Look, I know it must be hard being in the legislature. You have to collect your per diem. You have to raise money so you can be re-elected. You have to go to fundraisers and talk to people. You have to collect money from different special interest groups and make sure none of the groups are affiliated with terrorists.
But you also have a job. You have to pass a budget. No wait, that didn't happen properly and is based on faulty assumptions. Sorry. Selling State Compensation Insurance Fund was about as good an idea as say selling access to Assemblymembers. That wouldn't happen. No. Never. You can't make a donation and then be able to talk to an assemblymember. Never. I don't believe it. So, in addition to passing the budget, you have to deal with the water crisis. No wait. That isn't done either. You have to deal with prison overcrowding. Yes. You have an idea. Let's just release 40,000 prisoners. That is a good idea. And there are no public safety issues with that. None. It is a perfect idea - if you are leaving in Simsville.
Instead, you vote on bils without any knowledge. I don't want to beat a dead Michael Jackson, er, horse (is it okay to still make fun of him now that it has been ruled a homicide? or, should I make fun of him more because he was more doped up than Chris Farley?), but let me talk about some recent votes by Huber. You know what, she probably calls herself Attorney Huber or Dr. Huber. We all know those attorneys who do that: "I have a JD degree so you should call me Doctor." Does that mean people who get a BS should be called "Bulls**t Jones?" Just wondering.
Anyway, Huber writes me a letter after I call her office and email her. She thanked me for the emails. Apparently, not for the calls, but only the emails. I guess she would prefer that people not bother her busy staff. After all, it takes a lot of work to organize fundraisers and figure out which conman, er, lobbyist is going to take her to dinner that night. Maybe they have to go get pedicures while their boss sits around not doing her job. I don't know. But, I only got thanked for the emails. Maybe the staff's writing is so bad Huber couldn't read my name. Here is a hint: I am the one who called and wanted to actually get answers but couldn't!
So, she thanks me and tells me she voted for AB 764 because "In some cases, there are individuals who exploit those at their lowest point through exorbitant loan modification fees when in reality, successful loan modifications are completed for free through HUD-certified counseling agencies and lenders." Now those of you who know me personally will know that this sentence and me don't get along for a few reasons.
First, I don't know about the rest of you, but I learned not to use a 25 cent word when a 5 cent word will work. I had to go look up exorbitant. But I was just a state school graduate. It means excessive or extreme. Apparently, when you are voted into public office, you decide to use four syllable words instead of two syllable words. I don't know. Maybe she was trying to confuse me. After all, clearly I ain't that bright.
Second, that is one long sentence. I mean, she puts together like 35 words. 35? I think most of my sentences have five words - maybe ten. One time, at band camp (laugh, that's funny), I put it together with.........I mean I had a sentence with thirteen words. But, 35? Really? Break out some shorter sentences with some active verbs. Look at me - I may have learned something in English class!
Third, successful loan modifications for free from HUD agencies and lenders? Really? Does Huber read the newspaper? Any newspaper? How about my blog? How about any blog? Does she even read? Well, does she read anything in English that carries news? Did she miss the big story that less than 10% of all qualified homeowners have received a loan modification? Was she sleeping that day? Did her staff not alert her to that story? Oh, and the two biggest lenders in California - B of A and Wells Fargo - have done 6% and 4%, respectively. But you go with this ridiculous concept that people are getting them done for free. Next she is going to tell me that criminal defendants always receive a fair trial and no one is on death row mistakenly. Yes, and OJ is really innocent.
I am not asking for much. I am telling you that you aren't getting my vote next time. But, is it that hard to do some independent research before you vote on a bill? Especially a bill that would criminalize behavior when we have no room in our prisons anyway. Stop listening to the streetwalkers who pay you money so you can be re-elected again. Stop listening to folks who want you to vote "their way." Start listening to your constituents and learning the facts. Start doing some homework. Stop being such a ridiculous Lemming who does whatever Karen "I should be fired" Bass tells you to do.
By the way, she signs her letter "Sorry I wasn't able to call you personally." Don't apologize unless you mean it. Don't tell me you are sorry unless you really are sorry. If you don't mean it, don't say it. I am fine with you not calling me back. It decreases the chances I will pick up a disease. Isn't the rule that if A kisses B and then B kisses C that C has kissed A? Doesn't this work for legislators as well? If legislator A talks to disgusting voter buyer B and then legislator A talks to constituent C that C has talked to B and can pick up whatever B had? YUCK! I don't need to pass that on.
Showing posts with label AB 764. Show all posts
Showing posts with label AB 764. Show all posts
Tuesday, August 25, 2009
Friday, June 26, 2009
SB 94 and AB 764
So our friends at the Capitol are at it again. Now, they clearly don't have enough to do. I mean, it looks like they are sitting around doing nothing and trying to save everyone. After all, we don't have a $24 Billion budget deficit. Yes, that is Billion with a B. How big of a deficit is this? This deficit is as big as the GDP of Trinidad and Tobago. Okay, if you don't get GDP, go ask your friendly neighborhood economist or that outstanding econ professor at CSU Sacramento, Prof. Lang.
What would you do if you had a $24,000,000,000 deficit? I would go about fixing it. But not these people. We are on the verge of paying vendors with IOUs and they are still doing other things. What great things are they doing? Trying to screw consumers AND put a whole bunch of good attorneys out of business.
Lets start with this concept: if you can't keep your own house in order, don't tell me how to run mine. Seriously, it is easy to sit around as a legislator and tell people who to run their businesses. But you can't even take care of your own business. I think the expression these days is "handle your business." I know, it is your business to protect people. That comes somewhere after PASSING A BALANCED BUDGET.
Now for those in the Assembly and Senate reading this, and I know you do because you freaking follow me on Twitter, let me give you a remedial math lesson. You cannot spend more than you take in. Simple. Income minus expenses cannot be a negative number. If it is, you are broke. If it continues, you file for bankruptcy. If it still continues, you end up being California.
You want to know why people spend more than they make? Because they look at their leaders who clearly think it is an acceptable thing to do. Oh, and don't sit there Mr. Conservative and blame the liberals, you won't freaking raise taxes. And don't blame the conservatives, Mr. Liberal who was giving away the farm doing the good times. Really, do you think that giving cost of living increases and step increases for pay can go on indefinitely?
Seriously, these folks are giving money away left and right. Now, I understand that some state workers are getting furloughed 3 days per week. That is a 15% pay cut. Where is your 15% pay cut, Dave "I want to be insurance commissioner" Jones. (For google purposes, DAVE JONES!") Darrell "I can't do math" Steinberg, I don't see you taking a 15% pay cut. But you want the working folks to take one. No, not want, force it on them. And Karen Bass, you aren't any better. Steinberg and Bass should resign now for their utter lack of leadership ability. You should have resigned before.
But, let me get back on track. While these yahoo's are screwing around over a state budget, a few of their colleagues decided they should try to regulate attorneys who help people get loan modifications. Their bills would ban an attorney from collecting any money up front. Yes, that's right. We would have to get paid AFTER we get the client a result. Fine. But, what client's do they think are going to pay AFTER getting what they want? Let's be honest. The mechanic doesn't give you the car back before you pay to make sure you are happy with the work. The home builder doesn't fix every problem before having the money. The legislator doesn't balance the budget before getting paid. No, these folks all get paid up front.
But let's play along. Now as an attorney I cannot get paid for the work I do up front. I can't even put the money in my trust account. I have to trust my client to pay me on the back end. Would some of my clients do this? Yep. Would most of my clients do this? Probably. Would all of my clients do this? Nope.
Imagine if you go to work every day and your boss decides to pay you 75% of the time. Would you go back to work? No. Of course not. Who would do work when there is no guarantee of payment? Very few people.
So, what happens in this scenario? The attorneys who are doing the work stop doing it. What's the problem with that? Well, according to the folks at the Capitol and the consumer groups, nothing. After all, the banks are doing a fine job giving people loan modifications. And the attorneys are all ripping people off. We have to stop the attorneys.
A little perspective: the State Bar has about 850 to 900 complaints about attorneys handling loan modifications. They have 100 attorneys under investigation. There are 200,000 or so attorneys in the State. Um, I am not that good at math, but that is, .05%. You are passing a law to stop less than 1% of the attorneys in the state who are scumbags.
Now, the banks? Nope, they can pay their attorneys anything they want. And the bank lawyers? They can charge anything they want and get paid up front. You see, we have to stop the attorneys who are representing consumers. We have to stop the small guys. Are there bad attorneys? Yep. I heard of a guy who has made millions since the beginning of this year alone and done no work.
Seriously, the legislators and the consumer groups think that the banks are doing a fine job as are the non profits. Have you talked to someone who has called a non profit? Ask them how much help they are getting. NONE! Are the banks offering loan modifications? Sometimes. Of course, Wells Fargo turned down a client because it wasn't in WELLS FARGO's best interest. Countrywide declined a short sale because they were missing 1 page for 1 offer and there were 6 other offers. Did they notify anyone that the page was missing? Nope. Just denied it.
Heck, GMAC has all but admitted that they will take attorney cases and move them to the front of the line. Yes, those folks go first. But now there won't be any of those folks. So, what is going to happen? Anyone? Bueller? After all, if the banks did the right thing in the first place, we wouldn't be in this mess, would we?
Sure, consumers are to blame. They wanted to keep up with the Jones'. That isn't good. But mortgage brokers were putting people in mortgages that they knew couldn't be afforded. And real estate agents were selling people homes that they knew were outside of their price range. And banks were writing garbage no doc loans and accepting that people who were high school dropouts were making $150,000 per year as a street sweeper. But we are now supposed to believe that these same banks are trustworthy and are going to do the right thing?
I guess our legislators are either dumb, paid off or blind. I don't care which but if any of them has the cajones to debate me on the issue, I am game. You morons can't balance a budget but you want to tell me how to run my business? Really? Should I run my business the way you run the state? Should I run a deficit? Are you going to bail me out since you are now telling me who I can and cannot charge?
But it gets worse for me. The State Bar agreed with this idea. They had a board of governors meeting. The President, of course, was on vacation and couldn't fly back for the meeting. She couldn't even attend by phone? Webex? Video conference? Freaking pick up the phone and call and be put on speaker phone? Apparently that is too complex for her. So, President-elect Howard Miller ran this meeting and pushed this idea through. Miller claims to be a plaintiff's lawyer or a consumer attorney. I guess if you consider a millionaire a consumer attorney then he may be. But he just said to every other consumer attorney "I think you guys should sit and spin."
He just agreed to let the legislature tell us how to run our business and how to charge our clients. What's next? Maybe a personal injury attorney can only charge 10%? Maybe a criminal defense attorney can only charge his client if the client avoids jail? Maybe the medical malpractice attorney shouldn't be able to charge a fee since someone in the legislature must think doctors do good things. Maybe if Miller is so happy with the way the legislature wants to regulate business, he will let them come in and tell him what he can charge and how much. No? He doesn't want that? Then here is an idea: don't support them telling me how to run my business, numskull.
We have the perfect storm. The State Bar has now decided that the legislature should tell attorneys how to charge. The legislature gets to deflect attention away from their complete and utter failure and lack of ability to do their jobs and claim they are out protecting people. And the banks get to continue making their millions of dollars by screwing consumers. And somehow the consumer groups think this is good. Do we really wonder why our state is falling apart when we have a system where I was told by a legislative staffer "that may be the truth but that won't sell in the Capitol?" When these bills pass, the government of California will have failed to protect consumers once more while continuing to cover up their incompetence.
By the way, to those of you reading this at the Capitol, the offer still stands: a public debate of these bills. Yes, that goes for you Nava, Calderon, and Corbett, as well as you Jones, Steinberg and Bass. Oh, and you alleged consumer groups, that goes for you as well. Anytime, anyplace, anywhere.
What would you do if you had a $24,000,000,000 deficit? I would go about fixing it. But not these people. We are on the verge of paying vendors with IOUs and they are still doing other things. What great things are they doing? Trying to screw consumers AND put a whole bunch of good attorneys out of business.
Lets start with this concept: if you can't keep your own house in order, don't tell me how to run mine. Seriously, it is easy to sit around as a legislator and tell people who to run their businesses. But you can't even take care of your own business. I think the expression these days is "handle your business." I know, it is your business to protect people. That comes somewhere after PASSING A BALANCED BUDGET.
Now for those in the Assembly and Senate reading this, and I know you do because you freaking follow me on Twitter, let me give you a remedial math lesson. You cannot spend more than you take in. Simple. Income minus expenses cannot be a negative number. If it is, you are broke. If it continues, you file for bankruptcy. If it still continues, you end up being California.
You want to know why people spend more than they make? Because they look at their leaders who clearly think it is an acceptable thing to do. Oh, and don't sit there Mr. Conservative and blame the liberals, you won't freaking raise taxes. And don't blame the conservatives, Mr. Liberal who was giving away the farm doing the good times. Really, do you think that giving cost of living increases and step increases for pay can go on indefinitely?
Seriously, these folks are giving money away left and right. Now, I understand that some state workers are getting furloughed 3 days per week. That is a 15% pay cut. Where is your 15% pay cut, Dave "I want to be insurance commissioner" Jones. (For google purposes, DAVE JONES!") Darrell "I can't do math" Steinberg, I don't see you taking a 15% pay cut. But you want the working folks to take one. No, not want, force it on them. And Karen Bass, you aren't any better. Steinberg and Bass should resign now for their utter lack of leadership ability. You should have resigned before.
But, let me get back on track. While these yahoo's are screwing around over a state budget, a few of their colleagues decided they should try to regulate attorneys who help people get loan modifications. Their bills would ban an attorney from collecting any money up front. Yes, that's right. We would have to get paid AFTER we get the client a result. Fine. But, what client's do they think are going to pay AFTER getting what they want? Let's be honest. The mechanic doesn't give you the car back before you pay to make sure you are happy with the work. The home builder doesn't fix every problem before having the money. The legislator doesn't balance the budget before getting paid. No, these folks all get paid up front.
But let's play along. Now as an attorney I cannot get paid for the work I do up front. I can't even put the money in my trust account. I have to trust my client to pay me on the back end. Would some of my clients do this? Yep. Would most of my clients do this? Probably. Would all of my clients do this? Nope.
Imagine if you go to work every day and your boss decides to pay you 75% of the time. Would you go back to work? No. Of course not. Who would do work when there is no guarantee of payment? Very few people.
So, what happens in this scenario? The attorneys who are doing the work stop doing it. What's the problem with that? Well, according to the folks at the Capitol and the consumer groups, nothing. After all, the banks are doing a fine job giving people loan modifications. And the attorneys are all ripping people off. We have to stop the attorneys.
A little perspective: the State Bar has about 850 to 900 complaints about attorneys handling loan modifications. They have 100 attorneys under investigation. There are 200,000 or so attorneys in the State. Um, I am not that good at math, but that is, .05%. You are passing a law to stop less than 1% of the attorneys in the state who are scumbags.
Now, the banks? Nope, they can pay their attorneys anything they want. And the bank lawyers? They can charge anything they want and get paid up front. You see, we have to stop the attorneys who are representing consumers. We have to stop the small guys. Are there bad attorneys? Yep. I heard of a guy who has made millions since the beginning of this year alone and done no work.
Seriously, the legislators and the consumer groups think that the banks are doing a fine job as are the non profits. Have you talked to someone who has called a non profit? Ask them how much help they are getting. NONE! Are the banks offering loan modifications? Sometimes. Of course, Wells Fargo turned down a client because it wasn't in WELLS FARGO's best interest. Countrywide declined a short sale because they were missing 1 page for 1 offer and there were 6 other offers. Did they notify anyone that the page was missing? Nope. Just denied it.
Heck, GMAC has all but admitted that they will take attorney cases and move them to the front of the line. Yes, those folks go first. But now there won't be any of those folks. So, what is going to happen? Anyone? Bueller? After all, if the banks did the right thing in the first place, we wouldn't be in this mess, would we?
Sure, consumers are to blame. They wanted to keep up with the Jones'. That isn't good. But mortgage brokers were putting people in mortgages that they knew couldn't be afforded. And real estate agents were selling people homes that they knew were outside of their price range. And banks were writing garbage no doc loans and accepting that people who were high school dropouts were making $150,000 per year as a street sweeper. But we are now supposed to believe that these same banks are trustworthy and are going to do the right thing?
I guess our legislators are either dumb, paid off or blind. I don't care which but if any of them has the cajones to debate me on the issue, I am game. You morons can't balance a budget but you want to tell me how to run my business? Really? Should I run my business the way you run the state? Should I run a deficit? Are you going to bail me out since you are now telling me who I can and cannot charge?
But it gets worse for me. The State Bar agreed with this idea. They had a board of governors meeting. The President, of course, was on vacation and couldn't fly back for the meeting. She couldn't even attend by phone? Webex? Video conference? Freaking pick up the phone and call and be put on speaker phone? Apparently that is too complex for her. So, President-elect Howard Miller ran this meeting and pushed this idea through. Miller claims to be a plaintiff's lawyer or a consumer attorney. I guess if you consider a millionaire a consumer attorney then he may be. But he just said to every other consumer attorney "I think you guys should sit and spin."
He just agreed to let the legislature tell us how to run our business and how to charge our clients. What's next? Maybe a personal injury attorney can only charge 10%? Maybe a criminal defense attorney can only charge his client if the client avoids jail? Maybe the medical malpractice attorney shouldn't be able to charge a fee since someone in the legislature must think doctors do good things. Maybe if Miller is so happy with the way the legislature wants to regulate business, he will let them come in and tell him what he can charge and how much. No? He doesn't want that? Then here is an idea: don't support them telling me how to run my business, numskull.
We have the perfect storm. The State Bar has now decided that the legislature should tell attorneys how to charge. The legislature gets to deflect attention away from their complete and utter failure and lack of ability to do their jobs and claim they are out protecting people. And the banks get to continue making their millions of dollars by screwing consumers. And somehow the consumer groups think this is good. Do we really wonder why our state is falling apart when we have a system where I was told by a legislative staffer "that may be the truth but that won't sell in the Capitol?" When these bills pass, the government of California will have failed to protect consumers once more while continuing to cover up their incompetence.
By the way, to those of you reading this at the Capitol, the offer still stands: a public debate of these bills. Yes, that goes for you Nava, Calderon, and Corbett, as well as you Jones, Steinberg and Bass. Oh, and you alleged consumer groups, that goes for you as well. Anytime, anyplace, anywhere.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)