Category: Politics

Glenn Simpson reports in today’s Journal on how lenders lobbied against state anti-predatory lending laws, with the result of worsening the subprime crisis. While the federal government was asleep at the wheel, or worse, worshiping the “miracle of instant credit,” states were trying to protect their residents from being harangued by jackals promoting risky or questionable lending plans. $20M in donations, however, made it possible to roll back protections:

During the housing boom, the subprime industry succeeded at more than just writing mortgages. It also shot down efforts by some states to curtail risky lending to borrowers with spotty credit.

Ameriquest Mortgage Co., until recently one of the nation’s largest subprime lenders, was at the center of those battles. Working with a husband-and-wife team of Washington lobbyists, it handed out more than $20 million in political donations and played a big role in persuading legislators in New Jersey and Georgia to relax tough new laws. Those victories, in turn, helped blunt efforts by other states to crack down on reckless lending, critics of the industry contend.

[…]

Federal lawmakers didn’t pose much of a threat to the subprime industry in recent years. Members of Congress received at least $645,000 in donations from Ameriquest and large sums from other big subprime lenders, Federal Election Commission records indicate. They debated new oversight of the industry, but took no action.

The states were a different matter. “What seemed to be developing in the states was that there was going to be a wave of legislation,” Mr. Andrews, the lobbyist, said in an interview.

In 2001, Georgia passed the Fair Lending Act. Among other things, it required lenders to be able to prove that a refinancing of any home loan less than five years old would provide a “tangible net benefit” to the borrower. Ameriquest began lobbying the state legislature to remove that provision, arguing the standard was too vague. Other lenders also complained about the law, as did Fannie Mae, the giant buyer of mortgages.

“Ameriquest was very, very engaged,” recalls Georgia state Sen. Vincent Fort, who authored the law. Mr. Fort says that Adam Bass, a lawyer for Ameriquest, lobbied him directly. The state senator says he accused Mr. Bass of victimizing poor minorities, which angered Mr. Bass. A spokesman for Ameriquest, speaking on Mr. Bass’s behalf, says the meeting “was a very candid conversation about complex policy issues.”

[…]

The subprime industry mounted a campaign against the Fair Lending Act. Within months, the Georgia Senate voted 29-26 in favor of a new law that eliminated for nearly all loans the tangible-net-benefit requirement opposed by the industry. The state House passed the law, 148-25.

Bill Kristol will soon have a weekly column in the New York Times. I have to admit, I’m really excited.

You see, Bill Kristol, or as we like to call him Krissandra has a nearly supernatural ability to be wrong. While some might think that the NYT has lost all credibility by hiring someone as unrepentantly incorrect as Kristol, I think they’re providing a valuable service.

After all, if we see what Bill Kristol has to say, we always will know that we should do the opposite. He’s not a worthless idiot, he’s actually a very useful one, simply because he’s so consistently incorrect.

Reiterating our previous call for this debate, I’d like to point out two articles that have come out in the past day, that may address some of the negative commentary here.

The first is Chris Mooney and Lawrence Krauss at LA Times.

The second, by Sheril Kirshenbaum and Matthew Chapman at HuffPo. Note, I consider the Huffington Post a den of denialist iniquity, supporting the lies of Chopra, Kirby and various other conspiracy mongers. But I will consider this an act of saint-like walking amongst the sinners to spread the good word of science. Further, she does a pretty good job addressing some of the early complaints about the plan.

Generally, I can sum up my commenters complaints that this is not a feasible idea based on the fact it wouldn’t benefit most of the presidential candidates, or that debates themselves are not valuable as they are just press conference, or more simply, what kinds of questions would we ask? Is it just going to be an exam? Finally Chris at completely misses the point and has a mixture of complaints ranging from “science should not mix with politics” and that we already know where the candidates stand.

Sheril and Matthew point out:

One of these is the suggestion that the candidates simply are not equipped to talk about science. We disagree. The candidates do not need a degree in economics in order to talk about the economy, nor do they require one in science in order to discuss science.

We are not proposing a pop quiz or an argument, but rather, we are suggesting an illuminating debate. The electorate should have the opportunity to hear the candidates discuss their policy positions on our many scientific and technological challenges, what their ethical positions are in relation to them, and what their aspirations are.

But this does not finish the job. Here’s my arguments for why you critics should stop being such a buzz kill.

Science and politics are already intertwined, ignoring the problem will not make it go away or prevent it from getting worse.

It would not necessarily be bad for the hyper-religious candidates, because their constituency may actually be thrilled to see them reject science for denialist nonsense like ID or AGW denialism. It will give them the opportunity to stand up for their popular pseudoscience if they like. Although they more be more cautious depending on who makes up the panel. It might be quite interesting.

As far as the publicity stunt/fake debate criticisms that is inevitable with any debate but that doesn’t mean the debates aren’t helpful. For one thing, this emphasizes that science has become important enough to have a public discussion, no matter how orchestrated it might end up being. Second, even though we supposedly know where the candidates stand, making them say out loud what they believe, ideally to a panel of Nobelists asking questions, may diminish their lack of embarrassment in announcing their love of anti-science ideas. Forcing candidates to evaluate science and be publicly challenged by experts may make them refine and improve their positions. Rather than throwing the occasional bone to an interest group, they may have to develop a coherent set of ideas.

Finally, it makes the minority of Americans that think science is incredibly important a defined constituency that must be courted. We may be a minority, but we’re likely one of the largest minorities – those that accept science as fact. To be treated as a bloc increases our power.

All, Mark has been busy becoming a Dr. and I’ve been busy doing end-of-semester stuff at UC-B. So, sorry for the absenteeism. Maybe when Mark recovers from his hangover we’ll have more good content here. But until then, check out Lawrence O’Donnell (who is on HBO’s Big Love) rant on Mormonism. Ouch!

I can’t resist. South Park, All About the Morons.

You guys are so damn lucky. I want Al Franken to run in my state. That race is going to be a total blast. Not to say a showdown in Virginia between Mark Warner and one of the incompetent former Republican governors that bankrupted the state in the last decade won’t be entertaining, but a Franken run raises it to a new level.

I was shocked by this one statement in the article however:

“To think of him as a United States senator almost boggles anyone’s imagination,” said Ron Carey, the chairman of the state’s Republican Party. “So much of what he has said is vile and offensive — you can’t even quote it. I look at his words and that’s not how Minnesotans talk, not even in private conversation. His vile bomb throwing is so non-Minnesotan; he must have left his Minnesota roots in Hollywood and New York.”

Really? That’s the best they can do in a state that previously elected Jesse Ventura governor? Suggest the bogeyman of “Hollywood”?

And maybe I’m not familiar enough with the entire tome of Franken’s public statements, but has he really said so many things that are so foul they can’t even be quoted? Seriously I’m asking. Quote these horrific statements in my comments. My impression of Franken is that he’s actually quite judicious in his choice of words. He might be forceful, or call people “fat idiots”, but since that line is quoted in the article, what is it we’re missing that can’t be quoted? I smell slander.

Another sign the monkeys are running the zoo is the news that the head of consumer protection doesn’t want consumer protection.

The top official for consumer product safety has asked Congress in recent days to reject legislation that would strengthen the agency that polices thousands of consumer goods, from toys to tools.

On the eve of an important Senate committee meeting to consider the legislation, Nancy A. Nord, the acting chairman of the Consumer Product Safety Commission, has asked lawmakers in two letters not to approve the bulk of legislation that would increase the agency’s authority, double its budget and sharply increase its dwindling staff.

Ms. Nord opposes provisions that would increase the maximum penalties for safety violations and make it easier for the government to make public reports of faulty products, protect industry whistleblowers and prosecute executives of companies that willfully violate laws.

The measure is an effort to buttress an agency that has been under siege because of a raft of tainted and dangerous products manufactured both domestically and abroad. In the last two months alone, more than 13 million toys have been recalled after tests indicated lead levels of almost 200 times the safety ceiling.
…
Ms. Nord, who before joining the agency had been a lawyer at Eastman Kodak and an official at the United States Chamber of Commerce, criticized the measure in letters sent late last week and this afternoon to the Democratic leaders of the committee. She was critical, for instance, of a provision to ban lead from all toys. She said that the proposal to raise the potential penalty to $100 million “may have the undesired consequence of firms, as a precautionary measure, flooding the agency with virtually every consumer complaint and incident.”

Now, match this news with the latest news on Halloween plastic teeth.

Based on the inquiries by CBS News and the complaint filed with the Consumer Product Safety Commission, there is now an official investigation into why some “Ugly Teeth” have levels of lead 100 times beyond the legal limit.

There are thousands of these fake teeth, which have been purchased in the past few days as part of the ghoulish outfits of tiny trick-or-treaters around the country. Lead is dangerous if ingested, and extremely dangerous to small children.

…

The proportion of products that Professor Jeff Weidenhamer found to have high lead levels is what troubled him. Out of 56 Halloween-related products he tested, he found six to have levels between four and 130 times what is allowable. All 6 of the products with these problems were made in China.

I love the irony.

The teeth are supposed to make you look stupid. The irony is, with all the lead in them, they may actually make you stupid.

How fortunate we are that we have yet another incompetent or downright crooked Bush appointee in place to ensure that our critical regulatory agencies don’t do their jobs.

It’s the big news, at a FEMA press briefing FEMA employees threw softball questions to give the appearance of answering questions from the press.

. No one asked about trailers with formaldehyde for those made homeless by the fires. And the media seemed to be giving Johnson all day to wax on and on about FEMA’s greatness.

Of course, that could be because the questions were asked by FEMA staffers playing reporters. We’re told the questions were asked by Cindy Taylor, FEMA’s deputy director of external affairs, and by “Mike” Widomski, the deputy director of public affairs. Director of External Affairs John “Pat” Philbin asked a question, and another came, we understand, from someone who sounds like press aide Ali Kirin.

Ok. This is how incompetent FEMA is. If you’re going to have fake reporters at a press conference do not use the deputy directors! You wouldn’t think you’d have to explain this to them but sheesh. What a bunch of morons. This is what interns are for.

P.S., I started with the title “a new low for this administration”, but then I realized I forgot about Jeff Gannon!