Cheryl Cotterill

Bank of America Extends More Credit to a Bankrupt Enterprise

Bank of America has a good future. Their stock will make a come back.

The other financials don't understand yet.

Citigroup Rescue Triggers Reduction in Credit Default Swap Pricing

Truth like an anvil is falling heavy and fast on Citigroup. No "safety net" is going to stop it.

Neel Kashkari, the Treasury Department official in charge of implementing the $700B financial rescue plan, came under heavy fire during today's TARP hearings: One lawmaker called TARP the "great taxpayer train robbery," while another demanded Kashkari's resignation.

Despite it all, only four words remain for Citigroup's investors: "Get out! Get out!"

While you can. No joke.

Citi's Underwhelming Bailout

Carefully consider the consequences that a bailout will have on the people. First and foremost, it takes away their constitutional right to due process. For example, anyone with a Citi credit card is now also indebted to the government, which means that if your debt is sent to collections you no longer have your day in court to explain your side of the story.

The bailout means that these nationalized financial institutions and banks are now entitled to use the Treasury's full arsenal of collection tactics. Your tax returns and refunds may be seized and your wages may be garnished with impunity. Gone are the constitutional days that require a court judgment prior to depriving one of their property.

So thank your government for working hard on your behalf to bailout these untrustworthy institutions and in doing so also handing over your constitutional right to due process.

A Smart Electricity Solution for Transportation

Gas run vehicles and oil companies are both moribund industries. Let them go. Something better will take their place.

Samsung Cutbacks Raise Chip Concerns - Citi

Citgroup? I'm quite concerned for their investors--Citigroup is simply not being straight with them.

The worst is still to come for Citigroup.

Spitzer: Self-Destruction

Remember the ramifications Joe Wilson faced after his op-ed "What I Didn't Find in Africa" was published in the New York Times?

Well, more people should read Eliot Spitzer's column published in the Washington Post less than a month ago entitled "Predatory Lenders' Partner in Crime." We need to applaud and support those like Eliot Spitzer who aren't afraid to stand up and tell the truth because there aren't enough of them. Yet.

Predatory Lenders' Partner in Crime
How the Bush Administration Stopped the States From Stepping In to Help Consumers

By Eliot Spitzer
Thursday, February 14, 2008; A25

Several years ago, state attorneys general and others involved in consumer protection began to notice a marked increase in a range of predatory lending practices by mortgage lenders. Some were misrepresenting the terms of loans, making loans without regard to consumers' ability to repay, making loans with deceptive "teaser" rates that later ballooned astronomically, packing loans with undisclosed charges and fees, or even paying illegal kickbacks. These and other practices, we noticed, were having a devastating effect on home buyers. In addition, the widespread nature of these practices, if left unchecked, threatened our financial markets.

Even though predatory lending was becoming a national problem, the Bush administration looked the other way and did nothing to protect American homeowners. In fact, the government chose instead to align itself with the banks that were victimizing consumers.

Predatory lending was widely understood to present a looming national crisis. This threat was so clear that as New York attorney general, I joined with colleagues in the other 49 states in attempting to fill the void left by the federal government. Individually, and together, state attorneys general of both parties brought litigation or entered into settlements with many subprime lenders that were engaged in predatory lending practices. Several state legislatures, including New York's, enacted laws aimed at curbing such practices.

What did the Bush administration do in response? Did it reverse course and decide to take action to halt this burgeoning scourge? As Americans are now painfully aware, with hundreds of thousands of homeowners facing foreclosure and our markets reeling, the answer is a resounding no.

Not only did the Bush administration do nothing to protect consumers, it embarked on an aggressive and unprecedented campaign to prevent states from protecting their residents from the very problems to which the federal government was turning a blind eye.

Let me explain: The administration accomplished this feat through an obscure federal agency called the Office of the Comptroller of the Currency (OCC). The OCC has been in existence since the Civil War. Its mission is to ensure the fiscal soundness of national banks. For 140 years, the OCC examined the books of national banks to make sure they were balanced, an important but uncontroversial function. But a few years ago, for the first time in its history, the OCC was used as a tool against consumers.

In 2003, during the height of the predatory lending crisis, the OCC invoked a clause from the 1863 National Bank Act to issue formal opinions preempting all state predatory lending laws, thereby rendering them inoperative. The OCC also promulgated new rules that prevented states from enforcing any of their own consumer protection laws against national banks. The federal government's actions were so egregious and so unprecedented that all 50 state attorneys general, and all 50 state banking superintendents, actively fought the new rules.

But the unanimous opposition of the 50 states did not deter, or even slow, the Bush administration in its goal of protecting the banks. In fact, when my office opened an investigation of possible discrimination in mortgage lending by a number of banks, the OCC filed a federal lawsuit to stop the investigation.

Throughout our battles with the OCC and the banks, the mantra of the banks and their defenders was that efforts to curb predatory lending would deny access to credit to the very consumers the states were trying to protect. But the curbs we sought on predatory and unfair lending would have in no way jeopardized access to the legitimate credit market for appropriately priced loans. Instead, they would have stopped the scourge of predatory lending practices that have resulted in countless thousands of consumers losing their homes and put our economy in a precarious position.

When history tells the story of the subprime lending crisis and recounts its devastating effects on the lives of so many innocent homeowners, the Bush administration will not be judged favorably. The tale is still unfolding, but when the dust settles, it will be judged as a willing accomplice to the lenders who went to any lengths in their quest for profits. So willing, in fact, that it used the power of the federal government in an unprecedented assault on state legislatures, as well as on state attorneys general and anyone else on the side of consumers.

The writer is governor of New York.


www.washingtonpost.com...

Bill Gross: 5 Picks for 2008 - Barron's

Impeachment is the only hope the US Economy has of saving itself. If impeachment does not occur, legitimacy will not return, and the economy will not recover--for a long time.

General Motors vs. Toyota: Which Will Speed Ahead?

Impeachment is the only hope the US Economy has of saving itself. If impeachment does not occur, legitimacy will not return, and the economy will not recover--for a long time.

Sallie Mae's Albert Lord: The Deathwatch Begins

And that's why you don't exploit students.

Sallie Mae's Albert Lord: The Deathwatch Begins

And that's why you don't lie to investors.

Sallie Mae's Albert Lord: The Deathwatch Begins

And that's why you don't commit fraud.