Short Sale at the White House?

I haven’t had much time to cover the ins and outs of the foreclosure settlement, which has been genuinely imminent for two weeks, but which is faltering now on banks’ refusal to be sued for anything. My guess is that Eric Schneiderman’s indefinite delay of his presumed announcement that he was joining the settlement last night means he had demonstrated the banks weren’t serious about how narrow they claimed the release to be.

That said, I found this to be a rather interesting article. It confirms what was obvious when they held a meeting in Chicago a few weeks back: this settlement is now the White House’s baby.

The White House has quietly injected itself into ongoing settlement discussions aimed at resolving regulators’ allegations that leading US banks abused struggling homeowners, underscoring the deal’s potential impact on the broader housing market and the presidential election.

Aides to President Barack Obama have in recent weeks courted civil rights groups and borrower advocacy organisations, scheduling meetings and calls in an attempt to gain support for the expected settlement and muffle criticism from key political allies.

Now, one of the aides named in the story is Jon Carson, director of the White House’s office of public engagement. It makes sense that he’d be the one to reach out to groups like NAACP and La Raza, as the story describes (It sounds like NAACP is much more willing to buy this sell than La Raza).

I also find it interesting that they’re reaching out though civil rights groups. That’s because–at least according to the way-too-optimistic release terms posted by Mike Lux–civil rights claims are at the top of the list of abuses not immunized with this settlement.

No release on any fair housing, fair lending, or civil rights claims.

Also, predatory subprime lending has been one of the few abuses actually investigated and, in a few cases, settled (albeit with inadequate payouts).

In addition to Carson, National Economic Council Chair Gene Sperling is the other White House aide named in the article. Granted, he had a big role in the auto bailout, so he has not limited himself to bank issues, but I found it notable in any case.

But here’s one question I’ve got about this article. It says that Sperling and Carson are sharing the terms of the deal.

In addition to sharing confidential details of the settlement terms, the White House has sought to alleviate advocates’ concerns that the liability release is too broad by detailing which legal claims would remain if a settlement were reached.

Really? These confidential details can be shared? Well then, why aren’t they being shared?

That Obama is sharing the purported details of the deal with certain groups is all the more alarming given that the AGs who have been working on this deal for over a year appear to have no idea of what the terms actually are.

In short, it’s not so much that I’m surprised the White House is running this show. It’s that this stinks to high hell of another asymmetrical info op, the kind they pull on national security all the time. By compartmenting information, they ensure people buy off on stuff they have a badly incomplete understanding of.

Look, if NGOs can have access to this information, than so can everyone, from taxpayers to the Attorneys General trying to hold banks accountable.

Tweet about this on Twitter0Share on Reddit0Share on Facebook0Google+0Email to someone

19 Responses to Short Sale at the White House?

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
  • 6
  • 7
  • 8
  • 9
  • 10
  • 11
  • 12
  • 13
  • 14
  • 15
  • 16
  • 17
  • 18
  • 19
Emptywheel Twitterverse
emptywheel @joanneleon some will be more forthright abt our wars.
11mreplyretweetfavorite
bmaz RT @dcbigjohn: This SIGAR report in Afghanistan spending really puts the lie to "most transparent administration" claim http://t.co/GQhPOky
11mreplyretweetfavorite
bmaz Yet more out of control cops RT @radleybalko This is looking bad. http://t.co/rTFPm2yp2P
12mreplyretweetfavorite
bmaz @JonathanTurley She seems to recognize no bounds on Executive Branch power; maybe you could address that problem.
25mreplyretweetfavorite
bmaz I love @digby56 but, dammit, I had totally forgotten that Joe Klein existed before she up and had to remind me. http://t.co/MYUQ30AvTD
26mreplyretweetfavorite
bmaz @JasonLeopold @AmbassadorPower @SenFeinstein Jason, that word has banned from the lexicon of our mighty political elites. Don't trifle them.
35mreplyretweetfavorite
emptywheel What if Rand Paul ran on this? "As President, I promise to classify how much war we're at so you can pretend I've ended it."
1hreplyretweetfavorite
emptywheel @mattapuzzo MILLIONSWILLDIE (which, if true, would be far worse than the hundreds of thousands I'm in the process of killing)
1hreplyretweetfavorite
emptywheel @cristianafarias No biggie. It's what @bmaz gets for going so long between legal posts. ;p
1hreplyretweetfavorite
emptywheel @cristianafarias That's @bmaz, not me. Somehow fit it in between Super Bowl events.
1hreplyretweetfavorite
bmaz RT @MonaHol: Poop found on gym floor: Students forced to expose underwear for inspection http://t.co/vgNUZl8JMt Attn: @ChuckCJohnson. Ur al…
1hreplyretweetfavorite
bmaz @ScottGreenfield @gideonstrumpet Incredible. "Stickier than it seems". Fuck you Professor Moron.
1hreplyretweetfavorite
February 2012
S M T W T F S
« Jan   Mar »
 1234
567891011
12131415161718
19202122232425
26272829