FDIC may REQUIRE 20% downpayment on homes

The FDIC may require home buyers make a 20% down payment.  One news source, quotes US Senator Isakson of Georgia, as saying  that will disqualify 60% of purchasers in the state.  He has some thirty years of real estate experience, as a founder of Northside Realty.  According to this statement, he is author of the Dodd-Frank financial reform act of 2010.  

Isakson spoke on the Senate floor to reiterate to Sheila Bair, chairman of the Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation (FDIC), and other federal regulators that he is very troubled by recent suggestions that they might be considering requiring a down-payment as large as 20 percent for a homebuyer to be eligible for the Qualified Residential Mortgage while failing to address the issue of private mortgage insurance. Isakson, along with Senators Mary Landrieu, D-La., and Kay Hagan, D-N.C., authored the Qualified Residential Mortgage provision of the Wall Street Reform and Consumer Protection Act, also known as the "Dodd-Frank financial reform bill," that was signed into law on July 21, 2010.

According to NAHB (National Association of Home Builders)

Under the Dodd-Frank financial reform law passed last year, lenders are required to have “skin in the game” by retaining five percent of the credit risk of each loan that they sell into the secondary market. The law also called for federal banking regulators to establish rules for a qualified residential mortgage (QRM) that would exempt lenders from these risk retention rules. The Dodd-Frank law exempts FHA and VA loans from the risk retention requirement and the proposed risk retention rules will not apply to Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac while they remain in conservatorship.

Where does a young couple getting $20,000 in cash to buy a $100,000 home?  Yes, it's good for people to have a substantial investment in their home and community, but is 20% realistic?  Certainly 0% down wasn't.

Reportedly purchasers may still be able to obtain PIM insurance but at higher rates.  Apparently the FDIC determination will be made in June.  That's just before HB87 will become effective, assuming Governor Deal signs.

It should be noted that Sheila Bair, will leave the FDIC on July 8th:  http://www.viewheadlines.com/News/Article.aspx?i=250041&t=Bair-to-step-down-as-FDIC-chairman-in-July.  Will that alter things?

Some believe the depressed housing market is holding back economic recovery.  But ask yourself.  If people are still unemployed with few prospects in sight, or if they recently found a new job, won't it be at least one year before they are likely to qualify for a mortgage?  The housing issue is likely to persist for some time, possibly a couple of years.

So, housing isn't what is holding back the economy. It's more complicated.  Mortgages were possibly too easy to get with zero down, no doc loans.   Jobs were exported. AGAIN.  Remember when "mill towns" became ghost towns as the mills shut down and those jobs were moved overseas?

Georgian's aren't eager to work 14 hour days harvesting crops in the the scorching sun and high humidity, by hand. Not all crops can be harvested mechanically.  They don't live where the crops are grown.  And what will they do when Georgia crops have been harvested?  How will they earn a living?   If they migrate, as our current agriculture work force does, they won't be here spending money.   And regardless of education they don't have the skills necessary - they aren't farmers.   This country needs to make some changes, become innovative, and find new economic drivers.  But that's another issue. 

Could the FDIC require Georgia borrowers to meet the 20% down in part because of the state ranking number ONE in the nation for bank failures?  That remains to be seen.  Stay tuned.

A  20% downpayment for  purchasers would no doubt compound housing issues in Georgia.  Selling a home will be significantly more difficult.  Currently homes remain on the market for extended periods.  Some years.  Very troubling, particularly with the prospect of so many vacant housing units likely to be coming available.

Georgia's Anti-Immigration Pending Legislation

If Georgia citizens realized what these anti-immigration bills will do if enacted THEY would run for the border and escape Georgia.  The legislation won't accomplish what the public wants but unfortunately it will cost taxpayers and business dearly.   

Arizona business leaders are distressed over the situation created by that states anti-immigration legislation.  Sixty of Arizona's big company leaders sent a letter to Arizona this week.   There is a link to the letter in the Arizona Republic News.

Police resources are already stretched thin.  These "new crimes" will distract police focus away from  higher/serious offenders (Level I & II) in the community and put the focus on immigrants who may have been riding a bicycle or fishing without a license.

Additionally some of the legislation will further burden the child welfare system when one parent is jailed for one of these "new crimes" and the other is sent to ICE detention.

Some Georgia jurisdictions already participate in the 287g program which has also experienced controversy.   

House Bill 59 - Would bar undocumented aka unauthorized immigrants from attending Georgia public universities and technical colleges even if they pay higher out-of-state tuition (as the current law allows).  Those paying out of state tuition actual pay more than the costs of the universities, so undocumented students are funding the education of citizens.  One argument given by bill supporters is the undocumented take seats from citizens.  Those here on Student Visas can attend those same schools. Their families do NOT live here or contribute to the tax base,  while undocumented people/families DO pay Georgia taxes. 

House Bill 87 - (Georgia's answer to Arizona's SB1070) Multiple components: Mandates E-Verify; ID Theft, with stiff penalties for using giving an invented name and/or for making up a 9 digit Social Security number;  Licensed drivers, authorized residents can be arrested, jailed, fined AND have the vehicle seized for having an undocumented adult passengers in a vehicle under the "transporting" provision;  "Sheltering" - A husband or wife can be arrested, jailed and fined for providing "shelter" and food to their undocumented spouse - the parent of their children.  Same applies to roommate situations.  

House Bill 296: If passed, would mandate local school and hospitals to count the illegal immigrants they treat.  In order to get an accurate count they would have to ask ALL patients for that information.  This would be burden on schools AND medical providers as well as PATIENTS.  AND likely necessitate costly changes to records systems & databases. 

Senate Bill 7: If passed, would ban undocumented workers from collecting workers’ compensation benefits for on-the-job injuries.  This is particularly troublesome as those injuries now covered by workers comp would still need to be treated.  Again burdening healthcare providers.  Undocumented workers frequently work positions authorize residents don't want.  As a result some are at risk from falls, wounds and exposure to chemicals such as insectides and weedkillers.

Senate Bill 27: Toughens current laws to prevent state agencies and counties from hiring undocumented workers for taxpayer-funded projects.

Senate Bill 65: Would prohibit undocumented immigrants from collecting unemployment benefits.  This isn't needed as undocumented people are already prohibited from collecting unemployment benefits. 

Senate Bill 104:  Has components similar to HB 87 and SB 40.   Punishes drivers who pick up day laborers in certain situations.  Would allow warrantless arrests of those who police have probable cause to believe have committed 'any public offenses' that make them eligible for deportation.  

Senate Bill 174: Would require all jails in Georgia to participate in Secure Communities. The program compares the fingerprints of people booked into jails against a federal database, and if an unlawful immigrant is determined,  ICE is notified and may place a detainer on the party.  See "Secure Communities" info at ICE.

Georgia House Bill 72 (HB72)

English only Driver Testing

The Georgia House of Representatives discussed House Bill 72, the "English-only" driver license bill today.  Georgia has for many years, administered the written portion of the driver’s test in 13 languages in addition to English.  This bill would eliminate all but the English tests.  Those who can NOT read and write would continue be given the test ORALLY in English testing

This same issue was presented last year but was not passed.  

HB72 - The Supporters View:  

Change is needed for SAFETY;  driver’s must be able to read electronic signs, such as those on the metro area interstates warning of accidents or other hazards ahead.  

Literate residents who can’t read and write English would get a one-time five year provisional license giving them time to learn English. 

Illiterate residents don't significantly contribute to traffic problems in Gwinnett County; it's immigrants who do.

Commercial drivers and airline pilots are required to have a command of English. 

One traffic accident cited as an example, occurred in 2000 when, a Mexican man, driving on a South Carolina driver’s license, allegedly caused a fatal accident while speeding.  Dustin Inman, a 16 year old was killed.  

Those Opposed say:  

If the need to read English is a safety issue, why continue to issue driver's licenses to the illiterate?

Why are residents OK to drive for five years, but suddenly unsafe AFTER five years.

Speeding would be more likely to factor into the cause of the accident than the origin of the driver or his language abilities.  

My Take:   

• People drive all over the world.   
• Visitors from many foreign lands can drive in Georgia on their “home” license WITHOUT obtaining a Georgia license.  Why are Georgia RESIDENTS less safe?  Presumably residents are more likely to KNOW the streets than foreign drivers.
• Driver’s license testing is to insure that the operator can safely operate a vehicle, recognize road signs and see adequately to drive.  NOT to test their language skills.  
• Commercial drivers - drive for a living.  They may be transporting materials, sometimes hazardous, that require the ability to convey that information to authorities should an incident occur.  That situation is unlikely to occur with the average driver.  Pilots and others who  transport humans understandably have a need to speak English.  
• Even some street names and signs signs utilize foreign names. 
• The cost of living is such in Gwinnett County that one would expect FEW illiterate people could afford to live there, so naturally there would be fewer involved in traffic incidents.  There are also programs to teach the illiterate basic skills.  
• Targeting those not fluent in English, as the cause of accidents, is like targeting ALL driver's with green eyes because someone with green eyes had an accident. 
• Georgia is home to the worlds busiest airport  Hartsfield-Jackson International Airport, Atlanta, Georgia.  Atlanta is an international city that wants to attract foreign business, trade and investors.     

Why are we wasting taxpayer dollars rehashing an out dated concept?  Supporters of HB72 can hardly be considered conservative with taxpayer resources or dollars.  One must  wonder how much time and money was spent drafting this legislation.   Hundreds of lawmakers and average citizens have spent countless hours pouring over this issue.  

This is NOT the way to create jobs for Georgia.

If SAFETY were the issue, Georgia would erect directional signs, cross street ahead indicator signs and warning signs in far more places and far more consistently.  

     In 2007, a multi-fatal charter bus accident occurred in Atlanta Georgia while transporting team members from Bluffton University in Bluffton Ohio to a game.  Inadequate and confusing signage was cited as a causal factor in the one vehicle accident.  http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bluffton_University_bus_accident  

     While signage was modified at the site of this accident, it remains lacking in other locations throughout the state.  Including at ingress and egress points in and surrounding Hartsfield-Jackson airport. 

Could it be that those who support the “English Only testing” position would prefer to return to the era of early 1940s Georgia?  Before World War II, before Civil Rights?      

The bill was tabled today but will come up again.