Bankruptcy Reform - An Analysis

So, here we are. Six months after the BARF (bankruptcy reform) went into effect and the results so far have to be heartening to those millionaire card company CEO's. Todd Zywicki sure is impressed:

From Bankrate.com

In addition to stopping the abuse, Zywicki says the law protects consumers.

"It's got a number of consumer-protection provisions, such as greater restrictions of debtors to reaffirm debts and penalty provisions for creditors that don't accept good-faith efforts for debtors to repay voluntary payment plans."

However, some of the people that have to suffer from Professor Zywicki's love child have a different opinion:

Judge opinion (quoted by Todd Zwyicki in a post on the subject):

Here's what Judge Markell wrote in his opinion in In re Kane, 336 B.R. 477 (Bankr. D. Nev. 2006) (I couldn't find the opinion on-line other than in Westlaw) at page 481:

This court concurs with Judges Mark and Riegle--the cap applies to all debtors who do not satisfy the 1,215-day rule--but for different reasons than either of them advanced. Whether the text is ambiguous or not, it is still possible to consider and implement what Congress unambiguously intended and to overcome the drafters' unfortunate choice of words. [FN7]

FN7. Section 522(p) is one of many examples of poor drafting in the new bankruptcy law, which Professor Todd Zywicki assured the Senate Judiciary Committee was "fine as it is," adding, "There is no word that I would change in this particular piece of legislation." SEN. JUD. COMMITTEE, Hearing on S. 256: Bankruptcy Abuse Prevention and Consumer Protection Act of 2005, 109th Cong., unofficial transcript (March 10, 2005).

Professor Zywicki whined:

Much to my surprise and dismay, it appears that I have been badly misquoted by Federal Bankruptcy Judge (and former law professor) Bruce Markell regarding my testimony before the Senate Judiciary Committee regarding BAPCPA. Not only did Judge Markell grossly take my words out of context in a published judicial opinion but I understand that he did the same thing in a recent speech to the a local bankruptcy lawyers association

Oh, poor baby. Of the 48 comments on Zywicki's post, about 45 of them said that the Professor WAS NOT TAKEN out of context. The remainder only suggested that the Judge's opinion was a valid opinion even if they disagreed with it. However, in fact, it was clear from a reading that Professor Zywicki did in fact endorse the bill as written without any need whatsoever for amendment.

That said, I went after the dear Professor in this post. One of my peeves was with the issue of fraud:

Yet, you reference a claim by the FBI that as many as 10% of bankruptcy filings are fraudulent. We are not aware of any debtors being arrested in the two districts we work in at any time in the last 7 years. The total number of filings during that time is over 150,000. A case from this week is illustrative of the scrutiny the trustees in this district use: a client appeared at the 341 wearing a single earring (a man). The trustee noted no jewelry was listed on the schedules and required amendments to be filed. Does this constitute fraud?

Professor Zywicki's claim is recalled again in the Bankrate piece:

Supporters of the law frequently cite fraud as the catalyst for change and point to findings by the Federal Bureau of Investigation, which estimated that 10 percent of bankruptcies have involved fraud, with "hiding of assets" as the most common type. Feldstein believes, based on bankruptcy petitions his researchers have examined, that the percentage is an understatement.

Bullshit. Pure and simple. If 10% of the cases involved fraud, there would be 1,500,000 people facing federal prison over the last 10 years. In fact, the FBI has prosecuted less than 1000 cases in the last 10 years! Far from widespread, the issue is practically non-existent. Bankruptcy fraud cases are so rare, the FBI issues PRESS RELEASES when they get a case!

Professor Zywicki cited in his testimony and it was reported again in the Bankrate piece, a report produced by "SMR Research Corp., a market research firm". Does anyone know who the clients of SMR are? Why it is the banks and credit card companies. This is the same firm that helps credit card companies TARGET consumers for pre-bankruptcy cards .... sorry, credit cards. Do you think a company that helps credit card companies increase the number of active cards is going to suggest...they are promoting bad risks? Nahhh.

I went after SMR's report in this post also.

So, we have SMR and Professor Zywicki rehashing their position from the pre-signing days, claiming two things in the Bankrate piece: 1) it is too early to tell if the law has had much impact; and two, it has brought much needed relief to the credit card industry.

First, the impact: Filings are down 80% nationwide in the first 6 months of the new law. Even allowing for the idea that people that would have filed over the last six months rushed to be the law, filings should have rebounded by now. Roughly speaking, an additional 400,000 cases were filed in September and October over the previous years average. That is roughly 25% of the annual rate over the previous 3 years. If we had spread those 400,000 cases over the last 6 months, filing rates would still be down 45%.

Worse, one factor that drives people to bankruptcy is a threatened foreclosure. Foreclosures are up 50-60% so far this year. These people, previously a reasonable bankruptcy candidate, are just walking away in droves.

Second the credit card industry. On average, the credit card companies reported between a 1 and 2 percent reduction in PROFIT for the third quarter last year. (the period of heaviest pre-law filings). There has been of course NO reduction in interest rates. There has been an increase in the minimum monthly payments however.

Other factors. The fee to file bankruptcy changed with the new law. Chapter 13 went down - to encourage more chapter 13's we were told, and Chapter 7 fees were raised 30%. That lasted less than 6 months. On April 9th, fees for chapter 7 went up, again and Chapter 13 fees were increased 30%.

Let us look at a few other items in the Bankrate piece:

Financial organizations and researchers have listed 10 ways they believe the bankruptcy law combats consumer fraud:

• A petitioner's lawyer must agree to review all financial claims and must sign off on the accuracy of the claims. Lawyers and petitioners can be penalized for fraud.

Sounds good right? Now think about a criminal attorney swearing that the client s/he represents is telling the truth. Now imagine what happens to the attorney when the client is found guilty. Why the court can demand payment from the attorney for court costs and potentially find him/her guilty of lying to a court! THAT is what the bankruptcy law has done to attorneys. Can you imagine attorneys quitting the practice? Don't imagine, it is happening.

• Petitioners must file copies of their recent tax forms. This filing eliminates falsification of income and rids the bankruptcy system of criminals and other persons who don't file income tax returns.

Because of course, only criminals fail to file tax returns.

• The U.S. Trustee program, which regulates bankruptcy laws, will contract with a third party to conduct audits for at least one out of every 250 bankruptcy filings in each federal judicial district.

A demand of a previous policy. Can you imagine an attorney that would risk their livelihood for a $750 fee from a bankruptcy client?

• Mandatory bankruptcy credit counseling before filing provides debtors with alternatives to bankruptcy. It's designed to deal with "bad-apple debtors' attorneys" and "bankruptcy mills" that push people into bankruptcy without telling consumers all their options. The required counseling after a debtor files is intended to cut down on repeat filers. In addition, the counseling provision adds an additional paper trail for fraud investigators.

Here is a good one. A report on credit counseling results for the last quarter of 2005 (after the law went into effect) was discussed by me here. Primary result: 97% of people taking the pre-bankruptcy filing counseling, could not afford $100 a month towards their unsecured debts. This is 10 percentage points ABOVE the number of chapter 7 filers pre-law. Average of 13% of all filers were Chapter 13 repayment plans.

One final comment on Professor Zywicki. He commented back in 2005 that only 10-15% of filers would be affected by the new law. I said bull shit then, I say bullshit now. First, everyone has to pay the $50 for the credit counseling; everyone has to pay $90 more in filing fees, and attorneys (with their license and livelihood on the chopping block for every case) have raised their fees (almost every district we have heard from - about 1/3 of them) about 100%. That's right. Doubled. Why? Bankruptcy mills have undercut every attorney out there. The cost to file a bankruptcy in 2005 was virtually the same as in 1990. The mills are folding up and attorney's that 'dabbled' in bankruptcy have left. Fees have responded. The ones most hurt by all of the above? The least able to afford it.

The Bankruptcy Law does have a lot of supporters, unfortunately for consumers, none of them have to suffer. Judges, trustees, and attorneys have all reported the same: the law added much to the confusion surrounding filings, added expensive burdens to the courts and consumers and in the end, did nothing to fix the problems.

But the Banks and Credit Card Companies are happy!

The World's Bodyguard

The left would have us believe that it is not our place to get involved in the affairs of other countries - that they don't like - and the right would have us believe that it is our moral obligation to help those less fortunate.

A pox on both their houses.

The Left:
"Why Iraq? North Korea HAS nukes...why don't we attack them?"
Such mindless stupidity. The fact that North Korea could practically hand toss those couple of nukes on major population centers in South Korea leading to mass casualties seems beyond their ability to comprehend.
"They can't harm us, they are no threat."
A couple of guys from "them" hop a plane and fly it into a building. Harm and threat.
"Why can't Iran have nukes? We have them..."
If you can not see the difference between Iran and the United States...oh, wait, you can, we are imperialist, they just want to defend themselves.....right...and the threat from their leader to wipe Israel from the map, well, that's Israel's problem right?

The Right:
"They have a right to liberty."
Yea, and they have a responsibility to fight for it. It is not our responsibility to do it for them, help them yes, but not build the house and hand them the keys.
"If not us, who?"
The world, the part that proclaims itself civilized, has had it's military needs provided by the US for the last 60 years. They have forgotten that the absence of their military was not the reason for the absence of conflict. The Balkans proved that when faced with armed conflict in their own backyard, they have lost all will and means to deal with it. However, that does not mean we should continue to provide for them.
"They are a threat and must be faced"
Iran and North Korea and Syria are NOT threats to the United States. They can and will take opportunities to inflict casualties where and when possible against Americans, but there is no country, or even group of countries currently on this planet with the capability of inflicting permanent damage on the United States. Even if a nuke explodes in New York or Washington. Ignoring the utter stupidity such an act suggests, the repercussions against the perpetrators would exceed Dresden and Hiroshima by such a magnitude as I could imagine the entire world would be actually stunned into silence...for a time. I like to think no one is that stupid, but I know better. However. I see no reason for preemption. This is a change for me. Primarily because a large portion of AMERICANS are such whining cowards that our government fights wars short-sheeted. A large vocal portion of the American population can not conceive of a reason for war. It might take the deaths of a million fellow Americans on American soil to convince them otherwise. I am not asking for, or hoping for such an attack. I believe that given time, it WILL occur. And the longer people continue the whining and anti-war protesting, the MORE likely it will happen.

So. For the last 30 years or so, people have complained that we were acting like the world's police and who gave us that right? It was not a right, it was an obligation because so many countries in the world abdicated their responsibility to provide for their own defense. So much so that they began, and do believe, that their lack of responsibility in fact was a right.
The last 15 years, those same people have changed their words and increased their strident tone. Calling our actions imperialist. Again, such shear stupidity and ignorance should be dismissed out of hand, except it is coming from "learned and respected" sources. I am neither and it is stupidity and ignorance that fuels their beliefs.

I am tired of the shit we get for doing the right things. First, almost no one outside this country thinks it is the right thing we do, and second, a large portion of our own population does not believe or support it either. I don't always agree with the President, but I was taught that if you do the right things, a lot of people are not going to like you. It seems from the President's approval rating he is doing a lot of the right things.

I do not want to be protectionist or to withdraw into a shell. Too much of our economy relies on the outside world - although I believe that we could survive better than any other country if we were to do so. I do want every US military base in every other country closed and the military withdrawn to our shores. I believe that we can not do so for Iraq. Now, or for the foreseeable future. But there is no reason to still have troops in Europe or Asia.

I am tired of being the world's bodyguard. Time for everyone else to step up (or not) and take responsibility for their own survival. If Iran wants to nuke Israel, it faces a short existence as a net glass exporter. If North Korea wants to starve itself into oblivion, so be it. If Africa wants to continue slaughtering it's own population, let it. If South America wants to revert to socialist peasantry, I can live with it.

Is it the right thing to do? No, but what I think is right is no longer shared by the vast majority of non-Americans, nor by the 'apparent' majority of Americans.

The Rule of Law

About a year ago, we had a client that owed money to the IRS. They filed bankruptcy and planned on repaying the IRS debt along with much of the rest of their debts. However, the IRS did not file a claim in the bankruptcy by the deadline. (They must if they want to receive money from the bankruptcy trustee.) A trial was held to determine if the IRS could still receive their money despite not filing on time. In court, on the record, the Judge ruled that the IRS had failed to file their claim on time and the law said they could not therefore receive funds from the Trustee. He further stated that his boss, the appellate court, held the same position. But he thought that was unfair to the IRS and ruled in their favor. Our client of course could appeal, but they are afterall, bankrupt and the cost to appeal was beyond them. However, they had planned on repaying the IRS, so there were no 'new' costs associated with the loss.

A couple of weeks ago, at trial, a Judge at the Circuit Court level said to the opposing counsel, "those sections don't apply in this case counsel...give me something to work with..." She eventually ruled against our clients and claimed that a wrongful act that did not cause a partnership dissolution was cause for denying our clients the right to join in the winding up of the affairs of the partnership. Again, it is very appealable and almost certain to be overturned. But after 5 years with no payment from them to us, three trials and hundreds of hours of work, they are practically at the poverty line and we don't handle appeals.

A conversation with a court clerk about illegal immigration turned ugly, I was called a racist because I called illegal immigrants criminals.

A non-citizen, here for almost 30 years, will be deported after serving time for confessing that he did in fact raise funds and support terrorist organizations after spending 5 years complaining that he not only did not raise funds or support terrorists, but that he was the victim of racism and bigotry.

Another non-citizen, here on a student visa, has been arrested and will likely be deported for calling for the assassination of the President and others. Many are coming to his defense saying he didn't mean for it to really happen.

A potential client came in today to talk finances, but a quick check of the court docket found a recent traffic ticket....for inattentive driving. Nothing else, just talking on the phone while driving on the Interstate. $175 fine. It didn't help his finances....

Getting justice requires money. I know, it is not supposed to be that way but attorneys every day represent clients that have not, can not, many never, pay for their services. A former client came in today to ask for a payment plan for fees they did not pay last year. $25 a month for 6.5 years, no interest.

A bankruptcy Trustee will receive $24k in fees for paying $6k in debts, and last year, the same trustee received $17k in fees to pay $7k in debts. Just two recent cases. He has been cited by the court for taking excessive fees in the past.

The law is a wonderful thing. It is however, used and abused daily. After the last couple of years of working for an attorney I can tell you without a doubt, the law favors one side...the side with the money.

Churchill said that democracy was the worst form of government, except for all the other forms. I would suggest that our legal system is the worst, except for all the other legal systems.

Iraq and the Anti-War Rant

Yesterday, about 36,000 residents of the 210,000+ people that live in Madison, voted in the spring election referendum calling for the troops in Iraq to be brought home now. Of course the impact of such a vote on REALITY, is zero. No troops will be positioned because the people of Madison want it so.

We can start off with a discussion of the relatively low turnout, but why bother. I voted. Most people don't. The vote totals were 24,344 for bringing the troops home and 11,252 against bringing the troops home. I voted against the referendum.

We attacked another country with an army estimated at 500,000, took control of an area the size of California, and we have lost just over 2,300 troops in three years. We have lost less troops in combat, troops that volunteered to serve and are willingly re-enlisting in large numbers, than civilians on 9/11.

For that priceless cost, two countries have been freed from tyranny and horrors seldom seen in the civilized world. However, 24,344 people in Madison decided that they have their comforts and to hell with anyone else.

I would like to believe that only 24,344 people in Madison are so callous and indifferent to the plight of others. But I know it is not true. Those 24,344 are just the tip of the iceberg. Of course they will complain that in fact it is their caring that causes them to support such a referendum. They are wrong. The people of Afghanistan and Iraq WERE NOT better off under their previous governments. And while North Koreans are inarguably some of the worst off people on the planet, it would cost tens of thousands of lives and the infrastructure of an entire country (South Korea) to change their plight. If Americans are unwilling to support the relatively low cost of Iraq, I can not imagine them even considering North Korea, despite their flippant attitude on the subject.

I can not imagine for a second that Clinton, Gore or Kerry would still be in either Afghanistan or Iraq - hell, I can't imagine we would have gone in there in the first place with either Clinton or Gore.

24,344 Madisonians proved yesterday that they do not care about the people of other countries, do not care about our troops but do care about their own comforts. Fortunately for us, the people in Iraq, Afghanistan and the rest of the world, we can 'safely' ignore them.

Foreclosures

Todd Zywicki of Senate fame for his support of the bankruptcy bill has complained that a judge that quoted his Senate testimony did so out of context. It was a whine of excellent proportions and I ignore it here. However, I did post a comment on his blog, recreated here for all to read:

Todd,

He is not the only judge bad-mouthing the law. Hundreds of judges, trustees, bankruptcy attorneys and a large number of law school professors wrote extensively on what was wrong with that bill. Sen Feingold happens to be my Senator and I do not like him, but unlike the Republican Senator from Wisconsin who voted for the bill, he opposed both the intent and way the bill was rammed through. Your characterization only lent support for the effort and if you don't like the result, well, you are not one of the thousands of debtors that have to deal with it.

We were one of the voices in the wilderness shouting that the law was bad. From my blog and on my partners law office website , we tried to warn people.

Needed or not (and we didn't think it was needed to address the issues you so broadly claimed needed addressing), the law is a non-functioning nightmare.

Two issues most clearly stand out. Bankruptcies are down almost 80% nationwide - as intended by the bill - but foreclosures are up as much as 50% in some areas (68% in our district), so the reasons for people to file have not changed.

Second, the attorney fees, court filing fees (slated to go up AGAIN on April 9th), and the cost of credit counseling have made it very difficult for the people 'least likely to be affected by the law' to actually afford adequate representation.

Proclaim 'out of context' all you want, the judges and attorneys that have to deal with what you considered fine legislation for the next 20-30 years will remember your contribution for a long time. And if they immortalize you in their decisions, well, what more could an attorney want!?

****************

Well, I did want to follow up on the one set of numbers I referenced in the comment with some hard numbers:

Metro Denver foreclosures increased to 1,523 in the first month of 2006, the highest number on record in Metro Denver. Compared to January 2005, the number of foreclosures in Metro Denver stands 37.1% higher. Denver, Adams and Douglas
counties reported the highest levels of foreclosure activity in January 2006 in terms of percentage gains from January 2005. Although all seven Metro Denver counties reported heightened foreclosure activity, Boulder, Arapahoe
and Broomfield counties reported the smallest percentage increases. The largest number of foreclosures in January occurred in Adams, Denver and Arapahoe counties.

Source MetroDenver.org

Indiana lead the nation with its foreclosure rate was nearly 1 percent. The Midwest has had the roughest time lately in the country as stagnant employment and rising energy costs have hit the region hard.

Source The Realestate Bloggers

After recording more than 9,000 foreclosures in 2005, Wayne County ended January with 3,364 homes in active foreclosure, the highest of any county in the nation by more than 1,000."

Source Get Foreclosures Blogspot

"“This is the third straight month the U.S. foreclosure rate has moved higher, and it'’s the second straight month new foreclosures have topped 100,000",” said James J. Saccacio, chief executive officer of RealtyTrac.

Source RealtyTrac.com


If more people than ever are facing foreclosure and fewer people are filing bankruptcy...we have many more homes being liquidated and many more people falling off the homeowner rolls. This is neither good for the real estate markets nor the industries supported by home ownership.

Hey Todd...don't you feel proud!??

Evil

[cross posted to Religious Agnostics ]

Last night I marveled at the number of people that defend the indefensible.

On the radio, someone was talking about amnesty and registering illegals and all I could think of is gun control. If only the good people registered their guns, all the criminals would still be out there with guns. If all the good illegal (oxymoron?) aliens register, what will we do with all the bad illegal aliens? The marches going on against immigration reform - would anyone else find a march by looters demanding the abolishment of theft laws absurd? Illegal immigrants are proven law breakers. I would like to say that anyone arrested and brought before a judge for breaking a law "with good reason" will still have to pay a penalty but...

A version of Jessica's Law was passed in Ohio over strong opposition. I know the argument - mandatory sentencing takes the justice out of the system. In many places I agree with that, however, as long as judges continue to consider predators of children to have a momentary lapse in judgment, I want to prevent such lapses from happening on the bench.

NAMBLA. Is there any reason this organization exists? Why hasn't the population of this country risen up and lynched every single one of the members? I generally am against vigilatism, but please, someone...anyone?

Here in Madison on April 4th, a measure is on the ballot calling for the immediate withdrawal of troops from Iraq. There are signs all over this town calling on voters to say yes. I wanted to buy a dozen cans of yellow spray paint and paint yellow stripes on every sign I could find - two problems, one, someone is going to remember a woman buying a dozen cans of yellow spray paint when the news reports the 'vandalism' and two, it would take more than 100 cans to get all the signs...

Jill Carroll was released and proclaimed that her captors 'treated her well'. Being kidnapped, having your translator killed in front of you, being forced to plead for your life on video and being held for 3 months against your will IS NOT BEING TREATED WELL.

Islam is NOT a civilized religion. Some, maybe a majority, of Moslems are civilized. But any government or religion that seeks to kill someone for changing their religion IS NOT CIVILIZED.

As a mob, and this country is no better than a mob at this time, we have lost the capacity to recognize evil. Even the concept of evil is mocked or dismissed.

Looters are excused because they only wanted food and water.
Illegal immigrants are excused because they only want jobs.
Kidnappers are excused because 'we' invaded their country.
Child rapists are excused because they need treatment.
Murderers are excused because 'we' supported Israel.
Religions are excused because 'we' lack sensitivity.
Countries are excused because they are 'democratic'.

Evil does not start as a full blown country spanning movement, it starts small, day by day eroding our will to address it. I am not religious but if you can not see the evil growing in this country, YOU ARE PART OF THE PROBLEM.

** By the way, if your first thought was of a political party or politician, you are clueless ***

Why You Should Be Voting

About a year ago, this blog, joined with many others in voicing strong opposition to what would become the new bankruptcy law. Among the most interesting results of that experience was my awareness that our political system was dangerously out of whack.

Of course, many of you will snort and loudly say "DUH!".

How many times have we heard of some nut case shouting about some piece of legislation that would doom people and thought, get over it. Last year, I was one of those nut cases. Legislation that would impact less than 1/2 of 1% of our population was rammed through Congress on the premise that a significant portion of those affected were criminals and they should not be allowed to get away with it.

My former political party, the Republicans, acted the way the Ted Kennedy's of the world always complain they act - serve the corporate interest and the hell with the citizen. I can not tell you how much it hurt me to claim Ted Kennedy was right. I could not remain a Republican. Everything that they should have stood for was corrupted by that law. In a letter to President Bush and email to Sen Herb Kohl, I renounced my support of the Republicans that supported that law, promised to work actively against their attempts at re-election and would consider myself party-less for the first time in my adult life.

It should be shouted at every opportunity that Congress has abdicated its role as the representatives of THE PEOPLE. It is not just earmarks. Bill after bill, law after law is designed to create a benefit for a select few. And if the consequences can be limited to individuals without sufficient political clout (money) to prevent it, all the better.

I have suggested, here and elsewhere, that the first step in correcting the problem is to vote every single incumbent out of office. All of them. Unfortunately, almost every Congressperson has a sufficient base in their own district that will claim their representative is one of the good guys and should be left in. But I am wrong. Changing the Congress will not change the process. The bureaucracy and the lobbyists create a parasite/host symbiosis - you try and figure which is which because I can't tell - that is only minimally affected by whatever warm body occupies a seat on Capitol Hill.

No one in their right mind would seek political office. All you need to know about the vetting process is that unless you are 1) politically connected and sponsored; 2)without a blemish - figuratively and literally; 3) completely compliant with the monied interests; 4) politically correct for your area, you are going to be smeared like a mouse under an 18-wheeler. We have thousands of people with the experience and skill to represent us in Congress - but who wouldn't touch the idea of running for office with a 10 mile pole.

This past weekend, someone asked me my opinion of Hillary Clinton's position on illegal immigration. I said it didn't matter. She was pandering to whatever group she was talking to at the time. But it is not just Sen Clinton. They ALL do it. Sen Feingold claimed principle was driving his censure resolution but two things suggest he was pandering also. First, there was/is no impact except politically to the President with passage of his resolution. If he really wanted to impress upon the President and others that the President was acting illegally and should be called on it, he would have sponsored a bill of impeachment. Second, despite protests to the contrary, we are in a war and his resolution complained of the prosecution of that war. It is the President as Commander-in-Chief that has the Constitutional authority to wage war, and Congress - at one time - voted to approve that authority. If Sen Feingold feels the President is not acting correctly with regard to the war, he can sponsor legislation WITHDRAWING Congressional approval. But he did neither of those things. So, like others, it was political pandering.

I voted for Feingold in the past, it won't happen again. I voted for Bush, and will not have the chance to vote against him in the future. I will vote against Sen Kohl this time around and I will vote against every single incumbent on the ballot. It is not a perfect solution, or even a relatively good start, but until politicians start to really worry about their 'careers', no one, NOT A SINGLE ONE, will ever get my vote twice.

When your choice is the lesser of two evils, it is time to change how you get your choices.

Bankruptcy for the little people:

One of the features of bankruptcy reform proponents pointed to was the change in filing fees. An actual reduction in the cost to file a Chapter 13 from $194 to $189. The change in Chapter 7 fees went from $209 to $274, to encourage people to file Chapter 13s apparently. However, a few pointed out that if someone could still qualify to file a Chapter 7 (under the median income filers) the higher fees and extra costs of credit counseling would have a negative impact. The response was that the higher cost was a small one. Tell that to someone that paid $20 to fill their gas tank last year and $40 to do it this year.

Well, in an effort to balance the federal budget, those wonderful congresspeople have corrected the error of their ways. Less than 6 months after the new bankruptcy reform went into effect, the fees for filing bankruptcy are increasing.

Effective April 9th, the filing fee for a Chapter 7 will increase $25 to $299. And the filing fee for a Chapter 13 will go UP TO $274.

Don't cha love it!?

Oh, you were serious?

I just deleted a ten paragraph rant against the Republicans and Democrats because the two groups actually think they are doing well, it is just the fanatics of both parties that have lost it.

Sorry folks.

Republicans:
1. You have screwed up just about everything you have touched in the last 5.5 years.
2. What you haven't screwed up, you have ignored to our sure-to-be sorrow.
3. You have assumed that being the least of two evils was good enough to get elected.

Democrats:
1. Being the opposition party is not a platform.
2. The war on terror is not a video game that can be reset if we fail.
3. When the President turns to lead the country forward, it is NOT an invitation to stab him in the back.
4. Almost every single problem Bush and the Republicans have screwed up on BEGAN ON DEMOCRATIC WATCHES.

Our own government bureaucrats:
1. The State Department actively opposes the Administration.
2. The CIA intentionally intervenes in American politics.
3. The Immigration Department is corrupt and compromised.

Our own institutions:
1. The Mainstream Press considers national secrets political tools.
2. Colleges and universities are not teaching, they are breeding hatred of American culture and freedoms
3. The culture media (movies and music) work actively to destroy families and to support cultural segregation.

What are the right answers? Here is my problem, and ours:
1. The UN is not a democratic or freedom promoting institution and we should abandon it.
2. Islam is a threat to the freedoms and liberties we value and support.
3. Current common culture is worse than crass, it is vulgar and offensive.
4. Rights have responsibilities and for too long, we have ignored the disconnect that exists now.
5. Respect is EARNED, not bestowed.
6. Diversity is neither a goal, nor a means, it is a characteristic.

Some obvious examples of what is wrong:
1. A newspaper published details of two national secrets, but refused to publish an editorial cartoon because it might offend someone.
2. "The life of a pimp is hard" won an Academy Award.
3. A ban on partial birth abortion may be illegal.
4. A million illegal aliens are crossing our borders every year.
5. The spokesman for the Taliban is attending one of our top universities, gratis.
6. A Senator wants to sanction the President (an action with no other consequences than political gain) for attempting to catch people planning to kill innocents.
7. We had men on the Moon 36 years ago. We have had one shuttle launch in the last 4 years.
8. My daughter's school will be paid $250,000 this year to teach her and her 24 school mates. 90% of them will be unable to compete with the 5th graders in virtually every other industrialized country by the end of the school year.

Any suggestion I make to correct a problem we ALL agree exists, will be proclaimed as an assault on freedom of...., or offensive to...., or interference with...

And there in lies the problem that is at the heart of all our problems, only I can take responsibility for my actions, I can not force YOU to do the same.

In Wisconsin News - Part 2

Seems to be a day for Wisconsin stuff.

Other bloggers have commented on some recent rulings of the Wisconsin Supreme Court (WSC) and the likely impact those rulings will have on the economic future of Wisconsin. I have not engaged nor commented on those rulings as law (for all my actual interest in it) is basically very boring to the average person.

Ok, slap me on the back of the head....it should not be I agree and my own response to the Bankruptcy Reform Act is an indication that I actually do pay attention and call others to do so also.

However, an authoritative voice making an analysis is worth listening to. Former Wisconsin Supreme Court Justise Diane Sykes gave a lecture about the recent WSC rulings and her concern is justified not just from the legal, but from the economic points of view.

Worth the read if you are from Wisconsin or do business here.

BTW: Milestone, this is my 100th post!

In Wisconsin News

I have not been very verbose on Wisconsin politics because I am usually so negative on the whole lot that everything I try to write sounds shrill. Still, a couple of things just pissed me off yesterday that I have no choice today.

Item 1:

Herb Kohl, senior Senator from Wisconsin, while commenting on the Prescription Benefit program complained that the program was just political payback for pharmaceutical industry.

WELL SENATOR KOHL, WHAT THE HELL DO YOU THINK THE BANKRUPTCY REFORM ACT WAS?

The Prescription Benefit program at least has the APPEARANCE of being pro-consumer. The Bankruptcy Reform Act (BARF to those of us that deal with consumers) has neither the appearance nor the intent to assist consumers at all. The Bankruptcy Reform Act was political payback for the over $100 MILLION paid by lobbyists to Congressmen on behalf of the credit/bank industry over the last 8 years.


Item 2:

Our daughter brought home her school newsletter Wednesday and I finally read it yesterday. A nice letter from Superintendent Art Rainwater on No Child Left Behind (NCLB). Let me excerpt a couple of pieces:

The recognition of the importance in understanding our children's learning needs through good academic assessment has been a major positive change.

Good, he recognizes the value of actually assessing student performance! But like any good reactionary, no positive can be left without a negative..

Unfortunately, NCLB uses this very positive educational advance to create a punitive climate for change. Schools will not succeed because of the NCLB strategy of apply sanctions; schools will succeed when:
* the need for change is understood based on clear and convincing data;

Stop there! "when the need for change is understood"? We have a 50% drop out rate from high school and a large percentage of students can not read by 6th grade and there is some question about the need for change????? Continuing:

* well planned staff development provides teachers with "best practice" skills

Wait..."best practice"? Where and when might these best practices be determined? In universities where they teach our teachers to teach? There are no incentives for good teachers to teach well under the current (non-NCLB) system. I will admit that a big part of the problem is the parents that want their little tyke to have positive self-esteem, ability to read be damned. Continuing:

* progress is monitored for improvement

Is not that one of the major points that Rainwater acknowledges earlier? Assessment is a good thing?

Despite the political rhetoric to this point, Rainwater then states something that is SO stupid that it should be clear to anyone that our schools are in trouble not only because of the problems in the classroom and at home, but in their administration and management from the top:

NCLB takes a punitive approach by identifying schools that are not making adequate yearly progress (AYP) and applying increasing levels of sanctions. There has now been substantial discussion that illustrates the almost mathematical certainty that under the current system of identifying AYP schools, all of our nation's schools will eventually be on the AYP list.

That's right. Discussion illustrates a mathematical certainty that ALL schools will fail to make adequate yearly progress. Mathematical certainty used here is exactly the same tone as "I read somewhere", "they say".

The positive approach of using student date to inform instruction is negated by the certainty of ultimately being unsuccessful. If there is no hope for final success, it is difficult to undertake the journey.

Mr. Rainwater, our daughter is 11. Your JOB is to teach her, now. No one expects a perfect system and we fully expect things to continuously change and IMPROVE as time goes on, but she will not wait for you to get your system right, you have to make it work now. The "system" before NCLB was not working, and years of increasing spending was making it worse, not better. Left to your own (you, your staff and the entire educational system) devices, things were getting much, much worse. If you don't like the idea of sanctions, maybe you should consider a job in the real world, a place our daughter is going to face in about a dozen years. You know, a place where if you fail to meet expectations, you get fired.

Included in the newsletter was a page titled: What is the importance of standards-based curricula in mathematics? Subtitled: Research and Best Practice

An interesting paragraph illustrates my point and Rainwaters lack:

Extensive logitudinal studies show that the mathematics standards in many school districts in this country [note real studies, not discussions] are not as rigorous as those in other countries. In international studies, American students are not achieving world-class mathematics standards. U.S. students rated average by their teachers[note rated, not tested] may actually be performing at the basic level by international standards. Many high school graduates need remedial courses before attempting college-level mathematics; too many do not pass their beginning university courses.

These are students not covered by NCLB. They were failed by the system that supported self esteem over concrete results.

Initial reports - Bankruptcy Reform

The National Association of Consumer Bankruptcy Attorneys has issued a study looking at the first batch of consumers to run the gauntlet of bankruptcy reform.

A review of the agencies reporting results in the study:

*************************************************************
There are only 122 CCOs (credit counseling organizations) on the current list maintained by the US Trustee. Of these 122, 69 are approved in more than one district, fifteen of them in 10 or more districts.

The six CCOs listed in the report represent 5 of the CCOs with the largest footprints:
MMI 85 districts covered
Greenpath 77 districts covered
Springboard 84 districts covered
Hummingbird 86 districts covered
Institute for Fin Lit 86 districts covered
ByDesign 4 districts covered

First blush: The report covers 10/17/05 - 2/1/05. 61k consumers served. If all became bankruptcy clients/filers, then we get 250k annual rate of filing from that number...a 85% drop from the 1.6m filings the previous year.

The report says it approached ten CCOs, the 10 that cover the largest footprints are:

Consumer Credit Counseling Services of San Francisco 74
Credit Counseling Centers of America 75
GreenPath, Inc. 77
Consumer Credit Counseling Service of Greater Atlanta Inc. 80
Credit Advisors Foundation 84
Springboard Nonprofit Consumer Credit Management Inc. 84
Garden State Consumer Credit Counseling, Inc. 85
Money Management International Inc. 85
Hummingbird Credit Counseling and Education, Inc. 86
Institute for Financial Literacy, Inc. 86

ByDesign only handles 4 districts...who else did they approach?

***********************************************************

Let us start off with some info regarding credit counseling from a story from Bankrate.com on March 3. Approximately 38,000 debtors filed bankruptcy from Oct 17 to the end of the year. Based on the number of people covered by the NACBA study, most (maybe 90% or more) of debtors that filed bankruptcy until Jan 31/Feb 15 were counseled by the CCOs in the study. It appears the study does accurately reflect the majority of consumers filing bankruptcy post 10/17.

So far this year we are seeing between a 70 and 80% decrease in filings over last year same time (reported by attorneys in our discussion group). Our district is 80% down from last year, 81.5% down from the 2003/2004 average. The Bankrate release claims a 75% decrease nationwide.

The study reported that 97% of the debtors could not make any payments on debt, indicating that the average consumer looking to file bankruptcy post 10/17 has less than $125 per month excess income. The report does not note if the credit counselors are using the IRS allowed expenses or not. The report also does not indicate how many of the consumers were below or above the median incomes for their areas.

The percentage of consumers facing financial difficulties as a result of events beyond their control, 79% in the study, is lower than our experience, but still higher than many would believe.

As for the increase in filings pre-reform having a significant impact on the credit card industry...well...a minor bump in the road:

NEW YORK--(BUSINESS WIRE)--March 7, 2006--The most recent Fitch Credit Card Index results indicate charge offs improving dramatically by declining 359 bps to 3.29%. Correspondingly, one-month excess spread improved in the latest period by 306 bps to a robust 8.38%, bringing the three-month average excess spread up 112 bps to 6%. Last fall's spike in personal bankruptcy filings has finally worked its way through U.S. credit card master trusts' performance measures.

'The pig in the python has been fully digested,' said Darryl Osojnak, Senior Director, Fitch Ratings. 'The outlook for charge offs is positive over the near term and master trusts should benefit from increased levels of excess spread going forward.

Isn't that nice! Do you think anyone is going to see a reduction in their interest rates?

The major banks have all reported profit decreases in the 4th quarter but this caught my eye:

<>The News Journal
<>01/24/2006

A new bankruptcy law that's been criticized as bad for consumers also turned out to be bad for Bank of America in the final months of 2005.

Bank of America, now Delaware's largest private employer following its buyout of Wilmington-based MBNA Corp., said Monday that fourth-quarter profit fell 2 percent largely because of increased loan write-offs related to the new federal bankruptcy law.

Bank of America said it earned $3.77 billion, or 93 cents a share, compared with $3.85 billion, or 94 cents a share, in the 2004 fourth quarter. Excluding $59 million in costs related to the 2004 acquisition of FleetBoston Financial, the bank would have earned 94 cents a share.

About $20m reduction in profit, not a loss, just a minor glitch in the profit.

As for other banks:

Last week, JPMorgan Chase said earnings at its Wilmington-based credit card unit plunged 41 percent because of higher bankruptcy filings.

MBNA also saw its earnings slump in the fourth quarter, the credit card giant's last as an independent company. MBNA's net income slid 49 percent to $389 million, or 30 cents a share, as revenue dropped 11 percent to $2.5 billion.

But wait a sec, from WebBolt:

JPMorgan Chase & Co. reported 2005 fourth-quarter net income of $2.7 billion, or $0.76 per share, compared with net income of $1.7 billion, or $0.46 per share, for the fourth quarter of 2004.

And from a PPT from Bank of America with regard to MBNA:

Net income of $1,771 million in 2005 and $389 million in 4Q05

How terrible was the impact? Really?

Do the numbers reflect a significant decrease in consumers in financial trouble? From the same Fitch report:

The Fitch Credit Card index is published during the first week of each month and includes month end data from two months prior, resulting in about a 35 day lag. Fitch's Credit Card Index for charge offs was 7.52% for Nov. 2005, a 144 bps increase over the same period in 2004. February's prime charge offs of 3.29% represent an improvement of 423bps from the peak observed in the November reporting period. Fitch expects charge offs to remain below 6% for the remainder of the first half of 2006 for the majority of the prime issuers.

The acceleration of charge-offs also purged a significant percentage of receivables from the 60+ day delinquency status for many portfolios. The current Fitch Credit Card Index 60+ day delinquency rate was 2.19%, an increase of 10bps from last month, yet down 77bps from the same time last year.

The charge off rate for Nov 2005 was 7.52%, 1.44 above the previous year....meaning about 6.08% If the Feb numbers were only 3.29, then we have a better than 50% reduction in the charge off rate post-BARF. Great. Except they are not expecting it to continue. How much an impact the increased minimum payment requirement is going to have on these numbers was mentioned somewhere in a report lamenting the reduction in profitability of credit card issuers from lost interest revenue.

If the people filing now are the real hard core, those that have no choice about bankruptcy, then the idea that the new law would only impact 5% or so of filers is wrong. 15-25% of filers in the past had no choice but to file and the law has of course made it harder and more expensive. Can they still file? Yes. But at what cost?

The study, along with reporting of the impact on credit card issuers, indicates that 1) the impact of bankruptcy on the bottom line of the credit industry was negligible, 2) consumers are staying away from bankruptcy in droves, 3) consumers most likely to file bankruptcy, are the ones closest to financial bottom, 4) opponents to the bankruptcy law were basing their positions on conditions closer to the truth than were the proponents.

Here is an interesting statistic from our district:

2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005
Chapter 13 604 826 968 1125 1107 1123
Totals 5734 7432 8386 9371 9122 12687

Chapter 13 filings did not change AT ALL! The increase in filings was all Chapter 7.

An another:
From 1/1/05-3/1/05, our county had 68 foreclosures filed.
From 1/1/06-3/1/06, our county had 116 foreclosures filed.

Remember, foreclosures are usually filed only after consumers are more than 90 days behind in payments, meaning most of these consumers were in trouble PRIOR to the bankruptcy law changing.

The new law did nothing to stop the erosion of the financial condition of many consumers. For those with no where else to turn, the cost and difficulty of filing bankruptcy has added stress and expense when consumers can least afford them. The significant jump in bankruptcy filings did no more than cause an itch in bank profitability. With the change in credit card minimum payments and higher gas prices (fortunately a mild winter or heating bills would have been much higher), we are seeing more people in trouble and the law change is going to make it much harder for them to recover.

Jar Jar Binks Award goes to...

Ms Peggy Noonan!

I start with a dictionary definition, from American Heritage, not that anyone needs it because everyone knows what a lady is. It's a kind of natural knowledge. According to American Heritage, a lady is a well-mannered and considerate woman with high standards of proper behavior. You know one, the dictionary suggests, by how she's treated: "a woman, especially when spoken of or to in a polite way." Under usage, American Heritage says, "lady is normally used as a parallel to gentleman to emphasize norms expected in polite society or situations."

I would add that a lady need not be stuffy, scolding, stiff. A lady brings regard for others into the room with her; that regard is part of the dignity she carries and seeks to spread. A lady is a woman who projects the stature of life.

These definitions are incomplete but serviceable--I invite better ones--but keep them in mind as I try to draw a fuller picture of what it was like to be taken aside at an airport last week for what is currently known as further screening and was generally understood 50 years ago to be second-degree sexual assault.

Poor Ms Noonan. Her delicate sensibilities were offended...."No way to treat a lady" playing in the background as her Jar Jar Binks Award is placed on the mantel.

(HT to Soxblog )

Off topic and

a shameless plug.

I have a new blog up at No Time, No Money. Please check it out.

Dear Wisconsin

I hate liver, guacamole and eggplant. I hated Seinfeld, dislike wrestling, love golf, read science fiction and hate romance novels. I have freckles and fair skin. I work my ass off and snore. Is there any reason why I should be singled out for legislation opposing my choices for any of these items?

Exactly what threat do you think we represent to you? My partner and I have been together for more than 12 years, we are raising, what by all objection opinion is an intelligent, well adjusted happy 11 year old. We live in our community, participate in it's functions/events. We vote. We attend church weekly, are active in it's community. Our home is well maintained and appreciated by neighbors and visitors.

Apparently we are insufficient citizens. We do not rate similar legal protections as the majority of our neighbors. We are less of a family than other families in our state.

I am tired of hearing the excuses: we are not normal, we are shoving our lifestyle in your face, we corrupt the impressionable, it is against God. I will compare the hysteria concerning gay marriage to radical Islam's hatred of the United States.

Yes, it is the same. I am a NORMAL human being. I CHOOSE to be with another woman. Unlike many gays born to their preferences, I CHOOSE. And as an American, a veteran, I demand the right to the pursuit of happiness. Any attempt to abridge that right better have some serious support, and so far, DOMA and similar attempts are nothing but religious, arcane rants no different than those fanatics in the Middle East.

Grow up. The world changes, and right now, Wisconsin is about to join the likes of foot stomping fanatics screaming "it ain't right, it ain't right".

There has always been a small percentage of humans that have same-sex preferences. It occurs regardless of race, income, education, location. That in and of itself should be sufficient to support the concept that same-sex preferences are a normal variant of humanity.

Somehow my personal relationship is an affront to others. Apparently the United States is an affront to others. For hundreds of years, America has been a deviant. Democracy and capitalism a threat to the established order of the world. The only threat my relationship is to Wisconsin and the United States is that it might expose some for being less willing to accept freedom, liberty and democracy for others than for themselves.

Bias, bigotry and the Ports

It has been my goal to give people the benefit of the doubt until or unless they have given me reason to think otherwise. Some of the bloggers I respect and read regularly have come down on the side of opposition to the Ports Deal and I have stated pretty clearly that I think their position is a reaction to "Arabs" in general, Dubai in particular.

It has been hard to read their posts complaining that they are being labeled racist or bigoted because of their position when they clearly state very good reasons to be concerned by Dubai's dubious past.

But after feeling guilty for maybe labeling them inappropriately, I come back to, were they against it before they were against it with good reason? Is prejudice justifiable once cause is found?

A commentor noted that after the Mosque bombing last week, many outlets were saying "see, civil war, warned you it was inevitable" but after a few days, things have begun to settle down and civil war has been averted yet again by Iraqis that truly want peace. The commentor lamented the speed at which some want to paint the Iraqis as incapable of peace and any violence is used to support that PREJUDICE. Are there any companies doing business in the Middle East (of any corporate origin) that do not act in ways that would be unacceptable in the United States but simply must be done there to actually get anything done? How many countries and companies that we (the United States) do business with act in ways that are not in our best interest all or even most of the time, but are good business decisions? How many French or German or Japanese companies have pasts that we ignore, even justify on the basis that they are our ally and that the past is history?

Dubai is not a perfect ally. It has to operate in an area of immense danger to itself and it's citizens. It is NOT always going to act in ways we agree with.

I feel bad that bloggers I generally respect disagree with me about the ports, but how many of them supported their position with real concerns before opposing the deal? Honestly? I am afraid fewer than I hope.

Port Responsibility

A couple of years ago someone I know said that all white people were racist, because we were white. I was upset by that statement, racist that it was, because I worked hard to make sure that I did not respond to people based on their classification. So it has been with some dismay that my very first response to hearing that an Arab company was about to buy some American ports was one of "you got to be kidding?! Let me read the story..."

So I did, read some stuff about the deal that actually had some facts about what was going to happen and then made a clear headed decision(see post below). Would that more people did what I did.

It is NOT bias, prejudice or racism, if the INITIAL reaction was the same "you got to be kidding". We have seen 9/11, Madrid, London, the Cartoon Riots, the carnage in Iraq, Lebanon and Jordan, and the ongoing war between Israel and everyone else. We have seen many, many examples where Moslems have responded with bloodshed over the last five years. The concern that we would be welcoming them to come to the US and to control an entry point EVERYONE agrees is a major weak spot in our defense is a GOOD response...initially.

It is prejudice if after hearing that a foreign company has been running the ports for the last decade you continue to insist it is a bad idea for an Arab company to do so.

It is racist if after hearing about Dubai and it's assistance in the GWT and in Iraq that you continue to insist the deal should not go through.

Does this mean that we should allow Dubai or any other company to manage our ports without a thorough review? No. But we also have several other foreign companies/countries in our ports now! The emphasis on this being "yea, well it's Arabs!" clearly introduces racism into the argument.

One commentary suggested that last week we had a Hillary Clinton/George Bush brain transference in the debate. George Bush saying we had to be open to trade and working with Arab nations and companies if we are ever to bridge the cultural divide and Hillary Clinton all but proclaiming "not with THEM". The congresswoman that wrote the President "not only no, BUT HELL NO" portrays herself no less as racist than the KKK.

If Dubai Ports underwent the same review as other foreign owned port managers and was accepted, then I see no reason NOT to allow them to proceed with management of the ports. I do not believe any additional restrictions should be placed on Dubai Ports than existed under P&O. If that makes people concerned, GOOD! Maybe then more people would be pushing for greater security measures being introduced at ALL the ports.

Islam and Western values may never be compatible, but as we have seen with the Cartoon Riots, for Americans to allow Arab culture to dictate our response is to concede the point.

There is NO difference between the Cartoon Riots and our denying Dubai the right to legally purchase a company and operate that company according to our laws, on our soil. If you don't see it, or suggest I am being naive, then YOU have a problem.

What happened to....

Cheney and hunting? This was a big story.....Cheney was hiding something....where is the outrage?

Gone.

Last Friday almost everything was about Cheney and the accident, by Tuesday there wasn't a word and I have looked for ANYONE to be making any further comment, gone.

So, the question is: was the Cheney story really a non-story, made a story because the press had nothing else to write about? Or was it just a non-story that died appropriately.

Inquiring Me whats to know...

My friend Tom over at Bizzyblog has a regular feature of questions he would like answers to, here are a few of my own:

1. Global warming: what effect has adding 4 billion people to the planet, each generating heat and CO2 over the last 100 years caused to the average temperatures? Related: cities are huge heat generators, what has been the effect of large heat generators(metro-complexes) over the last 100 years? Note: ignore the issue of buildings burning fuels to heat or cool, all the extra cars, focus just on the fact that all that concrete and steel retains heat that would not be retained by prairie or forest; people generate heat and CO2 just by walking around, we have added 4 billion people to the planet in the last 100 years, a 400% increase.

2. Inflation: a long time ago I wrote an essay about the money supply, inflation and drugs. Now that I have received my Bachelors in Economics (as of July 2005, started in 1987) , I will reiterate the question in the essay: People pay cash for drugs, that cash is pooled and eventually transferred to the source of the drugs - namely other countries - resulting in a separate cash economy denominated in dollars in those countries. Some of the cash gets returned via trade (that is accounted for as a deficit on our books) but a lot stays out of our economy. How much is anyone's guess, but it obviously affects the amount of currency in our economy, affecting velocity/money supply indicators, affecting inflation. What would happen if a consistent amount of currency flows changed? Say, by cutting drug trafficing?

3. Regulation: Congress is thinking about creating a law that says certain companies can not own businesses in the United States. Does anyone think this is a good idea? I am against allowing a company (based in another country or wholely or mostly owned by a foreign country) to take over production or service that is part of our national security - ie, I would not allow the takeover the operation of Oakridge, Las Alamos or Lawrence Livermore Labs (to name a few). Do ports rise to the same level of concern? I don't think so.

Related: Self-regulation: the original issue that started the Cartoon Wars was an author's concern that media outlets were self censoring themselves so as not to insult anyone...some in this country are calling for laws similar to European laws banning some speech, those laws are wrong for the US (they probably are wrong for those European countries but that is their problem, not mine).

4. Transportation: With minor changes, the means by which we move people and goods has remained unchanged for 60 years (ship, plane, train, truck and automobile - all combustion engines). The efficiency of the combustion engine is one of the few things unaffected by technological changed (yes, it has gone up...but certainly not as much as other areas of 'productivity'). How much has fuel economy improved when vehicle weight is considered?

February Rant #2

Olympics: We watch them (we love curling) and have been consistently doing so. One thing that has stood out for us is the lack of ability in American gold medal winners to actually sing the National Anthem....it is quite apparent they don't know the words...what is with that? Can't the Olympic Committee hand out the words to Olympians in their welcome packets?

Ports: Hillary is against it therefore, I am for it. Wait. Carter is for it therefore I am against it. Wait. I am against it because they are Arab? Racist? Me? Never...I am for it. Wait. How about some F.A.C.T.S!?! Until something changes, I am for Dubai getting the contract.

MSM: Is there really any reason to even bother with them anymore? 1) They never get their own information, it is either picked up from the wires or from some small hustling wannabe that actually gets the story; 2) EVERY story has a slant, a bias, a prejudice even if you can't see it right away. All reasonable sounding until someone else points out the fallacies inherent in the reports; 3) Did I really see a show over the weekend where the media was covering the story of the media and how it covers the media? A true result of self-esteem building navel gazing being taught in classrooms from kindergarten to graduate schools; 4) 1/2 of the stories are about MSM non-bias, 1/2 the stories are about other MSM failures to either report or report accurately, 1/2 the stories are about MSM itself, 1/2 the stories are about how bad non-MSM sources really are compared to the MSM, 1/2 the stories are about how America is destroying the world (globalism, imperialism, greenhouse gases), 1/2 the stories are about how American is doing nothing to save the world (hunger, poverty, democracy-opps...democracy is unnecessary); and last but not least, at least 3/4 of the stories are about how America, having done nothing, or everything, or too little or too much, is to blame for tsunami's, hurricanes, earthquakes, war, poverty, hunger, socialism failing, capitalism overpowering, religious strife, cartoons, freedom of the press/speech, killing Hitler... And I think my percentages are understated.

Cynicism: I have decided that I can not believe what anyone writes, reports, televises or tells me anymore unless I have heard it from at least two other completely unrelated sources, with at least two other conflicting opinions about what it means and if at all possible, two separate legal opinions that actually contradict what a reasonable, non-lawyer would think about the topic. If you think that I have too much time on my hands (I do, business sucks), or that I will never actually get all of the above on just about any topic, you are right(both counts). So, what would you do?

I'm thinking about chucking it all and moving to New Orleans to build houses and live in an RV. No actually I am not. (Victoria will read this and be worried). But come on. The world has a billion Moslems that consider my murder to be nothing more than stomping on a bug trying to crawl into their house, (moderate Moslems you say? Where? If they exist, they are hiding from the fanatics). There are a couple tens of millions of Christians that want nothing more than Armageddon, the sooner the better. Socialists (Communists with an inferiority complex) want everyone to pay everything so that everyone else will have everything they don't have but want because the Jones have it...as long as it is not invented, produced, manufactured, marketed or funded by anyone or anything American as that would be globalistic, imperialistic, capitalistic subjugation of impoverished peoples. Oh yea, and anti-union...

Iran wants a nuke, does ANYONE seriously believe that they are just going to let it sit on some well-lit pedestal to be admired? Does anyone seriously believe that if we ignore it and they use it, we will not be blamed for not acting unilaterally? Does anyone seriously believe that if we act unilaterally before they get a nuke and blow the shit out of them, that we will not be shouted down in every city in Europe, many here at home and UNIVERSALLY condemned?

Every single person I have ever known that has driven with me tells me I am a terrible driver, a threat to every decent driver on the road...but EVERY SINGLE ONE of them, wants ME to drive if we are late!

I am tired of whiners and what the hell is a rant but whining?!?

February Rant #1

Inherent in the liberal mindset is the belief that their position is based on compassion and rigorous intellectual effort. Therefore, anyone that does not share those beliefs is either not compassionate, ie evil, or lacking sufficient intelligence to reach a similar conclusion. The idea that most of human existence is nonlinear completely escapes them. (Nonlinear - more than 1 possible solution to 1 set of events)

Some examples:
"War is not the answer"

But is one possible answer. Of course the response to Pearl Harbor was war, but there were people that 1) blamed the US for Japan feeling it necessary to attack (sound familiar?) and 2) felt that we could negotiate with Japan. Chamberlain argued that Hitler could be talked to.

"Iraq is not our enemy"

Of course it was. As long as it was lead by Saddam, it was. North Korea is our enemy, Syria and Iran are. The PEOPLE of those countries may not be. Osama is not our enemy, he is a threat. Osama can not destroy the United States. He might be able to damage a part of it...but the liberals (and their press partners) have done more damage than 9/11...

You know what scared the shit out of the world? An America united and focused in anger. Not a single country (or group of them) could stand against us. The only real threat to the United States right now is being divided internally. And the liberals CLEARLY KNOW THIS.

Look back to 2002. Between the first attack on Afghanistan and the end of the year, the press caught on to the very small minority that blamed us for 9/11. It was our fault...not 19 murderers...not Osama...not the Taliban...we asked for it. Over the year, more and more it was printed that we were at fault...actually, Bush was at fault...

"Not in our name"

The arrogance of such a position. However, it is completely consistent with their idea that Iraq is not our enemy. It is also completely consistent with their "Bush is not my president". It all hinges on the concept that they are better than their countrymen. Understanding this position is simple: look how many of these people responded to 9/11 by demanding Afghanistan be blown 'back' into the dark ages. "How could they attack us...we are innocent....it was our government...not us!"

The liberal belief is actually based on a conservative ideal (no, really, give me a sec..): personal responsibility. Liberals believe each of us personally have a responsibility to help others less fortunate, lucky, skilled, educated than they (liberals) are. Their focus is on their own behavior...they have to help, they have to be the honorable ones, the ones that turn the other cheek...because the "others" are just not as good as they are...poor souls. And...and...we agree with ONE qualifier: did those "poor souls" arrive in their position as the result of their own choices, or choices out of their control? See, conservatives believe in personal responsibility also...we just expect OTHERS to held accountable too.

Question....

If Dick Cheney had accidentally ran over Mr. Whittington with a golf cart resulting in a dangerous back injury would the current frenzy be occurring?

How about Mr. Whittington being hit by a golf ball and suffering a severe concussion?

How about Mr. Whittington tripping while walking down stairs with Cheney and suffering a broken neck?

Or is it only because a gun is involved?

And of the 18 hours. The shooting took place about 5:50pm. Assuming fast action and close proximity to a hospital, Mr. Whittington might have been in the hospital by 6:30 and no doubt Cheney was very worried about his long time friend. Give the doctors some time to determine his condition and call it 7:30pm. Apparently Bush was informed shortly thereafter and I am certain he was told Cheney pulled the trigger even if no one else is going to own up to it.

So...an accident occurs, the VP is not injured. Injuries to a private citizen appear non-life threatening. Put out the press release in the morning. Anyone got a problem with this? If Mr. Whittington had fallen off horse while riding and broke his neck, permanently paralyzed...VP issues a press release? How about the family? Any consideration there?

Or is it only because there is a gun involved?

I thought the left liked cowboys right now?

The Jar Jar Binks Award

Yes, I have decided to create an award for people who's sensibilities are harmed by the crassness of everyday life...

The Jar Jar Binks Award will be initially presented to James Risen, New York Times correspondent and author of "State of War". Dean Barnett offered a review of the book and mentioned two episodes that caught my eye:

"You know where you are going. Before you get there, I'm going to find your mother and fuck her." Once again, Risen was so traumatized that he had to resort to putting the quote in italics to fully display his displeasure.

Risen's attitude in both cases shows you where he and his like-minded ilk stand. Note how his concerns here go well beyond the range of Andrew Sullivan-defined torture. While the belligerent CIA agent's comment will no doubt strike some as offensive and unnecessary, perhaps it is for the best that rough men like him are waging the war on terror rather than kindly sensitive types like James Risen.

Of course the Left is concerned with torture, after insuring the guns are unloaded, the interrogator's hands are tied, their response to "What are we going to use...HARSH LANGUAGE?!" is... of course not. As Jar Jar Binks would say, "Hawww ruudde!"

Congratulations James Risen, 1st recipient of the Jar Jar Binks Award.

OFF-TOPIC: Blogrolling

Yesterday I spent some time updating my blogroll. I wanted the list to more clearly represent what I am reading and recommending and my own idea about what blogging should be.

There are blogs that have literally a hundred blogs in their blogrolls. I am happy to appear in a few, however, I believe the best use of a blogroll should be to highlight blogs that you think others would benefit from reading. The blogs listed here I read regularly. Others that I visit only on occasion (either because I strongly disagree with their viewpoint or because like me, they don't post regularly) are omitted.

People like being listed in the blogrolls of popular sites...it MIGHT mean a few extra visitors and if the visitor count is important, worth the effort. However, the majority of us do not blog for dollars/visitors. So how about it? Trim your blogrolls, focus on those you would recommend to other busy readers and maybe blogrolls will become as valuable a resource on your page as it's position suggests!

Incitement #2

Newspapers around the US are refraining from printing the editorial cartoons of Mohammad so as to not inflame the situation, insult Moslems, or provoke the wrath of the fanatics. So, tell me...exactly what were they doing with hundreds of pictures of prisoners in Abu Grab? Despite being told and shown, that publishing the pictures would do nothing but inflame the situation, the papers stated it was their duty to inform their readers and that without the pictures the story was incomplete.

John Gibson of FN pissed me off last week with his insistence that a Victorville California newspaper editor would act differently (they published one cartoon with an editorial) if they had a large Muslim population available to threaten their staff. (Note: I lived in outside Victorville while stationed in the Air Force and read the Daily Press most days).

If any media outlet published ONE picture of prisoner abuse from Abu Grab and they do not publish the cartoon(s) they have failed as an institution to live up to their mandate: stand and fight for freedom of speech, freedom of the press and freedom from religious persecution. Is it any wonder they oppose the war on terror...

Incitement

Why should papers not publish the Mohammad cartoons now? Because it will further inflame the situation...

Sorry, but if those that want to protect the sensibilities of Moslems were to for a moment THINK about it, they would laugh at the Moslems protesting their poor insulted sensibilities. Sticks and stones may break our bones, but cartoons....please!

The Jordanian editor said it best, "which is more insulting, some cartoons or video of Moslems cutting off people's heads?" Blowing up civilians is ok, political cartoons are not? Why are we even having a discussion? I think every blogger, newspaper and news outlet should publish one editorial cartoon PER DAY for the next month poking fun at Islam and Mohammad. Why? Because if we are going to believe that the pen is mightier that the sword, we had better take them out of the pocket protectors and actually start using them....otherwise, the blood on the sword will soon be ours.

Cartoon - Laugh or cry

If one of you, just one of you that supported the publication of the editorial cartoons depicting Mohammad in European newspapers DARES to call Tole on his depiction of Rummy over a soldier's hospital bed, so help me....

Do not dare to marginalize our troops' sacrifice by suggesting anything but support for the editorial cartoon....you don't have to agree with it....but any call that it is over the line is itself over the line.

Bankruptcy...(the new law, not the moral lack)

Judges have been rendering opinions about the new bankruptcy law since before it was passed and signed. The difference now is the opinions are legal....

Judge Frank Moore, Western District of Texas in case #05-20097

"Those responsible for the passing of the Act did all in their power to avoid the proffered input from sitting United States Bankruptcy Judges, various professors of bankruptcy law at distinguished universities, and many professional associations filled with the best of the bankruptcy lawyers in the country as to the perceived flaws in the Act. This is because the parties pushing the passage of the Act had their own agenda. It was apparently an agenda to make more money off the backs of the consumers in this country. It is not surprising, therefore, that the Act has been highly criticized across the country. In this writer's opinion, to call the Act a "consumer protection" Act is the grossest of misnomers. One of the most absurd provisions of the new Act makes an individual ineligible for relief under the Bankruptcy Code unless such individual..."has, during the 180-day period preceding the date of filing of the petition by such individual, received from an approved nonprofit budget and credit counseling agency described in 111(a) an individual or gropu briefing (including a briefing conducted by telephone or on the Interent) that outlined the opportunities for available credit counseling and assisted such individual in performing a related budget analysis." See 11 USC 109(h)(1). No doubt this is a truly exhaustive budget analysis"
"Simply stated, if a debtor does not request the required credit counseling services from an approved nonprofit budget and credit counseling service before the petition is filed, that person is ineligible to be a debtor no matter how dire the circumstances the person finds themselves in at that moment. "
"This Court views this requirement as inane. However, it is a clear and unambiguous provision obviously designed by Congress to protect consumers. "
"The Court's hands are tied. The statute is clear and unambiguous. The Debtors violated the provision of the statute outlined above and are ineligible to be Debtors in this case. It must, therefore, be dismissed. "
"An Order of even date will be entered herewith. Congress must surely be pleased"


I don't know about Congress, but I am sure the mortgage company that has foreclosed and thrown the Sosa family out on the street is!

Civil War

I read 18 blogs daily. Some may find that excessive, or light. For the most part, they are conservative oriented. I try the liberal side regularly but I can't deal with the raving lunatics in the comments every day.

One blogger has an excellent piece in which he complains that Democrats are all Ahabs. Democrats can only see the world through a Bush hating looking glass. But all the conservatives see when looking at liberals is Bush hating. Is it really any different?

We are in a 'civil' war. No one is shooting guns at the otherside, but it has all the characteristics of a war. Verbal assaults are launched, from the MSM or blogsphere. Damage is assessed, skirmishes deemed won or lost. Neither side has the high ground, though both can and do claim it. (I purposely left out the word moral from that sentence and if you don't immediately understand why...you may be a combatant).

Anyone caught even suggesting there might be some underlying truth to the position of the otherside is considered treasonous. Doubts among the faithful are quashed by a need to utterly defend their side from the overwhelming assault from opposition at any sign of weakness.

Frankly, I would have been blissfully unaware but for the bankruptcy law passage last year. Everything about the effort to pass that law was wrong. Hell, I agreed with and quoted TED KENNEDY. How many other laws and bills before the various democratic institutions in this country THAT DO NOT AFFECT ME IN ANYWAY, are flat out wrong? Are bad for the very people our representatives are sworn to protect?

In every war we have our Lt Calleys. Our Cindy Sheehans. They are nothing to be proud of or to dismiss as aberrations. War brings out the best, and worst of us. This 'civil' war we are in, blame it on Bush. Not because he is causing the war, but because he is like most moral people, a lightning rod for everyone that sees only shades of grey. Unfortunately for some, fortunately for most, he is the President. He would not gather such storms in a lesser position.

The few people that try to avoid the conflict, to engage in dialogue, are quickly marginalized or overwhelmed with verbal artillery. From my position safe far from the battlegrounds (the ten or so people that read this blog have been a quiet bunch), I can observe and comment. But further away, across oceans, others observe more closely and with less good will. 'Civil' war in the US is good for them and as long as we are distracted by each other, they will continue to wage their own not so civil wars.

The left and Iran

You have got to be kidding?!

The Left (lead by Sen Clinton) is accusing Bush of fumbling Iran....(wait for it)...by letting diplomacy by the UN and EU to run for two years, thereby allowing Iran to get that much closer to WMD.

Elenor Cliff in 2002: "They elected a wuss but got a cowboy."
Elenor Cliff in 2006: "They elected a cowboy but got a wuss."

Or was that a movie?

Where the hell are all the protest marches calling for unilateral action against Iran? Where is all the clamoring for a draft to protect us?

Where the hell is the EU? France, FRANCE for god sake has said it will respond with it's own nuclear weapons if provoked...

If this is deja vu, I want NEO.

Self esteem and the education system

One of our favorite TV shows is American Idol. The three of us pick who we like and don't like and pit ourselves against the judges. On Wednesday, on contestant just couldn't believe that the judges did not like her....she thought she was good...a 6 out of 10 - for a couple of mistakes. Simon gave her a .5 out of 10. Another, Zachary was, also disappointed because the judges were prejudice that a man couldn't sing with the same range as a woman on a "woman's song". None of the judges could get a handle on whether it was a man pretending to be a woman being a man or what. The vocal effort was well below any possibility of moving on (Paula's comment).

Ladies and gentlemen: In this ring, 16-25 year olds with no clue they suck. Why you might ask do they not know they suck? Well, no one told them! That would hurt their self esteem. Better they think they are great so that when they are faced with the REAL WORLD, they can stare dumbfounded at the unfairness of it.

And, as I was contemplating this little missive, I heard a story on the radio. A woman was complaining about the school system her children were in. Her second grader came home with a report card and in the comments section were these two gems:

[childs name] is having problems in sciance. (not my misspelling....the teachers)

and..

She is also having a difficult time communicating, both orally and writtenly.


It is a wonder we have any students capable of college work.

Ya gotta laugh...

Throughout my life I have suggested that the only real response people should have towards others so wrong in their positions or outlook is to laugh at them.

In all earnestness, we speak to the UN, to the EU, to the democrats, attempting to get our point of view across while accepting the validity of their point of view. Yet, they make no such attempt to respect our point of view....dismissing it is the best they do, denigration being the usual response.

All the posturing this past week by the Democrats and their supporters against Alito (and his wife) was not respectful, even at the margins. No matter how many pointed out the abject lameness, the "Left" stood proud for its positions. It was so utterly lame, ya gotta laugh...

The EU has had their posturing about our "unilateralism" on Iraq thrown back in their face by Iran. Two years of 'negotiations' and as pointed out here, only the Iranians have moved their agenda forward. Ya gotta laugh at their stupidity.

The UN is a joke. No matter how much John Bolton tries, every time the UN enters the public arena, the result just makes you laugh...

Come on...laugh at them. They were, and are, a joke.

You may suggest that the seriousness of the issues is no laughing matter and I would agree, I am not laughing at the issues. We need serious, thoughtful opposition in all arenas if we as a species are to survive and prosper, it is also quite clear that the Democrats, the UN and the EU do not offer such.

And since I am not left leaning....I can't cry....

Politics as usual

Can it be that power corrupts and absolute power corrupts absolutely? Where have I heard that before? If the GOP were out of power right now they would be howling, gnashing teeth and pulling hair out of their heads at the BLATANT crap currently going on in Congress....yet...yet...the best we have seen so far is a hunkering down and hope that it will blow over with minimal impact on fundraising efforts in this, oh so important, election year.

The only reason, THE ONLY REASON, we have not seen a mass exodus from the republican ranks to support Democrats is because the current democrat leadership is staffed with raving lunatics.

Only in an asylum would ANYONE take Dean, Pelosi and Reid seriously.

So those of us with a desire to see minimal government, strong defense and fiscal responsibility are left with nothing.

If we can get 50 million Americans to agree with us that things need fixing so bad that political loyalty can be left on the sacrificial alter of lobbyists, then we can correct things in 4 years. Vote every single incumbent - ALL OF THEM - out of office this November, .and do it again in two years, and again two years later. The result would be an completely knew crop of politicians. Of course we have the problem of the bureaucracy, .the "true" power in Washington. The easiest way to deal with them is to give all legislative and executive branch bureaucratic managers (mid-level and up) 4 year, non-renewable contracts (offset to all elections).

Consider

Has the effort to 'diversify' teaching by eliminating grading systems, adding 'soft' subjects like 'Analysis of Tom and Jerry in a Bi-Sexual Relationship' contributed to the overall support of intelligent design? Stay with me a sec...

If hard subjects like math and science were replaced with easier, less demanding subjects, might the liberal education community have slit it's own throat by creating an entire generation of people completely incapable of rational thought?

A recent conversation with a very intelligent person resulted in the following comment: "Can anyone really believe we descended from apes? Please..."

Apparently evolution is fine to explain animals...but humans...we just popped into existence and started building pyramids and cities on hills.

Bankruptcy fallout

or more correctly, falloff. You know I don't like links, but here is the first story of the expected rash:

http://www.lowellsun.com/business/ci_3236266

We all expected there would be a fall off of bankruptcy filings, but in MA it is over 95%. Our district, Wisconsin Western, has had a 98% drop from average last year. We have had two calls since the law change. (Our district had about 8,000 cases last year, we are over 13,500 so far this year but will probably finish with less than 14,000. 7,000 of those cases were filed between August 15th and October 16th.)

My guess is there will be less than 10,000 cases filed NATIONWIDE between October 17 and the end of the year. That would be a 97% drop from last years average.

It will take several months to see if the numbers stay that low (not likely). My guess back in March was a drop to 100,000 filings per year after 2 years of the new law. I would suggest that number is going to be pretty good. A 95% drop. Anyone want to speak up and suggest that 95% of the people filing bankruptcy didn't need to? Go ahead...speak up...

Leaks in a bucket

Come on! We have a 2 year investigation into the leaking of a CIA operatives name (which by the way seems to have ignored the person that actually published the name) and no one is charged with leaking the name...

NOW, we have a leak about super-secret CIA prisons in foreign countries and no one is calling for investigations about the leak....noooo....we want investigations into why there are these super-secret prisons.....

What are we....France-lite?

Politically Incorrect

The form of government currently in place in the United States is fundamentally SUPERIOR to that found anywhere else.

The form of economic system currently in place in the United States is fundamentally SUPERIOR to that found anywhere else.

The ideals, goals, and culture of the United States are fundamentally SUPERIOR to that found anywhere else.

That the United States lacks perfection does not in anyway diminish the standings.

And this IS a moderate position.

Time to be a moderate?

I heard this morning on the radio (it might have been Fox because I have XM) that a woman that was pro-choice, a self declared feminist, was considered conservative because she supported Bush in the war on terror. Welcome to the moderate base.

Yesterday, the commission on tax reform released it's report. It made some suggestions, one of which was the elimination of the tax deductibility of mortgage interest. Now many people like that deduction because all by itself it can make itemizing deductions better than the standard deduction. The other suggestion was the elimination of deductions for state and local taxes. Let us take one at a time.

Mortgage deduction. Get over it. Come on people! If your income is $100,000, tax rate is 35% and your mortgage of $250,000 has an interest rate is 5%, taking nothing else into consideration, you will save about $4375 in taxes...but if we reduce the rate to 30% and eliminate the deduction, you would save $5000 in taxes. And that is just this year. Next year your interest deduction will be smaller, your income higher and your tax bill greater. The reduction in the tax rate means less taxes paid on the higher income.

A lower overall tax rate generally speaking is better than just about ANY deduction. With an emphasis on deductibility, the only way to continue to benefit is to take ever larger mortgages (or higher interest rates)....does anyone else see the stupidity in THAT? Removing the deductibility does something else much harder to quantify: it removes the leverage of some special interest groups in tax policy, and that should be very welcome.

State and local taxes. One argument local officials make in raising taxes is that it will hurt less because of deductibility. Of course the problem is that state and local tax increases hurt the lowest income people most and they are less likely to be able to get any relief from deductibility. This argument needs to be ignored, getting local and state taxes lowered is the place to fight.

Simplifying the tax code reduces the dependence on tax accountants, improves tax collections and allows the economy to act with less bias.


Alito. It looks like Bush did find a moderate conservative. Yea!

What now? Meirs and the next option...

George Bush can pick the most radical right wing ideologue and demand that the right stand up and fight every inch of the process for confirmation. A candidate without the slightest hint of moderation would be an open invitation to the base to put up or shut up.

Unfortunately, Bush has never seen fit to rub anyone's nose in their own crap, so expect a moderate conservative (is that possible?).

The person whose opinion I would most like to have for a recommendation to the Court is Judge Roberts.

On Bankruptcy....

Newcomers, my partner is a bankruptcy attorney, I work in the office. The last three weeks have been....busy. Some interesting news.

The US Trustee has reported that over 205,000 bankruptcy cases were filed LAST WEEK. The number of filings for October appears to be easily over 250,000 and it may approach 500,000 since mid September....we filed the equivalent of 4-5 months worth of cases last week. Amazingly, the electronic case filing system seems to have held up under the onslaught...however, one thing has fallen apart. Each bankruptcy case is assigned to a trustee that reviews and administers the case. Most trustees hand 75-150 cases per cycle. Right now, their load is closer to 500 (guessing based on our experience in our two districts and reports from other districts). The law requires that a hearing on the case be held no earlier than 20 days after filing but no later than 45 days after filing. Due to the load, hearings are being set WELL outside that time frame. Some districts are setting hearings as late as MARCH 2006. This is probably ok as there will be very few filings over the next three months.

There have been several rulings dealing with the new law provisions already active, among the most interesting is that Arizona and Minnesota homesteaders are not bound by the $125,000 equity caps...primarily because the law says that if you choose state exemptions, the bk law can limit the exemption to $125,000. In Arizona and Minnesota, no choice is possible, therefore, the limit is not applicable. On Monday a ruling in Georgia came down that said that attorneys admitted to the bankruptcy bar are NOT Debt Relief Agencies under the bk law. One provision in particular was cited as damning - attorney regulation is a STATE responsibility...any attempt by the bk law to regulate attorneys would be a federal intrusion into state domain and as no one seems to have brought that up before, it must mean that the law was not intending to regulate attorneys. This law is going to be such fun...

Some interesting anacdotes: an attorney mailed petitions to the court on Friday...they got sent back - there is no mailbox rule. Cases are not filed until they hit the clerks desk. We had a potential client slip a small retainer fee with a note under our door asking for an emergency filing, sometime after 2pm Saturday when I left the office but before 11am Monday when I returned. Needless to say, no emergency filing. They had been in our office on 10/4 and were informed that all fees and paperwork had to be in by 10/12....too late. And given the need for a lot of preparation for filing under the new law, we could not prepare a petition before their home would be sold at foreclosure auction next week.

If 500,000 cases were filed in the last 30 days leading up to the law change, AND each case had at least $10,000 in unsecured debt (our average was closer to $40k), then $5,000,000,000 (billion) in unsecured debt was cleared away from consumers.

UPDATE: Victoria attended CLE on Friday and the clerks from the BK Court said that as of last Friday, 19 cases had been submitted after the law change, all were mailed on Friday 10/14 and all were wrong and returned.

Lost their minds

In thinking about the unbelievable screeching going on about Meirs FROM THE REPUBLICANS I can only be reminded about two things:

Howard Dean yyyyyyyyyeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaa

Al Gore "HE BETRAYED US, HE BETRAYED US"


Many of those from the right opposed to Meirs have lost their minds....

I got to thinking tonight...

I know, dangerous...but I have it covered...

Bush. Interesting read today on some characteristics of Bush and something struck me. He is a born-again Christian. Now we know many of them that give that a bad name and further, many more that scare the bejezus out of less religious folk. But: turn the other cheek; do what is right, not popular; stand up for your principles; associate with people of good character; do not speak badly of your neighbor. In general, I see that Bush has lived up to those. I have come to a decision on Meirs...

I have read George Will and Ann Coulter. I have read the debates (such that they are) on a dozen blogs and listened to the talking heads for the last 36 hours. Two things have been of interest.
Bork. A legal genius. Very conservative. Big fight. Lost. Got Stevens.
Thomas. A legal lightweight. Conservative. Big fight. Won? Got Thomas.
Souter. Got Souter, lost.
Roberts. A legal genius. Conservative (?). Minor fight. Won.

After the last 20 years, all the wonderful legal minds we have on the current court, we get Kelo. Also, for those completely normal people, there was a ruling a couple years ago In re Seminole Tribe that is just terrible. We recently lost a case against the State because of that case, the state ignored the bankruptcy court and we couldn't do a damn thing about it....couple lost their home.

Ann Coulter thinks we need the best legal minds possible on the court. Rush makes the point that we don't want "touchy-feely" types making decisions. It seems to me that the result is Kelo. Law without compassion is not JUSTICE. Was it the best legal minds that found privacy in the constitution? Does ANYONE think that privacy is bad? You know, the Founders probably never envisioned that someone standing on a hill could not only hear what was being said in the house over the hill IN THE NEXT COUNTY, but could READ what was being written at the same time. Our Constitution is designed to change, to be changed, we just don't want judges doing it. It doesn't seem to me that it takes the best legal mind possible to understand that.

I don't think Bush is beholden to his base. I think he cares more about this COUNTRY than just about anything else and his actions are designed to promote that. Seems to me that those that voted for Bush in the first place (and the second place) did so BECAUSE he cared more about the Country than polls or being liked. Seems to me that the nomination of Meirs is exactly in keeping with HIS goals. That he chooses people based on his faith and trust in them should be considered a POSITIVE. Maybe Meirs is NOT the best LEGAL mind available, but if Bush looked around and said this is the person I most trust NOT to legislate from the Bench, then he picked exactly the right nominee for his goals for the country.

I for one (and there are damn few of us) am willing to accept the nomination and pending any information that suggests she is unfit to serve - being Christian, woman, lawyer, not a judge, not the best legal mind are all not issues - she should be confirmed.

Update: How many people now complaining about Bush's pick were stating that he had the right to have his choice approved absent any evidence that he was unfit?

Hello? Government?

From the IRS Website:

> Housing and Utilities Allowable Living Expenses
>
> /*Disclaimer:* IRS Allowable Expenses are intended for use in
> calculating repayment of delinquent taxes. They are not intended for
> use in bankruptcy calculations./

Did anyone check with Congress...because in 12 days we have a law that SPECIFICALLY states those expense tables are to be used for bankruptcy calculations...

What is wrong with me?

I am a reasonably intelligent person. Fairly well read. Educated to a degree.

I read an editorial in the WSJ and find it's arguments compelling. A few days later, a rebuttal makes an equally (and heretofore unconsidered) strong case for exactly the opposite position. I read George Will, whom I admire greatly, and feel like an idiot, not even a honest one.

I am partnered with a very liberal Democrat, I understand implicitly the value of dissenting opinions. I acknowledge that honest people can have equally compelling, but opposing positions on many issues. How many people in this country (forget about considering the rest of the world for a moment) do not build into their daily lives opportunities for competing ideas?

When important decisions are made and respected people hold conflicting opinions on an appropriate choice...how do you decide who is right? This is important. We elect people to make tough decisions because in our analysis, those people most consistently reflect our own positions. But what happens when they do not make decisions we agree with?

I have often said (and did so again yesterday) that when a republican or democrat is elected President, they all seem to come to the understanding that they are no longer a democrat or republican, but the President of ALL OF US. The likelihood that a President will piss off both the opposition AND his own base approaches certainty is inherent in the job.

So, the right is disappointed (to use a term) that Miers is 1) a lightweight, 2) a close and loyal friend, 3) a missed opportunity to have a 'debate'. They complain that Bush has no stomach for a fight...that he is showing weakness.

Point: Less than 50% of the people continue to support the war in Iraq. That means that people that elected Bush are against the war. If the President has a weakness, it is in doing the right thing even when all around him abandon him and not calling them on it.

The same groups/individuals that claimed Roberts was "an inspired choice" now complain that Miers is completely idiotic one. Selections made just a couple of months apart by the same person. I'm confused....what's wrong with me?