[email protected]

NAACP, Wells Fargo and Kansas City Blues

The NAACP kicked off its 101st annual convention on Saturday at the Kansas City Convention Center.

 

Some are singing the blues because President Barack Obama decided to skip the convention.

The Senate is expected to vote on sweeping financial reform legislation this week.

It would have been awkward for Obama to talk about the need to change the way the financial sector does business at a convention whose lead sponsor is Wells Fargo.

The reckless practices of Wells Fargo and other bailed-out banksters triggered the financial crisis that drove the economy into a ditch.

Although Wells Fargo is being sued by several cities for targeting African Americans with subprime loans, the predator lender looms large over the convention.

While the NAACP stonewalls on the terms of its “partnership” with the predatory lender, the Associated Press reports Wells Fargo “will be at the convention talking to borrowers about modifying loan terms.”

If Wells Fargo’s record on loan modifications is any indication, it will be just that – talk.

Consider: An analysis by ProPublica found the federal government’s loan modification program, Making Home Affordable, is “still sputtering.” The $75 billion foreclosure prevention program is administered by the Treasury Department.

To date, only 23.8 percent of Wells Fargo’s borrowers have received a permanent loan modification. Nearly 50 percent have had their temporary modification canceled.

Reports vary as to the number of people at the convention. An indeterminable number are Wells Fargo borrowers.

How many NAACP convention-goers will have their loan modified after their talk with a housing counselor? Few, if any.

The “Financial Freedom Campaign Center” is little more than a fig leaf to cover up a partnership that benefits only certain people.

The NAACP is convening in the “Show Me” state, but it has yet to show the African American community how hooking up with Wells Fargo is in their interest.

Transparency for Thee, but Not for NAACP

Two weeks ago, I wrote a post about Wells Fargo’s sponsorship of the NAACP’s 101st annual convention that ignited a controversy. The heat from bloggers smoked out NAACP President and CEO Benjamin Todd Jealous.

Ben defended the NAACP’s partnership with Wells Fargo on the grounds the agreement “improves their practices and increases their transparency in ways that go far beyond what we could win in court.”

But there’s nothing groundbreaking about an agreement that commits Wells Fargo to doing what it says it is already doing.

Don’t take my word for it. Click here for “Wells Fargo & Co. Responsible Lending Principles for Consumer Credit.” The page was last updated Oct. 1, 2009.

Also, Wells Fargo has had an African American Business Services program since 1998.

As previously noted, I know Ben. I should also note that Ben has called me, but I have not returned his call. The reason: I don’t want to hear that I should trust him and not my lying eyes.

Instead, Ben should just answer the questions:

How do the “fair mortgage lending principles” differ from Wells Fargo’s Responsible Lending Principles for Consumer Credit?

Was a formal partnership agreement signed? If so, how will it be enforced?

Does the NAACP have the resources to examine the lending practices of the fourth-largest U.S. bank with more than 27,000 employees?

How will the NAACP be able to succeed when the Treasury Department, after a $25 billion $36.9 billion bailout, has not been able to get Wells Fargo to change its behavior towards struggling homeowners or increase access to capital for small businesses?

The Service Employees International Union’s profile of Wells Fargo states:

• Wells Fargo put taxpayers on the hook for up to $36.9 billion in bailout funds and programs plus an unknown amount from the Federal Reserve's $8 trillion in emergency programs. This money was supposed to help the banks get the economy going again. But little of this money has gone to relieve struggling homeowners and increase the flow of credit to small businesses.
• Despite its large portfolio of at risk mortgages, Wells Fargo has started trial mortgage modifications for only 11% of its 292,515 borrowers who are eligible for the Obama Administration’s Making Home Affordable Program (and are at least 60 days past due). At Wachovia, which Wells Fargo acquired in 2008, the number is even lower, 2% of 74,231 eligible borrowers.

SEIU should demand that the NAACP answer the questions. After all, SEIU is mobilizing support for the “Showdown on K Street.”

SEIU and allies will call out lobbyists for Big Bank -- Bank of America, Citigroup, Goldman Sachs, JPMorgan Chase and Wells Fargo -- who are using campaign contributions to weaken financial regulatory reform.

The New York Times reports the NAACP and SEIU are organizing a rally in October to “create momentum for President Obama and Congress to enact more progressive-minded legislation on jobs, a financial overhaul and other matters.”

In his blog post, Ben wrote the NAACP paid a price for filing the lawsuit against Wells Fargo:

It was not without a price. Just before I did so, I informed our board that we would need to revise down our corporate revenue projections because we would be bringing lawsuits against corporate supporters . . . .

[...]

Wells Fargo stopped supporting our national events shortly after we announced the suit.

Ben asserted the agreement “does not interfere with but complements lawsuits brought by cities which are largely for remunerative damages.”

We now know dropping the lawsuit has been remunerative for the NAACP. But the civil rights organization has not disclosed how much remuneration it has received from Wells Fargo.

In addition to sponsoring the annual convention, Wells Fargo is a co-sponsor of the upcoming Leadership 500 Summit.

There is no such thing as free money. The question remains: What is Wells Fargo getting in exchange for its corporate support?

NAACP, Wells Fargo and a Banker’s Heart

Outside of Bank of America’s former headquarters in San Francisco, there is a sculpture that locals have dubbed a “banker’s heart.”

The NAACP has come under fire for its “partnership” with cold-hearted Wells Fargo, which is being sued by states and municipalities for discriminatory and predatory mortgage lending practices.

Up until a few weeks ago, Wells Fargo was in the NAACP’s cross hairs.

Now, the “unequal opportunity lender” is in the NAACP’s embrace.

After being put on blast by Dr. Boyce Watkins and me, NAACP President and CEO Benjamin Jealous responded:

The NAACP agreed to end our lawsuit against Wells Fargo because we successfully negotiated an agreement that improves their practices and increases their transparency in ways that go far beyond what we could win in court. (Click here to read the NAACP's Countering Lending Discrimination Report).

Wells Fargo’s signature on our banking principles - with measures to hold the bank accountable - implement practices that guarantee: (a.) full disclosure of rates, (b.) borrowers will only be offered products they can understand and afford, (c.) no consumer will be targeted based on zip codes and race, and (d.) diversity amongst their suppliers and employees.

Most importantly, the extra transparency allows us to ensure accountability and that the principles are being followed.

If an unenforceable agreement were enough to force a predatory lender to have a heart, there would be no need for financial reform.

And President Barack Obama would not be pushing for an independent consumer financial protection agency.

A White House fact sheet on financial reform and African Americans notes:

Too many responsible African American families have paid the price for an outdated regulatory system that left our financial system vulnerable to collapse and left families without adequate protections. The Obama Administration’s plan will promote financial stability and protect African American families from the unfair practices that contributed to this crisis. The plan will establish a new consumer financial protection agency, which will have the power to set clear rules of the road and ensure that financial firms are held to high standards.

Call me skeptical, but I do not believe the NAACP will be able to hold Wells Fargo accountable. It is axiomatic that he who pays the piper calls the tunes.

BTW, I was called worse by the NAACP’s PR flack. But her defamatory comments merely strengthen my commitment to accountability reporting.

The NAACP’s 101st annual convention will be held in Kansas City, which has a vibrant blues scene. That’s the reason I visited their website to confirm the dates.

I’m a blues lover but “I’d rather drink muddy water, sleep out in a hollow log” before I attend a convention whose lead sponsor has a banker’s heart.

NAACP Hooks Up With Wells Fargo

In 2007, I applauded when the NAACP filed a class action lawsuit against 15 of the nation’s largest subprime lenders for “systematic, institutionalized racism in sub-prime home mortgage lending.”

The defendants included Wells Fargo Bank & Company.

Though Well Fargo’s role in the subprime mortgage scheme was well-known, the predatory lender was the “title sponsor” of Tavis Smiley’s annual talkfest.

Smiley claimed ignorance. He finally severed his ties with Wells Fargo when the glare of media spotlight got too hot.

NAACP President and CEO Benjamin Jealous was an outspoken critic of Wells Fargo. So you can imagine my surprise when earlier this month, I read the NAACP dropped its lawsuit against the predatory lender:

The NAACP announced today that it is ending its lawsuit against Wells Fargo Bank, N.A. Since 2007, the NAACP has filed lawsuits against more than a dozen of the largest financial institutions alleging violations of the Fair Housing and Equal Credit Opportunity Acts and racial discrimination.

Unlike other pending lawsuits that seek monetary damages on behalf of individual borrowers, the NAACP lawsuits seek to change mortgage lending industry behaviors.

So what did the NAACP get? Wells Fargo endorsed the NAACP’s “Banking Principles on Fairness and Lending.”

Jealous said:

We brought these lawsuits against lenders to change and stop patterns of racial discrimination and other mortgage lending behaviors that have shattered American lives, families, and neighborhoods. We developed the NAACP banking principles to ensure that our country moves toward higher rates of sustainable homeownership. We commend Wells Fargo for taking a leadership role by being the first to embrace our principles, and hope this effort becomes a model for collaborating with other financial institutions.

Query: how will the NAACP enforce the agreement?

Jon Campbell, Wells Fargo’s executive vice president for social responsibility, told the New York Times it will be a while before there’s any change in their lending practices:

But now we have a partner, and we can look at ourselves through their lens. Will there be tweaks? We hope so.

So that’s what the NAACP got? Hope.

The NAACP is headquartered in Baltimore. On the same day the civil rights organization dropped its lawsuit, the City of Baltimore filed an amended federal complaint accusing Wells Fargo of steering blacks into subprime mortgages.

City Solicitor George Nilson said:

Our purpose in bringing this lawsuit remains the same as it always has been. We intend to expose Wells Fargo’s illegal, discriminatory practices to the light of day in a court of law. We want to make sure Wells Fargo reforms its lending practices, and takes specific, constructive steps to assist the City in repairing the damage caused by the many unnecessary foreclosures its irresponsible practices caused.

Fast forward to yesterday. I visited the NAACP’s website to confirm the dates of its annual convention. I nearly spilled my coffee when I saw this banner.

 

While no money changed hands on April 7, Wells Fargo is now a “lead sponsor” of the NAACP’s 101st annual convention.

Less than two weeks ago, Jealous participated in the “Measuring the Movement” national leadership forum. The air was filled with talk of holding “everyone accountable from government to our own institutions.”

Will the NAACP be held accountable for its relationship with a predatory lender?

Or was all the talk more hot air?

State of Black America 2010

At a press conference at the Newseum in Washington, DC, the National Urban League released its annual report, “State of Black America 2010: Responding to the Jobs Crisis,” a fact-based analysis of the problems facing the African American community and innovative solutions to address joblessness and minority business development.

Urban League President and CEO Marc Morial said:

What is at stake for black America in 2010? We are at a time of, one, crisis. And we are at a time of crossroads … We are at a time of crisis because we cannot yield a blind eye…to the manner in which this recession has affected our community.

[…]

We’re here today because we want to send the most powerful message, the strongest message possible. That a nation that can invest trillions of dollars bailing out banks on Wall Street can and should pass a jobs bill that helps out-of-work Americans.

Morial called for targeted programs and initiatives to help the chronically unemployed.

A new report from the Joint Economic Committee found that “though African Americans make up 11.5 percent of the labor force, they account for 17.8 percent of the unemployed, 20.3 percent of those unemployed for more than six months, and 22.1 percent of the workers unemployed for a year or more.”

He debunked the notion of a “black jobs bill.” Instead, emphasis should be placed on communities where the unemployment and poverty rates are high:

If the Department of Transportation doesn’t enforce its minority business goals and the Department of Labor doesn’t fund apprenticeship programs so that people in our communities [can get jobs], than these initiatives could bypass our communities. We cannot yield on the principle that targeting is a very important part of policy.

Morial questioned how we can commit $53 billion for a reconstruction plan for Baghdad, but there’s no money to put people to work in Baltimore, Boston and Binghamton:

If you can do it for Baghdad, why not cities right here? If you can do it for the banks, why not do it for the cities … It’s time for Washington and America to focus on jobs, jobs, jobs.

He asked his members to contact their representatives and urge them to co-sponsor the “Local Jobs for America Act” (H.R. 4812), which would create or save one million jobs in the hard-hit communities:

Our voices need to be about a plan. But they also need to be about priorities. America has to be about the priority of putting people back to work.

To help move the black agenda -- jobs, jobs, jobs -- make your voices heard. Contact your representative and senators and make some noise.

A Black Agenda? Yes, We Can!

I viewed a live stream of the latest iteration of Tavis Smiley’s talkfest, “We Count! The Black Agenda is the American Agenda.”

Given the givens, I expected little more than infotainment. So, I was pleasantly surprised by the thoughtful critique of President Barack Obama and the proposed solutions to the jobless crisis in the African American community.

It’s a reflection of black folks’ confusion in the Age of Obama that African American scholars, thought leaders and political influentials have to defend answering the question: Is there a need for a black agenda?

By contrast, Latino leaders and illegal immigrant advocates show no such confusion. They criticize Obama without apology. And they have the audacity to march on Washington and demand that Obama focus on their agenda ahora.

 
Though I oppose comprehensive immigration reform amnesty, I agree with the open borders crowd: Change takes courage.

Chicago alderman Dorothy Tillman, an early supporter of then-candidate Barack Obama, observed:

We have a responsibility to bring the question to the President of the United States. When you look at black people today, I’ve never seen black folks so fearful and scared. Black folks are in pain. And this is the first time since we’ve been in this country that we’ve been in pain and scared to do something about it.

[…]

When Obama says a rising tide lifts all boats, he means it. But the descendants of enslaved Africans have a different experience . . . When it comes to blacks, they tell us to shut up.

Georgetown Prof. Michael Eric Dyson refuses to shut up. Dyson reminded Obama that he’s an American, too:

You are the president of everybody. That includes me. I’m from Detroit. I don’t have to be white to be part of America.

Dyson added:

Latinos asked for something, and they got something. Gays and lesbians said: “Don’t ask, don’t tell, change it.” Our Jewish brothers and sisters said, “Deal with Israel,” you deal with them.

Why is it when it comes to Negroes . . . when it comes to black folks, we are suddenly persona non grata? I tell you that every president before you has had to deal with the black agenda. How are you going to be any different?

The panelists’ criticism was cloaked “in love.” But what’s love got to do with it.

The issue is whether African Americans will remain silent and hope “a rising economic tide for all will lift African-American boats.”

Obama’s FY 2011 budget, meanwhile, provides funds to “expand opportunities” for the lesbian, gay, bisexual and transgender community.

The bottom line: Constituency groups, including women, Asian and Pacific Islanders and Native Americans, are not waiting. They are demanding that Obama focus on their agenda. Right now.

No Ford in New York’s Future

Like most native New Yorkers, I don’t know much about cars. But I do know that New Yorkers would rather buy a Ford Edsel than hitch a ride with Harold Ford Jr.

In a new Quinnipiac poll, Sen. Kirsten Gillibrand leads Ford 2-1.

www.colbertnation.com

Ford is the chairman of the Democratic Leadership Council, which the Rev. Jesse Jackson Sr. derisively referred to as the “Democratic Leisure Council.”

A darling of Wall Street banksters who has never voted in New York, Ford could not find his way to “Chinatown or on Riverside” without a helicopter pilot.

President Barack Obama recently observed:

Bankers don’t need another vote in the United States Senate. They’ve got plenty.

If Ford wants to represent banksters, he should waltz his you-know-what back to Tennessee.