Thursday, February 19, 2009

ACORN and the Mortgage Crisis

Remember ACORN?

Turns out they plan to have a role in the ongoing mortgage crisis; Michelle Malkin has the story:
Trumpets ACORN: “On Feb. 19, ACORN members will launch a new tactic in fighting foreclosures: civil disobedience. Participants in the ACORN Home Savers campaign nationwide will simply refuse to move out of foreclosed homes, or in some cases, will move back in. ACORN homesteaders intend to squat in their homes until a comprehensive, federal solution for people facing foreclosure is put in place.”

ACORN’s foot soldiers, funded with your tax dollars, will scream, pound their fists, chain themselves to buildings, padlock the doors and engage in illegal behavior until they get what they want. It’s a recipe for anarchy. Threatens Baltimore ACORN’s Louis Beverly, who calls himself a “Foreclosure Fighter”:

“After you’ve used all your legal options, your last resort is civil disobedience. We’re talking about families who have been in their homes 20 or 30 years. People who are assets in the community, who look out for the elderly, who have community associations, and these are the people being kicked out of the community.” [...]

Instead, ACORN offices, funded with your tax dollars, are training teams of “Home Savers”—described as “people ready and willing to mobilize on short notice to defend the homesteaders against attempts to evict them.” Ready, willing and able to mobilize on short notice because they are either unemployed or employed full time as ACORN shakedown artists.

Guess who’s encouraging them to defy the law. Democratic Rep. Marcy Kaptur of Ohio, who told them: “Stay in your homes. If the American people, anybody out there is being foreclosed, don’t leave.” The housing bullies will be assisted by left-wing propaganda documentarians at the Brave New Foundation, headed up by Hollywood lib Robert Greenwald, who will disseminate sob stories to crank up pressure while Obama pushes his housing entitlement plan.

ACORN is targeting the following cities: Tucson, Ariz.; Oakland, Calif.; Los Angeles, Calif.; Contra Costa County, Calif.; Orlando, Fla.; Baltimore, Md.; New York, N.Y.; Houston, Texas; San Mateo County, Calif.; Denver, Colo.; Bridgeport, Conn.; Wilmington, Del.; Broward County, Fla.; Boston, Mass.; Flint, Mich.; Detroit, Mich.; Minneapolis, Minn.; Raleigh, N.C.; Durham, N.C.; Albany, N.Y.; Cincinnati, Ohio; Cleveland, Ohio; Pittsburgh, Pa.; and Dallas, Texas.
Lovely.

I realize that there are good people out there who got talked into borrowing too much or who paid too much for their homes in a bubble market, who are now stuck "underwater" paying a too-high mortgage for a home that's now only worth a fraction of the purchase price. I realize, too, that compassionate solutions including community-based aid ought to be considered in dealing with families who are faced with the awful prospect of losing their homes.

But as Malkin herself opines in the essay, home ownership is not a civil right. Buying a home means taking on a legal obligation to pay back any part of the purchase price you're unable to pay up front (which for most people is most of the price of the home, these days). Losing the ability to pay your mortgage is a tragedy, but it's not a situation that gives anyone the right to demand that the government pony up the cash to pay the difference.

Government funds don't materialize out of thin air. Responsible homeowners, taxpayers, small buisness owners etc. will be taxed at higher and higher rates to pay for those defaulting on their mortgages. If there were only a few such mortgages, and a relatively stable economy, it would be one thing to suggest government help for those in need--but demanding such help, even to the point of civil disobedience, in an already shaky economy has the potential to make things a whole lot worse, not better.

Demanding that people be allowed to remain in their homes essentially for free is a blatant cry for socialism; it deserves to be challenged as such. Capitulating to the demand that those whose homes are being foreclosed ought to be able to stay in those homes is a very bad idea.

4 comments:

opey124 said...

Oh joy.

I am still mad about the mortgage bailout.

Can't stand ACORN.

MommaLlama said...

I couldn't agree more with Opey..., I'm sick and tired of footing the bill for everyone else! Seriously, this has gone beyond out of hand.

It's a shame for those who will lose their home. My question is what is the % of hardworking Americans in a tight spot that just need a little help, versus those who were irresponsible and now we should have to make up for their moron decisions.

I have a guess...

John Michael said...

Have you heard how much money ACORN is going to get from the "stimulus package?" No connections between the president and ACORN? ? ? ?

Disobedience, it's a sin. It's that simple.

Muscovite said...

A responsible person who has lived in his home for 30 years should not HAVE a mortgage and therefore, should not be at risk of losing his home.