How People Voted
 |
 |
38% For, 62% Against
Take Action
  |
Alert Your Friends and Colleagues |
  |
Write Your Representative in Congress |
| Save & Share | |
 |
del.icio.us |
 |
Digg |
 |
|
 |
|
 |
|
 |
Yahoo! |
Discussion: S. 2636, The Foreclosure Prevention Act of 2008 (27 comments ↓)
- This item is from the 110th Congress (2007-2008) and is no longer current. Comments, voting, and wiki editing have been disabled, and the cost/savings estimate has been frozen.
No discussion on this article yet.
Learn More
Visitor Comments 
Jim
February 15, 2008, 11:44pm (report abuse)Though I have not found the text for this bill, s.2136 I have read. I hope that this bill is effective in resolving the problem with title 11 section 1322(b)(2) and people that are facing financial challenges caused by escalating loan payments beyond their means and unsustainable into loans which help with keeping in homes with sustainable loans. We need the above mentioned clause which is preventing people from completing successful chapter 13 plans stricken. Also the previous bills in the house and Senate are getting me confused. How can we get any legislation passed in a timely manner to be effective if we keep introducing bill upon bill with the basic subject matter covered repeatedly. We only need one wheel and all the resources available to help chisel it round for forward momentum. We currently have about as many versions of this bill as a semi and trailer has wheels.
Jim
February 18, 2008, 9:08pm (report abuse)I read the bill. It is better to pass title IV as a separate measure as s.2136 is already under way.
It would also make it easier to determine what is going on with legislation.
If a value-pak form of the legislation needs passed to get title IV passed instead of the bill already under way, we need to determine if we want all of the other measures this bill includes.
Jim
February 27, 2008, 9:18pm (report abuse)It is reassuring that two of the perspective Presidential candidates along with well known Senators are co-sponsoring this legislation. Title IV is my main concern but the other provisions are valuable also.
Jim
March 22, 2008, 11:31am (report abuse)It is apparent that this legislation is being held up from proceeding due to partisan crippling regarding legislation that would help those living on the lower end and within the middle of economic means.
It appears that is is definitely needed to rid the Senate and the House of members who are stalling this legislation in order to fight the majority and make it look as Democratic members are not doing enough to protect their constituents.
It is needed to reduce the number of Republican party members in both the Senate and the House if Republicans do not want to consider this helpful legislation.
Jim
April 4, 2008, 10:33am (report abuse)I hear a lot of conversations where Title IV was stripped from this legislation by 10 bought and still being paid for Democratic Senators along with the usual pay rolled GOP Senators and an Independent (yea, independent!) Senator.
Without this title being re-instated as the legislative bickering and stalling trickles through to an ending compromise, this legislation would do very little to prevent Foreclosures. It would enrich banks, give home builders tax rebates but very little in regards to preventing massive home displacement.
The greed and disregard for the struggling homeowner needs to be addressed. Political party expectations pretty much limit straight party considerations.
Jim
April 4, 2008, 10:35am (report abuse)continued:
Either the political parties must rid their ranks of Senators who have financial gain and self profiteering motives out of Congress or the majority party will no longer be able to show that they are for their constituents, not their second (or first) job of taking financial personal gains over legislating for the peoples protection.
Jim
April 6, 2008, 11:18pm (report abuse)Also, wouldn't a bill that is titled foreclosure prevention need to contain something that prevents foreclosures from happening?
This bill without Title 11 included should be retitled "After Foreclosure cleanup" or "The banks own the politicians" or as our very disastrous Administration branch, simply called "SO!" or maybe "The other Bush will veto bill!"
Jim
April 6, 2008, 11:21pm (report abuse)Clarification:
Inclusion of Title IV regarding the exception in section 1322(b)(2) of title 11.
Kathy
April 10, 2008, 4:31pm (report abuse)We purchased a foreclosed home Dec. 28th 2007 that had been on the market 2+ years. Do you think we would qualify for the $7k tax credit? Or will that only be for people buying foreclosed properties beginning when the bill is entered into law?
Jim
April 10, 2008, 7:35pm (report abuse)The tracking for this legislation is tough to follow. I read that it is a $3500 per year for 2 years. You might have better luck searching for $7000 tax incentive for properties in foreclosure.
I believe that it is for properties bought after the date legislation is approved. I believe the credit will face opposition from legislators on both sides.
Hopefully someone following that provision answers your inquiry.
Title IV is the portion of this bill that mostly holds my interest in this legislation.
Charles
April 10, 2008, 10:05pm (report abuse)The $7000 tax Incentive for properties in foreclosure. I will make my senator, Chris Dodd, pay for this. Once Connecticut voters find out what he has done (and I will tell them), he will NOT be re-elective 1010.
I can't express in words how angry I am. They don't have words vile enough in the english language
Charles
April 10, 2008, 10:06pm (report abuse)The $7000 tax Incentive for properties in foreclosure is SICK. I will make my senator, Chris Dodd, pay for this. Once Connecticut voters find out what he has done (and I will tell them), he will NOT be re-elective 1010.
I can't express in words how angry I am. They don't have words vile enough in the english language
Jim
April 11, 2008, 8:52am (report abuse)If this incentive is for properties not yet foreclosed upon, then the $7000 tax incentive might be appropriate and in line with preventing foreclosure.
If this proposal is geared at post foreclosure cleanup the proposal would only help bank and would be not be in line with the title of the bill.
I agree, I would not even put such a provision in the bill. It is dastardly to even encourage further foreclosures with ta incentives. Regarding Dodd, I thought he ws set to help families.
Jim
April 13, 2008, 12:50pm (report abuse)Senators fighting this legislation. All Republican senators against. Following Democrats(?) and Independent Senator listed below:
Lieberman (ID-CT)
Baucus (D-MT)
Byrd (D-WV)
Carper (D-DE)
Johnson (D-SD)
Landrieu (D-LA)
Lincoln (D-AR)
McCaskill (D-MO)
Nelson (D-NE)
Tester (D-MT)
Resource:
HR 3221 - votes to table amendment.
solution:
Remove all listed Democrats and Independent and every Republican Senators from the Banking Sente
lLL
April 16, 2008, 7:27pm (report abuse)I LOOKED INTO REFIANCING MY HOME,I;VE LIVED IN FOR 15YRS.I;M A LITTLE IFFY BECAUSE MY HOME IS ALMOST PAID FOUR. 10YRS TO GO.IF THE ECONOMY DOESN;T CHANGE SOME I JUST MIGHT TO BITE THAT BULLET.
Adam
May 9, 2008, 1:06pm (report abuse)The $7,000 tax incentive is geared toward post foreclosure cleanup like Jim mentioned. However, only purchasers using the home as a principal residence can take advantage of the credit, so it's unlikely that banks will benefit from this. My only question is that, since the banks will likely be the purchasers at foreclosure sales anyway, is the tax credit available to home buyers purchasing from the bank after foreclosure? If so, it seems like a pretty good provision that could encourage quick turnarounds to families who might not otherwise be looking to buy. If not, it seems like a provision that won't help anyone (banks or individual buyers).
Gary
June 25, 2008, 9:53am (report abuse)The $7000 incentive is written to encourage perspective buyers to purchase a foreclosed home and clean out this part of the real estate inventory. A foreclosed property can only be termed as "foreclosed" if the bank already has taken it back from the original owner. So the $7,000 incentive will only directly help buyers of these homes. This provision benefits the banks only by removing the property from their REO inventory which as we all know is a "cost" to the bank/mtg company. Given the entitlements of this bill, this provision is imo helpful to quickly clearout foreclosed properties within communities so that they do not continue to drag the values of the houses around them down.
Brenda
June 27, 2008, 9:22pm (report abuse)Maybe someone can point in the right direction and educate me on any chances I might have to refinance my home mortgage that I and my two sons have lived for over 8 years. Long story short, I had a 6 percent interest rate, lost my job and went into another field, better benefits less pay, My pay was cut in half, I fell behind on all my bills and was consistenly paying late, it was ruining my credit, I requested a refi, and was granted one at 9.125 percent (which is killing me) and was told I would only have to pay that for 12 months, prove I make payments on time, then I would be able to refinance. When 12 months came along which was Nov. 07 I was told now that I could not refinance due to the housing crisis and the stricter guidelines although I brought my credit score up.
Acedebase
July 2, 2008, 1:17pm (report abuse)This bill is an outrage and an insult to every fiscally responsible American that has been shut out of the housing market because they were not willing to give into impulse buying, and irresponsible lending and borrowing practices. Everyone involved in the housing correction is to blame - the lender AND the borrower. To allow this bill to pass means that no American need be held accountable for their own greed and folly - I'll go and purchase a house 3 times more expensive than my income can afford because your tax dollars will bail me out. OUTRAGE!!
Justin
July 11, 2008, 7:28pm (report abuse)I am all for the tax incentive for foreclosed homes. I recently bought a foreclosed home so hopefully they'd backdate for credit but nonetheless foreclosures suck the life out of the market decreasing everyones value. The faster the number of them are reduced the better for the overall market. We'll see I'm fine with it either way good arguments on both sides.
Joyce
July 30, 2008, 10:51am (report abuse)There is so much more to the provisions of the bill which most people do not understand. One must follow the money, start to finish in such a transaction. Having said that, we are working on it as we speak, but the unknowns easily be defined, it is the result of the unknowns that may well go against the taxpayer who will now be the new noteholders for the FHA GUARANTEED LOANS. Reducing the inventory is critical of course, but when we do, we must measure what a lender discount represents - careful or we may be commited for some very far reaching debt and liability not anticipated in the way of taxpayer liability. I can assure you the banks know that we are assuming their debt and minimizing their exposure on their delinquent and REO properties. Too many unknowns at this juncture.
Joyce
July 30, 2008, 10:59am (report abuse)I, personally was against the $7,000 tax credit as this only decreases the tax revenue which God knows we are going to need over the next ten years with these latest spending progams. If the underwriting is quality generated, the help the first time home buyer get in with a 100% loan. Under the right circumstances, this will work. We cannot keep giving away the store. Now, since they are going ahead with the $7000 tax credit, it can only be used to purchase reo's effective with the progam start date. This could change I presume but we will see.
Joyce
July 30, 2008, 11:04am (report abuse)For anyone refinancing or attempting to speak to a representative of this program, you must some how make sure you understand the payback liability in the event you wish to sell your home and that starts from day one, after your refinance. It appears you may automatically owe the government some money if you elect to sell the house and somehow derive some equity out of it. This may not make a difference to you, but you need to understand it. You may find that you are more easily refinanced than you first thought. Learn all you can about the payback, Most people stay in their homes no more than 7 years, but that measurement too has probably changed..
Joyce
July 30, 2008, 11:08am (report abuse)I need to correct the statement about $7000 tax credit to say that a way of reducing foreclosures could be provided by first time home buyers that quality credit driven and provide them with a 100% loan. These of course would not be considered FHA LOANS, but normal conventional loans which FNMA AND FHLMC would make. Just a thought. I don't want everyone to think I have lost it here, but after 40 years in the business, it can help in many cases to reduce it. For example, we used it in the 80's and none of those loans ran into any trouble whatsoever. It is when we jumped to l996, Clinton's administration, that subprimers entered the picture.
Don
July 30, 2008, 3:15pm (report abuse)I am an accountant who works for Homebuilding clients. At one time there were provisions for allowing a 4-year lookback period as opposed to the 2-year period that has been in existence. Does anyone know if this provision is in the passed bill?
Sai
August 18, 2008, 5:58pm (report abuse)How may I ascertain if the house I bought from the bank (in Jan of 2008) is a foreclosure for these tax break purposes ? Also, what paper work do I need to put together to apply for this ? I know that the bank repossessed this house from its old owner but I am having a difficult time talking to any one who is even aware of this tax credit.
Thanks in advance for your response.
110-289
August 20, 2008, 9:21pm (report abuse)See public law 110-289 for the passed into law version.CBJBE
RSS Feeds for This Bill
Keep yourself updated on user contributions and debates about this bill! (Learn more about RSS.)
From the Blog
The Housing Bill and WashingtonWatch.com Statistics
One of the pleasures of running a site like WashingtonWatch.com is seeing where the information we produce travels on the Web, and all the communities that use it. A current example is this story on DSNews.com. What is DSNews.com you ask? Well, it...