Obama's Mortgage Relief Program Provides Little Hope For Homeowners...Foreclosures

(NY Times) Billions To Fight Foreclosure, But Few New Loans



They milled about the hallways of the cavernous State Supreme Court building in Jamaica, Queens — 42 homeowners whispering, studying old bills, waiting for a court officer to call their names and wave them, one by one, through a door.

There, in a dusty, high-ceilinged room with a steam radiator that never stopped wheezing, they took a seat across a table from a lawyer for a mortgage company. Then their work began: trying to persuade a stranger not to foreclose on their home.

The Obama administration’s plan to rescue Americans from foreclosure plays out day after day in rooms like this. On this day, as on most, nothing happened. One lawyer, visibly bored, put in a brief, token appearance. A few others seemed barely familiar with their cases. Another asked for more records, hinting that maybe next month the lender might talk about a settlement.

Ismail Ali, a silver-haired immigrant from Guyana, hoped to save his home in Ozone Park. “If it takes you another three months to evaluate me, and I keep paying, will I get a new mortgage?” he asked, almost pleading.

The lawyer shrugged, not unsympathetically. “I can’t answer that for you,” he said.

Ten months ago President Obama announced a $75 billion program to keep as many as four million Americans in their homes by persuading banks to renegotiate their mortgages. Lenders have accepted more than one million applications and cut three-month trial deals with 759,000 homeowners. But they have converted just 31,000 of those to the permanent new mortgages that are the plan’s goal.

In New York City, where 20,000 homeowners faced foreclosure this year, a recent study by the Center for NYC Neighborhoods found that lenders have offered new or trial mortgages to just 3 percent of the homeowners who have sought help.

Big mortgage companies — servicers, in the parlance of the industry — stand at the heart of this program. Many of the servicers that have agreed to participate are subsidiaries of the nation’s largest banks — Wells Fargo, Bank of America and JPMorgan Chase.

They say their performance is improving. “We ourselves stated that we fell short of our customer service goals,” said Mary Coffin, executive vice president for loan servicing at Wells Fargo. “Now we are doing three modifications for every foreclosure.”

But a drove of critics, including homeowners, nonprofit loan counselors, legal services lawyers and court officials, say these companies are also at the heart of the problem. Servicers, they say, pile delay upon delay, and too often steer homeowners into new mortgages with onerous terms. Some companies have insisted that homeowners waive their right to sue before getting a new mortgage, even though the Obama plan prohibits such demands.

Administration officials have vowed to shame servicers into action. And New York State lawmakers, like their counterparts in a few other states and cities, have tried to slow the headlong hurtle toward foreclosure by requiring lenders to negotiate with troubled borrowers in court.

Leonard N. Florio, a court-appointed referee, oversees such sessions in that dusty room in Queens. He is a chatty man and punctilious about not taking sides. But as he watched Mr. Ali, the Ozone Park homeowner, load his piles of bills and receipts back into his shopping bags, he could not help noting a pattern.

“I have yet to see an attorney for a servicer cut a deal,” he said. “Update this, update that. I mean, what’s the holdup?”

Loan servicers argue that homeowners are as often to blame: Many cannot show proof of income, and fail to make payments even on modified mortgages. And millions are in bigger trouble than the public realizes, burdened with monthly payments so exorbitant that even a reduced mortgage payment will not save their home.

The servicing companies make money either way. The Obama program pays them $1,000 for each loan modified, and another $1,000 per year for three more years if the borrower avoids foreclosure. On the other hand, the companies make large sums charging late and legal fees on overdue mortgage payments, and sometimes it is cheaper to foreclose than to cut the mortgage payment.

These same companies turned billions of dollars in profits during the fat years of the bubble. Four years ago, lenders strung banners from storefronts in Jamaica and Cypress Hills and Bedford-Stuyvesant, promising “You will not be turned down!” A no-documents-needed mortgage was easily obtained, often accompanied by the flimsiest of appraisals.

Now the lenders toss up daunting hurdles. Homeowners say they send and resend thick piles of documentation, only to be told that their papers have been misplaced, or that their pay stubs are out of date. Housing counselors dial a dozen times just to get a servicer on the phone.

“It’s a constant Catch-22: They never give you their name,” said Gerald Carter, a counselor with the Parodneck Foundation in New York City, which receives city and state money to advise homeowners. “You call back and say, ‘No, I was talking to Bob last time,’ but Bob wouldn’t give his last name — not even an employee ID number. So you start over.”

Last month, the Legal Aid Society of New York sued the federal government and a mortgage servicer, Aurora Loan Services, on behalf of four Queens homeowners. Aurora, which has a $116 billion loan portfolio, was a subsidiary of Lehman Brothers before that firm went bankrupt; it offered loans with interest rates just a bit lower than subprime rates, which are typically a few percentage points higher than rates on conventional mortgages.

The lawsuit charges that Aurora, and by implication many other servicers, systematically denied homeowners access to the federal rescue program. And, the lawsuit asserts, the Obama plan provides far too few safeguards for homeowners.

“The servicers ignore their obligations, and are throwing unaffordable agreements at people and setting them up for another default,” said Oda Friedheim, a staff lawyer with the Legal Aid Society.

Asked to respond, an Aurora spokeswoman e-mailed a statement saying the company tries to prevent foreclosure for its customers.

Tom Vellucci, 54, is one of the four plaintiffs in the lawsuit, and a soldier in this army of the potentially dispossessed. Once a maintenance man for an insurance company, with a modest home in Floral Park, Queens, he lost his health and then his job. When a tenant stopped paying rent, he fell behind on his mortgage. A so-called rescue firm offered to negotiate better terms and wheedled Mr. Vellucci and his wife, Maria, out of $8,000 in fees.

When the inevitable foreclosure notice arrived in March, the Velluccis called Aurora Loan Services and asked for a break. The company, he said, responded by piling on legal fees and giving them a four-month trial agreement that did not reduce their monthly payment.

The Velluccis say they drained their savings making payments. Then the couple asked Aurora if they could revise their mortgage terms under the Obama rescue plan. They say the company refused, saying their mortgage was not eligible because it was owned by investors.

Aurora makes a similar statement about investor-owned mortgages on its Web site. These claims are not true. The Obama program requires companies to make an effort to modify such mortgages.

Sitting on a bench in the Queens courthouse, where he has become a regular, Mr. Vellucci ran his fingers through thick black hair and shook his head. “We kept trying to pay on faith, all faith, so we could prove we were honest people,” he said. “Now all we look like is stupid.”

Phyllis Caldwell, chief of the Treasury Department’s Home Ownership Preservation Office, is not inclined toward tough talk about servicers, perhaps because the Obama plan, which she oversees, lacks enforcement teeth. Asked about Aurora’s refusal to consider modifying investor-owned mortgages, she suggested a reporter call the program’s compliance unit.

“If it is reported in The New York Times and someone chooses to audit it, that’s important,” she said.

She sees a brighter day coming. “We are holding the servicers accountable to report to us,” she said. “They are being much more transparent.”

For now, however, the Velluccis and thousands like them dangle perilously close to calamity.

Born in Italy, Mr. Vellucci and his wife migrated here as teenagers. They raised children, bought a house, lived their dream in Technicolor. Then his kidney gave out and their economic slide began. After court on this day, he would go for dialysis. The couple hope the lawsuit might give them one more shot at the Obama plan.

“I don’t sleep at night, I don’t sleep at all,” he said, rising slowly. “I tell Maria, ‘If we lose the house, I want to stop my dialysis.’ I want to die, honestly.”








Are Obama's & NACA Mortgage Relief Programs Scams?



Despite Millions of struggling American Homeowners seeking Gov't assistance to remain in their residences via Loan Modifications/ Loan Restructures from Pres. Obama's Making Homes Affordable (HAMP) or NACA's "Save the Dream" Tour, only about 4% (31,000 homeowners) applicants were approved.

This is absolutely unreal and totally unacceptable!

Something is most definitely wrong with this picture!

So Pres. Obama and NACA's programs are basically ineffective?

I've included NACA in this blog post because NACA employees use Pres. Obama's HAMP program Debt Ratio formula when assisting homeowners during "Save the Dream" tours.

4%?? Only 31,000 people??

According to several news reports (listed below) Banks are blaming the low number of approved Loan Modification/ Loan Restructure applications on lost paperwork.

What kind of lame excuse is that?

Where are the billions of dollars Pres. Obama and Congress allocated for Foreclosure Prevention earlier this year?

Better yet why won't NACA CEO Bruce Marks open his books to show real numbers of long term, proven success rates from his program to Congressional members?

Why is it ACORN CEO Bertha Lewis was the ONLY Federally Funded Housing program official required to open her organization's books to Congress?

Could it possibly be that Obama's HAMP program was perhaps intentionally set up to only approve a very small number of Loan Modifications in order to help banks stay profitable?

Doesn't this sound like something Tim Geithner might do?

No offense but for some reason I don't trust Tim Geithner. (Sorry Tim)

Could it be that participating Banks and NACA's CEO Bruce Marks are being paid by H.U.D. and Congress for each Submitted Application versus each APPROVED Loan Modification/ Loan Restructure application? (Permanent Loan Mods)

OMG! Isn't that considered a Scam??

When assisting Homeowners do NACA employees ensure all required, up to date paperwork is included with each Loan Modification/ Loan Restructure application?

So in essence it really doesn't matter to NACA or Pres. Obama's HAMP Program Administrators if Loan Mod applicants are approved for Long Term results or not, because Banks and NACA will be paid regardless.

Seems as if NACA's CEO Bruce Marks may have secret ties to Wall Street despite his claims of being a radical "Bank Terrorist".

Thus I'll ask this question again:

Why is it Congress jumped so quickly to deny funds for ACORN's Housing program unless CEO Bertha Lewis could prove her program was successful (by opening her books) but NACA's Bruce Marks can still receive Federal & State Funds without doing so?

Something is definitely wrong with this picture don't you think?

Again I'm speaking of Long Term or Permanent results, NOT 90-day trial periods.

Also due to the Recession millions of Homeowners are now living in "Underwater Homes", which means Property Tax values on those homes have dropped significantly.

When banks are processing Loan Modification applications, do they take that factor into consideration?

If so the Escrow on those loans should be reduced as well correct?

However in regions like Charlotte-Mecklenburg City & County officials have chosen to INCREASE Property Tax values on thousands of Underwater Homes.

Of course most of the residents living in those Underwater Homes are Middle Class & Low Income Minority Citizens.

What's the purpose of approving Homeowners for a Loan Modification/ Loan Restructure without including the decreased Tax Value on residential properties?

Considering the current Economic Recession our country is experiencing, why are City and County Officials Nationwide choosing NOT to lower Property Tax Values on homes, especially homes located in Middle and Low Income Communities as a best practice for their struggling Constituents?

Hmmm. This is certainly something to think about and inquiring minds want to know.

I propose that Congress should call Tim Geithner and Bruce Marks to Capitol Hill for inquiries about the operations of these two weak Foreclosure Prevention programs.

Immediately afterward Congress needs to than launch thorough investigations into Pres. Obama's HAMP and NACA's so-called "Mortgage Relief" programs.

Investigate as in requesting Pres. Obama's HAMP program officials & NACA CEO Bruce Marks to provide clear evidence and proof each program (since inception) has successfully helped at least close to 1 Million (combined) Homeowners versus just a paltry 31,000.

Don't you agree?

After all both programs are being funded with Taxpayer money just like ACORN was.

Only 4% (31,000 people) approved for Long Term results Indeed!




More tax dollars for the self-proclaimed Bank Terrorist

Despite receiving taxpayer money, NACA doesn’t provide public reports on either its loan-brokerage business or its campaign to modify mortgages. Jim Campen, an economics professor emeritus at the University of Massachusetts, Boston, says he tried in the 1990s to analyze the performance of loans arranged by NACA, but Mr. Marks refused to provide data.

Mr. Marks says he feared the data would be used by another nonprofit to discredit his group. NACA does provide information to lenders that work with it, he says, but sees no duty to disclose it to the public.

“He’s been very effective in shaking money out of the banks,” says Mr. Campen, but “he’s not one to open up his records to public scrutiny.” Wall Street Journal
Article dated * May 20, 2009




View Larger Map


Sources: NY Times, Wall Street Journal, Michelle Malkin, NACA, Youtube, Google Maps

Senate Increases National Deficit By $290B

Senate Lifts Debt Ceiling By $290B


A $290 billion increase in the Federal debt ceiling narrowly cleared Congress on Thursday, giving Treasury just enough leeway to pay the government’s bills into February and setting the stage for a showdown over fiscal policy early next year.

Senate Republicans insisted that 60 votes be required for passage and then held back their own members in order to force as many Democrats as possible to walk the plank on what has never been a popular or easily explained decision back home.

The same issue returns with a vengeance Jan. 20th when senators will be asked to vote on a still larger, long-term debt increase within days of President Barack Obama’s new budget and State of the Union address.

Treasury’s daily statements this week indicate it is still about $65 billion under its current $12.1 trillion ceiling, and conservatives argued that special measures could be invoked still to avert default over New Year’s. But with Congress leaving for the holidays, Senate Banking Committee Chairman Chris Dodd (D-Conn.) said that failure to act would have been “catastrophic” for the U.S. internationally. And Senate Finance Committee Chairman Max Baucus (D-Mont.) said that payments to Social Security recipients were also at risk.

“The bottom line is we have no choice,” Baucus told his colleagues. “We have to approve it.”

Between now and the January votes, there will be renewed efforts to try to reach some compromise on a bipartisan deficit reduction commission championed by the leadership of the Senate Budget Committee and more than a third of the full Senate. Without these votes, Treasury has no chance of prevailing, and the White House is already promising to take a more aggressive stance on deficits in its 2011 budget, due about Feb. 1.

But with the economy still fragile, Obama can’t afford to ignore the political threat of high unemployment and demands in his party for greater efforts to spur job creation. And for a man who campaigned on the promise of going through the budget page-by-page, the president has been remarkably silent on the new spending — and billions of dollars in parochial projects — included in annual appropriations bills approved this month.

In recent days, Obama has signed measures totaling more than $1 trillion with scarcely a comment. And going into House-Senate negotiations on health reform, he faces a major task now in convincing the public that the bill’s often tenuous financing schemes will actually hold up and not make the debt worse.

The bitter residue of that historic health care debate hung over the proceedings in the Senate on Thursday. And amid all the Christmas Eve hugs on the Senate floor, the debt ceiling vote was a moment of old-fashioned revenge for what many top Republicans view as a political betrayal last November after they joined in a bipartisan vote supporting the financial industry rescue plan championed by the Bush administration’s own Treasury Department.

The Democratic Senate campaign apparatus — overseen by Sen. Chuck Schumer (D-N.Y.), a strong ally of Wall Street — later ran highly effective ads attacking Republicans for supporting big bankers. And Minority Leader Mitch McConnell (R-Ky.) has never forgiven Democrats for those tactics and worked hard to hold back his colleagues.

“Mitch is hard over on this,” said one Republican, and the sole concession on the 60-39 roll call was among Midwest neighbors: retiring Sen. George Voinovich (R-Ohio) voted “yes” allowing Sen. Evan Bayh (D-Ind.), up for reelection next year, to vote “no.”

Sen. Judd Gregg (R-N.H.) had been a second Republican vote Democrats had hoped for — and one that might have been there if a real crisis arose.

As the ranking Republican on the Senate Budget Committee, Gregg had played a lead part in negotiating a deal with Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid (D-Nev.) this week guaranteeing him a chance to amend the next debt ceiling increase next month with legislation setting up a bipartisan deficit reduction task force or commission.

The 18-member group would be charged with making recommendations by the end of 2010, which would be voted on in the next Congress in 2011. Gregg is insistent that there be a statutory requirement that the House and Senate consider the commission’s findings under expedited proceedings, without amendment.

In return for getting a sure vote on his proposal, he had argued in Republican circles for more bipartisan support Thursday for the short-term debt ceiling adjustment. But ultimately he voted no in apparent deference to McConnell’s strategy.

“We’ll be back in January to consider yet another increase in the credit limit that probably will only allow us to borrow through the middle of next year if we’re lucky,” Gregg said in a statement later. “While it is critical to protect the government’s ability to meet its financial obligations, Congress should not consider passing a long-term debt limit increase unless the legislation also includes enforceable and meaningful measures to curb out-of-control government borrowing and spending.”

In explaining his vote for the debt increase, Voinovich also alluded to the January debate and the promise by Reid for a vote then on the Gregg commission, also backed by Senate Budget Committee Chairman Kent Conrad (D-N.D.)

“As one who knows all too well about our debt crisis, unbalanced budgets and unfunded liabilities — and one who is keenly aware of how closely the United States is being watched by the international community — I felt conscience-bound to vote for this short-term debt extension,” the Ohio Republican said. “For too long, I have felt alone in the desert in my calls for reform. ... I am … I am truly grateful for the leadership of Sens. Conrad and Gregg and was happy to help move this issue forward.

To hammer home the point further, Conrad released a letter immediately after the debt vote, urging Obama to come off the fence and back the commission. Signed by more than 30 senators, the letter takes note that the president has signaled he intends to make “deficit and debt reduction a center piece” of his State of the Union address.

“To accomplish these goals, we believe it is necessary to put in place a process that is bipartisan, accountable, comprehensive and which assures a vote on recommendations before the end of this Congress. Your support for and involvement in such a process is crucial for it to be a success.”


Sources: Politico

World, Dems & Repubs, Supporters & Opponents of Health Care Reform All Mourn Sen. Ted Kennedy's Death

Washington Post, MSNBC, National Post, Newsweek---

(Sen. Orrin Hatch (R) penned this song in honor of the late Sen. Ted Kennedy.)



U.S. Senator Edward Kennedy, one of the longest-serving senators in U.S. history and a towering figure in the Democratic Party, died at age 77.

Here are some reactions to the news:

KENNEDY FAMILY STATEMENT -- "We've lost the irreplaceable center of our family and joyous light in our lives, but the inspiration of his faith, optimism, and perseverance will live on in our hearts forever. He loved this country and devoted his life to serving it. He always believed that our best days were still ahead, but it's hard to imagine any of them without him."

U.S. SENATE MAJORITY LEADER HARRY REID -- "It was the thrill of my lifetime to work with Ted Kennedy. He was a friend, the model of public service and an American icon. As we mourn his loss, we rededicate ourselves to the causes for which he so dutifully dedicated his life. Senator Kennedy's legacy stands with the greatest, the most devoted, the most patriotic men and women to ever serve in these halls... The liberal lion's mighty roar may now fall silent, but his dream shall never die."

BRITISH PRIME MINISTER GORDON BROWN -- "Senator Edward Kennedy will be mourned not just in America but in every continent. He is admired around the world as the Senator of Senators. He led the world in championing children's education and health care, and believed that every single child should have the chance to realize their potential to the full."

IRISH PRIME MINISTER BRIAN COWEN -- "Ted hailed from a most famous Irish-American family, and through his own endeavors and achievement, he has added further luster to the reputation of a great family . . . In good days and bad, Ted Kennedy worked valiantly for the cause of peace on this island. He played a particularly important role in the formative days of the Northern Ireland Peace Process in the early to mid-1990s. . . . Today, America has lost a great and respected statesman and Ireland has lost a long-standing and true friend."

FORMER BRITISH PRIME MINISTER TONY BLAIR -- "Senator Kennedy was a figure who inspired admiration, respect and devotion not just in America but around the world. He was a true public servant committed to the values of fairness, justice and opportunity."

ISRAELI PRIME MINISTER BENJAMIN NETANYAHU -- "[Senator] Kennedy has been a friend for 30 years, a great American patriot, a great champion of a better world, a great friend of Israel. He will be sorely missed."

FORMER U.S. FIRST LADY NANCY REAGAN -- "Given our political differences, people are sometimes surprised by how close Ronnie and I have been to the Kennedy family. In recent years, Ted and I found our common ground in stem cell research, and I considered him an ally and a dear friend. I will miss him."

NANCY PELOSI, DEMOCRATIC SPEAKER OF THE HOUSE -- "Rooted in his deep patriotism, his abiding faith, and his deep concern for the least among us, no one has done more than Senator Kennedy to educate our children, care for our seniors, and ensure equality for all Americans."

CALIFORNIA GOVERNOR ARNOLD SCHWARZENEGGER, husband of Kennedy's niece Maria Shriver and a Republican -- "He was known to the world as the Lion of the Senate, a champion of social justice and a political icon... Teddy inspired our country through his dedication to health care reform, his commitment to social justice, and his devotion to a life of public service."

SENATOR ORRIN HATCH, REPUBLICAN OF UTAH -- "Today America lost a great elder statesman, a committed public servant, and leader of the Senate. And today I lost a treasured friend. Ted Kennedy was an iconic, larger than life United States senator whose influence cannot be overstated. Many have come before, and many will come after, but Ted Kennedy's name will always be remembered as someone who lived and breathed the United States Senate and the work completed within its chamber."


Both Parties Mourn Loss of Kennedy in Health-Care Debate

As Sen. Edward M. Kennedy's death suddenly quieted the national debate over health-care reform, some Democratic lawmakers suggested Wednesday that the passing of such a prominent advocate for universal health coverage may represent an opportunity to hit the reset button on that issue.

But whether that would improve the odds of passing a health-care bill was much less clear. Leading Republican senators hinted that no Democrat seemed ready to assume Kennedy's traditional role both in crafting a political compromise and in selling it to the Democratic base.

When the veteran lawmaker died Tuesday night of brain cancer, the cause he long championed stood at a dangerous crossroads. As President Obama's top domestic goal, a health-care reform bill had advanced further in Congress than any such effort in decades, only to spark a partisan brawl upon lawmakers' return home for the August recess. With every acrimonious town hall meeting, the fate of a final deal seemed to grow less certain.

With Congress's August recess nearing its end, the window is closing for opponents of a health-care overhaul to further undercut its public support before lawmakers resume working on the bill. Meanwhile, Kennedy's memorial services and burial are likely to draw more public attention to his political career, and to the issues he held dear -- including universal health insurance, which he once called "the cause of my life."

"My hope is that this will maybe cause people to take a breath, step back, and start talking with each other again, in more civil tones about what needs to be done, because that's what Teddy would do," said Sen. Christopher J. Dodd (D-Conn.), who has served as temporary chairman of the Senate health committee in Kennedy's absence.

"I hope that members of Congress will take a moment to reflect on Ted Kennedy's approach to issues, where he was passionate about his beliefs but willing to work with others to get things done, for the greater good," said Rep. Chris Van Hollen (D-Md.). "We need to renew that spirit in the current debate, not just about health care."

Three GOP senators suggested in their remembrances of Kennedy that Democrats will need more than respectful conversation to gain bipartisan support for a health-care bill. Sens. John McCain (Ariz.), Orrin Hatch (Utah) and Judd Gregg (N.H.) lamented Kennedy's absence in the negotiations.

"I think we may have made progress on this health-care issue if he had been there," McCain told CNN. "He had this unique capability to sit people down at a table together -- and I've been there on numerous occasions -- and really negotiate, which means concessions. And so, he not only will be missed, but he has been missed."

"I believe if he had been active the last few months, we would have some sort of consensus agreement," said Gregg, a passionate advocate of Medicare reform who has sat out Senate deliberations on perhaps the most extensive revisions ever to that program.

"We would have worked it out. We would have worked it out on a bipartisan basis," Hatch, who co-authored numerous health-care bills with Kennedy over the years, said on CNN. "I'll be happy to work in a bipartisan basis any day, any time . . . but it's got to be on something that's good and not just some partisan hack job."

Other Republicans played down prospects that opponents of reform would reconsider their position. "Certainly people honor Sen. Ted Kennedy for all of his work," Rep. Jeb Hensarling (R-Tex.) told CNBC. "But at the end of the day, this is a democracy, and I think the voice of the people have been heard quite loudly in the month of August."

The senior Senate Democrat, Robert C. Byrd (W.Va.), called for passage of health-care reform in Kennedy's honor. "As a tribute to his commitment to his ideals, let us stop the shouting and name-calling and have a civilized debate on health-care reform, which I hope, when legislation has been signed into law, will bear his name," he said.

Byrd's call drew jeers from conservative commentators. Michelle Malkin called the idea "crass," and Sean Hannity said that Kennedy's death "is not added reason to push for passage" and that "Obama-care deserves to be judged on its merits."

But liberal activist groups were quick to join Byrd in his call. MoveOn.org urged its supporters "to re-commit ourselves to achieving the thing that mattered most" to Kennedy, and Democrats.com called for lawmakers to pass "real health reform -- including a strong public option."

Kennedy's credibility with such groups tended to overcome their resistance to compromise as capitulation, and his skill as an expert dealmaker was such that when he worked with President George W. Bush to pass the No Child Left Behind education bill, he persuaded stalwart Democrats to vote with him on the controversial legislation.

"He brought to the table the absolute confidence of the liberal end of the spectrum, and so when he reached an agreement, there wasn't any sort of second-guessing of him," Gregg said.

Persuading the Democratic base to bend on provisions otherwise held as fundamental may be the single most important challenge for party leaders in the weeks ahead.

Sources: Washington Post, MSNBC, Newsweek, National Post, Photobucket