It would probably be the lesser of two evils, and probably cost less. True collaboration among these agencies, not turf guarding, could be constructive in theory.

In my naive way, I was sort of hoping for a meeting of the minds to develop an inter-agency common sense (chuckle) way to protect seniors from predators (family members, salespeople, etc.), not just regarding RMs but all other areas. I also believe in the Easter bunny.

I seriously doubt that reverse mortgages are very much on the minds of those members of the House who have been working on or debating the bill that would create the CFPA. Perhaps the attention of a few staffers can be gotten to assure there will be no unintended adverse consequences for RMs and the companies that originate them.

The responsibilities of the new CFPA would be duplicative of a number of existing agencies, which would be stripped of some their turf. The intent of the Minnick amendment is admirable (why create an entirely new bureaucracy?); however, in my mind, the powers intended for CFPA should be vested in a single, existing Executive Branch department or agency, which means not the Fed (which is not part of the Executive Branch).

HECM_Dude,

Good legislative ideas usually end up with less than desirable results. Idealism is fine but it rarely pans out. HERA should have made that clear. The original idea was to modernize FHA – a good idea – but then it ended up with our seeing maximum origination fees reduced – less than desirable results.

If you did not believe that any person in Congress had us in mind, please read the amendment to the CFPA legislation which is presented in today’s RMD article (12/11/2009) which was posted just minutes before you made this post. On legislative matters it is better not to be quite so naïveté.