We signed on to testimony delivered yesterday by Travis Plunkett of the Consumer Federation of America at a Senate Commerce Committee hearing on Consumer Protection and the Credit Crisis. The hearing focused on predatory lending, debt counseling scams, the growth of credit card debt and ways to increase regulatory and legal resources to protect consumers in the declining economy. Also appearing as a witness was University of Minnesota Law School professor Prentiss Cox, a longtime ally and former assistant state attorney general. From Travis's testimony:

The National Consumer Law Center, the Consumer Federation of America, and U.S. PIRG were among the first to warn that the nature of credit counseling had also begun to dramatically shift in ways that were very harmful to debtors. In the late 1990s, a new class of agencies emerged that aggressively marketed DMPs and related services, dramatically raised consumer fees, and had extensive relationships with for-profit vendors and consultants. Complaints about deceptive practices, improper advice, excessive fees and abuse of non-profit status sharply increased. 21 Federal and state regulators and policymakers, who had largely ignored the rise of these new agencies, and the problems they had created, began to investigate.

Our colleagues Chi Chi Wu of the National Consumer Law Center and Jean Ann Fox of the Consumer Federation of America have released their latest warning (release> and report) against triple-digit Refund Anticipation Loans. Tax preparers offer RALs as a way to get your refund today, not in a few days, but you'll need to pay through the nose for the "privilege." Don't. The report details how RALs promote fraud and how RALs hurt every taxpayer, not just purchasers.

The report reveals that RALs drained the refunds of about 8.7 million American taxpayers in 2007, the last year on which the Internal Revenue Service provided data. This represents about $833 million in loan fees, plus over $68 million in other fees. In addition, another 11.2 million taxpayers spent $336 million on related financial products to receive their refunds. NCLC and CFA also issued a special companion report entitled “RALs, Tax Fraud, and Fringe Preparers.” This report discusses how RALs provide tax preparers with an incentive to inflate refunds and commit tax fraud, while attracting payday loan stores, check cashers, used car dealers, and other questionable businesses into the field of tax preparation.

Over at his Practical Nomad blog, longtime privacy activist Edward Hasbrouck (that's his headshot) chronicles the correspondence and events -- starting with AMEX sending letters to cardholders changing its terms of service to allow myriad privacy invasions including robocalls, whether you object or not -- culminating this week in the cancellation of his card.

Hasbrouck has been a leader in challenging intrusive security measures by TSA and other agencies. He is a well-known author of several books on how to travel the world without burning a hole in your wallet. He notes in this post:

Before ATM's were so widespread, I used to recommend carrying an American Express card as a check-cashing card when travelling abroad. More recently, although their practices have prompted me to threaten to cancel my card, I've kept it as an emergency backup.

We testify this morning before the Subcommittee on Courts and Competition Policy of the House Judiciary Committee at a hearing on Competition in the Ticketing and Promotion Industry (you should be able to watch the hearing and download all testimony after 10am).

The hearing is really about the question: What were the behemoth monopolists Ticketmaster and Live Nation thinking when they proposed to merge instead of compete in the marketplace? Our testimony says: This merger is bad for consumers, bad for artists and bad for independent promoters. We also discuss the importance of NYPIRG's longstanding efforts to protect New York consumers against ticket scalping, question the long-term contracts between ticket and concert promoters and taxpayer-built venues and, finally, we condemn Ticketmaster's wretched, over-priced customer "service." Would you like convenience fees with that ticket? How about paying lots more than mail postage would cost for mere Internet "delivery?"

We also endorse the testimony of antitrust expert David Balto of the Center for American Progress Action Fund from Tuesday's Senate Judiciary hearing on the merger. We also approve this Huffington Post blog Stopping the Ticketmaster/Live Nation Merger by our colleague Jamie Love of Knowledge Ecology International. Our previous blog comparing the merger to the completion of Darth Vader's Death Star.

U.S. PIRG Tax and Budget Reform Advocate Nicole Tichon has released Bailout Briefing #1: How to Stop Rewarding Failure. It focuses on comparing executive compensation approaches, including the provisions of the newly-enacted law (as part of the Recovery package). The detailed accompanying table compares the executive compensation provisions of the new Recovery law, the Geithner guidelines and other federal proposals. Each quarter, we will update our recent report, Failed Bailout, with a new Report Card on the status of the transparency and accountability of the bailout.

In other banks behaving badly news, Chairman Barney Frank and 17 other House Democrats have demanded that Northern Trust Bank return its $1.6 billion in TARP money, which it apparently used for classic rock concerts (Chicago; Earth, Wind and Fire; Sheryl Crow), golf tourneys and Tiffany swag bags. Read more at the website TMZ.com, which helped break the story.

We've joined other leading consumer, civil rights and labor groups in a letter to the House of Representatives urging support for an amendment that would allow bankruptcy judges to make loan modifications to keep consumers in their homes paying their mortgages and out of foreclosure. The banks have been fighting this since last Congress, but with the muscle of the Obama administration behind it, we think we can get it through soon. Originally passed by the Judiciary Committee as HR 200, the proposal is now part of a package of bills being considered Thursday on the floor as HR 1106. Excerpt:

Judicial mortgage modification will provide a vital last resort that could prevent hundreds of thousands of foreclosures, without spending one penny of taxpayer money. Equally important, it will be the most reliable way to encourage loan servicers to offer sustainable mortgage modifications outside of court. The logic here is simple: We can’t end the financial crisis without stemming the rising tide of foreclosures. Court-supervised loan modification is an essential component of an effective and comprehensive plan to meet that challenge. At a time when an estimated 6,600 families are losing their home to foreclosure each and every day, there is no time for delay.

Privatization is a mess. Whether it is bad deals on toll roads or price-gouging on food or gasoline or even bad installation of electrical services resulting in electrocution of U.S. troops by government military contractors in Iraq, governments at all levels have bumbled badly when negotiating deals with private firms to take on government duties. The firms, however, have gotten rich.

Over at the Consumerist, read the latest about how state governments have privatized benefits transfer - this time, unemployment benefits -- and left recipients paying punitive bank fees. The same thing has happened with recipients of food stamps and other EBT (electronic benefits transfer) programs. Government just doesn't get it: if it is going to privatize government services, it needs to use its power and leverage to get a better deal. I have yet to see the privatization deal where the government adequately protected taxpayers, laid-off workers, or soldiers. We are lucky that the Social Security privatization idea never got off the ground.

Rep. Peter DeFazio (D-OR) and seven colleagues have filed legislation, HR 1068, the Let Wall Street Pay for Wall Street's Bailout Act of 2009, that could become an important part of the long-term solution to the financial meltdown and help rebuild the economy. The bill is based on a proposal first made by Nobel Laureate James Tobin of Yale (Wikipedia on Tobin tax). HR 1068 would impose a small tax (0.25%) on securities transactions. The tax would have two effects: first, it would help pay for the bailout as noted in the bill's findings. Second, and more importantly, its imposition might act as a brake on the size of Wall Street and the number of securities transactions made by helping to deter speculation and "right-sizing" the economic sector, which, according to many economists, has spun out of control considering its mere intermediary role in the economy. As economist Dean Baker of the Center for Economic Policy Research has noted:

Such a tax could easily raise a $150 billion a year, enough to pay for a national health care program or a major clean energy initiative. A tax of this magnitude will have almost no impact on someone who intends to buy and hold a financial asset.

From Dean Baker:

No airline is going to be discouraged from hedging on jet fuel futures because of a 0.02 percent tax, nor will any farmer be dissuaded from hedging on her corn crop. Similarly, most long-term investors will not even notice the 0.25 percent tax when they buy or sell their stock. The reduction in transactions costs due to the development of computer technology over the last quarter century far exceeds the size of this tax. Most traders will be paying far less for their trades in 2009 with the tax, than they did in 1980 without the tax. The only people who will really be hit by the tax are speculators; people who buy futures at 2:00, with the intentions of selling at 3:00. Even a modest tax can put a serious dent in the profits of those whose business is short-term speculation. We will therefore see less of this speculation, but it is hard to see why we should care.

The nation's two leading insurance watchdogs, Bob Hunter of the Consumer Federation of America and Birny Birnbaum of the Center for Economic Justice, have issued a warning to consumers to check their insurer's financial condition. The warning comes in the wake of revelations that some state insurance commissioners, often their own worst enemies in their self-preservation battles against federal preemption, have quietly changed rules to allow insurance companies to cook the books.

In recent weeks, insurance commissioners in a number of states have allowed some insurance companies to alter the way the insurers report the capital, assets and reserves that guarantee that consumers’ claims and benefits under the insurance policies will be paid. Under some of these “permitted practices,” insurers can, for example, now count more expected future tax credits (“deferred tax assets”) as part of their required capital – even though these deferred tax assets do not represent real money available to pay claims and benefits.

Over at Business Week, you can read about The Complaint Almost Filed Against Facebook. It was drafted by EPIC and we would have been a lead co-complainant, as we have been in a number of online privacy complaints filed jointly with EPIC and/or the Center for Digital Democracy or both. Business Week writer Douglas MacMillan speculates that the complaint "appears to have heavily influenced Facebook’s stance" when it dropped the new terms.

Meanwhile, over at the Washington Post, reporter/columnist Rob Pegoraro asks:

Seen another way, though, why would anybody pay more attention to Facebook's terms of service than to the other contracts we casually accept? Who reads the roughly 17,500-word "terms and conditions" contract governing Apple's iTunes Store before buying a song? Who digests Microsoft's nearly 5,500-word license for Windows Vista before booting up a new PC? For that matter, how many home buyers read in full the terms of their mortgages before signing stacks of settlement documents?

Well, they missed Madoff but they're slamming R. Allen Stanford, James Allen, Laura Pendergast-Holt, Stanford Investment Bank and related entities. The SEC has filed a lawsuit against these principals and their related Texas and Antigua based firms alleging an $8 billion fraud that may also be a Madoff feeder link. Short release; long complaint. The opening counts of the complaint use a variety of interesting technical and legal terms such as "even more strange," "improbable," "suspicious," and "alarming."

We've joined 15 other leading U.S. and international consumer and access-to-medicine advocacy groups, including Consumers Union, Knowledge Ecology International, Third World Network and Oxfam -- in a letter to Margaret Chan, head of the World Health Organization, criticizing recent seizures by Dutch officials of generic medicines made, in one case, in India and intended for use in Brazil, Colombia and Peru, after trans-shipping through the Netherlands. Copies of the letter were sent to Dr. Chan's counterpart director-generals at the World Trade Organization, World Intellectual Property Organization and the World Customs Organization. While the letter says it more diplomatically, the gist is this: we allege that the Dutch, acting on behalf of powerful European brand name drug companies, are subverting international laws and treaties to block access to legally-licensed (in the countries of both origin and destination) low-cost generic medicines intended for the poor.

Facebook has decided not to change their terms of service at this time, following a massive uproar by their own members and in the blogosphere, as kicked off by the Consumerist headline: Facebook's New Terms Of Service: "We Can Do Anything We Want With Your Content. Forever." last weekend. Washington Post. Facebook has stumbled and bumbled on privacy in the past (Beacon).

Newsweek has a nice online piece Majoring in Debt on the ways that students are targeted by credit card companies.

Despite the credit crunch, card issuers seem as eager as ever to recruit college students as new customers. "Banks will continue to seek out responsible borrowers regardless of what demographic they represent," says Ken Clayton, the senior vice president of card policy at the American Bankers Association. "With younger borrowers, they have a vested interest in establishing long-term relationships."

In Arizona today, President Obama is announcing a plan to counter the home mortgage crisis. Details are here and on the WH blog. After the jump, I've posted the President's statement, as prepared for delivery, which should be posted at whitehouse.gov soon.

NOTE: Fact sheet attached.

THE WHITE HOUSE

Office of the Press Secretary

__________________________________________________________________________________________________________________

FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE

February 18, 2009

Remarks of President Barack Obama on the Home Mortgage Crisis – As Prepared for Delivery

Phoenix, Arizona

February 18, 2009

I’m here today to talk about a crisis unlike any we’ve ever known – but one that you know very well here in Mesa, and throughout the Valley. In Phoenix and its surrounding suburbs, the American Dream is being tested by a home mortgage crisis that not only threatens the stability of our economy but also the stability of families and neighborhoods. It is a crisis that strikes at the heart of the middle class: the homes in which we invest our savings, build our lives, raise our families, and plant roots in our communities.

So many Americans have shared with me their personal experiences of this crisis. Many have written letters or emails or shared their stories with me at rallies and along rope lines. Their hardship and heartbreak are a reminder that while this crisis is vast, it begins just one house – and one family – at a time.

It begins with a young family – maybe in Mesa, or Glendale, or Tempe – or just as likely in suburban Las Vegas, Cleveland, or Miami. They save up. They search. They choose a home that feels like the perfect place to start a life. They secure a fixed-rate mortgage at a reasonable rate, make a down payment, and make their mortgage payments each month. They are as responsible as anyone could ask them to be.

But then they learn that acting responsibly often isn’t enough to escape this crisis. Perhaps someone loses a job in the latest round of layoffs, one of more than three and a half million jobs lost since this recession began – or maybe a child gets sick, or a spouse has his or her hours cut.

In the past, if you found yourself in a situation like this, you could have sold your home and bought a smaller one with more affordable payments. Or you could have refinanced your home at a lower rate. But today, home values have fallen so sharply that even if you made a large down payment, the current value of your mortgage may still be higher than the current value of your house. So no bank will return your calls, and no sale will return your investment.

You can't afford to leave and you can't afford to stay. So you cut back on luxuries. Then you cut back on necessities. You spend down your savings to keep up with your payments. Then you open the retirement fund. Then you use the credit cards. And when you’ve gone through everything you have, and done everything you can, you have no choice but to default on your loan. And so your home joins the nearly six million others in foreclosure or at risk of foreclosure across the country, including roughly 150,000 right here in Arizona.

But the foreclosures which are uprooting families and upending lives across America are only one part of this housing crisis. For while there are millions of families who face foreclosure, there are millions more who are in no danger of losing their homes, but who have still seen their dreams endangered. They are families who see “For Sale” signs lining the streets. Who see neighbors leave, and homes standing vacant, and lawns slowly turning brown. They see their own homes – their largest single assets – plummeting in value. One study in Chicago found that a foreclosed home reduces the price of nearby homes by as much as 9 percent. Home prices in cities across the country have fallen by more than 25 percent since 2006; in Phoenix, they’ve fallen by 43 percent.

Even if your neighborhood hasn’t been hit by foreclosures, you’re likely feeling the effects of the crisis in other ways. Companies in your community that depend on the housing market – construction companies and home furnishing stores, painters and landscapers – they’re cutting back and laying people off. The number of residential construction jobs has fallen by more than a quarter million since mid-2006. As businesses lose revenue and people lose income, the tax base shrinks, which means less money for schools and police and fire departments. And on top of this, the costs to a local government associated with a single foreclosure can be as high as $20,000.

The effects of this crisis have also reverberated across the financial markets. When the housing market collapsed, so did the availability of credit on which our economy depends. As that credit has dried up, it has been harder for families to find affordable loans to purchase a car or pay tuition and harder for businesses to secure the capital they need to expand and create jobs.

In the end, all of us are paying a price for this home mortgage crisis. And all of us will pay an even steeper price if we allow this crisis to deepen – a crisis which is unraveling homeownership, the middle class, and the American Dream itself. But if we act boldly and swiftly to arrest this downward spiral, every American will benefit. And that’s what I want to talk about today.

The plan I’m announcing focuses on rescuing families who have played by the rules and acted responsibly: by refinancing loans for millions of families in traditional mortgages who are underwater or close to it; by modifying loans for families stuck in sub-prime mortgages they can’t afford as a result of skyrocketing interest rates or personal misfortune; and by taking broader steps to keep mortgage rates low so that families can secure loans with affordable monthly payments.

At the same time, this plan must be viewed in a larger context. A lost home often begins with a lost job. Many businesses have laid off workers for a lack of revenue and available capital. Credit has become scarce as the markets have been overwhelmed by the collapse of securities backed by failing mortgages. In the end, the home mortgage crisis, the financial crisis, and this broader economic crisis are interconnected. We cannot successfully address any one of them without addressing them all.

Yesterday, in Denver, I signed into law the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act which will create or save three and a half million jobs over the next two years – including 70,000 in Arizona – doing the work America needs done. We will also work to stabilize, repair, and reform our financial system to get credit flowing again to families and businesses. And we will pursue the housing plan I am outlining today.

Through this plan, we will help between seven and nine million families restructure or refinance their mortgages so they can avoid foreclosure. And we are not just helping homeowners at risk of falling over the edge, we are preventing their neighbors from being pulled over that edge too – as defaults and foreclosures contribute to sinking home values, failing local businesses, and lost jobs.

But I also want to be very clear about what this plan will not do: It will not rescue the unscrupulous or irresponsible by throwing good taxpayer money after bad loans. It will not help speculators who took risky bets on a rising market and bought homes not to live in but to sell. It will not help dishonest lenders who acted irresponsibility, distorting the facts and dismissing the fine print at the expense of buyers who didn’t know better. And it will not reward folks who bought homes they knew from the beginning they would never be able to afford. In short, this plan will not save every home.

But it will give millions of families resigned to financial ruin a chance to rebuild. It will prevent the worst consequences of this crisis from wreaking even greater havoc on the economy. And by bringing down the foreclosure rate, it will help to shore up housing prices for everyone. According to estimates by the Treasury Department, this plan could stop the slide in home prices due to neighboring foreclosures by up to $6,000 per home.

Here is how my plan works:

First, we will make it possible for an estimated four to five million currently ineligible homeowners who receive their mortgages through Fannie Mae or Freddie Mac to refinance their mortgages at lower rates.

Today, as a result of declining home values, millions of families are “underwater,” which means they owe more on their mortgages than their homes are worth. These families are unable to sell their homes, and unable to refinance them. So in the event of a job loss or another emergency, their options are limited.

Right now, Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac – the institutions that guarantee home loans for millions of middle class families – are generally not permitted to guarantee refinancing for mortgages valued at more than 80 percent of the home’s worth. So families who are underwater – or close to being underwater – cannot turn to these lending institutions for help.

My plan changes that by removing this restriction on Fannie and Freddie so that they can refinance mortgages they already own or guarantee. This will allow millions of families stuck with loans at a higher rate to refinance. And the estimated cost to taxpayers would be roughly zero; while Fannie and Freddie would receive less money in payments, this would be balanced out by a reduction in defaults and foreclosures.

I also want to point out that millions of other households could benefit from historically low interest rates if they refinance, though many don't know that this opportunity is available to them – an opportunity that could save families hundreds of dollars each month. And the efforts we are taking to stabilize mortgage markets will help these borrowers to secure more affordable terms, too.

Second, we will create new incentives so that lenders work with borrowers to modify the terms of sub-prime loans at risk of default and foreclosure.

Sub-prime loans – loans with high rates and complex terms that often conceal their costs – make up only 12 percent of all mortgages, but account for roughly half of all foreclosures.

Right now, when families with these mortgages seek to modify a loan to avoid this fate, they often find themselves navigating a maze of rules and regulations but rarely finding answers. Some sub-prime lenders are willing to renegotiate; many aren’t. Your ability to restructure your loan depends on where you live, the company that owns or manages your loan, or even the agent who happens to answer the phone on the day you call.

My plan establishes clear guidelines for the entire mortgage industry that will encourage lenders to modify mortgages on primary residences. Any institution that wishes to receive financial assistance from the government, and to modify home mortgages, will have to do so according to these guidelines – which will be in place two weeks from today.

If lenders and homebuyers work together, and the lender agrees to offer rates that the borrower can afford, we’ll make up part of the gap between what the old payments were and what the new payments will be. And under this plan, lenders who participate will be required to reduce those payments to no more than 31 percent of a borrower’s income. This will enable as many as three to four million homeowners to modify the terms of their mortgages to avoid foreclosure.

So this part of the plan will require both buyers and lenders to step up and do their part. Lenders will need to lower interest rates and share in the costs of reduced monthly payments in order to prevent another wave of foreclosures. Borrowers will be required to make payments on time in return for this opportunity to reduce those payments.

I also want to be clear that there will be a cost associated with this plan. But by making these investments in foreclosure-prevention today, we will save ourselves the costs of foreclosure tomorrow – costs borne not just by families with troubled loans, but by their neighbors and communities and by our economy as a whole. Given the magnitude of these costs, it is a price well worth paying.

Third, we will take major steps to keep mortgage rates low for millions of middle class families looking to secure new mortgages.

Today, most new home loans are backed by Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac, which guarantee loans and set standards to keep mortgage rates low and to keep mortgage financing available and predictable for middle class families. This function is profoundly important, especially now as we grapple with a crisis that would only worsen if we were to allow further disruptions in our mortgage markets.

Therefore, using the funds already approved by Congress for this purpose, the Treasury Department and the Federal Reserve will continue to purchase Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac mortgage-backed securities so that there is stability and liquidity in the marketplace. Through its existing authority Treasury will provide up to $200 billion in capital to ensure that Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac can continue to stabilize markets and hold mortgage rates down.

We’re also going to work with Fannie and Freddie on other strategies to bolster the mortgage markets, like working with state housing finance agencies to increase their liquidity. And as we seek to ensure that these institutions continue to perform what is a vital function on behalf of middle class families, we also need to maintain transparency and strong oversight so that they do so in responsible and effective ways.

Fourth, we will pursue a wide range of reforms designed to help families stay in their homes and avoid foreclosure.

My administration will continue to support reforming our bankruptcy rules so that we allow judges to reduce home mortgages on primary residences to their fair market value – as long as borrowers pay their debts under a court-ordered plan. That’s the rule for investors who own two, three, and four homes. It should be the rule for ordinary homeowners too, as an alternative to foreclosure.

In addition, as part of the recovery plan I signed into law yesterday, we are going to award $2 billion in competitive grants to communities that are bringing together stakeholders and testing new and innovative ways to prevent foreclosures. Communities have shown a lot of initiative, taking responsibility for this crisis when many others have not. Supporting these neighborhood efforts is exactly what we should be doing.

Taken together, the provisions of this plan will help us end this crisis and preserve for millions of families their stake in the American Dream. But we must also acknowledge the limits of this plan.

Our housing crisis was born of eroding home values, but also of the erosion of our common values. It was brought about by big banks that traded in risky mortgages in return for profits that were literally too good to be true; by lenders who knowingly took advantage of homebuyers; by homebuyers who knowingly borrowed too much from lenders; by speculators who gambled on rising prices; and by leaders in our nation’s capital who failed to act amidst a deepening crisis.

So solving this crisis will require more than resources – it will require all of us to take responsibility. Government must take responsibility for setting rules of the road that are fair and fairly enforced. Banks and lenders must be held accountable for ending the practices that got us into this crisis in the first place. Individuals must take responsibility for their own actions. And all of us must learn to live within our means again.

These are the values that have defined this nation. These are values that have given substance to our faith in the American Dream. And these are the values that we must restore now at this defining moment.

It will not be easy. But if we move forward with purpose and resolve – with a deepened appreciation for how fundamental the American Dream is and how fragile it can be when we fail in our collective responsibilities – then I am confident we will overcome this crisis and once again secure that dream for ourselves and for generations to come.

Thank you, God Bless you, and God bless America.

---
You are currently subscribed to whitehouse-daily-reporters as: pwolfson@voanews.com.
To unsubscribe send a blank email to leave-whitehouse-daily-reporters-2214392C@list.whitehouse.gov

Although Congress did act to delay the switch to digital TV from today until 12 June, some stations may switch anyway under certain conditions that may not help all consumers. Some consumers, who may receive only one of several supposedly locally available over-the-air signals due to interference, may lose their TV. The intent of the delay was to assist consumers who hadn't received their digital converter subsidy coupons from the messed-up, mismanaged program yet, but because the government is allowing some stations to switch early, some consumers may be caught in the dark. Previous blog. Learn more from your government here. More from Consumers Union here. This debacle is what happens when you have a multi-billion dollar gold rush with consumers in the way-- consumers get trampled.

I'm honored to be among a distinguished cadre of panelists at an all-day NYU School of Law Journal of Law and Business Symposium this Friday, 20 February: Modernizing the Financial Regulatory Structure. The event is in Vanderbilt Hall at the Law School in Manhattan. You can get more information at the link.

Over at the Credit Slips blog, professor Bob Lawless links to a Slate column "If You Knew Suze Like We Knew Suze, You Wouldn't Listen to Her Advice." by "Maxed Out: The Movie" director James Scurlock. James analyzes her advice directly. I've also seen other blog posts (here and here are a few) that question the fees and commissions she receives for endorsements of the products she endlessly promotes. She could be a lot more up front about that. The profits from the products are certainly good for her portfolio, but may not be the best deal for you.

Our colleagues at Consumers Union -- non-profit publishers of Consumer Reports Magazine -- have launched a video blog defendyourdollars.org where you can see the "faces" of victims of the mortgage crisis tell their stories. Excerpt:

Beyond the statistics, these are real people, real families fighting to keep the most precious thing they own. Under pressure to make ends meet to pay their mortgages and feed their children, these are the stories of people targeted by predatory lending practices and forced to make difficult decisions. Watch these videos, then take action to help protect families from losing their homes!

Over at the Washington Post, reporters Kim Hart and Peter Whoriskey have a story Stalled Switch to Digital TV A Classic Tale of Breakdown that provides a good history of the Bush administration's myriad failures in implementing the switch to digital television, which will not happen next week as once planned and is now delayed into June. Basically, it comes down to this: why did the Bush administration want to go forward with the DTV switch without making people whole who'd done no wrong? Instead, it would have let their TVs go dark. Many were poor or people of color. If it weren't for the efforts of consumer champion Rep. Ed Markey (D-MA), we wouldn't even have the partially successful -- even if grossly mismanaged by the administration -- DTV converter box subsidy program. Previous blog.

Fifteen years ago, even the luster of both a complaint to the DOJ and Congressional testimony by the band Pearl Jam was not enough to stop the looming horizontal and vertical integration of the ticket and concert industry led by Ticketmaster, which was then only building the skeleton of its anti-consumer Death Star. But now that my Super Bowl MVP, Bruce Springsteen, has entered the fray, maybe Congress and the antitrust cops will take action to destroy the now nearly fully operational Ticketmaster Deathstar, coming around the planet Earth and readying its beams to take aim at consumer wallets. If Ticketmaster's proposed Live Nation merger goes forward, Ticketmaster will not only control ticket sales and ticket resales through "legal" ticket scalping enterprises such as its Tickets Now operation, but also control how bands book shows at venues, a service now dominated by Live Nation. The Washington Post calls Live Nation a "concert-promoting behemoth." More on the growing opposition to the anti-competitive hegemony sought by that growing evil empire from Reuters and NJ.com, whose story links to a growing rebel band of bloggers backing the E Street Band's campaign. More at the main fan blog for the Boss at Backstreets.com

More on corporate crime after the jump: