Ok. What is Biden's honest defense against this article in GQ?

[BigBearJohn]

I would really like to know.

https://www.gq.com/story/joe-biden-bankruptcy-bill

[Recursion]

1. He wanted to limit chapter 7 to the poorer half of the country?

I realize this bill is something of a shibboleth, but the the main pratical impact is that the richer half of the population can't declare Chapter 7.

[DeminPennswoods]

2. Delaware is corporate home to lots of corporations and financial companies

because of its lax financial laws. In Pennsylvania, this is known as "the Delaware loophole". It's not surprising that a senator from Delaware would do his best to look after the interests of his state's biggest industry.

[Locrian]

3. the senator from MBNA

https://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/2019/04/26/why-warren-is-calling-biden-out/

Indeed, he was such a staunch advocate of the credit card companies that he acquired the moniker “the senator from MBNA,” a reference to a large credit card company then based in Delaware that gave a substantial amount of money to Biden’s campaign coffers over the years.

[Mike 03]

4. I think it was MBNA

Freshman, at the university I attended, were given credit card applications virtually before we could get settled into our dorms. A lot of students got into trouble pretty quickly, and if I recall correctly this actually became an issue in the local media: was it a good idea to hook freshman into credit cards so quickly. I can't recall what the APR% was at the time.

[Locrian]

7. between that and the student debt - they wonder why young people don't support him?

https://theintercept.com/2020/01/07/joe-biden-student-loans/

Early in his senatorial career, Biden played a role in making it easier for students and parents to take out burdensome loans, spanning across several decades. Later, his landmark bankruptcy reform legislation made it nearly impossible to discharge student loans, birthing a predatory industry and sinking millions into unsustainable levels of debt.

[Hortensis]

5. Because people who could pay their bills were walking away from debt.

The practice encouraged/allowed people of inadequate principles to overspend and then to abandon their debts when paying them became painful, or just undesirable in too many cases. In a nation of over 300,000,000, that had multiplied to become a huge problem.

Btw, I used to be a real estate appraiser. A LOT of people think it's okay to break their contract when real estate prices drop, walking away from mortgages and making the lender take the loss, some exploiting lax bankruptcy laws when necessary, all knowing from the first that these were "options." EVEN THOUGH THEY'RE PERFECTLY ABLE TO FULFILL THEIR CONTRACTS.

I don't think it's okay to put it mildly. Besides the despicable cheating, exploiting aspect, empty properties deteriorate, victimizing their neighbors and even in too many cases neighborhoods.

As for those who really can't pay, bankruptcy laws exist for THEM. Including, of course, the one Biden worked very hard to finally get passed.

[LongtimeAZDem]

8. +1

[greatauntoftriplets]

9. + 100,000

[emmaverybo]

18. +++++++++++++++++++

[madville]

6. Bankruptcy rules were too lax

People were abusing the system and running up debt then walking away from it. It needed some reform back then.

[Demsrule86]

14. And they stayed pretty lax and people still abuse the system...Biden and others stopped

the GOP from getting the worst stuff the GOP wanted...so this is really a joke...if you know anything about how bankruptcy works, you know the idea the so many suffered is just bullshit...take a look at Warren's plan which in my view is way worse.

[myohmy2]

10. +1

"Unions, consumer protection groups, and the National Organization for Women all opposed the BAPCPA..."


" Ok. What is Biden's honest defense against this article in GQ?

I would really like to know. "


...me too...

[Demsrule86]

15. He doesn't need a defense...more hysterical bullshit. The bankruptcy laws didn't change much

despite the hysteria.

[Hortensis]

17. Agree. The title's attack all by itself.

[karynnj]

11. This more than any other issue is why I have not picked Biden

I remember watching the Senate floor speeches on the 2005 bankruptcy bill. Ted Kennedy introduced and defended a series of amendments that would make the bill less terrible. This was important as it was a certainty that the bill would pass. Every amendment failed - even ones that seemed to me watching it as "how can this fail"? One attempted to put a limit on the interest that could be charged that was very high (from memory 30%). Ted Kennedy read from the Bible on usury. It failed. Another wanted to have provisions that treated debt incurred because of medical bills less harshly. Ted Kennedy had stats on the percent of people who only went towards bankruptcy because they had a huge medical bill. Although that still happens, this was pre ACA.

That bill, which passed in 2005, had several earlier attempts. Elizabeth Warren fought the Clinton era one by convincing Hillary Clinton that Bill Clinton should oppose it. It came back in 2001 and passed the Senate, with Biden's, John Edwards' and HRC's vote, but with 911 there never was a bill that passed both Houses. Fortunately for HRC and Edwards it did not become law, so it was easier for their teams to spin it as that bill being good for some reason

Now, I watched enough coverage of the Senate to know that sometimes votes are explained by the state a person is from. I saw every NJ Senator protect the pharmaceutical industry's outrageous profits. I doubt you will find any Senator who has never cast a vote, that was likely against their ideological position, because it was a vote affected powers in their state.

Warren voting to eliminate the medical devices tax that was part of the funding for ACA was because of MA having many medical technology firms. When the ACA bill was created, there initially was a higher tax there, but Kerry, who was on the Finance committee negotiated the tax that was in the bill with those companies getting their support because they stood to sell more devices with ACA. I was not surprised that Scott Brown, when he was Senator, made it an issue to eliminate the tax. I was surprised that Warren did.

The difference between Warren and the NJ Senators, including Booker, and Biden is that the bankruptcy bill is uniquely lacking in compassion. It is a really bad bill. I think, that more than the complicated IWR vote, Biden needs to address this and admit that he was blinded to its impact. Unlike the crime bill, it is hard to find any reason that one could argue that ordinary people benefited by this bill.

I did - very briefly consider Biden - after listening to John Kerry make the case for him. I agree that immediate action on foreign policy and climate change is essential and Biden really does have more contacts. However, where I would have selected John Kerry immediately had he run - even better if there were a 20 year younger clone of John Kerry, Joe Biden is not John Kerry. John Kerry was better on foreign policy and climate change, Biden's strengths, and was excellent on women's rights and civil rights. I think both are fundamentally decent men and, on that, Kerry's endorsement does matter to me. I think the idea that Biden is better because he does not have the connections to the elite is ridiculous.

Now obviously, the real John Kerry, much less his nonexistent 20 year younger clone, are not options. The reason for the that comparison is because as I considered Biden, I questioned whether it was unfair to hold Biden to every position he had since 1972. My conclusion - where Biden mismanaged the Clarence Thomas hearing, freshman John Kerry spoke of there only being 2 women in the entire Senate and none on Biden's committee and criticized the committee for not hearing more testimony. Kerry voted against all the bankruptcy bills and in 2007/2008, worked with Gordon Smith on legislation that helped stem the flood of foreclosures that passed the Senate, but was eliminated by the House due to pressure from the Bush administration. My point is that the Biden liabilities, while common given the time, were not liabilities of all his peers.

However, I think the same thing could be accomplished by our nominee giving a vision speech (es) on these issues and speak of leading a the vast Democratic foreign policy bench that she/he would call upon as special envoys to repair our world relation. Other than Trump, no President does everything himself - what is needed is someone with a vision that inspires and informs their actions, integrity, willingness to be a cheerleader for legislation/foreign policy their administration does and, most importantly, having the temperament to value bringing together various experts and having them brainstorm the pro and cons of various options, after which the President makes an informed decision.

While experience and knowing the players is a big advantage, there are more of our candidates who I would envision doing something similar to what I described. From my perspective, it is very easy to see Warren, who came from academia, then working behind the scenes and then Senator as someone who could possibly do this. Stories read long ago on Booker in Newark show that he could could be seen this way. As does, Buttigieg. I am less certain about Bernie, because I have heard of instances as mayor of Burlington where he did not insure that women working for the city were thanked.

[Demsrule86]

16. Bankruptcy didn't change...people still get a fresh start and the Democrats stopped the worst

ideas put forward by the GOP...as for usury...that has to do with borrowing money not bankruptcy...Kennedy and others tried ( I admire that) to put consumer protections in the bankruptcy bill which failed. The bankruptcy law works just fine and did not damage ordinary people. It is not much different than it ever was. The only thing I would change is student debt. We need to put that back into the law and make it easier for our kids who can't find good jobs to rid themselves of this debt in court...I fail to see why running up your credit cards more worthy of relief than student debt. Biden has stated he wants to fix this...other than that ...leave it alone. You don't want to screw with something that works well.

[karynnj]

19. usury relates to charging exorbitant interest -- and a Kennedy amendment tried to cap it

Kennedy gave an example of a woman who after paying a large amount of money owed more than she originally borrowed due to penalties and high interest - obviously, she was paying less than the monthly accrued interest - so the payment actually continued to climb.

In addition to the student debt, there are people who were "ordinary" people until they incurred a huge medical bill. That can happen even with insurance.

I understand that bankruptcy should be rare and done only when nothing else works. No one cavalierly decides to eliminate their debt. There are sufficient real penalties. They will not be able to obtain credit - and that is a fair consequence.

[BlueMTexpat]

20. Thanks for your long and thoughtful

explanation!

[Demsrule86]

12. Warren's plan is worse...and as I said before in a different post...I helped some friends and

family members with bankruptcies...my sis made over 150,000 and qualified for chapter 7...the new bankruptcy laws have little effect...My sis kept both her houses (one her kids live in ), her cars and all her property which is the norm. Here is what changed... the now have i income standards for 7, you now have to provide documents proving income and debt etc, you can only do it once every 10 years and you have to take two cheap consumer courses....most folks still qualify for chapter 7,last figure I saw was 80% and those that don't rarely have to pay back their full debt...in many cases, pennies on the dollar.

Now under Warren's plan from what I can see...not really fleshed out,you would surrender most of your assets unlike in the current law in order to file chapter 7 and it looks like your entire debt in 11 or 13. This is way worse than what we have now and IMHO, not well thought out and punitive. The GOP will make ads that will be very damaging for Warren should she be the nominee.

[LongtimeAZDem]

13. That it was only reasonable that people not be able to just walk away from their obligations scot-free?