Obama To Veto H.R. 3808

Tyler Durden's picture

As we expected, and suggested last night, Obama would not enact H.R. 3808 for fear of the populist fallout that would follow. Indeed, Dow Jones has just confirmed that Obama will "Pocket Veto" the notarization bill, eliminating the last possible roadblock for a tsunami of legal action against mortgage servicers.

From Dow Jones:

President Barack Obama won't sign into law an overlooked piece of legislation that critics say would make it easier for banks and others to process foreclosure proceedings without human signatures, a person familiar with the matter said.

Obama hasn't yet issued a veto during his presidency. In this instance, he will send the bill back to Congress using a process known as a "pocket veto."

His decision comes amid growing complaints from lawmakers that the administration and regulators haven't done enough to intervene in a scandal tied to thousands of foreclosures that critics argue were processed with improper documentation.

Ally Bank, Bank of America Corp. (BAC), and J.P. Morgan Chase & Co. (JPM) have halted foreclosures in 23 states in recent weeks to review how many documents tied to these foreclosures might have been filed improperly. A central issue is the practice of "robo" signing, when documents are signed quickly by computers or people who don't review the documents.

The bill in question passed the Senate on Sept. 27 by unanimous consent. The House passed the bill by "voice vote" in April. Many bills that aren't considered controversial pass this way, with members of both parties essentially letting it move through Congress without debate.

The bill is called the Interstate Recognition of Notarizations Act of 2009 and it was authored by Rep. Robert Aderholt (R., Ala.). A spokesman for Aderholt didn't immediately return a call for comment.

The bill was cosponsored by Reps. Bruce Braley (D., Iowa), Michael Castle (R., Del.), and Artur Davis (D., Ala.).

The bill would require state and federal courts to "recognize any notarization made by a notary public" licensed in any state. This would include electronic signatures. The bill would have been a big win for businesses who complained it was too easy for people to challenge notarized documents in court when notaries were licensed in different states.

"This legislation will help businesses around the nation by eliminating the confusion which arises when states refuse to acknowledge the integrity of documents notarized out-of-state,"
Aderholt said when the bill passed the Senate. "This bill offers a common-sense solution to a problem that is more widespread than is generally recognized."

It is unclear how the bill might have affected the current foreclosure scandal, but liberal groups have insisted in recent days that Obama veto it. A spokesman for Aderholt said: "Contrary to some blogs and reports, there is absolutely no connection whatsoever between Congressman Aderholt's legislation and the recent foreclosure documentation problems."

Ohio Secretary of State Jennifer Brunner said Tuesday if the bill became law it would make it harder for consumers to challenge foreclosures.

The bill raised difficult policy decisions for government officials. Some argue it should be easier for banks and others to process documents electronically to help reduce the backlog of foreclosures and help the housing market. But there have also been questions about the loan-servicing and foreclosure-processing industry, which is loosely regulated and now faces accusations of fraud.

h/t London Dude Trader

Comment viewing options

Select your preferred way to display the comments and click "Save settings" to activate your changes.
LoneStarHog's picture

Who sent this F**KING SOB a PAIR?

tmosley's picture

No-one.  This is the most cowardly thing he could have done.  It just happens to also be the best thing for the market.

This is prima facie evidence that Obama in fact serves no master but himself.  He merely does what is in his own by definition short term interests.  The same goes for any politician.  If there ever was some vast conspiracy to create a one world government or anything like that, it would be doomed to failure the second that it became politically expedient for some powerful politician to veto it.

pan-the-ist's picture

tmosley, obviously nothing he does is good enough for you, is it?

Time to take off the politically slanted tinfoil hat.

NOTW777's picture

you win - free obama pom poms

Red Neck Repugnicant's picture

@ tmosley

I agree. You and I think the same way.

Obama is trying to turn America into some sort of perverse one world government (as you stated), that combines African politics with Nazi and Marx influences. 

I've heard from confidential sources that the next Chief of Staff is a real Maasai Chief straight from Kenya - Adolf the Maasai Warrior, or something like that.    

How long before ObamaCare (which is just thinly disguised eugenics) will create a nation full of basketball players? Our grandmothers shouldn't have to hide in our bunkers!  That's bullshit! 

I truly fear for America. Who is Obama?  Why is he black?  Why was he born in Kenya?  Why is his name Obama - that's a fucking weird name. 

We need to return America to its rightful owners...people like you and me.

I want my country back!! 

Palin/Beck 2012

Ein Stein's picture

Think--- and think again.

If that does not work, please read this:


It is now official.

hardcleareye's picture

That was a good read!!!! Your reference article was good but the actual Spiegel article by Brinkbaumer was chilling..........  Is this for real??  Anybody else read this article?

Ripped Chunk's picture

This will be back slightly altered for his signature after the elections.

Credit the internet community for exposing this. Our congress and senate work for the banks. I will not capitalize the names out of disrespect.




Miss Expectations's picture

Here's one you might not have heard about:

S510 Food Safey Bill.  Kiss you local, small farm options GOODBYE.



From Campaign for Liberty:

As I said earlier, our own Senator Richard Burr (R-NC) is still a cosponsor of this bill.  Despite the surge in demands for limited, constitutional government, Senator Burr still can't see how bad this bill is.  That's why he needs to hear from you!

Contact Richard Burr's office today at 202-224-3154 or email his office at chris_joyner@burr.senate.gov.  Tell him to join Senator Coburn's stand against this bill and to vote against it when Congress returns next month.

Ripped Chunk's picture

Like I said, all of these scumbags in the congress and senate need to be gone. That needs to happen for the next ten years until the law changes and these turd sucking fucks understand WHAT THE ELECTORATE DEMANDS !!!

Bringin It's picture

Dear Ripped - Here I was all happy that Obama finally did something right and then I saw your post.  Unfortunately, you're probably right.

I always appreciate and usually agree with your posts.  However, I think your belief in an electoral solution is uncharacteristically naive.

I mean look at this bill - passed on a voice vote.  Nobody cares about the electorate.

pyite's picture

Fix this stupid headline you MORON.

A pocket veto is exactly the same as signing it -- 100% the opposite of a veto.  It is arguably the most asinine term in our political system.


JonNadler's picture

A pocket veto is a legislative maneuver in United States federal lawmaking that allows the President to indirectly veto a bill. The U.S. Constitution requires the President to sign or veto any legislation placed on his desk within ten days (not including Sundays) while the United States Congress is in session. From the U.S. Constitution Article 1, Section 7 states:

If any Bill shall not be returned by the President within ten days (Sundays excepted) after it shall have been presented to him, the same shall be a Law, in like manner as if he had signed it, unless the Congress by their Adjournment prevent its return, in which case it shall not be a Law.





you're dumber than I am


You can't eat gold

nedwardkelly's picture

Yeah... I also just assumed 'pocket veto' meant he'd actually veto it... But that only applies if congress adjourns in the next 10 days. Otherwise it is passed into law by default.

FYI for anyone else: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pocket_veto

RichardP's picture

But that only applies if congress adjourns in the next 10 days.

The bill must be returned to the body where the bill originated - in this case, the House of Representatives.  On Sept 29, the House voted to adjourn, pending the clean-up of some last-minute business.  That was a week ago.  If they have not left town, they surely will before the next 10 days is up.  No one left for the President to return it to at the end of 10 days.

Kina's picture

The more spite and mallice inserted into a comment the greater the chance the poster is totally wrong, as in pyite's silly effort. More polite ways exist.

Zan's picture

A pair of what -- pink shoes to match his dress?

edit: remove duplicate info; apparenly i am slow today

pamriallc's picture

as many people who live in a police state would mention (if they were allowed to speak) is that under a dictator, the power of that dictator actually improves by maintaining a system at the ragged edge of chaos.

the idea that this VETO helps people is ridiculous.  importantly for any dictator, it *creates chaos* in which case everyone is so busy protecting themselves from the IRS bogeyman, the SEC bogeyman, the FINRA bogeyman, and these fine organizaitons are adding staff members by the HOUR in service of our great dictator. 

yes under a system in total chaos the *real problems* are swept under the rug as everyone lives in morbid fear of the *authorities* who do nothing more than tax the common people in glorification of themselves.

one need not look further than Venezuela with Chavez to understand that one need not have an organized system in order to achieve one's political means.  one only needs a totally chaotic system in order to loot that very system while everyone worries about themselves vs working "collectively" on real solutions which actually improve peoples lives.

what this action accomplishes is precisely the problem most Americans fear the most:  granting more power to the "Populist State" through whom all things are controlled.

"Bankruptcy of Moral Compass"

goldmiddelfinger's picture

I'm not for the bill but it shows O's got no guts

FunkyMonkeyBoy's picture

The controlled demolision of the U.S. continues...

Inside job i say.

Clark_Griswold Hedge Mnger's picture

Lawyers, sharpen your pencils.......

NOTW777's picture

you hear that celebration hollar from the trial lawyers

obama campaign contributions rolling in

free homes for everyone

pan-the-ist's picture

That talking point didn't take long to surface... Those evil liberal lawyers.

pan-the-ist's picture

If the world were fair and everyone acted altruistically we wouldn't need lawyers.  I am sure that in a principaled libertopian universe lawyers are unnecessary, however, in the 'real world' TPTB have created obfuscated laws that require lawyers to navigate.  The reality is, when you make a mistake on this scale, you hurt people, and the lawyers get rich.

I would counter your paranoia with my equally paranoid statement: TPTB make us hate lawyers so we don't litigate and stand up for our rights.

Bringin It's picture

There are too many lawyers.  Most are parasitic scum.

Where I live there really are no lawyers, courts are impossibly clogged and slow by design.  You assume your own risks and if there is a problem, you just work it out on your own, party to party.  People are free-er and happier without the oppressive burden.

LostWages's picture

And on the other side, the banksters are trying to put a Stop Payment on the contributions they made last week to Senators who rushed this thru at the last minute.

pan-the-ist's picture

You've got that completely backward.  Time to step back and read what is going on.

schoolsout's picture

I guess he figures the populace is, at least, paying attention to this issue...

carbonmutant's picture

It's not likly that our current Teleprompter Puppet had much to do with it...

Thunder Dome's picture

SHOCKED Obummer didn't bail out the banksters on this!


Is the angry mob gowing in strength?

LoneStarHog's picture

I wonder just how busy the Secret Service will be after reading some of the received comments.

Xedus129's picture

Why is there a white ford van parked on my street?

Rodent Freikorps's picture

THE AGONIST - And Their Eulogies Sang Me to Sleep (OFFICIAL)


And Mike Castle sucks.

Commander Cody's picture

There will be other attempts to circumvent current law to aid the criminals.

unwashedmass's picture


good for O....screw the banks...of course, it will probably mean they bring out the hellfires to take him down, but....at last he's doing something for the people

Dr. Richard Head's picture

Thank you Obama.  I have never said it before, but it is due today.  THANK YOU. 

Let the mele begin.

LoneStarHog's picture

Just a thought:  Obama refuses to support the Bill prior to the elections, then issues an Executive Order right after.

Rodent Freikorps's picture

The lame duck session will epic.

breezer1's picture

as i have felt all along. nothing but damage control until after the elections, that is unless a great distraction is required. we are witnessing collapse.

cmalbatros's picture

+1 , Indeed , just a pre election sweetner to calm the masses . Business as usual in 2011.

RockyRacoon's picture

So much for the Obama bashing that went on when the first article was written.

Think we'll see any apologies?  Right.

Go back and read some of the downright nasty comments.  Shameful.

And, no, I didn't vote for him.  It's all about fair chances.

Bob's picture

You don't believe he's earned the contempt? 

I worked like hell to elect him, but.