Tag Archives: civil rights

• Bankrate.com -Debt merry-go-round & Shopping for a home equity loan


**Jumping off the debt merry-go-round**

Steve BucciQuestion

Dear Debt Adviser,

Jumping off the debt merry-go-round By Steve Bucci

I have around $15,000 in credit card debt from college. I’m approximately five to six years from my last use of these two cards, which have since been charged off. Assuming the seven-year point rolls around, what are my steps to ensuring these charges don’t follow me?

I understand the immorality of not paying a debt, but I haven’t been able to save enough to really make a substantial effort in paying it off. I fear I will get caught in a never-ending, $100-a-month payoff plan.

— Kyle

AnswerDear Kyle,
It sounds like you need some help with your savings plan. My guess is that if you haven’t been able to save enough in five or six years to pay off your credit cards, then I’ll bet you haven’t been able to save very much at all. So, let me tackle your savings issue first, and then I’ll get to your very correct fear of a long-term, dysfunctional relationship with the collections process.

Saving money is not optional. If you want to be successful today, you can’t just save what’s left over at the end of each pay cycle. You need to have a plan to spend, a plan to save, and you need to do the saving before you spend. Low savings will force you to use credit, and in your case getting new credit may be problematic every time you hit a bump in life. A car accident, mechanical repair, illness, leaky pipe … you name it. Without savings, how do you handle it? Not well. Especially as you get older and accumulate more bumps in the road of life.

My suggestion is to immediately begin to put away a set amount each pay period based on a spending plan that includes savings. Every time you get a raise, promotion, tax refund or birthday gift of money, I want you to put half in the emergency savings fund and keep half for current expenses. Saving money that you don’t have yet is my favorite way of accumulating six months of expenses in an emergency account.

Now, on to your debt situation: The seven-year period you are referring to is the time frame for reporting your credit card accounts on your credit report. Negative information generally must be removed after seven years. But you still owe the money.

Collections businesses are big in the United States. There is a large and active market in uncollected debt that is sold and resold as the debt ages to increasingly aggressive buyers. So you can expect to hear from debt collectors for a very long time after the seven-year reporting period is over.

Another time frame you will want to be familiar with is the statute of limitations, or SOL, for collecting debt in your state. However, if your debt is beyond the SOL in your state, collectors can still call you and mail you in an attempt to collect what is owed. You can tell them you know about the statute in your state and you have no intention of paying. However, they can just resell your debt to the next collector.

As I see it, you have several choices. You can wait for the statute of limitations to run out and ignore the phone calls and collection attempts from the collectors, you can deal with the collectors on your own or through an attorney, you can file bankruptcy or you can work out a way to pay what you owe.

For complete closure on this part of your financial life, I suggest saving as much money as possible for the next six to 12 months and then contacting the creditors to explore a settlement for the amount you have saved. Be sure to get any settlement agreement in writing before you make a payment. Should you be contacted by collection companies regarding the accounts that were settled, you will need to simply forward them a copy of the settlement agreement. Whatever you do, start saving seriously and you won’t have to fear collectors ever again.

Get weekly advice on slashing debt and debt consolidation tips. Subscribe to Credit Card News.

Ask the adviser

To ask a question of the Debt Adviser, go to the “Ask the Experts” page, and select “Debt” as the topic. Read more Debt Adviser columns and more stories about debt management.

Bankrate’s content, including the guidance of its advice-and-expert columns and this website, is intended only to assist you with financial decisions. The content is broad in scope and does not consider your personal financial situation. Bankrate recommends that you seek the advice of advisers who are fully aware of your individual circumstances before making any final decisions or implementing any financial strategy.  Please remember that your use of this website is governed by Bankrate’s Terms of Use.

Tips on shopping for a home equity loan

By Donna Fuscaldo • Bankrate.com

Plummeting home values and tougher lending standards make getting a home equity loan tougher than in the past. But it isn’t a lost cause if you improve your credit score and shop around cautiously.

Qualifying for a home equity loan and getting the best rate depend on several factors, including your home’s current value and your credit score. The better your credit score, the better your chance of getting a home equity loan.

To improve your credit score, avoid making late payments, pay off your credit cards and be patient. The longer you can prove you are a responsible borrower, the more faith the lender will have in you.

Don’t forget to check periodically to make sure everything on your credit report is accurate. Under the Fair Credit Reporting Act, you have the right to dispute any inaccuracies on your credit report.

Keep trying

Don’t just assume that because one bank turned you down, you’re out of luck. Try several banks. Many community banks, credit unions, and savings and loan associations also have cash and want to lend.

When looking for a home equity loan, be mindful of high-cost lenders or what the Federal Deposit Insurance Corp. calls “predatory lenders.” If the offer is unsolicited or seems too good to be true, chances are it’s not true.

Before signing a home equity loan, contact multiple lenders and rely on recommendations from family and friends. Comparison shopping is one of the best methods of protecting yourself when shopping for a home equity loan.

News alert Create a news alert for “home equity”

JUSTICE: Uncertainty Around DADT


Last week, the Justice Department asked Judge Virginia Phillips to stay her broad injunction barring the military from enforcing the Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell policy until it has an opportunity to appeal the decision to the U.S. Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals. In the appeal notice that accompanied the stay request, the government argued that ending enforcement of the policy “before the appeal in this case has run its course will place gay and lesbian servicemembers in a position of grave uncertainty.” “If the Court’s decision were later reversed, the military would be faced with the question of whether to discharge any servicemembers who have revealed their sexual orientation in reliance on this Court’s decision and injunction,” the government wrote. “Such an injunction therefore should not be entered before appellate review has been completed.” Meanwhile, the Department of Defense has also issued new orders via email late Thursday afternoon “informing all five branches of the military that they must comply with an injunction ordered by a federal judge” until the judge grants the government’s request. The Pentagon warned gay and lesbian servicemembers against changing their behavior in the interim. “We note for servicemembers that altering their personal conduct in this legally uncertain environment may have adverse consequences for themselves or others should the court’s decision be reversed,” Under Secretary of Defense for personnel and readiness Clifford Stanley wrote on Thursday.

FRUSTRATION OVER APPEAL: DOJ‘s appeal of the decision comes after intense lobbying from House and Senate Democrats — including House Speaker Nancy Pelosi (D-CA) — to allow the recent ruling to stand. As DADT scholar Nathaniel Frank explained, “The court case, I think, is one of the more likely now, for the President to say, this actually is unconstitutional and although there is a tradition of defending standing law, it’s not obligated to defend a policy that it believes is unconstitutional.” President Obama has previously implied that DADT is constitutional and Republicans and two Democrats successfully filibustered repeal in the Senate (the measure passed the House in May). But Obama has consistently argued that he would continue to try to repeal DADT through the legislative process to accommodate the work of the Pentagon’s ongoing review. “I don’t think it’s too much to ask, to say ‘Let’s do this in an orderly way’ — to ensure, by the way, that gays and lesbians who are serving honorably in our armed forces aren’t subject to harassment and bullying and a whole bunch of other stuff once we implement the policy,” Obama told Rolling Stone magazine in late September. The appeal comes a day after Secretary of Defense Robert Gates warned that ending the ban is “an action that needs to be taken by the Congress and that it is an action that requires careful preparation, and a lot of training.” “It has enormous consequences for our troops,” Gates said, ignoring research by the Center for American Progress’ Larry Korb, Sean Duggan, and Laura Conley which has found that repeal is actually a simple process and has been completed without incident by many other countries, including some of our closest allies.

MILITARY RESISTANT TO CHANGE: Gates, along with other military leaders, has resisted and delayed changing the policy before the Pentagon releases its review of the ban during the first week of December. Following Gates’ remarks, The Palm Center established a website to track his prediction that the court’s decision to suspend the policy would have “enormous consequences,” including all reported instances of harm to unit cohesion, discipline and privacy that have arisen during this period of open gay service. “Now that the ban has been suspended, we are searching vigilantly for such consequences, and we will use the new web site as a hub for reporting what we find,” Palm Center Director Aaron Belkin said. Last week, the group also submitted a Freedom of Information Act request for all documentation of reported negative consequences of the suspension of DADT. Meanwhile, the Pentagon task force that has been studying the consequences of ending the policy, is “well along” in formulating its recommendations, and officials don’t expect ruling or the moratorium to affect its work. According to some military officials, “[t]he task force found deep resistance to the idea of repealing the law in some elements of the armed services, especially within the combat units, an officer familiar with the findings said. But the surveys also have found segments of the military who were not overly worried about allowing gays and lesbians to serve.”

ENDING THE BAN THROUGH CONGRESS: During an MTV/BET/CMT sponsored town hall on Thursday, Obama told young voters that the policy should be repealed by Congress, not through an executive order or the courts. Distinguishing himself from President Harry Truman — who desegregated the armed forces via executive order in 1948 — Obama explained that “the difference between my position right now and Harry Truman’s was that Congress explicitly passed a law that took away the power of the executive branch to end this policy unilaterally. So this is not a situation in which with a stroke of a pen I can simply end a policy.” Obama stressed that he’s been able to convince Gates and Joint Chiefs of Staff Chairman Mike Mullen to support repeal and promised that the policy would end “on my watch.” “But I do have an obligation to make sure that I’m following some of the rules,” Obama said. “I can’t simply ignore laws that are out there, I’ve got to work to make sure that they are changed.” On Thursday, White House Press Secretary Robert Gibbs promised that Obama would work to end the policy during the lame duck session of Congress, telling the Advocate’s Kerry Eleveld that the President would be “actively involved in that.” Obama should also suspend discharges using his stop loss authority, thus ending the discharges of qualified men and women during wartime.

A major announcement


Jack Conway and 200 Dems -- Social Security champs

Rand Paul, the Tea Party leader running against me for Senate in Kentucky, thinks Social Security is unconstitutional. Other Republicans across the nation are also campaigning on privatization and Social Security cuts.

With a Tea Party deep on the fringe, the way for Democrats to win in 2010 is to have a spine — and go on offense.

That’s why today, I am proud to announce with my friends at the Progressive Change Campaign Committee that over 200 congressional candidates and members of Congress are promising to oppose any cuts to Social Security.

We’re saying no privatization, no raising the retirement age, no messing with the best program for seniors and workers in American history — and no mincing words about it.

Can you show your support for Democrats who stand on principle and go “on offense” by signing a statement of support for today’s big move by 200 candidates? Click here.

We’ll make sure the political insiders and the media take notice of where the grassroots want Democratic leaders to be.

The PCCC has done a great job working with me and other Democratic candidates to go on offense on Social Security — and I’ve been taking the Social Security fight directly to Rand Paul in debates, speeches, and media events.

The 200 others include:

  • Senate candidates Scott McAdams (AK), Roxanne Conlin (IA), Lee Fisher (OH), Alexi Giannoulias (IL), Kendrick Meek (FL), Paul Hodes (NH), Elaine Marshall (NC), and others
  • House candidates Ann McLane Kuster (NH), Joe Garcia (FL), Bill Hedrick (CA), Rob Miller (SC), Julia Lassa (WI), Manan Trivedi (PA), Ed Potosnak (NJ), Michael Oliverio (WV), and others
  • Members of Congress Raul Grijalva (AZ), Mary Jo Kilroy (OH), Alan Grayson (FL), Michael Acuri (NY), Carol Shea-Porter (NH), Ed Potosnak (NJ), Bill Owens (NY), John Boccieri (OH), and others
  • The full list is at SocialSecurityProtectors.com

As Rachel Maddow would say, “This is what it looks like when Democrats go on offense.”

Can you support Democrats who stand on principle and go “on offense” by signing a statement of support for today’s big move by 200 candidates? Click here.

Then, please pass this email to your friends who want bold Democrats. Thanks for being a bold progressive.

Jack Conway

mindful Monday &some News


President and Mrs. Obama are hosting a Science Fair

Today.  I have been hearing more BS than ever from “the Media”  which is sad …people need to stop listening to the cable noise, the radio and get the facts -media opinion news is just that -an opinion!!- The Democratic and or President’s message that they speak of was not just held up by Republicans but cable and or mainstream tv that feature politics have held up the message  as well choosing to move more right of center each and every day as the Midterm elections come closer. I blame Republicans of course but the fact is”the Media” has to take some responsibility for their lack of getting any sort of fair and or balanced News from the Democratic Party out to the people wondering just what is the truth behind any story getting airtime. It is obvious that some people unfortunately believe the panel, guests or so-called experts who talk about an issue or a politician but ask yourself why don’t they just have the subject of discussion on for a rebuttal -that would be too easy right

I received and appreciate all the comments on the articles posted here. This week two articles got several responses but one person responded to two of them; one article was about Saving the Country, Murdoch style by MMA and the other was a response to one that came from Senator Barney Franck directly. My responses to both articles are below with some adjustments.

The first Comment was in response to Senator Barney Frank

(1)Well isn’t Barny the guy who said,  “it’s okay to have buddies with money”?  I guess he must of meant it was only okay if they were democrats.  So much for tolerance, eh?

Senator Frank is a politician and anyone with any sense knows that the fight is on to keep their seats in Congress and in doing so that not only means great campaigning, politicking or having the preferred ideology but money. If money meant nothing people would not be backing Angle, Fiorina, Whitman, Brewer, Palin or Christine O’Donnell because none of these embarrassing women are qualified to hold public office. I have no idea what you are asking me when you say – tolerance. The fact is people with or without money can be offensive.

Comment(2)

Tell me something, did you mind when Murdoch supported Hillary not so long ago? http://civillibertarian.blogspot.com/2006/05/rupert-murdoch-backs-hillary-clinton.html Do you have a problem …

Actually, my personal comments and or complaints when reading articles are about what I read first. I honestly do not care what side of the aisle the writer, journalist, cable and or mainstream view given to us by them is even though I am a democrat; I call them as i see them and when one side decides to push the envelope too far for me i respond… ah the wonders and need to tweet, FB or blog …and your comments about liberals having all the cable, major newspapers, magazines and whatnot …i know you are joking right? if you listen folks like Murdoch give to both sides of the issue and when one side becomes more of a commodity and gets more airtime he feeds it…everyone knows that -right? Again, people like him do not care just like the NRA they support 58 democrats as well as a whole lot of Republicans. What i do object to are the lies coming from Fox News the race baiting this station engages in …even CNN has moved right and that rhetoric though has 1st amendment on its side is offensive. As a person of colour and as a mom hearing Glenn beck send subliminal nonsense out into the airwaves with actual people choosing wrong instead of right -and people get hurt or worse …that is my prob. My sense of democracy means total cooperation from both sides of an economic collapse yet RTP has decided oh we will take all the money you’re handing out but we will vote no or scale it down as well as throw our own constituents under the bus to regain power -that is not democracy.

Other News …

**Best milk? Chocolate

**Sharron Angle makes some really ugly racist things to Hispanic High School Students

**Washington State- Election 2010 midterm information,tune in 10/19/2010  KING5 7pm

**President Obama will appear on Mythbusters to help kids excited about science

**Celine Dion hospitalized -baby is due next month

**Msnbc claims only 1/2 of the people who voted in 2008 election will be voting in the mid-terms

**Speaker Pelosi announces that the $250 bonus Soc.Sec checks will be voted on after Nov.2nd elections

**Chest pressures first then give breaths

**NOW backs jerry brown

**Federal tax credit ends 12/31

**11thousand cribs,made in China and sold at JCPenny 2003-2007 hardware problems

**did you know that Olympic College decided to ban the 1st Amendment



CSPAN …

Steven Rattner, Author 'Overhaul' Steven Rattner, Author ‘Overhaul’
Today
Pres. Obama & First Lady Michelle Obama at Ohio State Univ. Political Rally Pres. Obama & First Lady Michelle Obama at Ohio State Univ. Political Rally
Sunday
Texas Book Festival 2010 Texas Book Festival 2010
Saturday
Weekly Addresses Weekly Addresses
Saturday

RE: Russ Feingold



Donate now to keep Russ Feingold in the Senate
Donate NOW to keep Russ Feingold in the Senate

Russ Feingold’s opponent is Ron Johnson, a millionaire who’s spent $5.2 million of his own money trying to buy Russ’s Senate seat.

Ron Johnson supports NAFTA. He likes the Patriot Act. He thinks speaking out against the war is “extremely harmful to our nation.”

Lucky for us, Russ got Johnson to agree to three debates. Now Ron Johnson going to have to stand next to Russ and defend his extreme positions to Wisconsin voters.

FDL activists stepped up for Russ big time two weeks ago, raising more than $38,000 for his campaign. We want to show Russ and Wisconsin voters that ordinary people want to see Senator Feingold return to the Senate next year, not a self-funded millionaire.

The first debate is TONIGHT. Can you help us reach $50,000 for Russ? It’s critical we make a strong push for Russ right now. Click here to donate:

http://action.firedoglake.com/feingold

Russ stood alone and opposed the Patriot Act. He opposed FISA. He opposed the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan. And he’s done the same thing no matter who controls Congress or the White House. He always put principles before party.

Russ is locked in a tough battle, but he’s fighting hard. He’s got 22 field offices across Wisconsin, more than any campaign in country, and his supporters are working hard to turn out voters.

But a lot is riding on these debates. We want Russ to know going into them that we’ve got his back, so we set a goal of $50,000. We’re almost there – can you please chip in to make sure Russ Feingold can continue to fight for what’s right?

Russ was there for us when it was hard. Let’s be there for him. Click here to donate and help us get to $50,000 for Russ.

With your help, we’ll show Wisconsin voters that principle counts over party; that people power will prevail over a self-funded millionaire who wants to buy his way to the Senate.

Thanks for supporting Russ, and for all you do.

Jane Hamsher
FDL Action PAC