[StBernard] Is it Dems or GOPs?

[Westley Annis]

John R.,

When I spoke about the Community Reinvestment Act, I refer to its origins
back in 1977.  I was pointing it out as the "seed" where all this mess can
be traced back...and back then, it was Democratic Party controlled Congress
that passed it, along with Jimmy Carter signing off on it.  True, during the
Clinton Administration, when it was given new dentures, the GOP had the
majority.  But in defense of the GOP, I recall the salesmanship on selling
this to Congress...besides, they had already threatened to call any member
of Congress who opposed it a racist.  Not even GOP members wanted that
during reelection.

John Scurich
 

-----Original Message-----
Wendy:
 
I believe that your response may have been directed to me, as I provided
comments about the Community Reinvestment Act.  I do, however, agree with
and appreciate the response by John Scurich.  I also must point out that I
did not, in any way, indicate that I blamed the CRA.  I hope that I made it
clear that I blamed junior lenders for their interpretation of the CRA.
Also, in no way did I mention adjustable rates, much less blame them for
screwing the financial market, nor did I state that the CRA was passed by
democrats. (In fact, it was passed by Congress and the Senate which, at the
time, were controlled by Republicans).  As far as the "one article" I cited,
please remember that I stated that the article was a Pulitzer Prize winning
article and the catalyst for what later emeged as the CRA.  As far as the
numerous stories on CNN, may I suggest that you instead look at Fox News, as
CNN (in my opinion) still reflects the liberal views of its original owner,
Ted Turner.
 
You also mentioned that the CRA was exploited by Wall Street.  The CRA is a
law that applies to lenders, and while many lenders are, in fact, owned by
stockholders, if one can claim that it "was exploited", the claim would more
appropriately be aimed at Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac, as purchasers of
mortgage loans.  You have probably seen writings in "da parish.com" that
clearly prove that attempts to rein in the actions of Freddie Mac and Fannie
Mae, as proposed by Republicans, including John McCain, were denied by the
likes of Obama and Dodd, along with the Democrat controlled Congress.
 
I thoroughly agree with John's comments and I too have never made an auto
loan or mortgage loan without reading through the entire document prior to
signing it.  Throughout my lending career, I never once short-cutted the
disclosure process, even when it pissed the borrower off that I was taking
too long for the loan closing.  I always pointed out that their signature
was evidence that they read and UNDERSTOOD the documents they were signing.

 
Finally, I agree with John S's. comments regarding the length of automobile
loans.  While many lenders today offer 84 month car loans, I have a real
problem with that, especially considering that the quality of automobiles
usually means a trade-in somewhere in the neighborhood of 60 months.  As far
as ARM's, I believe that they had their place when fixed mortgage rates were
in the double digets, but even then, I believed that an ARM would only be
appropriate if it reverted to a fixed term at the 5 year mark.  At least
then, if rates had dropped, the borrower could choose the going rate, but
would have some protection if fixed mortgage rates had risen.
 
I hope that my response does not come across offensively. I appreciate your
comments and those of everyone that shares their views.
 
John R.