Guest Book

Sorry to take up so much space - but this is the crock of sheeet I was talking about: NY Newsday.com A bill bankrupt of protections Paul Vitello March 15, 2005 Under the Clear Skies Initiative, 20 tons more of mercury annually would be permitted into the air supply than previous law would allow. Under the No Child Left Behind Act, military recruiters were permitted unprecedented access to the names of every kid in the United States. enrolled in eighth through 12th grades. In this tradition of double-speak decree, then, comes the Bankruptcy Abuse Prevention and Consumer Protection Act of 2005, which mainly abuses the public and doesn't protect anybody except bankers and the very wealthy. I don't know if you have followed this story. It doesn't come up much on the evening TV news, which has given 100 times more air to Michael Jackson's trial. It doesn't even get much attention on the Sunday talk shows, which are supposedly about public policy. If you've missed it, then, the bankruptcy bill - passed in the Senate and soon to come up in the House - would basically make filing for bankruptcy more difficult for the average person. The new law would protect far less of a person's assets from creditors than are now protected. Supporters, including president George W. Bush and the conservative leaders of both houses, claim that more and more people are abusing bankruptcy law by running up their credit card bills and simply bailing out on their obligations. Besides opposition from most Democrats in Congress, the bill has drawn heavy criticism from public advocacy groups, consumer organizations and lawyers. In a letter to Congress recently posted on the Web site of the American Bankruptcy Institute, a nonpartisan professional organization, 92 law school professors of bankruptcy and commercial law said the proposed legislation "is deeply flawed, and will harm small businesses, the elderly, and families with children." Contrary to the bill drafters' image of bankruptcy filers as deadbeats, said the letter, "the overwhelming majority of people in bankruptcy are in financial distress as a result of job loss, medical expense, divorce, or a combination of those causes." Elizabeth Warren, a Harvard law professor, says the bill is so lopsided in favoring the interests of bankers over consumers that "it puts all the money on one side and all the hurt on the other." But rather than call the long list of witnesses against this new law, let me just list for you the amendments and exemptions to the bill that were rejected last week. Sen. Richard Durbin (D-Ill.) proposed an amendment to protect disabled veterans from certain provisions of the new, harsher bankruptcy law. It was rejected. Sen. Edward Kennedy (D-Mass.) proposed an amendment to protect people whose bankruptcy is partly caused by an inability to collect on alimony or child support payments. Rejected. He proposed another amendment to give some protections to people bankrupted by medical catastrophes. Rejected. Durbin and Kennedy proposed an amendment that would protect an elderly person's home from creditors, to a limit of $150,000. Rejected. Sen. Mark Dayton (D-Minn.) proposed an amendment that would limit credit card interest to a maximum of 30 percent. Rejected. Sen. Jon Corzine (D-N.J.) proposed an amendment extending some protections to people who are caregivers to seriously ill or disabled family members. Rejected. Durbin proposed to protect members of the armed services who go bankrupt with the help of lenders charging usurious interest rates - a scandal recently uncovered by the Army Inspector General at several stateside bases. Rejected. Sen. Daniel Akaka (D-Hawaii) proposed requiring credit card companies to disclose on every bill the total amount a person would pay on the current balance if he or she continued to pay only the minimum required. It was rejected. At the same time ... Sen. Charles Schumer (D-N.Y.) proposed to block the very wealthy from being allowed to shelter millions of dollars of assets in special creditor-free-zone trusts. Rejected. Sen. Patrick Leahy (D-Vt.) proposed to eliminate a provision in the new law that boosts business for investment bankers - allowing them to sell their services to a company before and after bankruptcy, a practice previously barred as a conflict of interest. Rejected. If you think this is an abdication of Congress' duty to protect the public interest, I second the motion, but our motion is rejected.