Al-Jazeerah History  
	 
	
	
	Archives  
	 
	
	
	
	
	Mission & Name   
	 
	
	
	
	
	Conflict Terminology   
	 
	
	Editorials  
	 
	
	
	
	
	
	Gaza Holocaust   
	 
	
	
	Gulf War   
	 
	
	Isdood  
	 
	
	
	Islam   
	 
	
	
	News   
	 
	
	
	News Photos 
	  
	 
	
	
	Opinion  
	
	
	Editorials 
	  
	 
	
	
	
	
	US Foreign Policy (Dr. El-Najjar's Articles)   
	 
	
	
	www.aljazeerah.info
	  
      
       
      
        
        
     | 
     | 
    
     
      The Looming US Foreclosure Financial Crisis:
	   
	As the Fed Runs Out of Bullets, Local 
	Governments Are Stepping In  
	By Ellen Brown 
	Al-Jazeerah, CCUN, July 7, 2014   Mortgage debt overhang from the 
	housing bust has meant lack of middle-class spending power and consumer 
	demand, preventing the economy from growing. The problem might be fixed by a 
	new approach from the Fed. But if the Fed won’t act, counties will, as seen 
	in the latest developments on eminent domain and litigation over MERS.   
	Former Assistant Treasury Secretary
	
	Paul Craig Roberts wrote on June 25th that real US GDP growth for the 
	first quarter of 2014 was a negative 2.9%, off by 5.5% from the positive 
	2.6% predicted by economists. If the second quarter also shows a decline, 
	the US will officially be in recession. That means not only fiscal policy 
	(government deficit spending) but monetary policy (unprecedented 
	quantitative easing) will have failed. The Federal Reserve is out of 
	bullets.    Or is it? Perhaps it is just aiming at the wrong target. 
	  The Fed’s massive quantitative easing program was ostensibly designed 
	to lower mortgage interest rates, stimulating the economy. And rates have 
	indeed been lowered – for banks. But
	
	the form of QE the Fed has engaged in – creating money on a computer 
	screen and trading it for assets on bank balance sheets – has not delivered 
	money where it needs to go: into the pockets of consumers, who create the 
	demand that drives productivity.    Some ways the Fed could get money 
	into consumer pockets with QE, discussed in earlier articles, include
	
	very-low-interest loans for students and
	
	very-low-interest loans to state and local governments. Both options 
	would stimulate demand. But the biggest brake on the economy remains the 
	languishing housing market. The Fed has been buying up new issues of 
	mortgage-backed securities so fast that it now owns 12% of the mortgage 
	market; yet housing continues to sputter, largely because of the huge 
	inventory of underwater mortgages.    
	
	According to Professor Robert Hockett, who originated a plan to tackle 
	this problem using eminent domain, 40% of mortgages nationally are either 
	underwater or nearly so, meaning more is owed on the home than it is worth. 
	Seventy percent of homes that are deeply underwater wind up in default.  
	  Worse, second mortgages are due for a reset. Over the next several 
	years, principal payments will be added to interest-only payments on second 
	mortgages taken out during the boom years. Many borrowers will be unable to 
	afford the higher payments. The anticipated result is
	
	another disastrous wave of foreclosures.     The mortgage debt 
	overhang was the result of financial deregulation and securitization, which 
	created a massive housing bubble. When it inevitably burst, housing prices 
	plummeted, but mortgages did not. The resources of the once-great middle 
	class were then diverted from spending on consumer goods to trying to stay 
	afloat in this sea of debt. Without demand, stores closed their doors and 
	workers got laid off, in a vicious downward spiral.    The glut of 
	underwater mortgages needs to be written down to match underlying assets, 
	not just to help homeowners but to revive the economy. However, most of them 
	cannot be written down, because they have been securitized (sold off to 
	investors) in complicated trust arrangements that legally forbid 
	renegotiation, even if all the parties could be found and brought to 
	agreement.   Reviving the HOLC   The parties themselves cannot 
	renegotiate, but the Fed could. The Fed is already voraciously buying up 
	mortgage-backed securities. What it is not doing but could is to target 
	underwater mortgages and renegotiate them after purchase, along the lines of 
	the 
	Home Owners' Loan Corporation (HOLC) created during the New Deal.    
	The HOLC was a government-sponsored corporation created in 1933 to revive 
	the moribund housing market by refinancing home mortgages that were in 
	default. To fund this rescue mission without burdening the taxpayers, the 
	HOLC issued bonds that were sold on the open market. Although 20% of the 
	mortgages it bought eventually defaulted, the rest were repaid, allowing the 
	HOLC not only to rescue the home mortgage market but to turn a small profit 
	for the government.     In 2012, Senator
	
	Jeff Merkley of Oregon proposed the large-scale refinancing of 
	underwater mortgages using an arrangement similar to the HOLC’s. Bonds would 
	be issued on the private bond market, capitalizing on today’s very low US 
	government cost of funds; then underwater mortgages would be bought with the 
	proceeds.    For the bonds to be appealing to investors, however, they 
	would need to be at 2-3% interest, the going rate for long-term federal 
	bonds. This would leave little cushion to cover defaults and little 
	reduction in rates for homeowners.    The Fed, on the other hand, 
	would not have these limitations. If it were to purchase the underwater 
	mortgages with QE, its cost of funds would be zero; and so would the risk of 
	loss, since QE is generated with computer keys.    Finance attorney
	
	Bruce Cahan has another idea. If the Fed is not inclined to renegotiate 
	mortgages itself, it can provide very-low-interest seed money to capitalize 
	state-owned banks, on the model of the Bank of North Dakota. These 
	publicly-owned banks could then buy up mortgage pools secured by in-state 
	real estate at a discount off the face amount outstanding, and refinance the 
	mortgages at today’s low long-term interest rates.   The Eminent 
	Domain Alternative   The Fed has the power (particularly if given a 
	mandate from Congress), but so far it has not shown the will. Some cities 
	and counties are therefore taking matters into their own hands.   
	Attracting growing interest is Professor Bob Hockett’s eminent domain plan, 
	called a “Local Principal Reduction program.” As described by
	the Home Defenders League:
	   The city works with private investors to acquire a set of the 
	worst, hardest to fix underwater mortgages (especially “Private Label 
	Securities” of PLS loans) and refinances them to restore home equity. If 
	banks refuse to cooperate, cities may use their legal authority of eminent 
	domain to buy the bad mortgages at fair market value and then reset them to 
	current value.    This plan was initially
	
	pursued by San Bernardino County, California.
	
	Then Richmond, California, took up the charge, led by its bold Green 
	Party mayor Gayle McLaughlin. Now some councilmen have gotten on the 
	bandwagon in New York City, a much larger turf that encroaches directly on 
	Wall Street’s. At a
	
	news conference on June 25th, New York City Council members and housing 
	advocacy groups called on the mayor to use the eminent domain option to help 
	underwater homeowners in distressed areas.   The latest breaking news 
	on this front involves the City of San Francisco, which will be voting on a 
	resolution involving eminent domain on July 8th. The resolution states in 
	part:    That it is the intention of the Board of Supervisors to 
	explore joining with the City of Richmond in the formation of a Joint Powers 
	Authority for the purpose of implementing Local Principal Reduction and 
	potentially other housing preservation strategies . . . .   The MERS 
	Trump Card   If the eminent domain plan fails, there is another way 
	local governments might acquire troubled mortgages that need to be 
	renegotiated. Seventy percent of all mortgages are now held in the name of a 
	computer database called MERS (Mortgage Electronic Registration Systems). 
	Many courts have held that
	
	MERS breaks the chain of title to real property. Other courts have gone 
	the other way, but they were usually dealing with cases brought by 
	homeowners who were held not to have standing to bring the claim. Counties, 
	on the other hand, have been directly injured by MERS and do have standing 
	to sue, since the title-obscuring database has bilked them of
	
	billions of dollars in recording fees.     
	
	In a stunning defeat for MERS, on June 30, 2014, the US District Court 
	for the Eastern District of Pennsylvania granted a declaratory judgment in 
	favor of County Recorder Nancy J. Becker, in which MERS was required to come 
	up with all the transfer records related to its putative Pennsylvania 
	properties. The judgment stated:   Defendants are declared to be 
	obligated to create and record written documents memorializing the transfers 
	of debt/promissory notes which are secured by real estate mortgages in the 
	Commonwealth of Pennsylvania for all such debt transfers past, present 
	and future in the Office for the Recording of Deeds in the County where such 
	property is situate.   IT IS STILL FURTHER ORDERED AND DECLARED that 
	inasmuch as such debt/mortgage note transfers are conveyances within the 
	meaning of Pennsylvania law, the failure to so document and record is 
	violative of the Pennsylvania Recording Statute(s).   Memorializing 
	all transfers past, present and future, probably cannot be done at this late 
	date – at least not legitimately. The inevitable result will be fatal breaks 
	in the chain of title to Pennsylvania real property. Where title cannot be 
	proved, the property escheats (reverts) to the state by law.   
	
	Only 29% of US homes are now owned free and clear, a record low. Of the 
	remaining 71%, 70% are securitized through MERS. That means that 
	class-action lawsuits by county recorders could potentially establish that 
	title is defective to 50% of US homes (70% of 71%).    If banks, 
	investors and federal officials want to avoid this sort of display of local 
	power, they might think twice about turning down reasonable plans for 
	solving the underwater mortgage crisis of the sort proposed by Senator 
	Merkley, Professor Hockett and Attorney Cahan.   ___________________ 
	Ellen Brown is an attorney, founder of the Public 
	Banking Institute and the author of twelve books, including the 
	best-selling Web of Debt. Her latest 
	book, The Public Bank Solution, 
	explores successful public banking models historically and globally. 
	  
       | 
     | 
     
      
      
      
      
     |