Employment endnotes

Sorry for the lack of updates in the past months - I have been incredibly busy. As some of you may know, I was let go from my foreclosure organizing position at Housing Action Coalition of Rhode Island (HAC) at the end of last month. A week later Rosalina, the organizer at RI Coalition for the Homeless (RICH) I had been working with on this effort was told there was no work for her there anymore, and that her position was being ended immesiately due to doubts about future funding.

So ended our time in the belly of the housing nonprofit beast in Rhode Island.

There is a long story here, full of lies, betrayal and intrigue, and if anyone is interested in hearing the particulars I would be happy to share. For the purposes of this post I want to discuss a little about what I learned about how the nonprofit industry operates in this state.

A little context first: HAC is an extremely small nonprofit - the only staff while I was there was myself and my boss, Brenda Clement. Brenda is a lobbyist, meaning that she spent most of her time at the General Assembly talking with legislators about bills she (or the people paying her) wanted passed and negotiating to make that happen. RI Coalition for the Homeless is significantly larger and has much more funding. A third nonprofit, RI Housing, acted as a major funder and partner to both of these agencies.

Nonprofits are self-interested
At both HAC and RICH, funding and alliances with "power holders" (politicians, bankers and mortgage brokers, basically anyone who has a lot of money and decision-making power in this system) governed the actions that they supported and decisions they made. For example, after a protest against Bank of America by the Tenant and Homeowner Association (the Association) Rosalina and I had helped organize, my boss complained about being criticized by her connections at the bank. She made it clear that, while BofA maybe be putting people out of their homes, they also gave money to housing groups and had power in the General Assembly and so were not a good target.

A related example: when the Association demanded accountability from State Senator Juan Pichardo because of his refusal to sponsor a bill they wanted put forward (after he said he would and spoke at one of their events), my coworker and myself were told that we were not allowed to support this action and (to quote my boss) "Juan can handle his constituents". That is to say, the Association was a problem and needed to be controlled, and HAC's support was based entirely on whether its members wanted what it wanted. When Juan saw an e-mail I had forwarded for the event from my e-mail account at work, he contacted my boss and I was let go from my job a month earlier than I had expected.

They are disconnected from the people they supposedly serve/advocate for/etc.
The board of HAC is made up of Community Development Corporations, the board of RICH is largely shelter providers to people who are homeless, and Rhode Island Housing has BANKS on its board. All three of their executive directors are white even though the people that use their services are generally lower-income people of color. Simply in regards to foreclosure work, I'm sure that none of these people has ever been in danger of losing their home because they couldn't afford to pay a mortgage.

What is the role of the affected community, then? In this case, while my boss was negotiating a harmful compromise bill with bankers and mortgage lenders, she did everything in her power to keep the Association members unaware and out of these talks. People who are at risk of losing their homes are not in control, no more than people who are homeless control RICH. What the community was supposed to do was create photo-ops and make some noise while the real power politics played out behind closed doors.

These observations have been based largely upon my own personal experiences with two particular nonprofits. In that sense, I make no claim that this is how all nonprofits work. In fact, at least one of the community-based groups in Providence which has been taking on the organizing work (DARE - Direct Action for Rights and Equality) is also incorporated as a nonprofit. However, I do think that we need to consider how these characteristics that I noted in this post are present in nonprofits in general. There is an existing critique of nonprofits and the nonprofit model from the radical left, and I think it's crucial that we think about these things more critically. From my own standpoint, I graduated college wanting to go into the nonprofit sector because I had read a lot of materials in classes about how NGO's (non-governmental organizations) were a growing alternative to private companies and more connected with communities. I would imagine many young people in my generation, especially those who went to liberal arts colleges, were given a similar story. It's important that young radicals think critically about everything that presents itself as an alternative to the system, especially when they are offering money.

How can we struggle against student loans?

Hey all - pardon the long absence, but things here have been rather intense. The housing establishment in Rhode Island, my employer included, have been busy selling us down the river, but that's another post...

A few weeks ago the Providence Journal ran a front page article on student loans and how students are getting reamed by the rising costs of higher education. Apparently the average cost of a private, 4 year college is now $34,132 (which is 3K less than what I was paying my first year of college, good times). And the number of students both public and private who are going into debt to afford higher education continues to grow. And with a deep recession in full swing, defaults on student loans are skyrocketing.

I believe a natural way to resist student debt is on the student side - fighting for lower and frozen tuition rates as well as more financial aid for students. Many chapters of Students for a Democratic Society have been at the forefront of demanding tuition-related changes (among other things) as part of the Student Power for Accessible Education Campaign.

But as the demands of the SPfAE campaign state, just like SDS itself, this isn't just about people currently in school. Goal #3 is debt cancellation for ALL student loans. Yet as far as I am aware there has been little collective struggle by college graduate to push for mass debt cancellation or for anything else student debt-related. This is a huge struggle, but a necessary one. We also have the opportunity to create radical change in the world! Student debt organizing seems a lot like foreclosure organizing:
-A LOT of people are affected by student debt. Not just students, but families of students as well
-There isn't a lot of sympathy for the bad guys in this situation - banks and lenders are getting massive bailouts with our money
-The problems affecting people are very serious, with a big impact on status of living. A huge student debt burden can make even renting impossible and take a big part of someone's paycheck
-The government is doing very little to solve the problem!

Of course, there are challenges as well. For example, much like the banks and lenders foreclosing on homes, student loan holders can be hard to target. While some people get loans from groups like Bank of America or Wells Fargo, there are companies like Nelnet working specifically in student loans that have few or no local offices. While there are many people dealing with the burden of student debt, they tend to be more scattered than people in the same neighborhood losing their homes while, like those struggling with foreclosure, they are dealing with a variety of different institutions. And unlike foreclosure resistance, the consequences for direct resistance (in this case, nonpayment) has the potential for more serious consequences than simply not moving from a home. Finally, there is a serious stigma against debtors in this country. Unlike the credit card crisis, student loans are not held by as many people in the US and as a result the tendency to "blame the victim" appears to be stronger.

So, how can we move forward on this? This is a work in progress, so I'm trying to think more about it. Thoughts?

Bailout? or FAILout?

In terms of shifting wealth from working people to the ultra-rich corporate elite, I would say that the massive amount of money being pumped into U.S. corporations by the government has been a huge success. AIG, Bank of America, Citicorp, U.S. Bank, and all of their cronies have made off with billions of dollars of our tax money and with little to no accountability or oversight. When this series of thefts were being "debated" in Congress, liberal paladins such as Sen. Christopher Dodd and Rep. Barney Frank (and Barack Obama, for that matter) wrung their hands and claimed they were "meeting a national crisis" and therefore had to pass something that was infuriating people around the nation. The necessity argument was put forth by most of the powerholders who handed our money to greedy corporate failures in the face of general outrage.

However, from the discussions I have had through my job, the working people here have not bought into this myth. The idea that banks that have received our money have an obligation to us is very much present in the minds of people who are being threatened by these very banks with the loss of their homes. And truly, the situation in this country is insane when you look at it with common sense. Consider:

-Banks that require our taxmoney to stay in business are throwing us out of our homes. They are using our money to do this.

-Banks are continuing to enforce the terms of predatory loans, even though these loans are illegal in many states now. This means that even if you were targeted for a loan you could never repay because of your race, age, and/or income, Bank of America is still demanding you pay that loan or lose your home.

-Banks are punishing workers who are laid off or have their hours cut by foreclosing on homeowners who can no longer afford their mortgages. The Bureau of Labor Statistics reported that in February, the average length of time someone in the US is unemployed is 19.8 weeks. That's almost 5 months - and unemployment in the US is skewed to look better than it actually is! A bank will generally begin the foreclosure process after three missed payments, meaning 3 months. Even if you have some money saved up, that's a huge burden on top of trying to pay all of the other bills and find a job!

-Banks are evicting tenants from their apartments for no other reason than they want it empty to sell it! These are people whose money is keeping these banks in business, and they are being forced out of their homes! Even if they are okay with leaving, many receive little or no compensation and very little time.

-The US government owns AIG - it has given $170 billion in our money to this sinkhole of corporate greed. In return, AIG has sent money to corporations that are already receiving bailout funds as well as gigantic multinational banks not even based in the US. On top of this, the company is awarding millions (perhaps over a billion) in bonuses to its executives! Let's keep in mind that the Obama administration put protection in the latest bailout specifically to protect corporate bonuses and that the man himself voted for the AIG bailouts! One of the fundamental contradictions in all of this is that the government, which owns 80% of AIG, is saying that it cannot (read: will not) do anything to stop these bonuses. This is "privatizing gains and socializing losses" at its most obvious.

-Let's not forget that high-profile liberals associated with the bailout such as Chris Fraud and Barney Bank have both received a huge amount of money and exceptional mortgages from banks and corporations who are now being held up by our money.

What are we seeing as a result of this insanity? Bank losses are socialized - meaning workers have to pay for their greedy practices - while the profits of executives at these banks is protected as a private gain that the government has no right to touch. This has always been the case - it's how capitalism works, and companies and investors have been bailed out for hundreds of years - but never has it been so high-profile and so massive. People are extremely angry at what their money is being used for, especially considering that the foreclosure and unemployment rates are accelerating all over the country. The banks and mortgage companies, along with other massive corporations, are on the giving end of all of this, and it's the poor and working people here who are getting plowed under.

So what is happening in this country? Conservatives who for the last 8 years built this monster (with the help or consent of many liberals) are now able to sit back and play the populist card against people like Barney Frank and Christopher Dodd even as they halt the taxation of the AIG bonuses in Congress. The Obama administration is now worried over a popular backlash against its pro-wealthy priorities. Consider the following quote:

"The change now is you have a free floating economic anxiety that has expressed itself in a kind of lashing out in those being bailed out and people who are bailing out," Michael Kazin, a professor at Georgetown University who has written extensively on populism. "There's not really a sense of what the solution is.

"I do think there's a potential for a damn-everybody-in-power kind of sentiment," Kazin said.

This analysis is not uncommon. In Britain, police are preparing for a long, violent 'summer of rage' as many of those most affected by the global recession take to the streets. Will we see the same thing in the US? One can imagine the possibilities if we can successfully build a movement out of the anger and pessimism about people in power!

The secret lives of banks and mortgage companies, pt. 2

In my last post on this subject, I mentioned that banks and mortgage companies almost always choose to kick families out of their homes after foreclosure - even if they are paying tenants. Having knocked on many doors with a fellow organizer since my last update, I cannot begin to relate the amount of situations we've run into with people facing eviction from their homes. For the purposes of this post, however, I will say that those directly impacted by foreclosure in Providence (and elsewhere, I would venture) are predominantly Hispanic people with low incomes. Neighborhoods which fit this demographic - among them the West End, Olneyville, Silver Lake, Upper and Lower South Providence - also tend to be highest in foreclosures. Decimated streets such as Hanover and Ford, rife with destroyed, empty three-family homes are a monument to the War on the Poor and the War on poor people of color in particular.

As with so many other things, undocumented people are particularly oppressed by post-foreclosure evictions. It seems to me reasonable to assume that all the confusion and distortion that surrounds tenant rights after foreclosure among documented people is also found among people who lack papers. However, there is also a strong and understandable fear of both seeking help from groups outside of the community confrontation with authorities such as the bank or the government. Rhode Island's racist governor, with support from the overwhelmingly Democratic General Assembly, has issued an executive order stepping up police actions against suspected undocumented people (read: cops harassing and detaining brown people). Documents from mortgage servicers are intimidating and almost always in English. And even if an undocumented person wanted to move out, money received through cash-for-keys is counted as taxable income and thus requires either a Social Security number or Individual Taxpayer Identification Number (ITIN). Given all of this it is easy to imagine that many people say nothing and continue to be exploited by landlords who collect rent after foreclosure and simply pack up and leave once they receive an eviction notice (if not before).

How is it possible for people to get organized in such a climate? This goes beyond systems of support - we're talking standing up and fighting back. I can't answer this question, because in part it's not mine to answer. I will say that until people start taking direct action, the racist power structure in Rhode Island will continue to tyrannize the people of this state. This is a struggle that's beyond fighting for a place to live - this is about living with dignity and safety wherever you choose to.

The secret lives of banks and mortgage companies, pt. 1

The anonymity of banks and servicers in the foreclosure crisis is terrifying, and it allows them to commit a multitude of abuses which go largely unnoticed and unpunished. Working with people facing foreclosure and eviction in Rhode Island, one observes how banks and mortgage companies take full advantage of our Dickensian dearth of laws protecting tenant and homeowners. Here are some of the most flagrant examples - these are real people I have spoken to over the course of my outreach.

Some quick notes: cash for keys is offered by a bank to a tenant as an incentive for the tenant to move without the bank having to go to court to evict that person. An eviction will cost the bank around $2000 per family they throw out of their home, so this is in their interest, and most will lowball tenants as much as possible (you may be offered as little as $500 to move in a very short amount of time). Not all banks offer cash-for-keys.

Banks and lenders are not required to evict tenants or homeowners after foreclosure, but as a rule the overwhelming majority choose to do so. Foreclosed homes sit vacant for months, and are often vandalized (pictures to come soon).

-Yolanda was the last tenant in a three-family apartment building that had been foreclosed by HSBC, a multinational bank. Her landlord ran away with her security deposit, and she was unable to get in touch with him. The bank offered her $500 to move out in 24 hours. She did not accept, as this was totally unreasonable for a mother of three who needed to find another affordable apartment. They then offered $400, then nothing. The bank shut the water off to the house - a "self-help eviction" to force her out which the bank had "looked into" and found to be legal in RI. The servicer - First American REO Servicing based out of Denver, told her that the shutoff wasn't their problem, and that she needed to leave her apartment. Needing to take care of her children and facing an apartment infested with cockroaches, Yolanda moved out. The house, located in a high-foreclosure neighborhood, was vandalized soon after and her belongings there were stolen. When I called First American they said they could only offer $800, but when pressed relented and offered the $1600 Yolanda wanted if she would leave by the end of the month and the apartment was in "broom-swept" condition.

-We spoke to a woman who is living in her third foreclosed apartment in a few block radius. She had moved into the three-family apartment on Sorrento St. only last month, and was in the process of fixing it up when we knocked on her door. All of her landlords have stolen her security deposits, and her most recent landlady took this woman into her house when the landlady was already in default on her mortgage. When we talked to the people in the apartment building, the landlady called her and told her that we were lying about the house being in foreclosure and that she needed to keep paying rent. Tenants do not need to be told about a foreclosure under RI law, allowing landlords to collect rent illegally for months and run away with deposits before the tenants even know what's going on. This woman has three children and one on the way. All three families in this building stand to be evicted and RI does not have "just cause" eviction, meaning that banks and lenders do not have to prove anything to have someone evicted once they own the house. The foreclosing lender is Saxon Mortgage.

-Virgilio is a (former) landlord that we've been speaking with is facing eviction from his home, which was foreclosed by predatory lender American Home Mortgage Services (formerly Option One). At the time that he went into default (stopped paying) on his adjustable-rate mortgage, he was paying around $3000 a month. This is not an uncommon amount, and many long-time homeowners who refinanced with the wrong company during the real estate "boom" have faced similar payments as their interest rates "reset". The lender that exploited Virgilio is now forcing him out of his home. He is on disability and suffers from severe depression; his son is successful in high school basketball but his father has no idea where they'll live. His money depleted by months of unfair loan servicing and a cut in his disability benefits, he cannot afford to rent without Section 8 (subsidized) housing but cannot find any in the state without a long waiting list. He is seeking cash for keys, but the servicer, Westcott Properties, informed me that AHMS rarely offers it and when it does only gives around $500. The woman I spoke to complained about being yelled at by Virgilio and informed me that she had around 100 cases to deal with (they're a local servicer). AHMS/Option One/their parent company H&R Block was recently forced by courts in Massachusetts to give 45 day notice on foreclosures initiated by them so the court may examine whether the loan was predatory. This essentially forces the company to negotiate with the borrower to modify the loan (fix the interest rate, lower the payment plan, etc.). We have no such law to sue with in RI. Virgilio's court date for eviction is December 12th.

more to come...