« previous | MUCK HOME | next »
Lawmaker Defaults on Three Morgtage Loans
Rep. Laura Richardson (D-CA) has been defaulting on her mortgage payments, but that hasn't stopped her from loaning her campaign cash.
She had three homes in default and has been renegotiating at least one loan with her lender, Washington Mutual, to stop foreclosure.
A spokesman for the freshman lawmaker said it was unclear whether she used money from the mortgages to fund her Congressional campaign. But she did use precisely that tactic last year to obtain $100,000 to loan to her campaign for the California General Assembly, the spokesman told The Hill.
A third home that Richardson borrowed heavily to move into in Sacramento was sold at auction earlier this month -- at a $150,000 loss to the bank that issued her the $535,000 loan. ...Even as that was happening, ethics watchdogs were crying foul over Richardson's personal finances and questioning how she was able to lend her campaign to Congress $77,500 in the midst of multiple home loan defaults. ...
Federal Election Commission (FEC) reports show that Richardson loaned her campaign a total of $77,500 -- in three installments -- between June and July of 2007.
Richardson's year-end FEC filing showed that her campaign still had $331,000 worth of debt but $116,000 cash-on-hand. ...
Meredith McGehee, policy director for the Campaign Legal Center, said it would be reasonable for the FEC to look into the timing of the loan against the timeline of Richardson's home loan defaults.
"In situations like this it's very important for whoever loaned her the money to demonstrate that they treated her equitably, not favorably," McGehee said. "Otherwise, you're getting into a situation of a corporate underwriting of a campaign."
Josh
Zachary
To me the issue here is that it shouldn't be so darned expensive to run for office in the first place.
May 28, 2008 4:25 PM | Reply | Permalink
And does anyone else see that this is more reason to have federal and state financing for campaigns, with reasonable caps on the amounts?
I know that there's a lot of revenue that all those peripheral services get from campaigns—everything from printing costs to TV advertising—but it's all gone too far. I've seen signs for one candidate spaced a mere hundred yards apart down one road for two miles, and that's really overkill.
I know that I'd be more likely to volunteer to work for a candidate that had to work within a budget and wasn't going to have to "repay" contributors. I'd know that it didn't take being rich to run for office, but a true desire to serve in the people. That's how to get people to care more about elections.
May 28, 2008 4:41 PM | Reply | Permalink
sounds like a candidate for the budget committee
dontchathink ???
/snark
May 28, 2008 5:22 PM | Reply | Permalink
Yes, we should have public financing for campaigns. We'd get more higher quality candidates less susceptible to corruption. But we don't yet have public financing.
Regardless I find it troubling that a Congresswoman, especially a Democrat, should have screwed up her finances so royally for any reason. If she thinks that her mortgage problems with three homes will endear her further to her constituents, she is sadly mistaken.
Dems like Richardson make it that much more difficult for us to both claim the moral high ground and portray our party as that of fiscal responsibility.
-AF
Andrew Sullivan Is A Fraud
May 28, 2008 7:41 PM | Reply | Permalink
Well, at least it's comforting to know that the Housing Crisis is even hitting members of Congress.....:-)
May 28, 2008 10:22 PM | Reply | Permalink
Not sure if this is the housing crisis or a crisis of intelligence, but I'll give her the benefit of the doubt because she's a Democrat and I'm discriminatory.
May 29, 2008 12:48 AM | Reply | Permalink
It is seriously surprising that Rep. Laura Richardson had been defaulting on her mortgage payments since so long, but that hasn't stopped her from loaning her campaign cash. Regardless I find it troubling that a Congresswoman, especially a Democrat, should have screwed up her finances so royally for any reason. If she thinks that her mortgage problems with three homes will endear her further to her constituents, she is sadly mistaken. She would definitely need a chance to refinance her three homes very soon. In situations like this it's very important for whoever loaned her the money to demonstrate that they treated her equitably, not favorably
December 24, 2008 1:54 AM | Reply | Permalink
It is seriously surprising that Rep. Laura Richardson had been defaulting on her mortgage payments since so long, but that hasn't stopped her from loaning her campaign cash. Regardless I find it troubling that a Congresswoman, especially a Democrat, should have screwed up her finances so royally for any reason. If she thinks that her mortgage problems with three homes will endear her further to her constituents, she is sadly mistaken. She would definitely need a chance to refinance her three homes very soon. In situations like this it's very important for whoever loaned her the money to demonstrate that they treated her equitably, not favorably
December 24, 2008 1:56 AM | Reply | Permalink