Wall Street Group Aggressively Lobbied a Federal Agency to Thwart Eminent Domain Plans
The Nation - January 17, 2014, by Alexis Goldstein - Despite Wall Street’s ...
The Nation - January 17, 2014, by Alexis Goldstein - Despite Wall Street’s recent gains, the foreclosure crisis that displaced 10 million Americanscontinues to wreak havoc on communities. One ongoing problem is that 10.7 million homeowners are stuck in underwater homes, in which the mortgage is more than the house is currently worth. Although the federal government doled out $700 billion to Wall Street via TARP during the 2008 financial crisis, it has not taken bold action to solve this problem. Money set aside during the bailout to help homeowners remains largely unspent, and a key federal housing regulator refused to pursue mortgage write-downs for struggling borrowers, even though their own analysis showed these loan modifications would save the agency money.
In this vacuum, several cities have begun to take matters into their own hands, as Peter Dreier reported on for The Nation. One plan by private equity company Mortgage Resolution Partners proposes that cities use eminent domain—a power traditionally reserved for seizing property for public use—to seize mortgage loans. The amount owed on the loans would then be reduced so that the borrower was no longer underwater, avoiding foreclosure. In January 2013, Brockton, Massachusetts commissioned a study and formed a working group to investigate using eminent domain to help struggling homeowners. In September 2013, the city council of Richmond, California, voted to move forward with such a plan.
One might think these small, local efforts shouldn’t be of much concern to Wall Street—after all, Richmond’s plan affects a mere 624 loans. But one of Wall Street’s most powerful trade groups, the Securities Industry and Financial Markets Association (SIFMA), has responded with ferocious urgency. SIFMA is the attack dog the largest Wall Street banks send when they don’t want their names attached to politically controversial lobbying efforts or lawsuits. The group does everything from denying that “too big to fail” still exists to drafting lengthy comment letters arguing for weaker financial regulation.
New e-mails obtained through a Freedom of Information Act request by the Alliance of Californians for Community Empowerment (ACCE) and a coalition of other community groups and shared with The Nation reveal the extent to which SIFMA has been spearheading Wall Street’s fight against using eminent domain to mitigate the foreclosure crisis. (The complete set of e-mails are available at the website of the ACLU, which sued the FHFA when the original FOIA request was ignored). When Brockton began considering using eminent domain, SIFMA employees traveled there and kept an entire section of its website, complete with an array of resources, to decrying the plans.
Grace Ross, Coordinator of the Massachusetts Alliance Against Predatory Lending and one of the members of Brockton’s eminent domain working group, said she was “shocked by the huge amount of resources SIFMA threw at this small study process in Brockton. While pursuing a plan like this would be deeply meaningful to Brockton, with up to 2,300 households that could have been directly affected, it’s small potatoes” for an industry as large as Wall Street. In April 2013, by a vote of 7-5, Brockton’s eminent domain working group concluded that the City did not have the legal authority to pursue an eminent domain plan.
SIFMA also made sure to send its careful notes and observations to a key staffer at the Federal Housing Finance Agency (FHFA), General Counsel Alfred Pollard. The FHFA is the regulator who oversees Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac, which have been under federal government control since the 2008 financial crisis. In 2008, Congress also charged the FHFA with implementing “a plan to maximize assistance for homeowners.” But not only has FHFA failed to meaningfully help homeowners, in an August 2013 statement, the agency threatened to take legal action against localities that used eminent domain to restructure mortgages, and it raised the possibility that Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac would be ordered to stop doing business altogether in areas that pursued eminent domain plans.
Through e-mails obtained by the ACCE’s FOIA request, we now know that SIFMA urged the FHFA to take precisely this course of action. In a March 25, 2013, e-mail to FHFA’s General Counsel Pollard, Richard Dorfman, then-head of SIFMA’s Securitization group, writes that “a federal solution would be the only way to quell this menacing concept.” Dorfman goes on to insist that the FHFA disallow Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac “to acquire, guarantee, securitize or otherwise transact in any loan” that could even hypothetically be subject to an eminent domain plan. And that is exactly what the FHFA did four months later.
In response to a request for comment on whether SIFMA’s e-mails influenced the FHFA’s actions, an FHFA spokesperson said, “FHFA first expressed concerns about the use of eminent domain when it requested public input on August 8, 2012.” The spokesperson noted that the August 2013 statement “reflected FHFA’s analysis of input provided, legal matters, and safety and soundness concerns for its regulated entities (Fannie Mae, Freddie Mac and the 12 Federal Home Loan Banks).” The spokesperson also said that the statement was “influenced by legal research and robust public input, including 75 letters from a variety of stakeholders.”
But SIFMA did not stop at demanding the FHFA’s help in threatening cities that pursued eminent domain mortgage seizures; it also asked FHFA staff to drum up local opposition. In the March 25 e-mail to Pollard, Dorfman writes, “Councilor Tom Brophy…is a key participant in the eminent domain working group in Brockton. [He] wants to speak with you by telephone pertinent to the matters I have raised…. I am accordingly asking you to agree. Please agree to do so, and we will make the arrangements.”
Brophy ultimately voted with the majority to scuttle the eminent domain plan on the grounds that Brockton did not have the legal authority to seize mortgages. Reached for comment, Brophy said that he does not recall any specific conversation with anyone from the FHFA, and the FHFA declined to comment on whether or not Pollard and Brophy ever talked on the phone. Whether or not that particular conversation took place, however, the e-mails reveal the active role SIFMA took in lobbying federal agencies to intervene in the Brockton vote, and they raise a question about how much influence SIFMA had on the outcome.
In addition to the comfort level displayed in their requests, the sheer volume of e-mails from SIFMA employees to General Counsel Pollard is significant. There is a formal comment process, yet SIFMA appears to have the capacity to supplement this process with these informal, previously private, e-mails to Pollard. When asked if e-mailing General Counsel Pollard directly is something that is available to all stakeholders, an FHFA spokesperson noted, “The Office of General Counsel email address is available to all stakeholders on the FHFA website.” But the e-mail provided on that website is OGCPublic@FHFA.gov. In the FOIA response, the e-mail used by SIFMA to contact Pollard is different: Alfred.Pollard@fhfa.gov.
The FHFA spokesperson also stated, “FHFA’s General Counsel routinely communicates with a variety of interested parties on numerous issues affecting Fannie Mae, Freddie Mac and the Federal Home Loan Banks.” Of the personal e-mails revealed by the FOIA, twenty-four are from SIFMA, and the rest are primarily from other Wall Street stakeholders (The additional listeddocuments are court filings or public comment letters—some of which were sent via e-mail and are thus listed as “comment e-mails”). And while the October 2013 FOIA did ask specifically for e-mails between Wall Street stakeholders and FHFA, it also included a much broader request for “all documents,” correspondence and meetings “regarding the City of Richmond’s offer to buy underwater mortgages from residents.” One would expect to see e-mail exchanges to Alfred Pollard from non–Wall Street stakeholders about Richmond, if FHFA truly had as close a relationship with others as they appear to have with SIFMA.
Perhaps one of the most damning e-mails is one forwarded to Pollard by SIFMA’s Dorfman on February 15. In it, Kimberly Chamberlain—managing director and associate general counsel of state government Affairs at SIFMA—laments the lack of bankers on Brockton’s Eminent Domain Working Group. Chamberlain concedes that there is an Oppenheimer representative, Stephen Bernard, on the working group. But it appears that to Chamberlain, Bernard’s industry credibility is in question, due to his association with the NAACP. Chamberlain writes, “The list does not appear to include local bankers or local mortgage bankers. The Oppenheimer representative he previously alluded to is Stephen Barnard [sic], who is also a Past President of the Brockton NAACP. At first blush, it would appear we have our work cut out for us with this group” [emphasis added].
It remains unclear why an affiliation with the NAACP is relevant for SIFMA to note, especially before stating that “this group” will require more work on their part. In response to a request for comment on the e-mail, a SIFMA spokesperson stated: “The e-mail from Ms. Chamberlain simply restates the information in Mr. Stewart’s original e-mail, which notes the affiliations of the working group members. SIFMA had been told, prior to the working group being formed, that the group would include several financial services representatives who could speak firsthand about the negative impact of eminent domain on mortgage credit. Without this firsthand experience, SIFMA felt it would be important to spend time educating working force members.”
In some e-mails, SIFMA also appears dismissive of the scale of the foreclosure crisis. In the March 25 e-mail, Dorfman calls the eminent domain plans “tedious.” In a March 8 e-mail to Pollard, Chris Killian, managing director and head of securitization at SIFMA, insults Brockton’s eminent domain committee, writing “the current ‘committee’ carries many markings of a charade.”
Please support our journalism. Get a digital subscription for just $9.50!
SIFMA’s concern is not the plight of these cities—but rather the time and money SIFMA has lost fighting eminent domain plans. In the February 15 e-mail, Dorfman writes to Pollard about eminent domain plans in Brockton and in Phoenix, Arizona: “One of the City Council members has found a messianic calling in the eminent domain scheme, so we are once again investing time and resources in this matter,” time that he laments should instead be focused on the “flurry of regulatory activity derived from Dodd Frank.”
The re-focusing of SIFMA’s attention from federal regulations to the actions of a few small cities trying to creatively solve their foreclosure crisis tells us that these eminent domain plans are a significant threat to Wall Street. SIFMA is terrified that this idea will spread. As SIFMA’s Killian wrote on March 8, “one of these places where there is smoke will soon catch fire.” If there is one thing SIFMA does not want, it is for banks to have to go to court, in multiple cities, to try and fight seizures of mortgages via eminent domain.
As of January 6, 2014, the FHFA has a new head—Mel Watt, who until recently served as a Democratic Representative from North Carolina. SIFMA has hardly made it a secret that it is expecting Watt to continue FHFA’s war on eminent domain plans. When Watt’s nomination was first announced, SIFMA released a statement insisting Watt “explicitly address the continued threat” of plans using eminent domain to seize mortgages. One of the first questions the public should ask is: Will the FHFA under Watt continue this tradition of using its power to act as a proxy for SIFMA? Or will Watt support cities’ searching for new and novel approaches to foreclosures?
Given that it’s been five years since the crisis and the federal government has done appallingly little to help homeowners, the least the FHFA could do is stay out of the way.
Source
Brett Kavanaugh's 2nd accuser contacted by the FBI: Lawyer
Brett Kavanaugh's 2nd accuser contacted by the FBI: Lawyer
With only a week to conduct its high-stakes investigation into the sexual misconduct allegations against Brett Kavanaugh, the FBI has already contacted the second woman to accuse the Supreme Court...
With only a week to conduct its high-stakes investigation into the sexual misconduct allegations against Brett Kavanaugh, the FBI has already contacted the second woman to accuse the Supreme Court nominee, her lawyer said.
Read the article and watch the video here.
Janet Yellen To Jobless African-Americans: You're On Your Own
Federal Reserve Chair Janet Yellen told members of the House of Representatives in a hearing on Wednesday that the Fed's concerns about inflation limit its ability to address high African-American...
Federal Reserve Chair Janet Yellen told members of the House of Representatives in a hearing on Wednesday that the Fed's concerns about inflation limit its ability to address high African-American unemployment.
“So, there really isn’t anything directly the Federal Reserve can do to affect the structure of unemployment across groups,” Yellen said during the House Financial Services Committee’s semiannual hearing on Federal Reserve policy. “And unfortunately, it’s long been the case that African-American unemployment rates tend to be higher than those on average in the nation as a whole.”
The African-American unemployment rate was 9.5 percent in June, nearly twice the rate of 5.3 percent in the population overall.
But Yellen said that the Fed’s ability to address this problem was limited by its commitment to keeping inflation under 2 percent.
Yellen’s remarks were in response to a question posed by Rep. Joyce Beatty (D-Ohio) as to whether the Fed was taking the high rate of African-American unemployment into account when assessing the health of the labor market. Beatty was one of several African-American committee members, including ranking member Rep. Maxine Waters (D-Calif.), who enjoined Yellen to consider the disproportionately high rate of African-American unemployment in deciding when to raise interest rates.
At the hearing, Yellen reaffirmed the Fed’s previous indications that it would raise interest rates before the year’s end. "If the economy evolves as we expect, economic conditions likely would make it appropriate at some point this year to raise the federal funds rate," Yellen said in her prepared testimony.
Maintaining price stability is one-half of the Fed’s dual mandate, together with maximizing employment. If the Fed prints more money, it spurs higher employment, ultimately putting upward pressure on prices. If it tightens the monetary supply, by raising interest rates, it keeps prices low, but also depresses employment.
Many progressive economists and activists fault the Fed for continuing to prioritize the inflation part of its dual mandate at the expense of full employment. It is a tendency they say disproportionately affects African-Americans, who already suffer from high unemployment and discrimination in the job market.
Jordan Haedtler, deputy campaign manager of the Center for Popular Democracy’s Fed Up campaign, which mobilizes communities of color for pro-employment Fed policy, said that Yellen’s Wednesday remarks are a reflection of this approach.
“It is indicative of the Fed’s continued emphasis on inflation even in the face of nonexistent inflation,” Haedtler said. “They are myopically focused on one portion of their dual mandate while ignoring another. If the Fed is saying that the economy is on enough of a positive trajectory to raise rates, they are saying they are OK with 9.5 percent black unemployment.”
The Fed Up campaign wants the Federal Reserve to wait for more significant wage growth before raising rates.
It is also encouraging regional Federal Reserve banks, along with Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac, to sell homes with delinquent mortgages to nonprofit organizations that are more likely to refurbish them. Currently, Fed Up claims, the homes often go to for-profit buyers who leave them in disrepair, limiting the economic recovery in many urban communities of color.
Source: Huffington Post
Here’s Where You Can Donate To Those Affected By The Earthquakes In Mexico And Hurricanes In Puerto Rico
Here’s Where You Can Donate To Those Affected By The Earthquakes In Mexico And Hurricanes In Puerto Rico
After the recent earthquakes in Mexico and hurricanes in Puerto Rico, it can be heartbreaking to see, from afar, all the devastation people in affected areas are currently enduring. While we might...
After the recent earthquakes in Mexico and hurricanes in Puerto Rico, it can be heartbreaking to see, from afar, all the devastation people in affected areas are currently enduring. While we might be at a loss about how to help our family and friends in Latin America during these trying times, there are ways to help. Here’s a list of charities, fundraising campaigns and other organizations helping those affected in Mexico and Puerto Rico.
Read the full article here.
Statement: As Texas Circuit Court Judge Rules Against Immigrant Families, The Center for Popular Democracy Calls on US Fifth Court of Appeals To Reject Politically-Motivated Lawsuit by Anti-Immigrant Politicians
For Immediate Release: Tuesday, February 17 2015
Contact: Ricardo A. Ramírez, rramirez@populardemocracy.org, 202-464-7376
...
For Immediate Release: Tuesday, February 17 2015
Contact: Ricardo A. Ramírez, rramirez@populardemocracy.org, 202-464-7376
As Texas Circuit Court Judge Rules Against Immigrant Families, The Center for Popular Democracy Calls on US Fifth Court of Appeals To Reject Politically-Motivated Lawsuit by Anti-Immigrant Politicians Undeterred by the political attacks, immigrant communities continue to prepare for new immigration programs and will fight on for a path to citizenship
Late on Monday night, U.S. District Court Judge Andrew Hanen of Brownsville Texas, who has previously expressed anti-immigrant views, issued a preliminary injunction that temporarily blocks the implementation process of the new immigrant deferred action programs. Immigrant communities and their allies have been eagerly preparing to take advantage of the President’s expanded administrative relief program, which is scheduled to go into effect on February 18, 2015. The ruling may delay the program’s start date, forcing the millions of immigrant workers who are ready to come forward, register, and apply for work permits, to wait indefinitely.
“Immigrants across the country are moving forward regardless of today’s ruling,” said Ana Maria Archila, Co-Executive Director at the Center for Popular Democracy. “We partner with dozens of grassroots pro-immigrant organizations across the country who refuse to be scared off by this. They are committed to fighting not only for DACA and DAPA, but for a path to citizenship for all 11 million.”
“The ruling is a temporary setback and it does not change the fact that the President's executive order is a victory for immigrant families,” said Joaquín Guerra of the Texas Organizing Project. “What is disappointing is that Governor Greg Abbott has put Texas on the same footing with Arizona's notorious Sheriff Joe Arpaio and his cheap political stunts. No longer can Texas Republicans distance themselves from Arizona or Alabama when it comes to attacking Latinos and immigrants. We call on the Department if Justice to immediately file for a stay at the 5th Circuit Court of Appeals so they can reject this meritless lawsuit that is an attack on immigrant families and a waste of taxpayer dollars.”
New York City allocates $500K to fight feds on deportation
US News - July 17, 2013, by Steven Nelson - Immigration advocates are thrilled that New York City is footing the bill for a pilot program to provide free legal representation to people fighting...
US News - July 17, 2013, by Steven Nelson - Immigration advocates are thrilled that New York City is footing the bill for a pilot program to provide free legal representation to people fighting deportation.
The City Council allocated $500,000 in June for the pilot program, with Speaker Christine Quinn – a candidate for mayor – taking the lead in shepherding the funds into the fiscal year 2014 budget, advocates say.
"There really was no controversy because the statistics bore out the injustice," Angela Fernandez of the Northern Manhattan Coalition for Immigrant Rights told U.S. News.
Non-citizens living in the U.S. without legal permission aren't guaranteed a free lawyer in non-criminal deportation cases.
Immigration law is "as complex as tax law," Fernandez said. She pointed to a research conducted by federal judge Robert Katzmann that found defendants without attorneys prevail less than 10 percent of the time in immigration cases.
"If they have access to a high-quality deportation defense attorney, their chances of prevailing is 67 percent," she said.
The Vera Institute of Justice, a legal advocacy group, will administer the program and approve grants to experienced non-profits whose attorneys specialize in immigration defense.
Fernandez said is costs up to $4,000 to defend a person during the course of immigration proceedings.
"The stakes are pretty high," said Brittny Saunders of the Center for Popular Democracy. "Folks who are detained, in many cases on minor infractions of immigration law, have no right to counsel ... so they're going up against federally trained attorneys."
Fernandez and Saunders agreed that the pilot program - officially called the New York Immigrant Family Unity Project – is the first publicly funded endeavor to defend immigrants against deportation, and they hope it will become permanent.
Quinn's office confirmed to U.S. News that the program was funded in the city's recently approved budget.
The immigration advocates, attorneys and Quinn are scheduled to discuss the program during a Friday event at Yeshiva University's Cardozo School of Law.
Source
April 15: National Protests on Tax Day Demand Trump Release His Tax Returns
April 15: National Protests on Tax Day Demand Trump Release His Tax Returns
WASHINGTON - Today, the National Working Families Party announced their participation in the Tax Day March. President Trump’s financial ties to Russia are causing growing questions for both...
WASHINGTON - Today, the National Working Families Party announced their participation in the Tax Day March. President Trump’s financial ties to Russia are causing growing questions for both Democrats and Republicans. As a result, thousands of people plan to gather in Washington, D.C., on Saturday, April 15, 2017, at 11 a.m. The Tax March was an idea that started on Twitter, but has gained momentum on and offline, with over 135 marches planned in cities across the country...
Read full article here.
Immigrant advocates attack banks for financing private prisons
Immigrant advocates attack banks for financing private prisons
“Private prison companies and their Wall Street financiers stand to benefit from policies that increase detentions, separate families, and cause irreparable harm to immigrant children," said Ana...
“Private prison companies and their Wall Street financiers stand to benefit from policies that increase detentions, separate families, and cause irreparable harm to immigrant children," said Ana María Archila, Co-Executive Director of the Center for Popular Democracy, in a statement.
Read the full article here.
Under pressure, U.S. Federal Reserve takes baby steps toward a more transparent and inclusive era
Under pressure, U.S. Federal Reserve takes baby steps toward a more transparent and inclusive era
Last year’s behind-the-scenes selection of three men with ties to Goldman Sachs to serve atop the Federal Reserve did not go over well with outspoken civic groups and many Democrats, including...
Last year’s behind-the-scenes selection of three men with ties to Goldman Sachs to serve atop the Federal Reserve did not go over well with outspoken civic groups and many Democrats, including Hillary Clinton, who have all called for a more transparent and inclusive central bank. In response to the critics, the Fed has rolled out a series of announcements, online forums and face-to-face meetings with Americans to portray a more open process of selecting its 12 district presidents that is also more sensitive to racial and gender diversity.
The Minneapolis Fed, like its counterparts in Philadelphia and Dallas last year, named a president in Neel Kashkari with a past at Goldman, the Wall Street bank. But it also broke ranks from others when it released video testimonials from directors shedding light on the year-long search process, and even published a “summary of attributes” sought in the candidate. The Atlanta Fed said last month it seeks a “diverse set of candidates” to replace outgoing chief Dennis Lockhart, and this month its board chair hosted a pubic webcast to explain the historically shrouded search process, raising hopes it would name the first black or Latino Fed president in the central bank’s 103-year history.
“In the Federal Reserve system we are taking this very seriously, but it’s not just because we want to go and say we’re diverse,” Loretta Mester, the Cleveland Fed President, told a gathering of low-wage workers and progressive economists organized by Fed Up, a labor-affiliated coalition of civic groups pushing for reforms. “It really is about … getting different view points that are very helpful to us in setting policy and thinking about the economy and understanding the trends,” she said at the Cleveland Fed on Friday. Mester met the group a day after her bank launched an online application form for the public to recommend people “diverse in backgrounds and perspectives” for board positions and advisory roles across her Midwest district. Asked to what extent outside pressure prompted the move, a spokeswoman said it was “just the latest in our ongoing efforts to broaden our outreach.”
The 12 Fed presidents have five rotating votes on U.S. interest rate policy. Unlike the five current governors at the Fed Board in Washington, who are selected by the White House and approved by the Senate, the presidents are chosen by their district directors, half of whom are themselves picked by private local banks that technically own the Fed banks. The dizzying structure is meant to ensure views from across the country are heard. But critics say it leaves the Fed beholden to bankers who are not representative of the public, and they point out that 11 of 12 district presidents are white while 10 of them are men. Among employees at the Fed Board in Washington, including service workers, 43 percent were non-white and 43 percent female last year. However at the executive level it was 18 percent and 37 percent, respectively, according to the central bank.
Clinton, the presidential candidate, has come out in favor of dropping bankers from district boards and making the Fed “more representative of America as a whole,” according to her party’s platform. That followed a May letter from 127 lawmakers to Fed Chair Janet Yellen urging more diversity.
After years of resisting more overt political efforts to curb its independence, the Fed under Yellen appears willing to take small steps in the name of transparency and inclusively. In an unusual entry in minutes of their meeting last month, Fed officials discussed a staff analysis of “differential patterns of unemployment across racial and ethnic groups.” U.S. unemployment among blacks is twice that of whites.
“While we applaud this progress, these very basic steps were available to them for the last hundred years and have only been rolled out very recently,” Shawn Sebastian, a Fed Up field director, said of the series of efforts by Fed banks.
In its latest critique, Fed Up called it “disappointing” that Nicole Taylor, a black woman and dean of community engagement and diversity at Stanford University whose term as director at the San Francisco Fed is soon to expire, would be succeeded on that district’s board by Sanford Michelman, a white man who is co-founder of law firm Michelman & Robinson LLP. John Williams, president of the San Francisco Fed, told reporters on Wednesday that while he has no control over the selection of directors, this board revamp “just redoubles my efforts and my team’s efforts to make sure that we are getting the voices and experiences from across the spectrum.” He added: “It’s definitely a step back in terms of what I’d like to see on our board. We’re working actively to build representation of women and minorities.”
By Jonathan Spicer
Source
Oakland spends far too much on policing
Oakland spends far too much on policing
The numerous police killings of black citizens around the country in recent years
have made us take a hard look at police brutality against black communities but law enforcement in Oakland...
The numerous police killings of black citizens around the country in recent years have made us take a hard look at police brutality against black communities but law enforcement in Oakland has a particularly alarming history.
Between 2000 and 2016, police officers in Oakland have killed 90 people, three quarters of whom were black. Victims include 23-year-old Richard Linyard, who was killed after fleeing police at a traffic stop and 30-year-old Demouria Hogg, who was shot and killed by police after they found him unconscious in a car with a pistol.
Read the full article here.
4 days ago
4 days ago