community Development Financial Institution or non-profits that have at least one of their purposes the development or management of affordable housing.

Eligible recipients can apply for a competitive grant through the Treasury to help develop, preserve, purchase, and rehabilitate affordable housing for mostly extremely low, very low, and low income families. Grant funds may also be used for economic development or community service facilities in conjunction with affordable housing to help stabilize a low-income or rural area.
The CMF may also be used to provide loan loss reserves, to capitalize a revolving loan fund or an affordable housing fund, or for risk-sharing loans.
Applications for the competitive grants are required to include a detailed description of the types of affordable housing, economic, and community revitalization projects the institution would use the grant for, and the anticipated time frame they intend to use it.
No institution can be awarded more than 15% of all Capital Magnet funds available for grants in that year.

---

This would amount to 1% of any profit. $10M for each Billion of profit at maximum. With the stipulations:

Institutions receiving grants must spend the funds within two years from the date of receiving them.

Prohibited uses are political activities, advocacy, lobbying, counseling services, travel expenses, and endorsements of a particular candidate or party.

Each grantee must track its funds by issuing periodic financial and project reporting, and audit requirements. If the Secretary is not satisfied with the compliance, the grantee may receive fewer funds, have to pay the Treasury back, or have their grant terminated.

The Secretary must submit a periodic report to the Senate Committee on Banking, Housing, and Urban Affairs and the House Committee on Financial Services describing the activities these funds are being used for.
------------------------------

There is probably a cap on administrative expenses of recipient organizations as well, as there generally is.

Source link for information. Couldn't find an exact government website, but found what appears to be a reasonably reliable summary.

Looks like ACORN could also benefit from the main fund as well:

Quote:

---

It will be administered by HUD, which will provide grants to states, which will designate a state housing finance agency, housing and community development entity, a tribal designated housing entity, or any other qualified agency to receive the grants.

---

Quote:

---

Eligible recipients of grants from the states are organizations and agencies (for-profit and non-profit) that demonstrate 1) the experience and capacity to produce the kind of housing the program calls for, 2) the financial capacity to undertake the eligible activity, and 3) familiarity with federal, state, and local housing programs.

---

Quote:

---

Prohibited uses are political activities, lobbying, counseling, traveling and administrative expenses, or endorsements of a particular candidate or party.
Recipients must conduct and submit periodic financial and project reports, and conform to audit and record retention requirements. If a recipient misuses the funds allocated to it, it must reimburse their grant to the state within 12 months after their misuse is known. Either the Secretary of HUD or the state can determine if a grant is being misused.

---

Hardly a direct "gimmie" to Obama's old friends.

The Dems, and not just Obama, said that some assistance for the people hit by this crisis would be included.

This may be unacceptable to the Republicans as a "poison pill" but should hardly be a surprise, nor is it some sort of underhanded funding for PACs.

Calling it a poison bill is laughable. That's 2 or 3 executives severance bonus that the we the taxpayers will paying. I don't see repubs in an uproar over them keeping their bonuses after they illegally cooked the books. > $100M for a few rich people = no problem. $100M for poor people = bad, horrible, poison pill.

I was listening to Limbaugh just now and he was parroting this misleading information. He was saying -

"Folks, we cannot allow 20% of this bailout plan to go to ACORN and Democratic voting drives."

:bang

And of course, the callers were upset about it.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Mr. Peabody

I was listening to Limbaugh just now and he was parroting this misleading information. He was saying -

"Folks, we cannot allow 20% of this bailout plan to go to ACORN and Democratic voting drives."

:bang

And of course, the callers were upset about it.

---

Rush Limbaugh? Parrotting something he heard/read without doing any fact checking? Nah. Never happen. Liar.

Don't give a shit about doing our wooooorkkk. We just want to make more money. more money more money mo mo mo money.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by MannyIsGod

This is bullshit considering the House GOP is floating around a bill that is ENTIRELY different and pretty fucking horrible. LOL @ a capital gains repeal. No.

---

problem is liquidity, capital gains repeal brings in capital. However, I agree that I don't like that idea because that is tax revenue out the window. Money in the form of a loan comes back, if done right.

I would guess that the GOP could have allowed the proposed bankruptcy change instead. That would have made for a much cleaner bill. To get buy-in from the Democrats, not to mention to help address the problem from the foreclosure end, there needs to be something that helps distressed homeowners more directly than giving money to the Bear Sterns and Washington Mutuals on Wall Street.

As it's stated though, it sounds like a provision that would never happen, and if it did, it would be months, maybe years, down the road.

As always, I am grateful to our conservative posters for avoiding any sensationalism.

I don't understand how reducing the capital gains tax helps companies that are losing money or whose balance sheet is near bankruptcy. These companies won't be paying taxes anyway, so this benefit goes to profitable companies who don't need to bailed out. How this eases the credit crunch is baffling to me. It sounds more like an unrelated item that is added on to get votes on the main item, you know, like an earmark.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by MannyIsGod

Well until that is done forget this repeal the capital gains tax bullshit.

---

I disagree. Thing is, without he capitol gains tax, profits are more promising. We don't need this $700 trillion. In fact, it's only about half the money needed to fix it properly. Without fixing it properly, and removing the regulations that cause it, it if a total waste of money. It will just happen again, especially if we bail them out. They will then say, "oh, don't fear. They had to bailed us out in 2008, they will have to again."

Back to the capitol gains. Other copmanies will invest their money into these banks if they can see a future profit. Capitol gains taxes are a tax against investment.

Back to the 20% since that is really this theads purpose. Why is it even there? Take it out. If it's good legislation, create a separate bill for it. It doesn't do anything in this bailout but act as a poison pill, pork, and earmark.

Get that shit out!