Isakson should join with John Lewis
My colleague Jim Galloway has called attention to the hearing conducted this morning by Atlanta Congressman John Lewis, a Democrat, who focused on fraud in the program designed to juice the housing market by giving a tax credit to first-time home buyers. Meanwhile, Sen. Johnny Isakson, a Georgia Republican, is leading the charge to expand the tax credit. (I talked to Isakson about it a few weeks ago.)
Given the stereotypes that adhere to the two parties — Democrats tolerate/invite fraud while the GOP fights fraud — it is interesting. More interesting are Lewis’ charges, from a report by the Treasury Deparment’s inspector general:
We will hear today that taxpayers claiming the credit include those: who already owned a home, who had not yet bought a home, and who are children—some as young as four years old. There are possibly hundreds of millions of dollars that have been paid to taxpayers who are not entitled “ to the credit. We want to, and we need to, stop this fraud and abuse.”
I’m not a big fan of tax credits for home purchases, period. I think the longstanding mortgage tax deduction should be repealed, for several reasons. But I also think that Isakson’s proposal probably should pass as a temporary remedy for a housing market that’s still in the tank.
I’d be surprised in Isakson didn’t sign on quickly to Lewis’ proposals to stamp out fraud in the program.
Tell us what you think about the site
Customer Care »
Vacation stops, manage subscriptions and more
AJC Services
Sections
Other Editions
Guides
Visitor Agreement | Privacy Statement
© 2010 The Atlanta Journal-Constitution
19 comments Add your comment
citizen
October 22nd, 2009
1:45 pm
How much fraud has occurred? I heard about $100 million.
How much fraud occurred with the collapse of the finincial market? Check out PBS’s expose “The Warning” and then try to explain to the American public why no regulations of the derivative’s market is yet in place?
Paul
October 22nd, 2009
2:54 pm
[[I’d be surprised in Isakson didn’t sign on quickly to Lewis’ proposals to stamp out fraud in the program.]]
But I thought as recently as yesterday Republicans weren’t interested in working with Democrats on anything?
But I’m pleased Democrats are bringing fraud fighting to the fore. And if Republicans sign on, so much the better.
jconservative
October 22nd, 2009
3:06 pm
If Isakson signs on with John Lewis for anything he will start getting in trouble with his social conservative base in Georgia.
Isakson has shown the ability to stand on his on two feet a few times in his career. This is another opportunity to do so. I, for one, would like to see him do so.
Joan
October 22nd, 2009
3:17 pm
And there is the rub. It is so easy to defraud the government. Any idiot can do it. So why do we expect the health care system to improve when it just opens up another great opportunity for the swift among us to make some extra money. The government needs to get out of business and let business run itself, because the government does a pathetic, and destructive job of everything it does.
TnGelding
October 22nd, 2009
3:28 pm
jconservative
October 22nd, 2009
3:06 pm
We libs put Johnny in office. Why he would want it is beyond me.
Kamchak
October 22nd, 2009
3:29 pm
So why do we expect the health care system to improve when it just opens up another great opportunity for the swift among us to make some extra money.
And those that are gaming the stock, commodities and bond, markets are what—paragons of virtue?
TnGelding
October 22nd, 2009
3:33 pm
Joan
October 22nd, 2009
3:17 pm
Of course there is no waste, fraud and abuse in business.
Who’s committing all this fraud and abuse? Are we going to have to make it a capital offense? Have we no shame?
Why are builders still building with the huge inventory and more foreclosures coming on the market every month?
TnGelding
October 22nd, 2009
3:35 pm
Kamchak
October 22nd, 2009
3:29 pm
No, they’re the backbone of our economy, according to some.
Kamchak
October 22nd, 2009
3:41 pm
No, they’re the backbone of our economy, according to some.
But that just begs the question–what backbone?
Paul
October 22nd, 2009
4:03 pm
Joan
I’d offer the financial institutions were pretty much running themselves before the meltdown.
And if we know what’s coming, all the more reason for strong controls and oversight, yes?
maybe
October 22nd, 2009
4:53 pm
Can a position be taken and stood upon. Two days ago the repubs wouldn’t work with the dems now they wnat to which is it?
Joan
October 22nd, 2009
5:52 pm
Thanks for the comments guys. The government, presumably Congress and cohorts, are people I wouldn’t trust to walk into my home without strict oversight. Most of Congress are having their pockets lined by lobbyists. They make laws, which sound good on their face, but they don’t enforce their own laws. I daresay banking and lending regulations were in place prior to the meltdown. They were just not enforced. The opportunity for fraud–I will say it again–is ample. And sure some businesses do dirty tricks, but I daresay a stockholder has more leverage over a corporation, than a taxpayer does over our government.
Carter is a Fool
October 22nd, 2009
7:17 pm
Cynthia Tucker should join forces with Cynthia McKinney. They both see a racist at every turn.
Kamchak
October 22nd, 2009
7:50 pm
I daresay banking and lending regulations were in place prior to the meltdown. They were just not enforced.
Hahahahahaha–you’re kidding, right?
Can you say Glass-Steagall? It was two pieces of legislation enacted in 1933 in response to the banking crisis.
Provisions of the Glass-Steagall Act were directed at these abuses:
(1) Banks were investing their own assets in securities with consequent risk to commercial and savings deposits. The concern of Congress to block this evil is clearly stated in the report of the Senate Banking and Currency Committee on an immediate forerunner of the Glass-Steagall Act.
(2) Unsound loans were made in order to shore up the price of securities or the financial position of companies in which a bank had invested its own assets.
(3) A commercial bank’s financial interest in the ownership, price, or distribution of securities inevitably tempted bank officials to press their banking customers into investing in securities which the bank itself was under pressure to sell because of its own pecuniary stake in the transaction.
Do any of these provisions sound relevant to the crisis of today? Glass-Steagall was repealed in 1999–and yes,Clinton signed it.
jt
October 22nd, 2009
8:06 pm
“Isakson should join with John Lewis”
They do join each other, behind closed doors,
and dance and laugh,
each time they fleece the American tax-payer.
deborahinathens
October 23rd, 2009
6:31 am
Yes, Clinton signed the repeal of Glass-Steagall, but it was Phil Graham (spelling?) a Republican that introduced the bill late at night,no one read it, and it was rubber stamped by a Congress that was made up of mostly Republicans. Clinton knew that if he vetoed the bill there was enough Republican votes to override his veto. Why don’t you tell the whole sorry story? The Republicans have consistently gotten rid of the regulations that have hampered the unbound greed and corruption on Wall Street. They have made it their clarion call! Reduce taxes and reduce regulations. It has destroyed the trust that people have to have in the financial system for it to work. The fact that all the members of Congress, Democrat and Republican, are sucking money from the lobbyists from the financial industry that are fighting tooth and nail every hint of regulation makes it certain that nothing will ever get done. The traders at Goldman Sachs that were responsible for Golman’s profit the last two quarters were essentially doing what brought down the house of cards last year. And they will get handsome bonuses for it. At least, now with Paulson, the ex-CEO of Goldman that Dubya chose as his Treasury Secretary, out of the picture, we might get some chance at rooting out the rot at the heart of the system. But you Repugs keep moaning and groaning about it–and keep voting the %#@holes into office.
ctucker
October 23rd, 2009
6:55 am
Carter is a Fool wrote: Cynthia Tucker should join forces with Cynthia McKinney. They both see a racist at every turn.
I’m guessing you were not a reader of my columns when McKinney was in office. I was one of her fiercest critics. The only thing she and I have in common is a first name and skin color, something you focus on much more than I do.
Lewis
October 23rd, 2009
9:29 am
Touche CT!!
napeolon hill
October 23rd, 2009
6:39 pm
CT, Great job on NPR this afternoon!