Over the past few weeks Republicans in Congress have led efforts to eliminate four foreclosure alternative and prevention plans, saying that they are doing more harm than good. Many experts agree with them, since programs like HAMP have dramatically underperformed while still effectively using millions or even billions of taxpayer money. The Department of Housing and Urban Development, however, believes that these programs are doing their jobs, providing “relief to tens of thousands of families who are still struggling to make ends meet after the deepest economic recession and housing crisis in a generation”.
Given that HAMP alone was projected to help three to four million people, tens of thousands seems like something of a letdown, particularly when you factor in that Neil Barofsky, special inspector general for the TARP program and HAMP watchdog, has publicly stated that “the program may be causing more harm than good”. Barofsky has since resigned his position, saying that “it is absolutely heartbreaking the number of families that are not being reached by this program [HAMP].”
Since the Obama administration has publicly stated that it will veto any bill terminating HAMP, NSP (Neighborhood Stabilization Program), the Emergency Homeowner Relief Program or the FHA Short Refi Program – all of which are in congressional crosshairs for failing to adequately help homeowners while burning through taxpayer funds – the entire argument may be moot once the bills pass the house and move on to the senate. Do you think that if these termination bills can pass the Democrat-dominated senate that Obama should veto them?
Thank you for reading the Bryan Ellis Real Estate Letter.
Your comments and questions are welcomed below.