President Obama to Pocket-Veto Bill That Might Make It Easier to Foreclose on Homes

succabm: The bill would make it easier for people to be falsely foreclosed on. That means that it would make it easier for banks to literally steal people’s homes away who should not be foreclosed on. There was one guy who bought his home with cash and a bank still tried to foreclose on him.

Jake-
It has always been unpopular among the Left and to be fair many working or blue collar citizens and those who vote that the banking industry are predators who have all the money. This image is distorted by the insecurities of those who by virtue of their bona fide agreements are legally responsible to secure the collateral they created. Few realize that banks want no part of foreclosures, this action always created loss for the banking institution and disdain by other residents which the bank does not need.Ask yourself if an Obama pocket veto on this matter is not politically correct for his election prospects.

Oh brother, the bill simply makes using out of state notaries legal. But Obama and deadbeats worse fear is that it will allow banks to use out of state notaries to foreclose on people who don’t pay their mortgage as the system should be. If banks can’t foreclose on those not paying, they won’t giving loans to people who do pay their mortgages. Getting foreclosed on sucks, but it is legal and necessary–FOOLS.

The conservatives on this site should hold their reflexively anti-regulation horses. The whole purpose of a Notary and all that stuff is to make sure that somebody’s actually looking at all these things to make sure the foreclosures are in order.
Folks, the controversy that lead to this bill concerned people processing tens of thousands of foreclosures a day. This lead to several of the banks putting the brakes on further foreclosures, given the fact that many of their foreclosures were questionable. That might have some pretty nasty consequences. This bill, being rushed through, would have the effect of legalizing what is quite a scuzzy practice.
But hey, Regulations are bad, right? Actually making sure foreclosures are legitimate is bad, right? I mean, you wouldn’t want to be buying a foreclosed home, only to learn that the bank didn’t have the right to sell it to you, right?
If you can’t ensure the quality of our financial transactions, you will only repeat the crash of 2008

It’s not a “pocket veto” Jake. It’s a full blown actually veto.
Article 1, Sec 7 says that the President must either sign the bill or send it back to the House from which it originated with his objections within 10 days. The latter procedure is a full blown veto — and that’s what the President did with this bill.
A pocket veto would be the President not signing it — but not sending it back to Congress with his objections either because the Congress is not in session.

Tax raises for “the rich,” who earn over two-fifty grand a year, meaning a lot of small business owners who pay on income, not on profits. This socialist freak should be sent back to Kenya or Indonesia or whereever he was born—maybe even Honolulu. What a total mistake and the MSM like Tapper are responsible.

GALLUP: UNEMPLOYMENT ACTUALLY AT 10.1%…
Government ‘likely to understate’ final report before midterms…
Job losses in 2009 likely bigger than thought…
OBAMA VS AMERICA

So ABC…. why did the Senate, who fully CONTROLLS the agenda…, even bring it up for a vote…… so what was the game being played here ABC….

So basically this was a Democrat baiting game being played……. right ABC….

Why should it be more difficult to enforce a contract? Recovery will happen when the artifices of liberalism are swept out of the way.

Apparently there are a whole bunch of right wingers don’t have gainful employment out there. Look at what they spend their time doing posting their insanity here.
And by the way, since it’s come out that Banks were Notorizing fraudulent documents, isn’t vetoing this bill a good thing by right wing standards? Oh yea, right wing standards means any time you can wack a Democrat, it’s a good thing and screw the public.
PS – I’m at lunch surfing the web, what are you righties excuses?

Did the US Senate just try to undermine the American struggling class. Uh oh.

Sorry Hesiod, you’re incorrect. The bill was passed and then the Congress adjourned. If the President doesn’t sign the bill, it is dead. That is what the “pocket veto” is. For it to be a regular “veto”, it means he has to not sign it AND return it to the originating house with his objections. But if Congress is adjourned, there is no one for him to return it to. Hence, the “pocket veto” and why that name applies to this situation.

Here we go. This will most likely cost a trillion when he is done. Does this president not understand to stay out of this so we can fix it.

“Apparently there are a whole bunch of right wingers don’t have gainful employment out there. Look at what they spend their time doing posting their insanity here.”
We’re paid quite well by the Kochs. Not as well as Obama was paid by BP and Goldman Sachs, but hey, it is a living!
“And by the way, since it’s come out that Banks were Notorizing fraudulent documents, isn’t vetoing this bill a good thing by right wing standards? Oh yea, right wing standards means any time you can wack a Democrat, it’s a good thing and screw the public”
They make Rangel look like a saint. And Maxine Waters.

The Senate is still in pro forma session — so “Congress” (according to Areticle 1, Sec 7) isn’t adjourned. See Wright v United States:
“1. The first question is whether “the Congress, by their adjournment,” prevented the return of the bill by the President within the period of ten days allowed for that purpose.
“The Congress’ did not adjourn. The Senate alone was in recess. The Constitution creates and defines ‘the Congress.’ It consists ‘of a Senate and House of Representatives.’ Article 1, § 1. The Senate is not ‘the Congress.”
The context of the clause itself points the distinction. It speaks of the “House of Representatives” and of the “Senate,” respectively. It speaks of the return of the bill, if the President does not approve it, “to that House in which it shall have originated;” of reconsideration by “that House,” and, in case two thirds of “that House” agree to pass the bill, of sending it, together with the President’s objections, to the “other House” and, if approved by two thirds of “that House,” the bill is to become a law. Provision is made for the taking of the votes of “both Houses” and for the recording of the names of those voting for and against the bill on the Journal “of each House respectively.”
Then, after this precise use of terms and careful differentiation, the concluding clause describes not an adjournment of either House as a separate body, or an adjournment of the House in which the bill shall have originated, but the adjournment of “the Congress.” It cannot be supposed that the framers of the Constitution did not use this expression with deliberation, or failed to appreciate
its plain significance. The reference to the Congress is manifestly to the entire legislative body, consisting of both Houses. Nowhere in the Constitution are the words “the Congress” used to describe a single House.” 302 US 587-88.

LOL…fine Hesiod, you go ahead and argue that line all you want and see where it gets you. If you want to beat your head against the wall and pretend you are the Supreme Court making a ruling that is enforceable, be my guest. But the bill is dead and all your convoluted thinking and posting on a blog isn’t going to change one thing. Have at it though, dude…pontificating is a lonely business…LOL…

I assume the liberal media calls unfair the foreclosures that result from customers who don’t make payments on loans where their house is collateral for repayment. How dare those evil banks expect repayment!

It’s too late for the Obama administration to ruin this country. The Republicunts have already done so.

Jay Jones: You make me laugh. From 2000-2008 we had average 4-6% unemployment from 2009-2010 we have 9-10% average – plus 1 in 5 homes is being foreclosed on because dems via Fannie and Freddie collapsed the whole economy by not regulating the housing market (you dont give mortgages $500,000 mortgages to people who make 30K a year) in fact unemployed people ought to be selling their homes if they cant pay for them and rent. So yeah I sure love paying more taxes and making less money while everyone else gets free money and entitlements under democrats LOOOOL.

“So I guess when Obama gave a trillion dollars to banks last year that was ok though. Does this mean Obama wants more banks to collapse? Hmmm? Why? Maybe he wants the government to take over the banking industry, just like the auto industry and the insurance industry.”
He just wants to guarantee campaign contributions.

Hey, that shows how easy it is to get legislative approval from Congressional Republicans.
Just make sure any new legislation supports the same banking and financial malfeasance that got us all (well, most of us) in this mess.

It never fails to amaze – that people can actually side with the greedy dishonest banks and big business and not give a single thought to their own self-interests. Republicans sure do a good job of brain-washing the weak of mind.

OK people…….if you haven’t been paying your mortgage, then you need to give up the home….period. I’m sure the banks have reams of paperwork already to get through to foreclose. If you pay your mortgage payment, the bank wouldn’t be foreclosing…period. Simplifying paperwork makes sense to me.

@succabm..OBama can not destrot this country anymore bacause the bushes already did it!

this is one good thing about obama

GOD BLESS OBAMA

I guess from the majority of the responses that most of you read the bill, since you all sound like experts. And it must have been a truly bipartisan bill since you believe that the Republicans somehow snuck in a provision that so favors banks and filthy rich people. And of course you are well aware that only Republicans could pull the wool over their supporters eyes, since YOU are intellectually superior in every way.
Mind you I’m still happy about the veto. Anytime Congress is pemitted to do nothing is a plus.
But if and until you have actually read the bill, then you can only assume you have been told the truth. You can only assume you k ow what the bill would a complish or not.
And you know what happens when you assume…you make a democrat out of you and me. ;)

This bill stands to eliminate our ability for it to come to light that a ton of illegal activity went on during the boom years. Illegal activity that could harm politicians, bankers, etc. I’d speculate this was a bi-partisan “yea” in that senate as they are all in on this.

You can tell the hard core ‘R’s’ in this posting who actually believe that when the banks ‘say’ that they have a right to foreclose, they actually do. Capitalists work in our own best interests, all the time, right?
I have spent much of this year putting the Office of the Controller of the Currency between me and a Big 3 mortgage bank, who negotiated my ON TIME & FULL payment, then, sent me a letter six days later suggesting (1) that my payment was for an insufficient amount, while they (2) including a certified check from SOMEONE ELSE in the letter!!! Still not convinced, and still having not found my funds, twenty days later, they had the nerve to ask me to get a copy of the rear of my check, fax it to them before they would clear me and correct my record. Under the wrong conditions, I could have been in the street before this situation was fully ‘accepted’ by these clowns in business suits.
This is exactly the kind of abuse, incompetence, bullying and gestapo tactics that this action will prevent.
Only after the OCC complaint did the bank feel it necessary to give me a ‘hot line’ to an executive area to help me clear this matter. A wingtip in their hindquarters was what it took to get this corrected.
If we don’t put some barriers in between corporations and us, also known as checks and balances, we’ll find ourselves working 60 hours a week and living in tents.

“Wny not a full blown VETO?”…this is the presidential way of voting “present.”

obama and Pee Wee Herman, same-same

Are these guys getting their last stabs at us? why in the world would they try to pass a bill that would make it easier to take our homes? It all goes to show you had our government does not have our best intrest at heart and they are just trying to keep their money hungry buddies in the banks happy and screw us, maybe the bank are getting back us because we aren’t taking their crap anymore so they are going to take our homes now to show who’s boss, I don’t know but they aren’t stopping to see the big picture, give up their old ways and maybe they would make more money, they need to bring the realistate people back down to earth and they would not be cought up in all of this mess and people would be able to pay their mortage payments and they would get their money.