Two Separate Bills Passed S 3217 to Become HR 4173

Last night the Senate officially passed their financial reform bill, S 3217 Restoring American Financial Stability Act by a vote of 59/39.  According to reports they changed it into an amendment to the House’s bill HR 4173.   There are now effectively two different versions of the same bill.  One passed by the Senate and another passed by Congress.  In order for this bill to become law the House and Senate have to convene a committee to assimilate the two versions into one.  It will then still require the signature of the President.

I urge every American property owner, real estate investor and tax-payer to contact your Congressmen and Senators to seek amendment of the seller-financing portion of this 1000+ page legislation.   Main Street is not Wall Street and individuals aren’t the cause of the financial collapse and shouldn’t be held hostage because of corporate malfeasance.

Protect property rights and the right to negotiate and sell your own property without government interference. Please help spread the word by sharing this post.  For more information see our earlier post http://www.creativerealestateinvestingguide.com/2010/04/26/protect-your-property-rights-now

Copy the code below to your web site.
x 
You can leave a response, or trackback from your own site.

7 Responses to “Two Separate Bills Passed S 3217 to Become HR 4173”

  1. A good credit score means a good deal to establish your fiscal believability. In this age of financial turbulence, a good credit score can aid you to acquire the confidence of financial institutions for monetary aid.

  2. julie says:

    The bill speaks for itself and it’s very timely since everyone’s major concerns are about financial issues.

  3. Augie says:

    I’m not sure what you mean by your comment??? Please clarify.

    To your success…

    Augie

  4. Augie says:

    This bill, while intended to protect the public, may also take away American Property Rights, and that is simply wrong. Any Bill that requires over 1,000 pages and is so broad in its scope that it needs new organizations to interpret it, needs to be broken down in smaller chunks so that lawmakers can actually read and understand what they are voting for; not just a pleasant sounding title.

  5. Augie, what has the bill done within the last year? I recently came across this while searching up on the housing market. I figure that this is sort of old news but it has to impact us in someway today I just can’t figure out how much this actually tears away from our property rights? After seeing what happened in the housing market I don’t see us having too many rights even before this bill passed. Any thoughts?

  6. Augie says:

    The key element in preserving or losing individual property rights in in how the Consumer Protection Bureau interprets the concept of “ability to repay” as it relates to non-institutional seller financing. Imagine you had a property that would not qualify for bank financing and therefore the only way you could sell it was with terms (i.e. collecting your equity in installments) and the government said you couldn’t do that. Your only option would be to sell for cash which would likely give your buyer a big negotiating stick because how many buyers will come along and pay all cash? I’m not saying they aren’t out there, just that I know when I pay all cash, I want a big discount. When the government restricts how we can sell property we own, then to me they are infringing on our property rights.

    To your success…

    Augie

  7. Jon Garciano says:

    I’ll tell you what really upsets me about all this, Augie – and this is purely from a lay person’s perspective – and that is that ever since 2008 (when the already-faltering property market really began to puke) they (the Government) kept telling us that ‘once the dust settled’ from this burst property bubble, a much more orderly and sustainable property market would result.

    Well, call me stupid, but this Bill has about as much stimulus for the property market as non-dry-cleanable suits would have for Bill Clinton!

Leave a Reply