Those of you who watched this week’s Democratic Party debate will note that the current foreclosure mess was an oft repeated theme. The candidates are trumpeting what they’ll do if they win in November, but two bills are already before Congress that will impact lenders and consumers.

The somewhat awkwardly named Emergency Home Ownership and Mortgage Equity Protection Act of 2007 and the Foreclosure Protection Act of 2008 are both being debated. Both are focused properties with nontraditional (neg am, interest only, etc) mortgages or subprime mortgages. Mortgage balances and monthly payments would be reduced based on how much a home’s value has decreased.

These won't impact investors directly, since they only applies to owner occupied properties. However, the measures are defiantly of interest to investors since it’s likely that it will impact the cost structure of the entire industry. The measure might decrease the number of underwater owners who walk away from mortgages, but essentially it forces the bank to eat the cost of the market downturn, instead of owners.

This is reform on the cheap, since short term the banks will be shouldering the cost. But the medium/long term effects won’t be good for consumers:

• Banks who are already reeling will be dealt an additional blow. This will lead to a real bail-out, paid for with real taxpayer dollars. The short term “reform on the cheap” won’t stay cheap for long.
• Banks are already recalibrating the way they quantify risk. But the current model assumes that a when a buyer purchases a home then said buyer will both enjoy the benefits of appreciation and the risk of a decrease in value. This assumption no longer holds, and the banks will be justified in charging accordingly. Home ownership will slip further out of reach of an increasingly large segment of the population.

Reform on the cheap doesn't work.  The banks will fix their own messes.  Some should fail - we should let them.  And if the government determines that citizens who are in trouble need help, we shouldn't fool ourselves that this can be accomplished without the government pulling out it's checkbook and spending some tax dollars.  Coercing the business sector to take an altruistic step will backfire in the end.