Bill Statistics

The Middle Class Position

The middle class supports.

How They Voted

69% with middle class
26% against middle class
4% did not vote
Pie Chart

Grades

Grade C
House

The House receives a grade of C for its support of the middle class on this piece of legislation.

300 Representatives voted for the middle-class position; 114 voted against.

H.R. 1728

Mortgage Reform and Anti-Predatory Lending Act of 2009

Introduced:
03.26.2009 [House]
House: Yea-300, Nay-114
The Legislation: 

The Mortgage Reform and Anti-Predatory Lending Act of 2009 protects mortgage borrowers from certain abusive and predatory lending practices. In addition to creating a “federal duty of care” that obliges mortgage lenders to meet minimum standards when originating a loan, the legislation requires creditors to make a good faith determination that a borrower has a reasonable ability to repay a loan and that refinancing a mortgage would provide a net benefit to the borrower. Federal banking agencies are instructed to develop regulations prohibiting mortgage originators from steering consumers into predatory or unfair loans, particularly ones that promote disparities among consumers of equal creditworthiness but of different race, ethnicity, or gender. The legislation makes mortgage originators and other parties to mortgage lending liable for violations of the law’s requirements and allows homeowners to use these violations as a defense in a foreclosure proceeding. The bill mandates that creditors retain a portion of the credit risk on subprime loans they sell to investors. It bans compensation of mortgage brokers based on the terms of mortgage loans, a practice that leads to higher interest rates for borrowers, and requires advance notice of interest rate increases for adjustable rate mortgages.

The Act expands protections for renters of properties that have been foreclosed upon, including a mandatory 90-day notice to vacate. The legislation prohibits certain prepayment penalties and mandatory arbitration of disputes involved with residential mortgages, permits federal preemption of state laws protecting consumers from fraudulent lending practices in certain circumstances, requires additional disclosures about the terms of mortgages, and strengthens the Home Ownership and Equity Protection Act, which restricts the terms of certain high-cost home loans. Finally, the bill expands property appraisal requirements and creates several housing counseling programs.

The Middle-Class Position: 

Middle Class Supports. As housing prices rose earlier this decade, mortgage originators, brokers, servicers, and investors created and promoted ever more deceptive products to extract further profits from current and aspiring middle-class families. Distorted incentives throughout the industry made it profitable to aggressively market loans these families never had a prayer of paying back. Prepayment penalties imposed fees on homeowners for paying mortgage debt early; adjustable rate mortgages resulted in payment shock when low teaser rates skyrocketed to exorbitant levels; borrowers with interest-only loans found that their loan principal increased as they paid back their mortgage; and “no-doc” loans locked unsuspecting borrowers into mortgages they could not afford. Lenders often used mortgage refinancing to strip middle-class homeowners of the equity they relied on to obtain loans to help make ends meet. Negligent underwriting and plain fraud, spurred by the promise of easy profit, allowed such abusive products to proliferate from 19 percent of the mortgage market in 2005 to 31 percent in 2007. People of color were steered into high-cost mortgages even when they qualified for better products: one study finds that 54.5 percent of all conventional loans made to African Americans in 2005 were high-cost, compared to 23.3 percent made to whites.

The Mortgage Reform and Anti-Predatory Lending Act takes some steps to combat and end the abusive lending practices at the root of the financial crisis. Requiring mortgages to meet minimum standards, such as ensuring a borrower’s ability to repay a loan and a ban on “steering” high-cost mortgages to minorities, will help current and aspiring middle-class families avoid mortgages that saddle them with debt they will never be able to repay. Obliging lenders to demonstrate that refinancing will provide a tangible benefit to a homeowner will protect households from equity stripping and, importantly, promote affordability. Prohibiting certain prepayment penalties, which can increase the risk of default by as much as 20 percent, and yield-spread premiums, which encourage brokers to steer borrowers into mortgages with higher interest rates, protects potential homeowners and helps realign the interests of borrowers, brokers, originators, and investors. Finally, approximately 20 percent of new foreclosure actions involve rental properties. The Act’s protections for renters will protect individuals and families who are frequently given little or no notice that the property they rent is in foreclosure.

Yet, this bill contains serious shortcomings that will likely leave intact the destructive relationship between borrowers, brokers, originators, and investors that has worked in favor of profit-maximization, rather than in favor of quality home loans that all parties want to see repaid on schedule and in full. Indeed, much could be done to improve the legislation. Provisions that permit preemption of strong state consumer protection laws by federal statutes will harm, not help, vulnerable borrowers. Further, the Center for Responsible Lending and the National Consumer Law Center raise very serious concerns about the strength of the Mortgage Reform Act. The groups worry that remedies for violations of the Act are unworkable, that the law’s restrictions on prepayment penalties and yield-spread premiums are insufficient, and that not enough is done to ensure that “legal accountability flows through the mortgage chain.” Lawmakers should heed these concerns as the bill works its way through Congress. Additionally, future reform should mandate that a standard mortgage option, with a fixed interest rate and no “affordability” gimmicks, be offered to all homebuyers.

Unfortunately, the Mortgage Reform and Anti-Predatory Lending Act is probably the best – and perhaps the only – opportunity in the near future to reform the mortgage industry so that it looks out for the best interests of homeowners, rather than the interest of banks and brokers. In general, the Act levels the playing field for middle-class households and so should be supported. Still, we fear that the concerns of the Center for Responsible Lending and other groups will come true and homeowners will once again be left without remedy against an abusive and outsized industry that has done much harm to the economy in recent years.

From the Experts: 

“[I]t is more essential than ever that Congress pass strong, sensible lending rules that will permit the mortgage market to resume its full functioning yet will prevent abusive, unsustainable lending in the future that could return us to the current crisis. The key to reform is to realign the incentives of the market with as many bright-line rules as possible, yet also with adequate remedies to ensure that no one will fall through the cracks…Many industry interests have already begun to present objections to any limits on lending, threatening that they won’t make loans if the rules are too strong from their perspective. Yet it is the absence of substantive and effective regulation that has managed to lock down the flow of credit beyond anyone’s wildest dreams.”
– Michael Calhoun, President, Center for Responsible Lending, April 23, 2009

“Over the last few years, lenders and other participants in the mortgage industry made some serious misjudgments and mistakes. Heading that list was the assumption that housing prices would continue to rise and support increasing loan volumes. That mistaken assumption helped contribute to a relaxation in underwriting standards, including the use of “no document” loans, 100% financing, and the over-promotion of certain mortgage products, such as hybrid and option ARMs. We support legislation that will strengthen mortgage lending and securitization practices. H.R. 1728 contains provisions which would implement changes in the system and we support those which we believe strengthen the system and benefit consumers.”
– John H. Dalton, President, Housing Policy Council of the Financial Services Roundtable, April 23, 2009

Beyond this Bill: 

While the federal government continues to bail out the financial services industry, Congress and the president have yet to adopt a comprehensive solution to the foreclosure crisis. Current programs to encourage voluntary lender modification of mortgages are not working and President Obama’s Homeowner Affordability and Stability Plan is not yet off the ground. Meanwhile, 8.1 million foreclosures are expected by 2012. The federal government must work to keep vulnerable homeowners in their homes. The Helping Families Save Their Homes in Bankruptcy Amendment, which would have allowed bankruptcy judges to modify the terms of mortgages on primary residences and helped avoid 800,000 foreclosures, would be a significant start.

Maine New Hampshire Vermont Massachusetts Rhode Island Connecticut New York New Jersey Pennsylvania Delaware Maryland West Virginia North Carolina South Carolina Georgia Florida Alabama Mississippi Tennessee Virginia Kentucky Ohio Indiana Michigan Illinois Wisconsin Louisiana Arkansas Missouri Iowa Minnesota Oklahoma Kansas Nebraska South Dakota North Dakota Texas Colorado New Mexico Arizona Utah Wyoming Hawaii Alaska Montana Nevada Idaho California Oregon Washington