Curtailing Predatory Banks, Supreme Court Rules In Favor of Eliot Spitzer Findings

SEARCH VEGSOURCE:

HOMESCHOOLERS: We have some very cool advertisers on this website, and as VegSource is supported by advertising, we're happy about that. If you can't see any ads, you might have an ad blocker, or a setting in your browser which blocks ads from showing up. Consider turning on ads while on vegsource so that you can see what they have to offer, and so that this site can remain free.

Reply To This Post Return to Posts Index VegSource Home

From: Jaq (12.236.179.134)
Subject: Curtailing Predatory Banks, Supreme Court Rules In Favor of Eliot Spitzer Findings
Date: July 1, 2009 at 8:38 am PST

Had Spitzer been able to investigate the banks,((2005)) he might have put the brakes on some of these practices fully two years before the entire subprime industry collapsed and brought the rest of the economy down with it. Instead, the OCC fought Spitzer's investigation tooth and nail, and this year received a helping hand from the Obama administration.

Both the Bush administration and now the Obama's admin' has not taken the high road. Of course, Bush's pattern has been to take the low road, anyway, but I was hoping Obama wouldn't succumb to the temptation of serving greedy Oligarchs. Apparently, Bankers have an insidiously powerful influence on Congress as well as the Executive Branch. Citizens can make a difference if we are vociferous.

In brief
Bigoted Banks 0, Eliot Spitzer 1
By Stephanie Mencimer | Mon June 29, 2009 3:02 PM PST

On Monday, conservative Supreme Court Justice Antonin Scalia and the Obama administration ended up on opposite sides of a case involving civil rights—in which the administration sided with the alleged racists. In Cuomo v. Clearing House Association, the court delivered a sharp rebuke to the Obama administration and one of its key banking regulators, the Office of the Comptroller of the Currency (OCC), which had gone to bat for national banks accused of racially discriminatory lending practices. And while the ruling was overshadowed by the chatter surrounding the court's reversal of Ricci v. DeStefano—the now infamous Connecticut firefighter case decided by Sonia Sotomayor—it could have significant ramifications for how the financial system is policed.

Cuomo v. Clearing House Association got its start in 2005, when then-New York attorney general Eliot Spitzer discovered that many major banks operating in his state were making a disproportionate number of high-interest loans to minorities...........

As the New York Times reported in early June, Wells Fargo aggressively targeted African Americans (referred to by bank employees as "mud people") and pushed them into subprime "ghetto" loans, even when they qualified for better rates. ....