Senate Opens Fire on U.S. Consumers
Gandalf Grey
THE SENATE OPENS FIRE ON U.S. CONSUMERS
By Arianna Huffington
U.S. consumers and freed Italian hostage Giuliana Sgrena found themselves in
the same position this week: under fire from those put in place to protect
them.
For Sgrena, the bloody barrage came from jittery U.S. soldiers. For
consumers, it was jaded U.S. senators who pulled the trigger, about to pass
a bankruptcy bill so hostile to ordinary American families that it could
only have come about in a place as corrupt, cynical and unmoored from
reality as Washington, D.C.
In a normal world, those elected to represent the interests of the people
would have fought for bankruptcy legislation that would, well, represent the
interests of the people. But not in Beltway Bizarroland. Instead of cracking
down on predatory lending practices, closing loopholes that favor the
wealthy, and strengthening the safety net for working people, single mothers
and elderly Americans struggling to recover from a financial setback, the
Senate put together a nasty little bill that reads like a credit industry
wish list. Rubbing salt in the wound, Sen. Charles Grassley, the bill's
chief sponsor, labeled it the Bankruptcy Abuse Prevention and Consumer
Protection Act of 2005--even though it does nothing to prevent bankruptcy
abuse or protect consumers.
So what does the bill do? It makes it harder for average people to file for
bankruptcy protection; it makes it easier for landlords to evict a bankrupt
tenant; it endangers child support payments by giving a wider array of
creditors a shot at post-bankruptcy income; it allows millionaires to shield
an unlimited amount of value in homes and asset protection trusts; it makes
it more difficult for small businesses to reorganize, while opening new
loopholes for the Enrons of the world; it allows creditors to provide
misleading information; and it does nothing to reign in lending abuses that
frequently turn manageable debt into unmanageable crises. Even in failure,
ordinary Americans do not get a level playing field.
Credit card companies have been feverishly lobbying for this legislation for
nearly a decade--and it looks like the $34 million the finance and credit
industries have contributed to political campaigns since 1996 is finally
about to pay off. On Tuesday, the cloture vote on the bill was 69 to 31. The
House passed similar legislation last year and GOP leaders are hoping to
bypass the conference committee deadlocks that have derailed similar
measures in the past and have the bill on President Bush's desk in short
order. The president, well aware that credit card giant MBNA is one of the
Republican Party's largest donors, has promised to sign the bill as soon as
someone hands him a pen.
Make no mistake, the inequitable nature of the bill--bending over backwards
to help the credit card industry while sticking it to American working
people who fall on hard times--is no accident. Time and again over the last
week, the Senate shot down amendments that would have made the bill a bit
less mean-spirited. They denied proposals that would have made it easier for
military veterans, the sick and the elderly to qualify for bankruptcy
protection. They even rejected an amendment that would have put a 30 percent
ceiling on the interest rates credit card companies can charge. Thirty
percent--that's more than Paulie Walnuts charges. But 74 U.S.
senators--including John Kerry, Harry Reid, Barack Obama and Dick
Durbin--clearly thought that wasn't high enough. Quick, somebody send those
guys a Bible bookmarked to Deuteronomy 23:19: "Thou shalt not lend upon
usury to thy brother."
For years, credit-card companies have been claiming that tougher laws are
needed to reign in high-flying customers using bankruptcy to game the
system. But the truth is that the vast majority of people who file for
bankruptcy are middle-class folks who can't pay their bills because they've
lost their jobs or been hit with high medical bills or gone through a
divorce.
Indeed, a recent study by Harvard University found that half of last year's
1.6 million bankruptcies were the result of crushing medical bills. Put
another way: Every 30 seconds, someone in this country files for bankruptcy
in the wake of a serious illness. How's that for a shocking stat? Here's
another: Three-quarters of the so-called medically bankrupt had health
insurance. It just wasn't enough to cover the dramatic rise in health-care
costs.
But instead of adapting to this harsh new reality, where hardworking,
college-educated, middle-class folks can be financially destroyed by a
sudden illness, the Senate is about to approve a one-size-fits-all law that
treats a family man who has sunk into debt because of a heart attack the
same as a con artist who maxes out his MasterCard, then refuses to pay up.
Worst of all, the bill does absolutely nothing to protect consumers from the
aggressive tactics credit-card companies have devised in recent
years--tactics that have proven hugely profitable. Along with sending out
over 5 billion solicitations a year, they are constantly developing new ways
to stick it to the people they've already lured into the tent. For instance,
companies now routinely jack up a cardholder's interest rate when their
payment is late--and, presto, a "fixed" 7 percent APR is suddenly
transformed into a cash-gobbling 30 percent loan.
There has also been an explosion in the fees that credit card companies
charge: late fees, balance transfer fees, cash-advance fees, over-the-limit
fees. Such fees bring in billions and are partly responsible for the fact
that, even as personal bankruptcies in America have steadily increased, so
have the profits of credit card companies--which reached a whopping $30
billion last year.
So tell me again: Just who is gaming the system?
It's one thing for credit card companies to exact their pound of flesh even
as their profits soar. But shouldn't we hold our elected officials to a
higher standard? The bankruptcy bill is morally bankrupt. And so is any
senator who votes for it.
© 2005 ARIANNA HUFFINGTON.
--
NOTICE: This post contains copyrighted material the use of which has not
always been authorized by the copyright owner. I am making such material
available to advance understanding of
political, human rights, democracy, scientific, and social justice issues. I
believe this constitutes a 'fair use' of such copyrighted material as
provided for in section 107 of the US Copyright
Law. In accordance with Title 17 U.S.C. Section 107
"A little patience and we shall see the reign of witches pass over, their
spells dissolve, and the people recovering their true sight, restore their
government to its true principles. It is true that in the meantime we are
suffering deeply in spirit,
and incurring the horrors of a war and long oppressions of enormous public
debt. But if the game runs sometimes against us at home we must have
patience till luck turns, and then we shall have an opportunity of winning
back the principles
we have lost, for this is a game where principles are at stake."
--Thomas Jefferson
Gandalf Grey
Arianna Huffington - Arianna Online
03.10.05 - U.S. consumers and freed Italian hostage Giuliana Sgrena found
themselves in the same position this week: under fire from those put in
place to protect them.
For Sgrena, the bloody barrage came from jittery U.S. soldiers. For
consumers, it was jaded U.S. senators who pulled the trigger, about to pass
a bankruptcy bill so hostile to ordinary American families that it could
only have come about in a place as corrupt, cynical and unmoored from
reality as Washington, D.C.
In a normal world, those elected to represent the interests of the people
would have fought for bankruptcy legislation that would, well, represent the
interests of the people. But not in Beltway Bizarroland. Instead of cracking
down on predatory lending practices, closing loopholes that favor the
wealthy, and strengthening the safety net for working people, single mothers
and elderly Americans struggling to recover from a financial setback, the
Senate put together a nasty little bill that reads like a credit industry
wish list. Rubbing salt in the wound, Sen. Charles Grassley, the bill's
chief sponsor, labeled it the Bankruptcy Abuse Prevention and Consumer
Protection Act of 2005 -- even though it does nothing to prevent bankruptcy
abuse or protect consumers.
So what does the bill do? It makes it harder for average people to file for
bankruptcy protection; it makes it easier for landlords to evict a bankrupt
tenant; it endangers child support payments by giving a wider array of
creditors a shot at post-bankruptcy income; it allows millionaires to shield
an unlimited amount of value in homes and asset protection trusts; it makes
it more difficult for small businesses to reorganize, while opening new
loopholes for the Enrons of the world; it allows creditors to provide
misleading information; and it does nothing to reign in lending abuses that
frequently turn manageable debt into unmanageable crises. Even in failure,
ordinary Americans do not get a level playing field.
Credit card companies have been feverishly lobbying for this legislation for
nearly a decade -- and it looks like the $34 million the finance and credit
industries have contributed to political campaigns since 1996 is finally
about to pay off. On Tuesday, the cloture vote on the bill was 69 to 31. The
House passed similar legislation last year and GOP leaders are hoping to
bypass the conference committee deadlocks that have derailed similar
measures in the past and have the bill on President Bush's desk in short
order. The president, well aware that credit card giant MBNA is one of the
Republican Party's largest donors, has promised to sign the bill as soon as
someone hands him a pen.
Make no mistake, the inequitable nature of the bill -- bending over
backwards to help the credit card industry while sticking it to American
working people who fall on hard times -- is no accident. Time and again over
the last week, the Senate shot down amendments that would have made the bill
a bit less mean-spirited. They denied proposals that would have made it
easier for military veterans, the sick and the elderly to qualify for
bankruptcy protection. They even rejected an amendment that would have put a
30 percent ceiling on the interest rates credit card companies can charge.
Thirty percent -- that's more than Paulie Walnuts charges. But 74 U.S.
senators -- including John Kerry, Harry Reid, Barack Obama and Dick
Durbin -- clearly thought that wasn't high enough. Quick, somebody send
payment is late -- and, presto, a "fixed" 7 percent APR is suddenly
transformed into a cash-gobbling 30 percent loan.
There has also been an explosion in the fees that credit card companies
charge: late fees, balance transfer fees, cash-advance fees, over-the-limit
fees. Such fees bring in billions and are partly responsible for the fact
that, even as personal bankruptcies in America have steadily increased, so
have the profits of credit card companies -- which reached a whopping $30
billion last year.
So tell me again: Just who is gaming the system?
It's one thing for credit card companies to exact their pound of flesh even
as their profits soar. But shouldn't we hold our elected officials to a
higher standard? The bankruptcy bill is morally bankrupt. And so is any
senator who votes for it.
Copyright (c) 1998-2005 Christabella, Inc.
URL: http://www.workingforchange.com/article.cfm?ItemID=18695
BUSH=TERRORIST
even ruled by the Supreme Court as illegal, which has forced millions
into financial debt just to survive.
Since Bush's plan is to hold the American people "hostage" because of
their debts with his bankruptcy bill, so if people were smart they
would stop paying the illegal taxation, and pay that money on their
debt, wipe it out, and be able to survive once again without going
into debt.
The links below with the details about the lawsuit against the
government, regarding taxes, and Bush's tax reform panel etc.,
who's planning to recommend the new "consumer" tax.
"As the Attachments conclusively document, in 1913, just months after
the adoption of the 16th Amendment, Congress stretched the meaning of
the term “income” beyond the constitutional meaning and the intent of
the framers of the 16th Amendment, as recorded in every official and
professional document of the era: the congressional record,
congressional reports, law reviews, journals of political science,
newspapers of record and so forth.
In the Income Tax Act of 1913, Congress, included a non-apportioned,
direct tax on the salaries, wages and compensation of ordinary
Americans and instituted withholding at the source, providing the
federal government’s creditors with the ultimate form of lender
security – the labor of its citizens.
However, in 1916, the Supreme Court brought the ultra vires action of
Congress and the Executive branch to a screeching halt. The Supreme
Court ruled in Brushaber v. Union Pacific, 240 U.S.1 (and the cases
bundled with it), that wages are NOT income within the meaning of the
16th Amendment.
The Supreme Court's decision in Brushaber soundly rejected the
government’s interpretation of the definition of “income” within the
meaning of the Constitution, and specifically limited “to whom” and
“where” the income tax could apply. The Brushaber court explicitly
concluded that the 16th Amendment gave Congress no new powers of
taxation, meaning that direct taxes (such as Social Security taxes and
Subtitle A income taxes) fell outside of the meaning of the 16th
Amendment and still must satisfy the fundamental requirement of
apportionment."
http://www.givemeliberty.org/RTPLawsuit/Misc/SchulzLetterTaxReform-2-12-05.htm
http://www.givemeliberty.org/docs/TaxResearchCD/Attach2-Overview.htm
http://www.givemeliberty.org/RTPLawsuit/Update2005-02-12.htm
Main page
http://www.givemeliberty.org/
If people stopped to realize their taxed, fees, surcharges by the
government and Big business etc., forcing people into debt by taking
nearly every dime they make.
Federal Tax, State Tax, City Tax, Property Tax, Sales Tax,
Re-Sale Tax, Gasoline Tax, Road Tax, Cigarette Tax, Liquor Tax,
Several taxes and surcharges on telephones, DMV fees, just to
name a few.
And part of those taxes are supposed to go towards education, yet
the parents are having to pay for public transportation for their
child to go to public school, classrooms have one set of books for
all 6-7 classes each day, no money for repairs/maintenance up keep
of schools, road taxes collected spent elsewhere, then taxes raised
to collect more money to pay for the roads needing repair etc.
But government never seems to cut back when it comes to benefits,
salaries etc. They can afford to pay their own retirement, just like
the working class has to do, they can afford to pay their own medical
and dental which 2/3 of the working class do without, they can do
without their automatic raise each year, after all, wages for the
working class is about the only thing that barely increases, if at
all, while food, housing, utilities, taxes, well just about everything
keeps skyrocketing.
Maybe if half of the government's bogus, front, useless, illegal,
etc., departments, agencies, panels, commissions, etc. were shut
down, and Bush removed, we wouldn't have the out of control deficit
we have now. Bush seems to think the bank account is bottomless,
and spending faster than it can be printed.
But apparently American's enjoy working for nothing, while those in
government are filling their personal bank accounts by stealing this
nation blind. With the American people all but carrying it to the
bank for them.