WASHINGTON (AP) -- Stung by two days of defeat for their bids to revise a bill overhauling the bankruptcy laws, Senate Democrats are portraying the measure as making it harder for low-income, elderly and sick people to dissolve their debts while allowing the wealthy to shelter assets.
Through a day of debate Wednesday, the Democrats maintained a rhetorical accent on what they see as the inequity of the bankruptcy legislation. The Republicans, who hold the majority, maintained tight discipline. Sen. Orrin Hatch, R-Utah, warned against "killer amendments" that could jeopardize the bill's acceptance by the House.
http://www.cnn.com/2005/ALLPOLITICS/03/03/congress.bankruptcy.ap/index.html This awful thing is about to go and there may be enough dem turncoats that it cannot even be filibustered. I have sent the following letter to Kennedy asking him to try to organize one. If anybody does not want to see this bill passed they should contact their congress people and let them know. If any of you want to borrow from my letter to send to your senators feel free:
Dear Senator Kennedy,
I apologize for being a non-constituent taking up your time but I wanted to be heard on the bankruptcy bill. I am concerned that my two republican senators maybe unresponsive and its my understanding that you have taken the lead opposing what is in my view awful legislation.
I work as a bankruptcy practitioner and below is a letter I sent my senators setting forth some of my substantive concerns about the bill. I am attaching it for any use you feel fit. The bill is bad enough, and its effects will be so sweeping, immediate, and dire for the middle class, that I believe this bill may merit a filibuster and I do not think I am overstating the matter. Please consider using this device to challenge the bill or at least to put some sunlight on it (the media has done almost nothing as to its negative consequences). Thank you for your consideration of this matter. The letter with the substantive points is as follows:
Dear Senator McCain,
I am one of your constituents and have practiced bankruptcy law for the past 12 years here in Phoenix. Before you vote to pass the bankruptcy bill could you please do two things: 1)Read this bill, and 2) Speak to at least one of Arizona's bankruptcy judges (preferably a republican one so that they have more credibility in your eyes) about the bill's merits. If you can still vote for the bill after you have read it and spoken to one of our judges then you have at least done the bare mininum diligence that this decision requires. I suspect though if you actually read the bill and speak to one of our judges about it (not necessarily in that order) you will be unable to vote for it because it is in effect an economic attack on the middle class and will render the bankruptcy courts dysfunctional. I know that may sound like hyperbole but I honestly do not think I am overstating the matter.
In my practice approximately 5% of the bankruptcy cases I see could be characterized as abusive or involving lack of personal responsibility. The balance are caused by the following in descending order: divorce, illness, injury, job layoffs, and entrepreneurial failure. Even Republican Senators during this debate have already described the bill as being "harsh" when applying it to members of the military. Just as the Senate does not think this harsh bill should apply to the military why would they want it to apply to the divorced, ill, injured, layed off and the entrepreneurs who fuel our economy, take the risks that have to be taken for growth to ever occur, and failed in this noble attempt.
I will preview two important provisions in the Bil. The Bill "means tests" the ability of people to file Chapter 7 liquidations and forces everyone except the lower middle class with one income (2 incomes will be too much), the impoverished, and the extremely wealthy to file a Chapter 13 wage earner plan bankruptcy instead of a Chapter 7 liquidation. The Bill also requires that debtor's lawyers assume liability for the accuracy of the Debtors' representations of their financial condition set forth in their bankruptcy schedules and statement of financial affairs. Chapter 13's administrative transaction costs are three to four times greater than Chapter 7's. Chapter 13's will require a monthly payment stream for 3 to 5 years whether or not there really is any disposable income from which this payment can be made. Chapter 13's do not provide a debt discharge until the conclusion of the 3 to 5 years and credit markets refuse access to these debtors prior to receipt of the discharge. In Chapter 7's the discharge order comes in approximately 4 to 5 months and credit markets (ie. car lenders) will deal with debtors (albeit at a higher rate) after the receipt of the discharge. Chapter 13's plan currently have a high failure rate (ie. most debtors default on their Chapter 13 plan payments and never get their discharge). No lawyers will represent Debtors with the new liability provisions. Without lawyers the already high Chapter 13 failure rate will skyrocket. The net effect is hundreds of thousands/millions of American middle class people (the divorced, ill, injured, layed off, and failed entrepreneurs) will no longer get discharges and no longer be able to function as productive members of the American economy. All this at time when we are likely looking at a coming housing bubble correction, interest rate spike (accelarated by government budget and trade deficts), and dollar sell off.
And for what? I understand that MBNA and other credit card issuers have contributed a great deal to Senators for the additional leverage on Debtors that this bill will give them but is that enough to vote for a bill that is harmful to the interests of the American economy and its middle class.
There are other bad things in the bill and if your office would to discuss them further feel free to correspond to arrange the same. Thank you for your time considering this matter.
Printer-friendly format
Email this thread to a friend
Bookmark this thread
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
