Why do progressive Dems support slowdown?
Posted in RESPA reform By Matt Carter, Thursday, May 8, 2008.Looking at who signed the Hinojosa/Biggert letter, it's interesting to see the breakdown of 84 Democrats to 64 Republicans (and also that the total number of signatures -- 148-- falls short of the 226 gathered in 2004).
I suppose Republicans are a little reluctant to go against what is, after all, a Bush administration initiative. But then again, that was the case in 2004, as well.
What surprises me, I guess, is that if HUD's RESPA reform proposal really is consumer friendly, why are progressive Dems like Dennis Kucinich, Rahm Emanuel, Maxine Waters, Barbara Lee and Jesse Jackson Jr. looking to slow down implementation? (Emanuel is more of a centrist but very influential in the party).
I understand from the discussion on this group that not everybody sees HUD's latest proposal as good for consumers -- that it could create additional costs, or make it harder for small, independent companies to compete for their business. But there are also those who think the industry would like to preserve the status quo because it's more lucrative to generate referrals from RE pros than to compete for business from consumers based on your prices and services.
Anybody have any thoughts on where the Dems who are siding with the industry on slowing the process down might be coming from, and why Republicans are largely staying on the sidelines?
Add A Comment
You must login or register to post a comment.
Submitted by Diane Cipa on May 8, 2008 - 11:07am.
Well at the risk of making a few people Radically peeved.......
Without even knowing political connections, I just presumed these are the folks taking the "juice" from the title establishment. So, thanks, Matt, now we can further identify the juice gobblers.
I found it fascinating that ALTA and RESPRO almost immediately went underground with their RESPA reform efforts. My guess is that they did not find the new open and free blogosphere friendly to their selfish spinning.
Guess they're pretty satisfied that old fashioned pocket filling politics still kinda work.
Submitted by Dave Wirsching on May 8, 2008 - 11:22am.
Bloggers don't sign the paychecks at HUD, political appointees and the Congress do.
The folks at HUD, regardless of what they wish to do, have to answer to the boss. ALTA didn't go underground, they just focused on a strategy that would work.
They didn't write blog post after blog post reiterating their position, or start a petition for consumers. Politicians and political appointees could care less. They care about people who vote.
The DC lobbyists engaged professionals who are active in their industry to contact their elected representatives. The representatives responded. Nothing tricky, evil or underhanded about it.
Until blog hits replace voting for representatives that's how its going to be. Blog away - just don't expect an impact on politics.
Submitted by Matt Carter on May 8, 2008 - 11:22am.
Yes it would be interesting to look back at political contributions to Hinojosa and Biggert for starters, although you can't automatically assume any cause-and-effect.
ALTA has been open about at least some of their recent lobbying efforts, perhaps in part because they are using the Internet to organize them.
They have their draft comments up on their Web site, and are telling the world that they got almost 3,000 people to write their Congressional reps.
Submitted by Matt Carter on May 8, 2008 - 11:32am.
ALTA seems to be backing Dems more than Republicans. Looks like Hinojosa and Biggert have both gotten some money from ALTA over the years, but so have plenty of others who didn't sign (like Barney Frank).
Submitted by Diane Cipa on May 8, 2008 - 11:40am.
Yes, agreed, and what I will find fascinating to watch is whether or not politicians will play business as usual and listen to industry insiders and trade groups who can speak in huge numbers OR pay attention to the reality of the mortgage credit crisis and all the constituents who have been harmed by predatory lending and a general lack of disregard for the interests of consumers.
HUD's proposal is the best I have seen from the perspective of the consumer.
They've gone to great effort to test it with consumers. They've demonstrated concern for mortgage lenders and settlement service providers without taking their focus off solving a major problem.
Unless the lobbying of real estate professionals, mortgage industry insiders, and title insurance underwriters - who all have rotten egg on their faces right now - can overcome the pain and suffering of massive numbers of consumers who are crying foul and the near collapse of the credit based banking system, I would hope the politicians are playing their normal game of stringing along contributors and in the end will side with the populace.
Maybe not. I don't know and I guess we'll find out.
In the meantime, I'll continue to repeat myself as often as I can in support of the solution I believe is the best choice.