Skip to main content

Cash for Clunkers looks like a Mercedes compared to the Edsel of Making Home Affordable

Here's the thing most people don't get about Libertarians: we don't argue that no government program will ever work. We argue the ethical issue of government by blackmail or coercion, and the general ineptitude of government as pretty much leaving the burden of proof to the State that it should be trusted.

Lots of Americans have lined up for Cash for Clunkers because its the next-best-thing to the tax rebates and tax cuts we'd all like to see.

But lots of Americans also expected to be able to line up for mortgage refinances under President Obama's Making Homes Affordable program (actual acronym: HARP). The program was announced in February, and in May here's what Treasury Secretary Geithner said in a self-serving government press release about the success of the program thus far:

With the Making Home Affordable (MHA) program delivering much-needed relief to homeowners and to our economy just over two months after the release of program guidelines, Treasury Secretary Tim Geithner and Housing and Urban Development (HUD) Secretary Shaun Donovan today provided an update on the program’s impact on stemming the housing crisis and keeping families in their homes and announced new options for homeowners facing foreclosure. The announcement and update came following a meeting with housing counselors from the National Community Reinvestment Coalition (NCRC) and with homeowners Nicholas Tekpertey of Reston, VA, and Warren Rohn of Lewiston, CA, who shared their success stories since participating in the Home Affordable Modification program.

“In just over two months, the Making Home Affordable program is up and running, helping our economy recover and making a difference in the lives and livelihoods of thousands of American homeowners. Historically low interest rates are allowing Americans to refinance and save money, and modifications are helping homeowners avoid foreclosure,” said Secretary Geithner.


Ironically, Geithner was technically being honest when he said that the program had been helping thousands of people, because--as AOL Real Estate reports:

Things haven't turned out as planned. The Obama administration had expected up to 2 million homeowners to take advantage of the refinancing program by its expiration date of June 10, 2010. But four months into the 16-month program, about 13,000 refinances had been completed, meaning that it was on track to help 52,000 homeowners, or about 1,950,000 homeowners shy of the administration's goal. That shortfall is equivalent to the number of houses and apartments in all of Kentucky.


Why? Just ask CNN, which has been collecting stories from people who actually tried to use the HARP program:

CNNMoney.com reported today that they’ve received an overwhelming number of negative reviews from nearly 500 people who wrote in about their experiences trying to obtain a loan modification through Obama’s Making Home Affordable program. Here are just a few of those complaints pulled from the CNNMoney.com list:

“Obama’s plan is a joke,” wrote Jean in Michigan. “The banks are a joke… fax, fax, fax, call, call, call and no response for months. Even Washington representatives can’t get an answer or help, what a sham!!!!”

“I have a Fannie Mae loan through Bank of America and have been fighting with Bank of America since May to work with me. They continue to indicate that I do not qualify during this phase, but yet Fannie Mae says I do. BofA has given me every possible roadblock and excuse. They are definitely doing this intentionally.”

“Litton Loan serving is the worst.
I did an informal email survey recevied responses from 123 people who applied for Load Modification…NOT ONE got the Modification. All were lied to and dragged along for weeks until finally they were told they did not qualify. Who can stop this madness?”


Wow, it sounds like someone needs to report Obama’s plan to the Better Business Bureau!


You see, the program's guidelines have been so poorly written that even the banks can't agree on what they mean--and the banks don't actually have to participate if they don't want to do so. Here's just one convoluted snippet from AOL Real Estate to give you the flavor:

Misconception: Under the Home Affordable Refinance program, lenders are refinancing loans with mortgage insurance.

The reality: If major lenders are doing refis of loans with mortgage insurance, they're being discreet about it. Bank of America, Chase and CitiMortgage did not respond to inquiries, but if e-mails from Bankrate readers are to be believed, none of those big lenders is refinancing loans with mortgage insurance.

A Wells Fargo spokesman replied: "We are not offering HARP refinances to borrowers who have mortgage insurance on their existing loans at this time. Unfortunately, I'm not able to provide any insight as to when we may be able to do so."

Bank of America has implied that it will refi insured loans "as systems become operational." Other lenders have been tight-lipped about whether they will refinance loans with mortgage insurance at all.

When the Obama administration promised to let people refinance their home loans but keep the same mortgage insurance policy, it was telling the insurance industry to do something that it's not set up to do. It's akin to selling your old car and buying a new one, and expecting the auto insurer to transfer the policy without changing one word of it.

The mortgage insurance companies say they have the procedures in place. The lenders are saying almost nothing. Neither side is pointing fingers at the other. Without a blamefest, it's hard to discern what's going on.

A spokeswoman for mortgage insurer MGIC says some lenders are refinancing loans with mortgage insurance under HARP, but she couldn't say which ones.


So, yes, I guess the Cash for Clunkers program looks like a real winner compared to other recent government efforts.

Comments

Alexandra said…
Learn how to manage your personal finance.
Anonymous said…
I wonder how many of the Cash for Clunkers will be repoed in the coming months by people figuing they can add a new loan for only $100 extra a month for a new car when they trade thier 'clunker' in.

I traded in my 10 year old jeep for a new dodge crossover and basically bought a new car for 40% off. i will keep this car for at least 10 years knowing that this deal was too good to pass up.
Anonymous said…
so many people get excited when they hear the word "FREE"

whether it's $4500 for a car woth $1,000 or $8,000 first time homebuyer stimulus. people think they have to rush out and get it before it's too late.

Another legacey of our failed publiuc education system.
Kilroy said…
Cash for Clunker a limited program ending November will do nothing to increase auto prduction. It's just anoter program to bailout auto makers or rather buy some time. Also, in most cases those new cars will come with a payment book which helps banks. And lets not forget get new cars mean auto insurance rates go up. So, more money for auto makers, banks and insurance companies.
Anonymous said…
What fools! Kilroy says "insurance rates" will go up! Thats your response to getting these junker/polluters off the road? These people purchasing the cars have to be approved by a bank or a loan company. Not everyone who wants a car is getting approved for one. What phoney bullshit you liberterians are supporting.

Keep talking the country down because you think you can regain power! hahahaha!
Kilroy said…
Anonymous said...
"What fools! Kilroy says "insurance rates" will go up! Thats your response to getting these junker/polluters off the road?"

Just saying new cars higher insurance and many of those who had older cars with near zero value most likely had just liability insurance.

"Keep talking the country down because you think you can regain power! hahahaha!"

Power re: R's and D's comes with the political tide. So are you George Bush, either you're with me or against me BS? Odds are those going for Cash for Clunkers are state and federal workers with job security.

Popular posts from this blog

A Libertarian Martin Luther King Jr. Day post

In which we travel into interesting waters . . . (for a fairly long trip, so be prepared) Dr. King's 1968 book, Where do we go from here:  chaos or community? , is profound in that it criticizes anti-poverty programs for their piecemeal approach, as John Schlosberg of the Center for a Stateless Society  [C4SS] observes: King noted that the antipoverty programs of the time “proceeded from a premise that poverty is a consequence of multiple evils,” with separate programs each dedicated to individual issues such as education and housing. Though in his view “none of these remedies in itself is unsound,” they “all have a fatal disadvantage” of being “piecemeal,” with their implementation having “fluctuated at the whims of legislative bodies” or been “entangled in bureaucratic stalling.”   The result is that “fragmentary and spasmodic reforms have failed to reach down to the profoundest needs of the poor.” Such single-issue approaches also have “another common failing — ...

More of This, Please

Or perhaps I should say, "Less of this one, please." Or how about just, "None of them. Ever again. Please....For the Love of God." Sunshine State Poll: Grayson In Trouble The latest Sunshine State/VSS poll shows controversial Democratic incumbent Alan Grayson trailing former state Senator Dan Webster by seven points, 43 percent to 36 percent. A majority of respondents -- 51 percent -- disapprove of the job that Grayson is doing. Independents have an unfavorable view of him as well, by a 36/47 margin. Grayson has ignored the conventional wisdom that a freshman should be a quiet member who carefully tends to the home fires. The latest controversy involves his " Taliban Dan " advertisement, where he explicitly compares his opponent to the Taliban, and shows a clip of Webster paraphrasing Ephesians 5:22 -- "wives, submit to your husbands." An unedited version of the clip shows that Webster was actually suggesting that husba...

A reply to Salon's R. J. Eskrow, and his 11 stupid questions about Libertarians

Posts here have been in short supply as I have been living life and trying to get a campaign off the ground. But "11 questions to see if Libertarians are hypocrites" by R. J. Eskrow, picked up at Salon , was just so freaking lame that I spent half an hour answering them. In the end (but I'll leave it to your judgment), it is not that Libertarians or Libertarian theory looks hypocritical, but that the best that can be said for Mr. Eskrow is that he doesn't have the faintest clue what he's talking about. That's ok, because even ill-informed attacks by people like this make an important point:  Libertarian ideas (as opposed to Conservative ideas, which are completely different) are making a comeback as the dynamic counterpoint to "politics as usual," and so every hack you can imagine must be dragged out to refute them. Ergo:  Mr. Eskrow's 11 questions, with answers: 1.       Are unions, political parties, elections, and ...