Newt Gingrich is now the front runner in a discordant Republican primary process as beautiful as angry alligators mating in a swamp or birds fighting over a smeared hamburger wrapper from a fast food dumpster. One might think that troubled times at home and abroad would bring forth American citizens from great traditions of military service, public service, economics, science or notable business careers. Instead Republicans have a field of flawed candidates. If these candidates somehow managed to slip into a conference of distinguished Americans they would be seated at a table by themselves in the corner of the banquet hall fighting over rolls and butter like a flock or voracious grackles. What is the cause of such low brow Republican candidates and a selection process which seems to go against our better nature? Why an ugly bird like Gingrich? 

The Democratic victories in yesterday's elections coupled with the recent birth of the Occupy movement seem to be evidence of a different political climate than we had even two or three months ago. It appears that we are out of the doldrums, a bit of a wind in the mainsail. I am tempted to meld all the different events into a pattern, disregarding the nature of the separate events. I want to say things like, "changed perceptions got people up off the couch," "now Democrats have a new reality," as if there were clear relationships between cause and effect. But it's not that easy. If my car stopped on the freeway because it "ran out of gas", contingent causes might be that my gas gage was broken and I was too cheap to repair it. But aside from the complexities of cause and effect and the invention of new realities, why do Democrats seem to have things going their way? 

I spent the last two days away from home on a job site in Tulsa. One of my clients was considering switching to a competitor. I have a "resource recovery" company---or, put another way, we scrounge the back lots of industrial plants looking for commodities which can be recycled and re-used. Our employees are well trained and long term and they do well on earnings. They drive our trucks and equipment to remote locations. and my insurance company requires drug testing. Because we control costs and like to make a bit of a profit there is a limit on how much we'll spend for a motel. When I'm on the road, which I don't enjoy, I stay where my workers stay.

Heartbreak Motel sits on the intersection of two truck routes. The four corners are a stark melding of the food chain and the employment ladder. On one corner is a convenience store and cash-only gas station---the bottom rung of life in a gritty America.  Outside, behind the store, four homeless people stand around a compressor smoking and making ready for the night with pieces of card board to sleep on. A police car idles two hundred feet away, pointed in their direction. I say to hell with it and walk over to the store. A small bottle of milk and some cookies might come in handy if I wake up at the motel in the middle of the night and have the creeps. As I try to go into the store a guy forces me off the sidewalk. I ignore him. Coming back out a woman blocks my path, "Are you stayin' over there for the night?"

The fire bloggers are already on "Obama's Plan" like flies on Schweddy Balls ice cream. There's so much chatter and misinformation about this plan that I hesitate to write this post and add to the problem. But certain facts seem to be clear and I'm advising an underwater guy in Vermont, so here's a quick take.

HARP is an Obama Administration plan, adopted and implemented by FHFA in 2009. It has produced about 900,000 re-finances, far less than projected. The Administration's potential influence over the FHFA is by appointment of the Director, with approval by Congress. Through a series of half steps, Ed DeMarco, appointed originally by Bush has risen to the top and appears irreplaceable. DeMarco would rival Peterson and Norquist as having the most power in Washington outside any given elected official.

The FHFA website gives the specifics of the revised rules regarding HARP. By the way, you can look up your loan there to determine if it is in fact guaranteed by one of the GSEs and if it was purchased prior to 2009 - two of the entrance requirements in qualifying for HARP - and a source of the smell sensed by fire bloggers. The program excludes a lot or worthy would-be refinancers. One of the headlines of this refi makeover is that there is now no limit on "how far underwater" one can be to still participate. Previously, the Loan-To-Value (LTV) had already been raised to 125% - but there were only 72,000 refinanced loans with  LTVs over 105%.  (A property appraised at $100K with a $105K loan has an LTV of 105%)