H.R.1106 - Helping Families Save Their Homes Act of 2009

To prevent mortgage foreclosures and enhance mortgage credit availability. view all titles (5)

All Bill Titles

  • Official: To prevent mortgage foreclosures and enhance mortgage credit availability. as introduced.
  • Popular: Helping Families Save Their Homes Act of 2009 as introduced.
  • Short: Helping Families Save Their Homes Act of 2009 as introduced.
  • Short: Helping Families Save Their Homes Act of 2009 as passed house.
  • Short: Nationwide Mortgage Fraud Task Force Act of 2009 as passed house.

Comments Feed

Displaying 1-30 of 98 total comments.

  • fordfse 02/28/2009 4:03am

    As much as I feel for the people who are loosing their homes and a large percent of them to an ARM which the bank got them into. A large percent of these people had no business getting that loan and the banks had no business qualifying them for the loan. The banks need to be stuck with these homes on their books or renegotiate the terms with the current owners. This is called Capitalism. The government created a large amount of this situation due to Fannie Mae & Freddie Mac fiasco. And now the government is attempting to get us out of it? Give me a break. Who is now going to be responsible for the difference in the principal when the Judge adjusts the principal and interest? This is not Capitalism; this is socialism and big government.

  • Comm_reply

    Filtered Comment [ show ]

  • Comm_reply
    jfreeman 03/06/2009 8:51am

    This is ridiculous on so many levels.

    Not everyone who is in mortgage trouble right now is a blue collar worker – many were speculators convinced the house would rise in value so they could sell before the adjusted rates kicked in.

    You are creating a false dichotomy between banks and workers. Banks are not evil. They serve a legitimate purpose – connecting savers with borrowers. Otherwise, they wouldn’t exist. The people who give their money so that workers can buy homes do not deserve to be burned. It is their money – not yours!

  • Comm_reply
    lakotajk 05/01/2009 2:57am

    You go James…I had a sickness in my family that went on for 4 months and the stse of NY only gave us 125.00 a week..and as said I drive a diesel truck and my fuel bill was almost 5 dollars a gallon.
    So…let the banks eat it..it’s interest anyway and we are always bailing them out..it’s time for the small guys.
    Have a great day!!!

  • Comm_reply
    dfharing 12/16/2009 4:43am

    Interestingly enough, the people that you are worried about benefiting from this bill (i.e. the investors looking to flip the home to make a quick profit) already have the ability to “cram down” the mortgage on an investment property; this has been part of the bankruptcy code for years. The ONLY people who cannot use this tool are the people who use the home for their primary residence. So, the only people who would be helped are those who were duped into believing that they could afford the mortgage by a bank who gave them the loan with teaser rates and ridiculous terms. Thus, the only people who would be hurt by this bill are big banks, and the only ones that would be helped are main street victims of predatory lending. As I said before, the speculators CAN ALREADY DO THIS, THE ONLY PEOPLE WHO CAN’T ARE THE PEOPLE WHO USE THE HOMES AS THEIR PRIMARY RESIDENCE!!!!!

  • Filtered Comment [ show ]

  • Comm_reply
    jfreeman 03/06/2009 8:52am
    Link Reply
    + -1

    Your comment is what is childish. This is why we can’t have any serious debate in this country: “Any Democrat or Republican that holds this up is working for a lobbyist.”

  • csledbetter 03/01/2009 1:24pm

    The housing market is a zero-sum game. The true value of a house has never changed. Greed and government manipulation chased the market up, and reality is settling it down again.
    When the market was rising, some bought the most expensive house they could afford, extending their credit to the breaking point. They were betting on the fact that house prices would continue to go up. Greed, not need, was the motive. Since the market has turned, it is overwhelmingly these people who are in trouble, not those who acted responsibly when deciding whether to sign a mortgage agreement. Why do my tax dollars have to go to pay for their gamble? I would rather help my own daughter buy a house than bail out one of these gamblers.
    This bill benefits only the very worst consumers in our country—the ones that cannot afford what they buy, and commit to promises they can’t keep. It hurts the most responsible consumers in our country and their families. Is that what the Congress is supposed to do?

  • Comm_reply
    lakotajk 05/01/2009 3:22am

    Your not paying for anything and it was not a gamble in many cases…
    It’s a fresh start for some that really need.

  • Anonymous 03/02/2009 5:45am
    Link Reply
    + -2

    Those consumers (that are struggling) helped people get jobs and even paid taxes along the way. If you don’t help people you don’t help the tax base. Which of you can drive a car to work without a tax base. Wait until the black holes in the street get bigger and cost you money or repairs because there was a shrinking tax base. Ultimately, you will pay more for everything regardless. You can give it to those that need it or AIG.

    No homeowners … no taxes. Help people that need help. It may be you one day if not today.

    I need help … so its a real problem that is affecting real people. We are not greedy we are American and if you can’t dream in America then where are you.

  • Comm_reply
    MTPatriot 03/05/2009 10:15pm

    Take a look at the foreclosure map for August of 2008.


    and look here to get another perspective.


    Do you not see some distinct geographical areas that are the source of the problem?

    I do. I see areas that were the epitome of the housing market bubble…overpriced real estate bloated to excess. I see this situation as the market finally trying to correct itself. But there goes our legislators thinking they can prop up this gaff made by bloodthirsty lenders, real estate agents, and greedy homeowners getting in over their heads and purchasing homes they could not afford.

  • Comm_reply
    MTPatriot 03/05/2009 10:15pm

    While I could sympathize to a certain degree that an individual and his family has lost, or is loosing their home, I could not justify taxing the rest of America that acts responsibly and are accountable for their own actions financially. People everyday get the short end of the stick. Good people sometimes loose. Life is not fair.

    Yet through these actions taken by Congress, the Senate, and the White House, by not even ASKING but merely TAKING responsible American’s money to pay for those that are irresponsible is undoubtedly a step towards socialism.

    How else can you explain and justify taking from the haves to give to the have nots?

    (Note: Just so you know when you look at the map…the red areas are the areas with the most foreclosures)

  • Comm_reply
    JamesBarrett 03/09/2009 3:40am

    But we can justify paying taxes to bail out wallstreet and how well did that work. Give it to the people if they are going to pay for it through taxes and make big buisness pay us back for the money they have racieved.

  • Comm_reply
    MTPatriot 03/10/2009 11:17am

    We have the same or at least a similar view on that James. I think the bailouts to the banks, insurance companies, and the auto industry was straight up theft by our legislators. Why should the American people have to pay an exhorbitant amount of interest for loans to major corporations and BANKS. Why could these banks and and corporations not take the loans directly from the Federal Reserve? After all, it too is a private corporation. There is nothing federal about the federal reserve.////I am in total support of giving the money to the people…WAIT, giving the money to American TAXPAYERS. The idea seems so simple that there must be some fundamental flaw. How would giving the money to the taxpayers be a bad idea? I know that if I would have received my portion I would have paid off some credit card debt and student loan debt. Thus recirculating this back into the banking system.

  • Comm_reply
    Anonymous 04/06/2009 5:30pm

    Money was given to the taxpayers to stimulate the economy, twice under the Bush administration It did not work, because the money did not go into circulation in the form of goods and services It went into savings and paying down debt – the source of the problem

    The government is the spender of last resort when the economy contracts If the taxpayers knew to to spenc, save and invest their money, we wouldn’t have these economic resessions – we would always have small but sustainable growth.

    The problems began in 1978, when laws in place to preserve consumer protections and rampant credit began to be undone, and accelerated in 1999 by the repeal of the law that kept commercial and investment banking seperate businesses.

    Economics is no longer a required subject taught in high schools, thanks to the NCLB act The majority of young people don’t understand that credit is an earned priviledge, not a right

  • Comm_reply
    CainLMT 03/30/2009 10:13am

    You said it, MTPPartriot. People buying too much house based on a lower variable interest rate hoping they could sell it in a year or two for a major profit. That’s what got us all in trouble. My house is worth far less then what I bought it for two years ago but guess what I knew what I was getting into when I bought. I’m not going to ask anyone to make my mortage payment. It’s my house so it’s my responsiblity.

  • Comm_reply
    Stevelle 03/06/2009 10:57am

    This bill won’t keep us from giving more wealth to AIG shareholders and executives. Instead, we will be giving away more loot to more people than ever before.

    This bill doesn’t include cram-downs, still. Without cram-downs the market will remain inflated, homes will remain unaffordable, millions more will walk away from their mortgage which means more foreclosures.

    That doesn’t mean I want you kicked out on the street, but it does mean I want the best solution in the long run and the housing market WILL NOT RECOVER until prices come down, one way or another. Either we can throw away a decade, like Japan did, or we can crash the prices force the losses and suffering to be shared and start moving forward again.

    We need cram-downs before this bill will do any good because without it, the housing bubble will remain inflated.

  • Comm_reply
    lakotajk 05/01/2009 3:24am

    Awsome Anonymous !!!!!!!!!!!!!!

  • Pissedoff 03/02/2009 6:47am

    The greed was from the lenders and developers that charged the outrageous prices. When alot of people bought their homes (me included) we didn’t see the cost of the homes going down from what we paid for them. We also didn’t expect the market to drop in less then 2 years when you have a prepayment penalty before you go variable. The experts said the market would hold so how can you say that it was greed on the part of the american home buyer? I didn’t buy a house that was too big or too expensive but my new variable is killing me becuase I couldnt refi out of a bad loan before the market dropped.

  • Anonymous 03/02/2009 7:20am
    Link Reply
    + -1

    This bill, if passed, will increase the lender’s risk of loss. If there is an increased risk in sustaining a loss, there will be an increase in the interest rates charged to offset that risk. This will be counter-productive to “helping the housing markets” by making loans more expensive. This is a terrible bill. Please vote “No”!

  • Comm_reply
    JamesBarrett 03/05/2009 7:33am
    Link Reply
    + -1

    They already raise the rates on people with lower scores which does not seem right. They should give people with lower scores help by getting them in a lower rate. Raise there rates and this is what happens.

  • Comm_reply
    daringone 04/17/2009 2:49am
    Link Reply
    + -1

    Or, the rate discourages purchase until the consumer has their credit under control and can afford what they want to purchase. Or, they purchase something smaller that they can afford until they have enough equity to afford something bigger. But of course, it’s not popular to say that in today’s thinking. In today’s thinking, everyone is entitled to everything whether they’ve earned it or not.

  • plenko 03/03/2009 6:18am

    This is a good piece of legislation and should be passed.

    Businesses have an easy out when declaring bankruptcy….not to mention having socialism currently extended to them for their own greed, ignorance and mistakes.

    Citizens do not have any easy manner of declaring bankruptcy due to extensive lobbying and bribery of Congress by banks and loan originators. Citizens also, as we are all aware, have received next to nothing in the current stimulus effort. They have, however, watched as their tax revenues have been mis-used to provide socialism to banks and other businesses.

    Many borrowers were deceived by mortgage underwriters and brokers. Many underwriters and brokers also lied on borrowers’ applications..in order to jack up the corpus of the loan….and get larger commissions for themselves.

    This is a good bill and the first chartiable handout to regular folks. Pass it!

  • Comm_reply
    MTPatriot 03/05/2009 10:32pm

    I would agree with you on the following.

    Was the handout to corporations during the bailout good for the nation? NO.

    Was the bailouts for the banks good for the nation? No.

    There is not much stimulating to the average American citizen when big business and banks get bailed out and we are left with the generation upon generation of debt.

  • Comm_reply
    MTPatriot 03/05/2009 10:32pm

    We differ on this. Many fingers can be pointed in various directions as to who should shoulder the blame when it comes to the housing market issue. I think it is fair to say that everyone involved with it (lenders, agents, buyers) should be accountable for their actions.

    Would a handout to people that make poor financial investments be good for the nation? No.

    This is all a form of welfarism that ultimately leads to the socialization of this once great Republic.

    An argument that would have been worth making is that instead of bailing out Freddy and Fannie, that money could have went directly to the American people. Would it be a false assumption to say that if the people of the country received the money directly that they would have paid off their respective debt (or at least a portion) and thus would have saved the banks and mortgage lenders?

  • Autumnlc 03/03/2009 7:39am

    I urge you to contact your represenative and sentators to oppose this bill. Judges should not have the right to modify a banks assets. This bill sends the message to people who are struggling and doing whatever possible to meet their obligations should just file bankruptcy. This bill will increase fees and interest rates on responsible borrowers.

  • Comm_reply
    JamesBarrett 03/05/2009 7:36am
    Link Reply
    + -5


  • Comm_reply
    LizaGee 04/05/2009 8:21am

    Responsible borrowers who are in a temporary situation will be able to get a “work out” regardless of this bill. It is only those that a work out plan will not do justice to that will get “help”. This just prolongs the agony since they would fail yet again and will only slow the process to healing. I do not wish to see any person or family without a place to live. That’s something that should never happen in our society but handing out temporary bandaids will not keep them from it and is what got us into this mess to begin with.

  • Comm_reply
    Anonymous 04/06/2009 5:35pm

    The bankruptcy laws we had for over 80 years were amended by the Republicans to make bankruptcy more difficult for individuals They did not, however, modify bankruptcy for businesses. A business can walk away from much of it’s debt. Why should the people who did not incorporate themselves be treated differently than a business?

  • brenda582 03/03/2009 4:54pm
    Link Reply
    + -1

    The banks and loan companies need to get with the people and work it out it shouldnt be the government, the government needs to stay out. If i mess up and i dont pay for my car is the government going to bail me out. I don’t think so.. i vote no.

Vote on This Bill

21% Users Support Bill

131 in favor / 490 opposed

Send Your Rep a Letter

about this bill Support Oppose Tracking
Track with MyOC

Top-Rated Comments