OCPP Finds Racial Pattern in Oregon's Subprime Lending

OCPP's findings are consistent with those of a report released last year by six housing research and advocacy groups that examined five cities where Washington Mutual lends.

(SILVERTON, Ore.) - As the Oregon legislature prepares to consider stronger regulation of the mortgage loan industry, a new analysis by the Oregon Center for Public Policy has found a racial pattern in the state's subprime lending.

A state Senate committee hearing on SB 1090, which proposes to better regulate Oregon's mortgage industry, is scheduled for tomorrow.

At all income levels, Oregon's African American and Hispanic borrowers are more likely than whites to have received subprime loans, said OCPP. It found, for example, that about half of African American and Hispanic middle-income borrowers received subprime loans in 2006, compared to just 25 percent of their white counterparts.

OCPP cautioned that by itself the analysis does not prove racial discrimination, because it does not control for factors such as borrower credit scores and other measures of risk. Still, the Silverton-based think tank noted that respected national studies that have attempted to control for these sorts of factors have still found unexplained racial disparities in the cost of home loans.

Besides examining racial disparities in Oregon's overall mortgage market, OCPP also analyzed the lending of Washington Mutual, one of the country's largest lenders, to understand more clearly how racial disparities may arise. OCPP found that most of Washington Mutual's African American and Hispanic borrowers had their loans through a Washington Mutual subsidiary focused on subprime loans, Long Beach Mortgage Company.

In 2006, 63 percent and 74 percent of Washington Mutual's African American and Hispanic borrowers, respectively, obtained their home loans through Long Beach Mortgage, while only 17 percent of Washington Mutual's white borrowers got theirs through the subsidiary, OCPP calculated.

That same year, nine out of 10 loans (91 percent) issued by Long Beach Mortgage in Oregon were subprime, compared to only one out of every 28 loans (3.6 percent) issued by its parent, Washington Mutual.

"Most of Washington Mutual's African American and Latino borrowers ended up with the subprime-peddling subsidiary, rather than being serviced by the parent's traditional retail operation," said Leachman. "That's a troubling pattern, particularly since subprime loans are much more likely to end up in foreclosure."

As with numerous other studies of subprime lending, OCPP counted as "subprime" primary single-family home purchase and refinance loans with interest rates at least three points higher than U.S. Treasuries of the same maturity and second mortgage loans with rates more than five points higher than Treasuries.

OCPP's findings are consistent with those of a report released last year by six housing research and advocacy groups that examined five cities where Washington Mutual lends: New York, Los Angeles, Chicago, Boston and Charlotte. That report found similar racial disparities in Washington Mutual's lending practices, as well those of other large lenders.

Unlike Washington Mutual itself, its subsidiary Long Beach Mortgage sold loans through a network of mortgage brokers, said Leachman. "Mortgage brokers in Oregon are not well regulated," he added.

Under current state law, Leachman said, mortgage brokers can receive a kick-back for selling a loan at interest rates exceeding the lowest rate for which the borrower qualifies and they have no statutory responsibility to act in good faith to provide their customers with the best product.

Senate Bill 1090 - which the legislature will consider during the upcoming special session and which is the subject of a public hearing to be held tomorrow before the Senate Interim Committee on Commerce and Labor - will address these and other problems in Oregon's mortgage lending industry, Leachman said. "It's past time for the legislature to step up to eliminate conditions that foster predatory lending," he added.

Ironically, regulatory changes to subprime lending in Oregon likely won't affect Washington Mutual. The company, facing surging defaults and a plummeting stock price, announced in December that it will "[d]iscontinue all remaining lending through its subprime mortgage channel."

The contemplated legislative changes also will do little for those Oregonians stuck with subprime loans who qualified for less expensive ones, said Leachman. "They are the real victims of the whole subprime fiasco."

Source: Oregon Center for Public Policy, a non-partisan research institute that does in-depth research and analysis on budget, tax, and economic issues. The Center's goal is to improve decision making and generate more opportunities for all Oregonians.

Salem-News.com Top Stories

2025: Hope for the Best, Prepare for the Worst

Two Wars with No Way Out

No One Owns the Future

The Ugly Origins of Trump's America First Policy

A One-State Solution Could Transform the World

Comments Leave a comment on this story.

All comments and messages are approved by people and self promotional links or unacceptable comments are denied.

Richard j Pollak February 10, 2008 11:06 am (Pacific time)

From; Richard j Pollak fersur@sbcglobal.net 4541 C.R.138A Alvin Texas 77511

Sued Mortgage holder Washington Mutual for Bank One

N.A. lost Principal Payment and Homeside Lending lost

Escrow, Homeside Lending Testified for Washington Mutual that Curtailments are "Common Practice" now undefended advised to Motion Appeal Roguish Judgment Ignorant of "RULE" Guidelines that beyond Constitution or Civil Rights Precedents International Commerce of Credit for Check Payments Transferred!

In 2008 Judge Ruled $1,000.00 Judgment Awarded in 2006 to be Paid, without help, from no fault of mine, I stand to lose my 15 Year Fixed 6.5 % First only Mortgaged Home, Second or Refinanced was Blocked, Bankruptcy was forced, Judgment with 24 Months Interest of $200.00 demanded {refused $1,000.00 plus half Interest of $100.00 Settlement} again Lender wasting Court Time. Likely losing home follows, from Forced Bankruptcy, Five Year battle, now Days.

Understanding Real-estate School's geared for Teaching not Defending, and Bar Reviews without License Removal. I'm just a People unprotected from longstanding power abusers bordering Criminal by toying Duty. Laws usefulness challenge to School culprit by default Teaching, Houston Defenders Cower Merits allowing Judicial Supremacy to trump International Commerce!

CLERK OF THE BANKRUPTCY COURT Case # 02-44178-H3-13 Case closed then Reopened only to allow overcharges return, Twice.

The B.B.B. Reduced Washington Mutual Rating from Officer to Insufficient for Three Years from Failure to Supply RESPA Loan History requested two 1/2 Years Ago, Pretrial. Also; Judgment Awarded $1,000.00 for Failure to Supply RESPA Section 6' Loan History requested, called "qualified written request" Line-item coveted Today!

Entire Trial was Predetermined {Protected under Judge "SEAL"} Defendant was revised to Former Corporate entity, Change of Venue or Jury Trial formally requested!

After Bankruptcy release of STAY Washington Mutual Released Loan History, Proof of Damage became COMPLAINT SEEKING DAMAGE IN CORE ADVERSARY PROCEEDING AND CLAIM OBJECTION or Appellant {Me} Suing Lender!

Protected under Judge "SEAL" original Appellee Homeside Lending, became Washington Mutual Witnessing Homeside Lending!

Washington Mutual Admitted Fault Pretrial. Lender Witnessing Lender Defended Principal and Escrow Abuse Testified as "Common Practice" Supported by Judgment absence, $1,565.14 reported Lost on Credit Report's and it's Taxable to IRS! Judge failed to Arbitrate. Appellate Judge failed to reopen. FIFTH CIRCUIT failed to reopen. Appellate Attorney failed to Verse Merits or Supply Case to Printer for U.S.SUPREME COURT review.

Now Washington Mutual has returned Core Mortgage Arrearages that Forced Bankruptcy filing, in essence reversing Judgment, repeating admittance, skirting Damage's!

Many DISPUTES resolved with refunds, the following Remain! DISPUTE = Trustee Overcharges $6,612.67 Due. DISPUTE = IRS Form 1098/Homeside Lending $383.88 Due. DISPUTE = Washington Mutual $1,155.01 Due Total Due = $8,151.56. DISPUTE = Washington Mutual 6 1/2 Years Day-Rate Damage to be determined! DISPUTE = Trial requesting change of Venue or Jury!

1. $383.88 = Homeside Lending Form 1098 @2

2. $2,085.00 = $885.00 + $1,200.00 Attorney Fee's @3B

3. $1,878.36 = San Antonio Federal Credit Union revised Payment Book @3C

4. $2.649.31 = San Antonio False Charge @3E

5. $200.00 = Washington Mutual Unpaid Interest on Judgment Posted $1,000.00 times 24 Months @4A

6. $955.01 = Washington Mutual Returned Core Bankruptcy Arrearages 1/2 Interest remains Due. @4B

7. Bank One Payments Misdirected 6 1/2 Years Damages for Misapplications of $1,565.14? @5B Accounting Interest, Action and Results Damage's!

Every one of these Seven have been Disputed without resolve, Interest of 10% Paid to Trustee relates Damages acquired.

Homeside Lending, Reported Form 1098 $383.88 @2 Trustee's Due - Original Attorney $2,085.00 @3B Trustee/San Antonio Due @3C $1,878.36 + @3E $2.649.31 = $4,527.67 Due. Total Trustee @3B, @3C, @3E = $6,612.67 Due. Washington Mutual Due @4A $200.00 + @4B $955.01 = $1,155.01 Total Due $8,151.56 Plus Day Rate Damages from September, 2001 to Date, from Washington Mutual Due.

@1A. Judge saw fit to State on Judgment, assertion assumption of My being Predisposed for Bankruptcy.

B. Judge Cropped "DEED OF TRUST" Contract by Edit, Lenders "General Terms and Conditions" was Breached Testified Escrow Mismanagement's "common practice" Defense!

C. Judgment Quoted partial Paragraph omitting Substance to revise intent, done without Publication to formulate "Case Law" dispute as Colluded!

D, Colluded Pretrial, Protected under "Seal," Defendant change from Washington Mutual to Homeside Lending, a Preexisting Corporate Lender that held Note Prior, blanketed under Washington Mutual Support, Loan Originator Damages was Muted Pretrial in the Eye of the Judge, by the Judge, {the foremost primary Substance of Case.} "Seal" Hobbled my defense be it Judge and Lender, or Judge and Lender and My Attorney.

E. Judge changed Defendant of Record from Homeside Lending to Washington Mutual allowing Washington Mutual Attorney to Defend and Place Homeside Lending on Stand to Testify, My Case was Proved by Lender Admittance Pretrial, Judge failed to award Damages for Lender Admittance's.

vF. Same Judge Confirmed Bankruptcy and Core Adversary Hearings and Over-Ruled Personal Order, Commanding My Attorney at Recorded Bankruptcy Conformation Hearing {to File "Proof of Claim" on My behalf} then failed to recall, {minutes under "Seal"} relating time expired fault, in Judgment.

G. Judge failed to admit into Evidence Letter Drafted with Attorney, Sent by My Attorney "Certified Mail" requesting Loan Payment History, REQUIRED DISCLOSURE RESPA Section 6 called "qualified written request." lacks Response or Resolve to Date.

H. Judge Posted US Mail 100 Days following Trial, Judgment backdated Two Days by administration, and Ignored "RULE" Bankruptcy's Guideline, that extended Appeal Days for clarification. To explain; Six Days Received, Eight Days Used, Twelve Days expired, Ten Days Allowed? {Excusable Neglect Argued} Five additional Days Bankruptcy "RULE" Precedent Ignored by Judge.

I. Second Appellate Judge reviewed My Case Docketed first directly following the Main ENRON Trial as seated Judge in the same Court House, for to allow My Case on Merits Required Judge Reprimanding for all the above, @1A, @1B, @1C, @1D, @1E, @1F, @1G.

J. Repeat Scenario by New Orleans FIFTH CIRCUIT Courts, Merits required Reprimanding. @1I, @1H.

K. Appellate Attorney failed to supply Case to Printer for U.S.A. Supreme Court Review, actual Merits were unexplored and not perfected only Excusable Neglect.

@2. Bank One Received all Payments in 2001, Loan Transferred to Homeside Lending November, 2001 receiving "0" Funds in 2001, reported on I.R.S. Mortgage Interest Statement $383.88 Form 1098, $383.88 Due.

@3A. Original Attorney Ignored Order from Judge to File My "Proof Of Claim" before additional allocated set-back Time expired. Bankruptcy Conformation was Suspended for Six Weeks allowing, failing his Duty he Quit, but Trustee rewarded! Dispute First Compensation, Reported Quit Case after 10 Months. $885.00 Due. Dispute $1,200.00 Second Compensation, Recorded to Courts he Quit Case after 14 Months. $1,200.00

B. Trustee Statements Detailed Original Attorney Received $1,200.00 after Courts 90 Day Dispute Time-frame had expired, Today's Trustee Account Summary fails to detail @3A document covets disbursement. Dispute = @3A $885.00 + $1,200.00 = $2,085.00 Due

C. Attorney Re'termed San Antonio Federal Credit Union, Auto Loan Principal by extension of Months Financed, Posting new Coupon Book that added Three Months, Timed with Quiting Case, Loan was Current. $1,878.36 Due

D. San Antonio Federal Credit Union denied it Re'termed with Letterhead Coupon Book at hand, but also Re'termed Loan Principal by extension of Months Financed adding Two Months, found by researching @3C, received requested amortize payoff, Loan was Current, Germaine to Repossession, Payments halted for surrender.

Timed with @1F being Ignored, RESPA ACT SECTION 6, Requiring written Acknowledgment within 20 Days, written clarification within 90 Days, equating Judgment Award, To Date Ignored even through Discovery Pretrial Questions.

E. Trustee charged Non-Mortgage Arrearage of $2,504.48 + $1.44.83 Interest Crediting San Antonio Federal Credit Union, Loan was Current, Timed with Attorney Quiting Case. $2,649.31 Due.

Total - @3B $2.085.00 + @3C $1,878.36 + @3E $2,649.31 = $6,621.67

@4A. Washington Mutual Attorney Questioned in Testimony at Appeal Hearing, my accounts accreditation of $660.00 Judgment, Disrespecting $1,000.00 Judgment with Question.

I Testified not $660.00, and the Judgment amount was unpaid, Just now Posted to Pay, without 24 Months Interest, from Judgment to Date. about $200.00 Due.

B. Washington Mutual Returned November, 2007 Core Mortgage Arrearages, in essence reversing Judgment, half of related Interest $955.01 Due.

C. Loan Originated Bank One N.A. / Loan Transferred to Homeside Lending / Homeside Lending F.A. was Bought/Acquired by Washington Mutual N.A. Washington Mutual Attorney Witnessed, Homeside Lending Manager/Lender/Supervisor at Trial.

LOAN HISTORY Bank One receives payment and Statement Bills following Month with a single detachable coupon. All Bank One payment's including December, 2001 current with coupon, first Three Homeside Lending Payments were current, Twelve current payments with Year old Loan resulted in Escrow Shortage demand of over $100.00 a Month. Bank One Loan History refused, with Homeside Lending Coveting Transferred first 20-so Days History, until release of Stay Day's History surrender, that proved both Lenders misapplication Breaches of Trust.

First; Bank One Credited December, 2001 Payment. Contract defines Misapplication Damages, so sought.

Second; Bank One Suspended the Funds from Principal and Escrow.

Third; Bank One Placed Suspended Funds into Loans Principal reducing 180 Month Terms, Homeside Lending first discovered after Release of Stay December 15, 2006.

Forth; Bank One Posted, Final Account Report, Stating Payments had been and are $100.00 more than actuality.

Fifth; Bank One Transferred Loan to Homeside Lending. Washington Mutual called-it December 2001 was Curtailed by Bank One. Documented and Evidenced, but argued in Court that it was a Concealed Prepayment {a Misnomer} not as Stated by Lenders Posted Report Evidenced, a "Principal Curtailment" {unauthorized concealed.}

Sixth; Washington Mutual called November 2001 Escrow Mismanagement by Homeside Lending, Admitted, Documented and Evidenced, but argued in Court that it was a Concealed Prepayment {a Misnomer} not what I call "Escrow Curtailment," using their word back at Lender.

Seventh; Homeside Lending requested November Payment, informed December was Paid in Full, Homeside Lending reported Account was being Investigated.

Eight; Homeside Lending Requested/Received Check Payment Front and Back Photocopy.

Ninth; Homeside Lending Reduced Escrow and Applied Funds to Principal and credited Escrow Paid in November for November. {Washington Mutual claims in November for December.} real time Loan Statements support November, 2001

Tenth; Homeside Lending Paid Loans Years Taxes Putting Escrow into Arrears then Returned Escrow Surplus Increasing Arrears.

Eleventh; Loan Statements and Twice Requested Loan History all "Blank" of December Payment, not owed/due/paid, resulting in False Credit Reports and 1098 Form Tax on Interest Report, Refinance was Blocked.

Twelfth; All Loan History Reports before and through Bankruptcy omitted Homeside Lending Payment History detailing first 28 Days, protecting Escrow Reduction Misapplication, including all Bank One Loan History Request.

Thirteenth; Washington Mutual Released Bankruptcy Stay then Loan Payment History on same Day, receiving Bank One and coveted Homeside Lending first 28 Days Proof of Principal and Escrow Misapplications admittance response Trial resulted.

Fourteenth; Misapplication admittance was excluded by "Common Practice" Defense by Homeside Lending, from the Stand in Testimony.

Fifteenth; Judge refused Appeal Ignoring Bankruptcy "RULE" claiming time expired, ENRON Judge Supported, FIFTH CIRCUIT Supported ENRON Judge.

ATTORNEYS One; All the First Attorney actions stand abusive.

Two; Second Attorney benefited by assuming first Attorney's Caseload bulk timed with our Contract.

Third; Attorney Immediately Drafted Loan History Request using REQUIRED DISCLOSURE PER RESPA ACT Section 6 "qualified written request" no reply, ever, Sent "Certified Mail" not allowed admitted into evidence, to Date Substance Ignored.

Forth; I Drafted from Attorney's "qualified written request" revised "Qualified Written Request" sent "Certified Mail" admitted into Evidence, allowing $1,000.00 Damage Award for being Ignored, only, Merit of Substance of Questions Unanswered today.

Fifth; Attorney received Damage award, through Appeal Washington Mutual Suspended Payment, Attorney remained Attorney of record awaiting Award Payment only.

Sixth; Judge ruled Award Payments, 2008, I Demand 24 Months Interest from Judgment to Date, and awaiting.

Seventh; Appellate Attorney only argued "Excusable Neglect" assuming Two Days expired for Appeal, when Prescient setting Bankruptcy "RULE" extends time guideline, Ten Days were not received.

Eight; Case never was presented to printer for U.S. SUPREME COURT Revue, I stand Unrepresented, Squatting, with suggestion of filing Motion, Houston Bar Association Fails, Security Exchange Commission Fails, Judgment Fails, Comptroller of the Currency Fails, U.S Attorney General Fails, the indiscretion relates to Credit for Payments Made, Governed by International Substance permitting Commerce, beyond Civil Rights or Constitutionality.

JUDGE'S Houston Core Adversary Judge {Famed} Ruled over Case that was by far the largest Bankruptcy Worldwide ever {Russia Oilfield Equipment.} My excused $1,565.14 Lost Payments, have never been return requested, Forced Bankruptcy Day-Rate Damages Are. Time to Appeal was denied, Extended Appeal Time was excused overruling Bankruptcy "RULE."

Appellate Judge {Famed} Concluded ENRON Case just prior to My Appeal review, allowing My Appeal would Highlight flawed U.S. Attorney General Oversight of U.S. Bankruptcies and Trustee's.

FIFTH CIRCUIT was Appealed to Overrule ENRON Judge.

@5A. San Antonio Federal Credit Union Payment Book received revised with extended Terms relating, Additional Payment Amount Increased $1,878.36, Sent by Original Attorney as he exited Case, return required $1,878.36 Due. @3B B. San Antonio Federal Credit Union Unsecured Claim of $2,504.48 + $144.83 Interest = $2,649.31 Due. Total = @3B $1,878.36 + @3B $2,649.31 = $4,527.67 Due.

@6. Both' Bank One Payments, Admitted in Testimony Misdirect by Escrow Misapplications {Judge fails to Publish relative "Case Law" allowing "common practice" as defended to stand.} $1,633.44 - $68.28 the P.M.I. insurance = $1,565.14 + Interest from September, 2001 to Date, with forced Bankruptcy Damages at whatever Day rate Damages equates $1,565.14 and Day-Rate Damages Due.

@7A. First Attorney Accepted Case and Prevision of providing Loan History Payment Assistance Credit, accepting and retaining original Loan Documents, from Day one.

B. Original Bankruptcy Attorney was not Board Certified, he Stated that he Quit My Case, after additional Pre'Conformation Time Judge Suspended expired, Four Months Prior to Notice that he was Quiting all Houston, TX. Caseload, assumed San Antonio, TX. Move.

C. Letter received recommended Second Attorney Board Certified, that assumed bulk-load of Originals Attorneys Cases, followed recommendation.

D. Second Attorney's first Action was Drafting RESPA SECTION 6 "qualified written request" Dated February 12, 2001 Sent by Attorney "Certified Mail."

E. Receiving no response, Payments were halted for Court Appearance, {Release of Stay} Attorney's first no-show.

F. I Drafted and sent "Qualified Written Request" Trustee, All Lenders, Texas Bar Association, Comptroller of the Currency, Bush, U.S. Attorney General, B.B.B. and many more, requesting assistance with Ignored RESPA Request.

G. My RESPA Request was admitted into evidence but line Item response. Germain Questions remain coveted, now Protected as Judged.

H. Stay was released, equating My being a Squatter, I called Washington Mutual Requesting for the up-tee-nth-time Loan History, Received and both Lenders Misapplications Highlighted, Lender admitted Error's, Attorney backdated hearing request, with the Courts assistance.

I. Core Adversary Pretrial Hearing, Attorney no-show, assistant Attorney {never meet} stated acceptance of Case, Paperwork was not ready, Judge told Me about to dismiss, out of hand.

J. About 105 Days following Trial Judgment received by U.S. Mail, Appeal required new Attorney and understandable arguments for Attorney to accept. Days later Attorney called stating Time was of up-most Importance for appeal, Less than Week was never expected.

K. Appellate Attorney Stuck with Excusable Neglect as Defense through the FIFTH CIRCUIT COURT, many Attorney Hours spent requesting Merit Defense on Phone, and In Office, final days for U.S. SUPREME COURT and Argument-ing the Unpaid RESPA Damage Award was Not-awarded presented as Case Summery, Case was without Case Merit review, Printer Time, Case Expired.

L. Washington Mutual Returned all Funds and half the Interest that forced Bankruptcy, but still Protects Insurance Lapses and backdated Loan Summery disputing Real time Loan Statements Received, Evidenced, Argued without Damage Award.

M. I Demand Credit Report revision/notation of Lender's Arrears returned, Bankruptcy cannot be reversed but Credit Report can Direct faults blame.

Jefferson February 3, 2008 11:34 am (Pacific time)

Say "Posters/Lurkers" are you familar with a saying by Albert Einstein" "Doing the same thing over and over again and expecting different results is insane!" Does that sound like familar behavior coming from the same poster? Ummmmm lol...

Henry Ruark February 3, 2008 8:10 am (Pacific time)

To all: "...donate my winning$ to the impoverished children of laid off New York Times' workers.." That's safe-enough promise since, for the record, no NY Times working staff from newsroom or media enterprises have been "laid off", albeit some changes have been made to accommodate shifts in responsibilities and activity demanded by shifts in the technology of news-gathering and publication. Publisher recently moved leading conservative Kristol onto Ed Page to preserve and protect balance and fairness, with notable lack of evaluation from conservatives. Might be they fear contrast with others on that page, which is notable for its own fairness/balance and enduring statements of realities.

Neal Feldman February 3, 2008 3:22 am (Pacific time)

Jefferson - Not just AZ but OK too... they are fleeing OK like cockroaches scurry when the lights go on. Unfortunately most are not going home they are just moving to Sanctuary states and Sanctuary cities who undermine the laws of this country. Ah well...

Neal Feldman February 3, 2008 3:19 am (Pacific time)

Henry Ruark - There is no constitutional problem with anything I proposed. The govt can fine businesses who hire, landlords who house/sucor or anyone else who aids and abets criminals. And illegals are, by definition, criminals. Those in this country illegally have no right to social services. ER services for life threatening situations should be allowed just on the basis of humanitarian compassion... they still have no RIGHT to it. They certainly have no right to drivers licences or any professional or occupational licenses or certifications. Even the policy of granting citizenship to the children of those here illegally is constitutionally suspect but I have little issue with the kid born here having citizenship. I oppose their use as 'anchor babies' illegitimately granting their illegal parents the right to stay here. As I presented, in such cases the illegal parent of a child born in the US has a choice... leave with the child who can return if they wish when an adult, or place the kid with a guardian who is lrgally in the country and the illegal leaves the country. No, not a good fun choice but who was it who created the situation where the choice was needed? The illegal who ran across the border like a running back lunges for the goal line to get into the US before birth to score 'the touchdown'. There is no constitutional right an illegal has to work in the US. Neither is there a constitutional right any illegal has to shelter in the US or to social services in the US etc. There is no constitutional right violated by enforcing a law that if you are caught in the US illegally you will never be allowed to return to the US legally. None at all. Would there be disruption as 10-30 million illegals fled? Probably. Such disruption would quickly pass. The govt can institute a legitimate guest worker program for the tens of millions seeking LEGAL entry to the US which can fill the 'jobs no one else will do'... other jobs will be filled by the un/under-employed once the wages are no longer held down by the presence of illegal workers (who will come themselves, not with their entire family and who will leave when their job is done not just continue to hang around), and part of the savings from not having to provide services to all the illegals and their burgeoning broods can go into a fund (along with the sale of all the property left behind, real and other - legitimate use of civil forfeiture) tp pay debts they left unpaid. Class sizes will get back to normal 20ish instead of unworkable 40+ reducing the need to build more and more multi-million dollar schools, the savings on less ESL programs alone will allow for betterment of education for those supposed to be here. (those here legally). See? Ah well...

Henry Ruark February 2, 2008 6:36 pm (Pacific time)

To all: Never any question re heavy majority wishes to clear up immigration mess. BUT still no answer to what can be done legally AND Constitutionally. Avoidance of issue not at all surprising. Challenge to do Op Ed on problem still stands.

Jefferson February 2, 2008 6:09 pm (Pacific time)

Over 80% of Americans want our illegal immigration laws enforced. The minority opinion, which I think it would be impossible for me to care less about, are free to opine all they want...it's their right in the U.S. Constitution (an instrument written for Americans, by the way, for those of you who are clueless to that special little factoid). Go New England , will donate my winning$ to the impoverished children of laid off New York Times' workers...LOL

Henry Ruark February 2, 2008 4:37 pm (Pacific time)

To All: Obvious and very clumsy distortion obfuscates fact entirely --no question of enforcing laws, but of Constitutional protection for employers and others, including illegals, guaranteed Bill of Rights protection by that very same Constitutional statement. AND of very heavy costs for the demanded bureaucracy, some new and some restoring slashes from current "administration." H-i-W knows this, and knows very well delay, defense, determined resistance from his cult and cabal will occur precisely as I predicted, protecting ongoing low-wage lure put in place purposely for precisely these purposes; but it is in his economic interest to distort realities, since his class lives on the results and consequences while the rest of us suffer the huge hurts to unions, workers, and our society and democracy. Professional statement re this would have checked for sure with legal source; so happens I have done so, with friend, by phone, currently in Oregon agency which entirely qualifies response. I await similar check and honest report from "others". SO you pays your money and you takes your choice: the source you know via "see with own eyes" and think "with own brain", or "ME !! ME!! ME!!" Not only hydra-headed, with growing count of advanced degrees, but forked-tongue also on many points, facts, numbers, issues, and problems. Note no answers to mine re specific actions to solve this migration problem: So where are they ? Seems natural place for own Op Ed, setting forth full detail answer for each question and supplying source for each, checkable by you and by me, don't you agree ? Editor awaiting his contact for that purpose, space ready for whatever can be supplied.

Jefferson February 2, 2008 1:53 pm (Pacific time)

So Neal has there been a problem with the Arizona approach as per their new laws that went into effect 1/1/08 dealing with illegals? It's been my observation that a small, but vocal minority are absolutely clueless about what danger the illegals will create if left alone. As far as constitutional laws on addressing this problem, well I imagine that if enforcing our laws is unconstitutional, then the constitution is unlawful. Note: They are self-deporting out of Arizona and some are heading to their homelands, others are coming to Oregon, so we need to get our legislator's to act, or we need to remove them. This issue is only going to get worse Neal, and we both no that, as does the vast majority of Americans,so at least in this matter, you are on the right side, but I'm not giving up on you...yet.LOL

Henry Ruark February 2, 2008 5:28 am (Pacific time)

"Anon" et al: Thank you for your insights; you are entirely correct. Perpetrators here are embedded deep withing the financial establishment, and this is repeat much deeper and broader of other similar instances. Excellent documentation now fully available proving up precisely that risk evaluation was thrown overboard while buyers were sought at any level, and with heavy emphasis on those at lower levels and with race-involved difficulties, which blacks have suffered ever since the Civil War.

Henry Ruark February 2, 2008 11:28 am (Pacific time)

Neal et al: Serious as your good intentions may be, I'll guarantee you that most of the methods you list will bring strong Constitutional questions and delay running into decades. Re "running for the border" might well produce some of the same chaos (as they left job, deserted home and business operations, ran out on ongoing obligations, et al, et al, et al) as forced export. Further delay surely built in by necessity to prove up case as "illegal" vs those you include here - ostensibly the existing law enforcement agencies already overwhelmed, facing continued cutbacks, loss of personnel, and all the other bureaucratic illnesses unavoidable in any such mess as this would surely create. Did you check with any legal authority re dangers via Constitutional questions ? The opposition to any such mssive outflow, motivated as you suggest OR as "forced export", will obviously come in depth, determination and millions of dollars for legal delays, from those responsible for this inflow originally by their concentrated, intended abuse of the U.S. labor supply; they are the same ones who aided Reagan et all to kill off 80 percent of the union power which made our middle class grow so well for so long.

Jefferson February 2, 2008 9:07 am (Pacific time)

In Florida and Nevada the majority of foreclosures are on "investment properties" (think flipping and whatever), not primary residences. Is this a similar scenario around the country? So how bad is it really? The majority of Americans are paying their mortgages on time (over 95+%). As far as a possible racial component in loan practices, well there are redress avenues, but I really doubt this is a big problem, otherwise I imagine there would be "empirical" evidence provided in the above article by the OCPP...right?! Many of these subprime loans were such that the people getting these loans did not have the funds available to pay for the common maintenance expenses associated with home ownership. You just don't provide a loan to people who don't have the available funding and credit history for responsible ownership. The calls of racism will be proven to be false in the vast majority of cases. Greed on both sides of these transactions is the real culprit. The market will fix itself as long as the government minimizes it's interaction. So the below poster going to defend his hero re: the internment of Japanese Americans into concentration camps during WWII? Was there a racial component in this outrage? Did his hero's business associates buy up the internee's property on the cheap while they were interned?

StormBoy February 2, 2008 7:19 am (Pacific time)

"minorities given sub-prime loans"?????????? How about "minorities sought out and asked for"????????? Why do we tend to absolve the recipients? Are we implying they are stupid?

Henry Ruark February 2, 2008 5:24 am (Pacific time)

Neal et al: No way anyone can defend h-i-w. That's a matter of genes, psychotics and malign attitudes, unfortunately probably beyond repair. Yours separately appreciated when written and will re-check. No way attacking other points of view, but cannot see any possible export for 12 MILLION human beings ! Other ways perhaps workable and will surely consider in detail.

Anonymous February 1, 2008 2:05 pm (Pacific time)

My guess is that loan officers are going to find the best rate for someone who has excellent credit and is likely toe ahop around for rates. Are lower-income folks not as likely to question the offer? What if they were given very low teaser rates that a conventional lender would not even have touched? The lower initial interest rate had been the figure used in qualifying income. My guess is that a lot of these folks would not have otherwise been able to afford a home. And... some of these lenders had no money down and no money out of pocket loans. They are preying on the poor, and I would think that minorities were a target market. I think it is an issue of poor lending practices. More and more banks cannot feed off the existing credit-quality borrowers, so they used tactics and loan programs that could only be sold into the subprime market. Again, I bet that a lot of these loans should never have even been made, regardless of race.

Neal Feldman February 1, 2008 12:53 pm (Pacific time)

Henry Ruark - Why do you insist on forcing me to defend Jefferson? I already did an article on how to solve the illegals issue and it does not require any of the tripe you listed. Simply make the USA toxic to illegals. Significant ($100k per illegal employee/$1 million per illegal the company had a hand in bringing into the country) fines against employers that hire illegals, significant fines (similar levels) against landlords who sell, rent to or in any other way give shelter/succor to illegals, denying any and all social services/welfare to illegals except legitimate emergency medical services (sucking chest wound not the sniffles), limiting 'anchor baby' interpretations so that the kid born in the uS can stay but their illegal parents cannot... they have the choice of placing the kid with guardians legally allowed to be in the US or they can take the kid back to wherever and the kid can when an adult re-enter the US. Why allow them to stay and pop out another anchor baby every 9 months? And finally permanently bar from ever being in this country legally anyone who has ever been found to be in this country illegally. None of this rounds up or deports anyone or does anything but enforce existing law.. but if all was done the illegals would literally be running for the border under their own power and they would stop coming here illegally. Even the illegals admit how effective this policy ould be because they scream and cry about it so loudly. If they thought it would be ineffectual they would not care if it were implemented. Ah well...

Henry Ruark February 1, 2008 12:29 pm (Pacific time)

To all: What is clearly "not hidden" in any real estate transaction is the skin color of the buyer. SOMEbody, along the route of the process, will know, and will share that knowledge. I never knew a real estate deal that worked without SOMEone along the route having met the buyer face-to-face. That does NOT require "scientific sampling" to have impact, shared for sure in most such cases, which may have some solid bearing on why the subprime subsidiary got all those loans.

Jefferson February 1, 2008 12:05 pm (Pacific time)

People, over 80% of Americans want agressive action taken against illegal aliens and I will go along with how this huge majority of "Americans" would like to deal with these criminal invaders (though don't ask Obama, because he's on record to provide them with driver's licenses, which will literally prevent him winning the general, and also prevent a VP run, he's finished, and you are just watching a glib show...remember the recall of California governor Davis?). Maybe a below poster who writes concern on this matter (treatment of illegals) could channel FDR, and discuss his policy on throwing American Japanese into concentration camps, or Truman on his dropping two atomic bombs that killed several hundred thousand people, i.e. , if he is so concerned about how past democrats have treated people? As I have stated before, the sheer percentage of subprime loans that are in trouble are ample evidence of the risks attendant on lending to less credit-worthy populations (regardless of race/ethnicity!) and validate the higher rates charged for this type of loan. (See Clinton's Cabinet member Cisneros as the one who requested this reduction of loan standards, and got the ball rolling!) Homes that are actually in foreclosure accounted for 0.99 percent of all homes at the end of the second quarter of 2007. With unemployment at around 5%, and the huge diversity of our nation's economy, a possible recession, will be short-lived. Beware of the "Chicken littles" out there, they come out during each election cycle. Think of the fable "Cry Wolf", when you hear them bellowing...

Disabled War Veteran February 1, 2008 11:08 am (Pacific time)

Neal said "Loans today are given based on credit scoring." I disagree. The Broker I worked with required that I bring in documentation from the U.S. Dept. of Veterans Affairs just for my refinance. Everything is not so cut and dry as the Credit Score. Also, if you think there is only a racial pattern, wake up Oregon!

Henry Ruark January 31, 2008 4:44 pm (Pacific time)

To all: Nothing else to use, so trot out that old worn-out "conspiracy theory" bit, re "What are they hiding ?" Comes flat and ridiculous from confirmed ID-withholder to complain re "hiding", don't you agree ? OCPP's reputation not about to be even dented by this so-ridiculous repeated attack, from one whose own statements make evident true feeling re race. "Sob stories", "open-border crowd", all combative words to produce emotional involvement, and avoid rational, reasonable response. Where does h-i-w stand re immigrations termed "illegal aliens ?" Does he now wish to export all 12 MILLION ? Where will they be sent ? WHO will pay huge costs for concentration camps, guards, transport, deaths, funerals, etc., etc. ? How possible, without huge new bureaucracy ? What then happens to keeping government small, cutting cost sure to mean more taxes, building worldwide notoriety re whole action ? IF he has answers, why not put 'em on record ? IF not, that alone proves up avoidance of real issues, while seeking to damage those who take much wiser approach by dialog on the realities involved. Pray tell me, too, what's wrong with "domestic insurgents" ? Our earliest ones, after prolonged dialog in the Federalist Papers, became our Founders. Revolutionaries are as revolutionaries always were, and will always be, open to honest, democratic dialog.

Neal Feldman January 31, 2008 2:06 pm (Pacific time)

Loans today are given based on credit scoring. So long as that scoring does not take sex, race, religion, sexual orientation, etc into account there should be no claim of lending bias. And bias based on names is easily checked... Put in, a month or two apart, two absolutely identical loan apps, one named John Monroe and one named Jesus Garcia-Lopez, for example. If one is rejected and the other approved there is reason for a govt agency to ask why. Ah well...

Jefferson January 31, 2008 11:46 am (Pacific time)

Frankly unless you use a "statistically valid sampling" methodology (those of you who have had graduate level courses in "Statistics" may appreciate this better!) of minority mortgage borrower credit profiles to help "theorize causal reasons" for the financial problems this population has, then it's just nothing more than "unreliable" and meaningless conjecture as their (OCPP) below quote clearly acknowledges: "OCPP cautioned that by itself the analysis does not prove racial discrimination, because it does not control for factors such as borrower credit scores and other measures of risk. Still, the Silverton-based think tank noted that respected national studies that have attempted to control for these sorts of factors have still found unexplained racial disparities in the cost of home loans." Oregon's African-American population is approximately 1.8% and the hispanic population is still a mystery, but we do know that in Nevada, e.g. , a significant percentage of illegals have been unlawfully provided mortgages via fradulent documentation (a crime!). So the sob stories here may not engender very much sympathy outside of the open-border crowd and other domestic insurgents. This article by the OCPP, what is it really trying to promulgate?! Why does it not incorporate scientific sampling? What are they hiding? I know, and so do you clear-thinkers!

[Return to Top]