Arizona Leads the Way in Combating Foreclosure
Monday 01 March 2010
by: Dean Baker, t r u t h o u t | Op-Ed

The front door to a home in New Mexico. (Photo: jurek d.)
As the Obama administration works up its 12,487th plan for keeping underwater homeowners in their homes, Arizona's legislation may have the courage and good sense to do the obvious: let foreclosed homeowners stay in their home as renters. A bill was just introduced in legislature that would allow homeowners in houses that sell for less than the median price to remain in their home as renters for at least one year following foreclosure.
With this simple gesture the Arizona legislature could do more for the nation's underwater homeowners than all the brilliant DC policy wonks have managed to accomplish in the last three years with all their billions of dollars. The legislation would give low and moderate-income homeowners security in their homes. It doesn't make them jump through hoops and prove to bureaucrats that they were worthy. It doesn't require them genuflect before loans servicers or bankers.
This legislation would give homeowners the right to stay in their home. And bingo, every low and moderate-income homeowner in the state would know that the bank could not just throw them out on the street. If this passes the banks may also think more seriously about loan modifications, since they couldn't just throw a foreclosed homeowner out on the street. The proposals doesn't cost the taxpayers any money. It also doesn't require any government bureaucracy. It's easy to see why it's a non-starter in Washington.
Fortunately, this one doesn't have to go through Washington. Every state in the country could follow the lead of Arizona. If legislators are tired of seeing people thrown out on the street, if they are tired of seeing foreclosed homes sit vacant and ruin whole neighborhoods, they can just grant underwater homeowners in their state the same rights as are being proposed for homeowners in Arizona.
Of course, this will mean bucking the banks. The banks don't see any reason that they should suffer just because they made bad loans in the middle of the housing bubble. The banks feel it is especially unjust that they should suffer since they have spent so much money buying politicians who will gladly funnel them taxpayer dollars for mortgage modifications under the guise of "helping homeowners." The whole point is to keep the homeowners paying money as much as possible as long as possible.
Who cares that underwater homeowners will never get any equity in their homes and that they are paying far more on their mortgage than they would ever pay in rent? The interests of the banks can't be held hostage to the welfare of homeowners.
So what if homeowners' debt burdens are dragging down the economy? It is not the banks' problem if mortgage payments leave consumers little money to spend in other areas. Bank profits are more important than sustaining the recovery.
That may be the view in Washington, but this view may not win out in Arizona. At last a group of legislators are prepared to take serious action to address the problems created by the collapse of the housing bubble instead o just repeating silly platitudes about the importance of homeownership.
Of course, other legislatures can and should go beyond the provisions of the Arizona measure. This act ensures homeowners the right to stay in their home for one year with the possibility of staying longer on a month-to-month basis. It would be desirable to provide greater housing security to foreclosed homeowners by extending the right to rent over a longer period such as 5-10 years. This would give foreclosed homeowners enough time to get back on their feet, to let their kids finish their school and in other ways get their life in order. After all, it wasn't that fault that Alan Greenspan and Ben Bernanke were too dumb to recognize the largest housing bubble in the history of the world.
But the bill before the Arizona legislature would be a great step forward. Washington may be controlled by people who can only think of ways to help banks, but the Arizona action shows that at least in some states people can get elected who have other priorities. We should hope that this will be the first in a series of state level measures designed to really help homeowners.
Correction: This article has been corrected. The state specified is Arizona and not New Mexico as previously reported.

This work by Truthout is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-Noncommercial 3.0 United States License.



Comments
This forum is moderated by software. Please allow up to 15 minutes for your comments to go live and avoid posting the same comment multiple times.
This is bad advice, don't
Mon, 03/01/2010 - 14:01 — Anonymous (not verified)This is bad advice, don't pay the banks, and default. You owned the place, and now you need to rent it? Fu#k that, and once and for all F#$k Dean Baker, who refuses to engage the real criminals in the sub prime mortgage mess.
A better solution would be to allow Bankruptcy judges to lower principles on fraudulently appraised properties. Baker is a patsy, if he offends people across the street at the ABA or the Treasury Department he'll lose his rent money.
Stooge! Goo'bye FalseOut.
Dean Baker is part of the
Mon, 03/01/2010 - 14:04 — Anonymous (not verified)Dean Baker is part of the reason nothing is going to change, no financial reform, no help for the devasted and poor, just a so-called liberal hack being fed by the Ford Foundation. If he pisses off the ABA across the street, his ass is fired.
Dean was too stupid to see
Mon, 03/01/2010 - 14:07 — Anonymous (not verified)Dean was too stupid to see the housing bubble too. Dean should go work for the Heritage foundation, and rename TruthOut to "We whine and pretend we're progressive, but we bow to the Status Quo." Foreclose on Dean Baker, tell the Ford Foundation he's an avowed fool,
I feel your pain (above),
Mon, 03/01/2010 - 14:52 — Anonymous (not verified)I feel your pain (above), consider Counterpunch for a more realistic, less liberal counter point to liberal think tank blather.
No Obamavillas there, YET!
Mon, 03/01/2010 - 15:15 — Vic Anderson (not verified)No Obamavillas there, YET!
I do not know of the author,
Mon, 03/01/2010 - 15:24 — Chief (not verified)I do not know of the author, Dean Baker. Ad hominum attacks are out of place.
I give the New Mexico legislature credit for implementing a plan that may be a viable alternative for some people.
If someone owes a lot more than the house is worth, well, maybe walking away is an option to consider.
I am no fan of any bank or financial institution. I consider them leaches on society.
While the Obama
Mon, 03/01/2010 - 16:58 — Anonymous (not verified)While the Obama Administration's policy to bend over backward to achieve a compromise with the Repugnants may be a wise policy for healing the wounds of our society so people can start talking to each other; unfortunately, the policy is based on the assumption that the other side is capable of understanding about the LEADERS responsibility to making society a pleasant experience for people. It may not be possible to force a bunch of low IQ, self-others-loathing true believers comprehend the nature of society. Most extremest Repugnants seems to be the born-again types, the ones who live in 21st century but their minds are frozen in the first century when men lived like monkeys. In such a situation, Mr. Obama has shown that his party may have to force health reform. Albeit, it is not really a health REFORM, it is manna from heaven for insurance companies if we do not have a publicly run system competing with the obscene profits of the insurance maggots.
So instead of pretending you
Tue, 03/02/2010 - 00:07 — Anonymous (not verified)So instead of pretending you own the dump and paying the bank a fortune, you finally give up and agree to surrender dreams of ownership but still pay half a fortune. What a victory for the working class! Hoorah!
One also wonders where the rent money is gonna come from if one is unemployed.
I'm waiting for the state that has some balls and tells people to just stay in their houses for now. Once home prices settle to a reasonable level, mortgages can be reevalued. The banks can go flack themselves. Who cares if they die? Nobody in America has savings anyway. The financial system's prime purpose is vampirism. They bleed everybody not in the top percentile, everybody, everwhere on Earth, all the time, screw them and let them die.
The Democrats are too
Tue, 03/02/2010 - 01:21 — Anonymous (not verified)The Democrats are too spineless, fearful and self involved to go it alone and do what the VAST, OVERWHELMING MAJORITY OF VOTERS SENT THEM THERE TO DO... It seems now that they couldn't govern a school lunch even if their life depended on it... They have no collective smidgen of an ideology to guide them, and what they appear to have become is basically a --'Re-Election Machine based in the sales pitch--- "I'm not the ''''other guy''''...... How disappointing Democrats have turned out to be. After the last election, I feel like I need a shower and perhaps shelter from the Dark Rise of the CONservative Wacko Republican Shit Storm about to come because the Democrats came on like Gangbusters and turned out to be nothing more than an even shorter version of the easily sidestepped Maginot Line... AND SO... What WE THE (last on the list of anyone's considerations) PEOPLE seem left with now are.., The Imaginarium of Loosely Affiliated Smiley Faced Democrats and the Population of Completely Ruthless, Seething, Insane Republicans... And with both so totally grounded in self serving nonsense, what kind of choice is that..?
Baker is a very poor writer
Tue, 03/02/2010 - 08:54 — Anonymous (not verified)Baker is a very poor writer in times of crisis. Again, he cannot offend his paymasters - If he would write a one paragraph appeal to US regulators the "foreclosure crisis" would be brought to an end. Dean Baker cannot criticize powerful criminals: Tim Geithner, Larry Summers, John C. Dugan and so on. It's interesting the first poster mentioned the ABA, an organization intimate with regulators and with Wall Street. An organization recently devoted to validating loan shark attacks on Americans.
With the predictions
Tue, 03/02/2010 - 12:03 — Tony Cartman (not verified)With the predictions pointing more and more foreclosures, it's important that states know how to combat the situation. Arizona is giving an example..
Regards,
Tony
http://www.foreclosurelistings.com/
States can't really do much
Tue, 03/02/2010 - 12:57 — Anonymous (not verified)States can't really do much of anything. Most big banks are "regulated" by the Treasury. A better word would be "capitulated". In the few instances where an Attorney General has gone after an insititution is when they have stolen from investors. Homeless deadbeats don't matter.
Now, since the US Treasury has shown it's contempt for anyone other then Wall Street so it's unlikely a criminal like corporate lawyer John C Dugan will ever consider assisting people keep their homes. Which is just fine - this gives more work to brokers, agents and Banks, like the poster mentioned and advertised above.
Dean can always go get a job
Tue, 03/02/2010 - 13:17 — Anonymous (not verified)Dean can always go get a job at the neocon Washington Post, place is already the number one employer of vichy hacks, incapable of writing anything with honest depth and analysis.
Why would anyone,
Tue, 03/02/2010 - 13:19 — Anonymous (not verified)Why would anyone, particularly those who have paid down considerable principle ever consider a "rent" arrangement on a property that has plummeted in value? It's a contract, come get the house you a$$holes.
Dean Baker this article is a
Tue, 03/02/2010 - 20:16 — Anonymous (not verified)Dean Baker this article is a lil' disapointing. This rentin' deal doesn't seem like it works out so well. Re-evalua tion on mortgage or include it in bankruptcy.
Maybe credit card debt should also be re-included in bankruptcy.
This is a ridiculous idea.
Wed, 03/03/2010 - 02:55 — Eric P (not verified)This is a ridiculous idea. Not because of what I've read in comments that former homeowners (poor victims of bad financial advice which they freely followed), but because these tenants would be paying rent that doesn't reflect market value, but what the bank wants to get to recover their losses. I suppose there is something magnanimous about not putting a foreclosed homeowner on the street, but there's not wisdom in this plan at all. And what a logistical headache for banks! No bank wants to own property, and they most certainly don't want to be landlords. They lend money and earn interest and sell assets to make more loans, that's it. People may have no sympathy for the banks, but as someone who sells mortgages, I can tell you that we front line people are doing a job and earning livings just like everyone else. There's not a single person I've met in the last few years who didn't honestly want to do a good job and make a good credit decision. Competition among lenders sometimes forces them to make loans they wouldn't ordinarily make, and the sad thing is these loans sometimes come back to bite them. It costs billions, not just for the homeowner who loses his home, but to the bank, the employees who lose their jobs (and maybe their homes too!).
We have to stop the blaming and start looking for solutions, but this is not one of them.
The poster above has no
Wed, 03/03/2010 - 08:23 — Anonymous (not verified)The poster above has no clue, simply no clue,
Fannie Mae underwrote impossible loans, bigger Financial Institutions bet against them,
since this quasi-government underwriter would be bailed and rescued, no one really cared whether anyone could actually "pay back". Such a narrow view of what actually happened, as if the brokers, realtors, appraisers were all concerned about regulations that didn't exist,
They were concerned only with closing a deal,
and they did adhere to regulations that were crafted by so-called regulators, like John C Dugan at the OCC in Treasury, meaning the banks are actively protected by engaging in loan shark activity. Does the poster above consider Canada? And why "mysteriously" they
didn't have a subrpime crisis?
We absolutely need to continue to place blame where it belongs. And in yet another disservice to the whole problem, Baker only seems to focus on the plight of the victim.
There are a number of techniques to prevent blame being cast onto the true purveyors of this outrageous theft, again Baker cannot/will not defend homeowners, the middle class, and millions of Americans whose lives in many ways have been hurt by the actions of gamblers. He's outlived his time, his half-assed liberal gurgitations simply have no place in the reality that confronts Americans miles away from the cushy K street corridor. Why not consider - just stop and consider where Dean gets his funding? Don't those same foundations profit from dropping bombs? (yes)
Is there any doubt that the
Wed, 03/03/2010 - 08:51 — editingbaker (not verified)Is there any doubt that the Fed knew exactly what the Bush administration was up to? Is there any doubt that the OCC's actions resulted in tens of thousands--if not millions--of homeowners losing their homes to foreclosure?
There's no doubt at all. People were getting fleeced in broad daylight. As the primary regulator responsible for overseeing the financial system an preventing "unfair, abusive and deceptive practices", the Fed could have intervened at any time and stopped the predatory lending and exploitation. Instead, they sat on their hands and let the larceny continue uninterrupted, which proves that Greenspan and Bernanke are either criminally negligent in executing their regulatory duties or complicit in aiding and abetting the banks and other financial institutions in the sale of fraudulent loans to investors and homeowners. Which is it? There needs to be an investigation to find out. - Mike Whitney
TO BAD "This legislation"
Sun, 03/14/2010 - 06:54 — Donald Byrd (not verified)TO BAD "This legislation" AND "A bill was just introduced in legislature" WAS NEVER GIVEN A NAME. WHAT BILL OR LAW ARE YOU GUYS TALKING ABOUT. LET ME HELP YOU.
http://www.whitehouse.gov/blog/2010/02/19/helping-hardest-hit-housing-markets
http://www.azleg.gov/FormatDocument.asp?inDoc=/legtext/49leg/2r/bills/hb2626p.htm
Maybe this will help those who aren't scared of a little reading something of substance. Instead of an article that doesn't include REAL TRUTH AND INFORMATION!!!!!!!!!!
This is great for the state.
Fri, 03/19/2010 - 10:59 — Tony Cartman (not verified)This is great for the state. Arizona knows that the situation is complicated and for this is making an effort to make things better