NationStates Jolt Archive

Just as I suggested two weeks ago, the ammendment propsed by the Democrats to exempt some of the more arduous new bankruptcy conditions for victims of natural disasters which was shot down by the Republican's during the bill's passage look likely to stand as is. No exemptions for having the bacd luck to live through the worst natural disaster in American history.

What this mean is such things as:
1) the income they had BEFORE their job got swept away will be considered as being income that they should still be recieving when calculating ability to pay, and
2) Any Federal relief funds given to them to help them get their communities back up and running will also be deemed income and be subject to appropriation by creditors.


People with a brain and a conscience understood that it makes no sense to hand over tax dollars to a shattered community only to have a good chunk of that money taken by Visa and MAstercard as some people's prior debts force them into a bankruptcy that they never wanted, but common sense doesn't seem to enter the picture very often anymore.... you see, people SHOULD plan financially for their entire region to be wiped out...


From Reuters: (http://today.reuters.com/investing/financeArticle.aspx?type=bondsNews&storyID=2005-09-13T233444Z_01_N13590464_RTRIDST_0_KATRINA-BANKRUPTCY.XML)


WASHINGTON, Sept 13 (Reuters) - The chairman of the U.S. House Judiciary Committee said on Tuesday he had no intention of reopening a sweeping bankruptcy law passed by Congress earlier this year, despite proposals to exempt Hurricane Katrina victims from some of its provisions.

The new, more stringent bankruptcy law will not harm people left "down and out" by the storm, Wisconsin Republican Rep. James Sensenbrenner said.

He said he would not hold a hearing in his committee on a bill by the panel's ranking Democrat, Michigan Rep. John Conyers, and 31 other Democrats who want to exempt Hurricane Katrina victims from parts of the new bankruptcy law. A chairman's decision not to hold a hearing usually prevents a House bill form advancing.

Congress last spring passed the new bankruptcy law, which makes it harder for heavily indebted Americans to wipe out their obligations. It goes into effect on Oct. 17.

Backers said it was needed to crack down on abuse of the bankruptcy system.

But after Hurricane Katrina struck the Gulf Coast, Conyers said hurricane victims should be exempted from a means test in the new law that determines whether filers can be put on debt repayment plans.

Sensenbrenner said Conyer's argument was "specious" because someone completely wiped out financially, whether by Katrina or anything else, would not be put on a repayment plan under the new law.

"If someone in Katrina is down and out, and has no possibility of being able to repay 40 percent or more of their debts, then the new bankruptcy law doesn't apply," Sensenbrenner told Reuters.



The problem is, of course, that it is the credit card companies that get to determine if they think you can repay 40% of your debt, and by counting your income for the 8 months of the year that you HAD a job plus any federal funds supplied to put a roof back over your head, they might well decide that you CAN pay - even as you live in a shelter looking for a new job in a place with NO jobs. And that you can't easily leave if you WERE a home owner as you need to stick around to get your house rebuilt before you have any chance of recouping any of your investment by selling it.


Of course, given the other smack in the head which is the repeal of prevailing wage laws during the rebuilding process - one wonders how much their income from any job they do find will be as well.




All I can say is that if you know anyone in that area who is looking at their pile of bills from a house they don't have anymore and wondering when they might find another paycheque - if they think they MIGHT need bankruptcy protection then they had best get it filed before October 17th to ensure that they get processed under the old legislation.

Shouldn't the NO residents file for unemployment? They got screwed here, but unemployment benefits would help.

It is a bit rough to get money taken from you for a house you don't have now, land you can't get back to, a car where you don't where it is and a job you can't go back to.

It is a bit rough to get money taken from you for a house you don't have now, land you can't get back to, a car where you don't where it is and a job you can't go back to.
Maybe the bank will take them back because the people can't make the payments.
Game. Set. Match.

Shouldn't the NO residents file for unemployment? They got screwed here, but unemployment benefits would help.


Yes, such benefits will help.

Any state programs for such things though are going to be likely problematic as much of New Orleans has been relocated across state lines to shelters elsewhere. This may exclude them from being able to file until they get back home.


Throw in the clogging of the system as so many people file at once, and the possibility that government offices (and employees) in New Orleans are probably non-existant, and you will likely see a fair wait before any State benefits kick in. Most government systems also require such things as a mailing address to send your checks to, which for someone being shifted around through the shelters also makes things more difficult.

Maybe the bank will take them back because the people can't make the payments.
Game. Set. Match.

I suspect the banks just want the money as the land, house or car will be unsellable since it was trashed by Katrina.

Maybe the bank will take them back because the people can't make the payments.
Game. Set. Match.

That was an incredibly stupid thing to say. The guy's point was that the house, car, etc. are now worthless, even to the bank.

That was an incredibly stupid thing to say. The guy's point was that the house, car, etc. are now worthless, even to the bank.
I know, it was a joke.


Government support for corporatism = anti-broke people

The smart thing to do would be to issue a debt freeze for these people. The debt they had before the hurricane would be static for a few months. That way they can rebuild after getting jobs and not have to worry about paying their creditors until they are back on their feet.

The government ought to help these people out. After all, a decent sized city and a portion of the national economy has taken a severe blow and if they want to recover to avoid a recession or at worse a depressing because of a spike in unemployment and gas prices, they should offer a safety net to those who were the victims of Katrina.

Do you get bankruptcy relief if your place of business is burnt to the ground? Do you get bankruptcy relief if your home is burnt to the ground?

If you don't why should they?

Do you get bankruptcy relief if your place of business is burnt to the ground? Do you get bankruptcy relief if your home is burnt to the ground?

If you don't why should they?
1 - if your business is burnt down, you still have a house to return to*
2 - if your house burns down, you still have your job*

*Not withstanding the extreme circumstance in which you live in the apartment above your business in which case you loose both due to unfortunate circumstances

I would venture to guess the striking-down of this bill probably has something to do with our rather disastrous budget situation at the moment. Bush, being the filthy statist bastard that he is, doesn't appear to have thought about what might happen if a massive tropical cyclone decimated the deep south. Part of the reason why I'm a proponent of fiscal conservatism is precisely for this reason.

Our politicians have never been very good about holding money in reserve for problems like this. Hopefully, the failure of bill will give the Republican Party the vicious anal fisting they so richly deserve.

Do you get bankruptcy relief if your place of business is burnt to the ground? Do you get bankruptcy relief if your home is burnt to the ground?

If you don't why should they?


Depends. If you are a corporation and go bankrupt you get the added bonus of looting the pension fund of the employees that you are firing to pay other corporations, thereby also ensuring that many of your long-term employees are more likely to spend their declining years in poverty and perhaps in bankruptcy themselves.

And if you are a personal small business owner who loses their place of business you still have a home to go to. If you lose your house you still own a valuable asset (you business) with which to rebuild your life from.

And if you lost BOTH in the flood then you get to pay for TWO sets of bankruptcies and are in the same damn boat as everyone else. PErhaps worse off, perhaps better depending on how your bank insisted that your business be insured if you were in debt to them.


Banks generally insist on more protection for their business loans than they do for their personal loans, which generally means that they have forced a safety net onto the business owner to an extent that they don't to Joe Public.

Yep, there's going to be a lot people in need of debt consoilidation and other looking to cash out some equity (provided they still have some) for home repair. It's a good time to be in the mortgage/refinance business.

I would venture to guess the striking-down of this bill probably has something to do with our rather disastrous budget situation at the moment. Bush, being the filthy statist bastard that he is, doesn't appear to have thought about what might happen if a massive tropical cyclone decimated the deep south. Part of the reason why I'm a proponent of fiscal conservatism is precisely for this reason.

Our politicians have never been very good about holding money in reserve for problems like this. Hopefully, the failure of bill will give the Republican Party the vicious anal fisting they deserve.



Errr, I think you missread Melkor.

The initial Bill passed.

At the time there was an ammendment propsed by Democrats who DID consider this very scenario and wanted an exemption put into the bill.

It was voted down along party lines leaving no added protections to victims of disasters.

And the news story today is a statement from the Judiciary committee indicating that they are unwilling to revisit this issue, even AFTER Katrina.

Well, the amendment. Whatever. You know what I mean. :p

Errr, I think you missread Melkor.

The initial Bill passed.

At the time there was an ammendment propsed by Democrats who DID consider this very scenario and wanted an exemption put into the bill.

It was voted down along party lines leaving no added protections to victims of disasters.

And the news story today is a statement from the Judiciary committee indicating that they are unwilling to revisit this issue, even AFTER Katrina.

For that, may the Republican congressmen die a slow, painful death.

Well, the amendment. Whatever. You know what I mean. :p


lol. OK.


Any way you slice it.... I'm just glad that I'm not one of the many trying to track down my insurance adjuster right now.

I remember after Andrew how many people just ended up spray painting their new contact information on the rubble that used to be their house rather than actualy wait around for the adjustor who might take weeks to get there.