“I was, frankly, offended by it,” said Republican strategist Karl Rove. “I’m a huge fan of Clint Eastwood, I thought it was an extremely well-done ad, but it is a sign of what happens when you have Chicago-style politics, and the president of the United States and his political minions are, in essence, using our tax dollars to buy corporate advertising.”

Already, Democrats have begun co-opting the “It’s Halftime In America” meme, and President Barack Obama’s campaign team has already signaled that “saving” Detroit and the American auto industry will be a central campaign theme in Mr. Obama’s 2012 reelection bid. Indeed, in June 2011, Mr. Obama proudly declared:

Chrysler has repaid every dime and more of what it owes American taxpayers for their support during my presidency–and it repaid that money six years ahead of schedule.  And this week, we reached a deal to sell our remaining stake.  That means Chrysler will be 100 percent in private hands.

The Washington Post fact checker, however, disagreed–strongly.

We take no view on whether the administration’s efforts on behalf of the automobile industry were a good or bad thing; that’s a matter for the editorial pages and eventually the historians. But we are interested in the facts the president cited to make his case.

What we found is one of the most misleading collections of assertions we have seen in a short presidential speech. Virtually every claim by the president regarding the auto industry needs an asterisk, just like the fine print in that too-good-to-be-true car loan.

At issue was the slippery language Mr. Obama used to calculate Chrysler’s repayment of its taxpayer-funded bailout.  Mr. Obama’s numbers were based off of the $8.5 billion the federal government loaned Chrysler while he was in office and did not include the government’s prior $4 billion loan extended in the last month of President George W. Bush’s presidency, for a total bailout of $12.5 billion paid for by taxpayers.   Therefore, even after the $11.2 billion the Obama Administration says it received from Chrysler, taxpayers are still left holding the bill for $1.3 billion.

Indeed, in a startling statement, Treasury Secretary Tim Geithner conceded that, yes, taxpayers would never recoup the $1.3 billion, but that the decision was nonetheless wise:

We did this to save jobs. The biggest impact was in the jobs saved and the wealth preserved. We’ll get everything we can to maximize the gain and minimize the loss. We are going to lose money on the auto industry but our job is to protect the country.

Still, Mr. Geithner hailed the taxpayer boondoggle a tremendous success:

As Treasury exits its investment in Chrysler, it’s clear that President Obama’s decision to stand behind and restructure this company was the right one. Today, America’s automakers are mounting one of the most improbable turnarounds in recent history – creating new jobs and making new investments in communities across our country.

At the time, Mr. Eastwood himself criticized the automobile bailout:

We shouldn’t be bailing out the banks and car companies.   If a CEO can’t figure out how to make his company profitable, then he shouldn’t be the CEO.

As for Mr. Eastwood’s compensation for the ad, Mr. Eastwood claims that “anything they gave me for it went to charity.”  Chrysler has not released figures on the total costs to design, shoot, and air the two-minute spot.  However, 30-second commercials reportedly cost $3.5 million.

Mr. Eastwood also says he is “certainly not affiliated with Mr. Obama.”

However, critics are left to wonder: how could a company who has yet to repay taxpayers the $1.3 billion it loaned them afford such a lavish advertising campaign?  And if, indeed, Chrysler is back on top, then why hasn’t it volunteered to repay Americans the money it still owes them?

After all, as the commercial says, “It’s halftime in America, too. People are out of work and they’re hurting. And they’re all wondering what they’re going to do to make a comeback. And we’re all scared, because this isn’t a game.”

So when can taxpayers expect Chrysler to cut them that $1.3 billion it owes them?  After all, isn’t that the right thing to do?

He’s held big gigs at BMW and Ford.  He also worked way up the food chain at (now $85 billion bailed-out) Chrysler and General Motors (GM) – retiring as GM’s Vice Chairman in 2010.

And he has recently written a piece:

Chevy Volt And The Wrong-Headed Right

…in vociferous defense of the Chevy Volt.

You know, the more-than-$200,000 in government-subsidies-per-unit-sold Volt.

The overproduced, unprofitable, unpopular, combustible Volt.  (And January 2011’s sales were no less disappointing.)

That Chevy Volt.

Are we on the Right wrong-headed?  Let’s take Mr. Lutz’s piece piecemeal and see.

The recent media coverage of so-called “Chevrolet Volt fires,” especially by the conservative talk shows and Fox News, has attracted my attention and ire.

Let’s set out the facts (and feel free to check them yourself):

Don’t mind if we do.

1) Not one Chevrolet Volt has ever caught fire in normal use or in accidents. Not a single one.

Fundamentally untrue, as we laid out in great detail after last week’s House Oversight Volt hearing.

From our piece:

There were in fact three other, private-owner Volt fires.  None of which involved Volts that were in crashes.

These three fires involved Volts that were simply garaged or recharging – i.e. “in normal use.”

More from Mr. Lutz:

2) The National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA), even after the highly artificial crash test (placing the car on its back, even though it did not roll over in the test) nevertheless awarded the Volt NHTSA’s highest crash-safety rating: 5 stars. Volt is supremely safe.

But there wasn’t just one NHTSA fire – there were three.

More from us:

The one NHTSA Volt fire discussed at the hearing was not the only NHTSA Volt fire that occurred.  In November, there were two others.

After conducting three different tests two weeks ago, the NHTSA found that the Volt’s battery either caught fire or began to smoke in two out of the three.

So that’s three Volt fires – all in the hands of the Obama Administration, all after crashes.

For a grand total of six Volt fires (about which we know).

And excuse us for being slightly suspect of the Government’s Five Star rating of Government Motors.

Especially when NHTSA, the Barack Obama White House and GM all covered-up the Volt fire(s) for nearly six months.

Especially when President Barack Obama is campaigning for reelection on the $85 billion auto industry bailout “success,” and showing up at car shows to do it.  So bad news for the Volt and Government Motors is bad news for him and his reelect.

So, again, excuse our suspicion.

More from Mr. Lutz:

3) The crashed Volt, its battery shorted by coolant from the period unjustifiably spent “feet up,” caught fire three weeks after said test. (I submit that this would provide adequate time for surviving passengers to exit the vehicle.)

Again, what about the other five fires?  Three of which were just plugged in or garaged – “in normal use?”

Mr. Lutz:

4) On average, 278,000 cars with gasoline engines caught fire in the U.S. each year between 2003 and 2007, according to the National Fire Protection Association.

True – but gasoline engines are a long-known commodity.  Lithium-ion battery cars are not.

And when the Obama Administration and GM have spent half the Volt’s shelf life covering up Volt flameouts, it certainly warrants additional attention.

Mr. Lutz:

5) No factory-produced electric vehicle has ever caught fire, to the best of my knowledge.

As we’ve just demonstrated, Mr. Lutz needs to better his knowledge.

And Mr. Lutz is making a blanket assertion – applicable beyond just the Volt to all electric cars.  Is he really comfortable going that far?

Mr. Lutz:

6) The Volt, the most technologically advanced car on the planet, was conceived by me and my team well before any federal bailout of GM.

Is the pride of creative authorship clouding Mr. Lutz’s judgement?

I’m not sure the Volt is the “most technologically advanced car on the planet” – given that the 1891 electric Morrison had a better battery range than the Volt.

The Volt was in fact conceived by Mr. Lutz and his team, in 2007.  But I notice, Mr. Lutz, that you didn’t rush to mass-produce it, did you?  It existed only as a visual aide for auto shows – not for actual for-sale production.

Only with the arrival of President Obama – and We the People’s $50 billion – did Volts find their way to the mass-assembly line.

Mr. Lutz:

These are the bedrock facts.

Yours aren’t.  Ours are.

Mr. Lutz:

Now, how did the U.S. right-wing media choose to report this admittedly headline-tempting news?

A nationally syndicated editorial three-panel cartoon stated (I believe I remember the sequence): “Thomas Edison discovered electricity;” then, “Alexander Graham Bell discovered the telephone;” and, in the third panel, “But it took the US Government to discover fire!” (accompanied by a drawing of a burning Chevy Volt).

Come on, that cartoon is just FUNNY.

Mr. Lutz then goes into some detail about Rush Limbaugh and Lou Dobbs (appearing on Bill O’Reilly’s Fox News Channel show) publicly decrying the Volt.

Then Mr. Lutz writes:

Much air time was spent on the $50 billion-plus (GM) bailout, which, the audience was left to assume, “funded” the Volt, doubtlessly at the whim of Obama’s known army of evil enviro-Nazis, intent on forcing vehicle electrification on a good-ole’-boy, V8-lovin’ populace.

Again, the Lutz-era GM created the Volt – but never mass-produced it.  Obama and the bailout arrived – and suddenly Government Motors is (sort-of) selling Volts.

Clearly there is some electric vehicle forcing going on.  GM in 2011 produced about 10,000 Volts – and sold only 7,671.  And until very recently – when finally hounded into  submission-to-sales-reality – Akerson and GM were planning on upping 2012 Volt production to 60,000.

Sounds forced to me.

Mr. Lutz:

To top it off, these two media pros lamented the fact that the same government that had forced GM to produce the Volt was now extending $7,500 tax credits towards its purchase, thus squandering even more of “our taxpayer” dollars on this failed Socialist-collectivist flop. Truth? The $7,500 tax credit was enacted under the Bush administration!

True.  But again, you, Mr. Lutz, never produced the Volt for sale under the Bush Administration.  Only after you left, under Obama – when General Motors became with our coin Government Motors – did the foolish tax credit apply to the foolish Volt.

And we Right-wingers have long acknowledged – and publicly decried and lamented – many terrible Bush Administration policies.  The $7,500-per-foolish-car is but another.

Mr. Lutz:

But who the hell cares about facts when you’re in O’Reilly’s self-described “No Spin Zone?” (The fine print might as well read, “We said ‘no spin,’ not ‘no deliberate misstatement of facts.’ ”)

Again, as we have thoroughly demonstrated, it is the esteemed Mr. Lutz that is misstating and omitting facts.

Mr. Lutz:

What on Earth is wrong with the conservative media movement that it feels it’s OK to spread false information, OK to damage the reputation of perhaps the finest piece of mechanical technology our country has produced since the space shuttle, OK to hurt an iconic American company that is roaring back to global pre-eminence, OK to hurt American employment in Hamtramck, Mich., as long as it damages the Obama administration’s reputation?

It is Obama that is staking his reputation – and his reelection effort – on the $50 billion GM bailout and the Volt.

If our pointing out egregious, inconvenient facts is harmful thereto, it is simply happy collateral damage.

Mr. Lutz concludes:

While as a conservative Republican I may well share the goal, I deplore the means employed to attain it. The conservative cause damages itself, destroys its credibility through the expedient spreading of untruths. The public will figure it out.

The right-wing “talking heads”, O’Reilly and Limbaugh at the forefront, have managed to make me embarrassed to describe myself as a conservative.

Come on, you guys. Shape up! There’s plenty of legitimate fodder out there. Let’s leave the “invention of facts” to the left-wing climate-change alarmists.

Unfortunately for Mr. Lutz – and the Obama Administration – there are plenty of inconvenient truths about Government Motors, the Obama Administration bailout and the absurd Chevy Volt.

And we “wrong-headed” Right-wingers are the only ones delivering them.

Mr. Lutz is in need of but a minor recalibration.  The Chevy Volt he’s defending may be unrecoverable.

That is exactly what is happening. The new “big success” automaker is spending millions hiring lobbyists to squeeze more millions out of state legislatures. As Justin Owen notes, GM has “turned to another, smaller government teat” by putting its hand out to the states. GM, Owen says, “has received another $1.7 billion in taxpayer-funded grants and tax abatements.”

This is no accident of timing, either. GM admitted to the Tennessee Watchdog that begging to the states for tax dollars is a concerted effort.

“We are increasing our activity with the states obviously, in the communities in which we operate. In doing this, we’ve invested more than $6 billion (throughout the states) during the last five years and brought 15,000 people back to work. So, the activity at the state level is important to us. Our lobbying is comparable to what our competitors are doing throughout the states,” said GM spokesman Greg Martin.

For the Watchdog, Christopher Butler found that GM has received more than $1.5 billion from Michigan, $7.5 million in tax incentives from Kentucky, over $10 million from Texas, and over $2 million from Indiana. Ohio and Maryland have given to the GM bailout fund, too, with tax incentives and other giveaways.

Naturally, as these lobbying efforts grow, GM has paid lobbying firms millions for their work, millions that are coming right out of the pockets of American taxpayers both federal and state.

Apparently, making cars is not a top priority for GM anymore. Owen says that, “turning taxpayers on their heads and shaking every penny from their pockets is a profitable corporate strategy for a quasi-public car company. As of last summer, GM sat on roughly $40 billion in reserves. Yet the ribbon-cutting ceremonies with state officials across the country continue like clockwork, with taxpayers footing a lofty bill.”

The main question here is, once all the facilities are open and humming, once all the tax dollars are safely in GM’s pocket, will there be demand for the products that all these new plants are turning out? Is it a good idea in this bad economy to massively expand using the false benefit of government handouts? What will happen if, after all this government aide runs out, GM finds that its sales still don’t justify all these new plants?

Are we taxpayers going to be expected to hand GM billions more because they are “too big to fail”?

I attended Wednesday’s 8:00am (8am?!?) House Oversight and Government Reform Committee hearing entitled:

Volt Vehicle Fire: What Did NHTSA Know And When Did They Know It?

The witnesses were killer:

National Highway Transportation Safety Administration (NHTSA), Barack Obama-appointee Administrator David Strickland.

And General Motors (GM), Barack Obama-appointee CEO Dan Akerson.

The scope of the hearing was a bit too narrow – leaving out some fairly important attending facts.  Like, say, the (at least) five other Chevy Volt fires that have occurred besides the one being discussed.

This hearing was all about a single June Volt blaze.  The battery burst into flames about three weeks after a test crash at and by the National Highway Transportation Safety Administration (NHTSA).

A fire about which Obama’s NHTSA did tell the Obama White House.

But a fire about which neither Obama’s NHTSA, the Obama Administration nor Obama’s GM told the American people for nearly six months – and then did so only when forced by a looming Bloomberg news story.

But:

The White House had no role in the decision to delay disclosure of a fire that broke out in a crash-tested Chevrolet Volt, the Obama administration told Congress on Friday.

Of COURSE not.

But:

Joan Claybrook, a former administrator at NHTSA believes part of the reason for the delay was the “fragility of Volt sales.” Yet she also believes that “NHTSA could have put out a consumer alert, not to tell them [customers] for six months makes no sense to me.”

Obama is running for reelection in great part on the non-success “success” of the $85 billion auto industry bailout.

On which he once promised we’d make money.  Then had to begrudgingly up the (admitted to) loss from $14.3 billion to $23.6 billion.

And We the Taxpayers still own 500 million shares of GM stock – which is tanking.  So that loss number still has growth prospects.

That auto industry bailout “success.”

Obama mentioned GM prominently in Tuesday night’s campaign – I mean State of the Union – speech:

America: Built to (Be) Last

And had as one of his bio-props – I mean guests – a GM plant manager.

The takeaway from all of this?

For Obama, notifying Americans of their potential immolation-by-Volt is of less import than his keeping his gig past November.

—–

And there’s tremendous immolation potential.

The one NHTSA Volt fire discussed at the hearing was not the only NHTSA Volt fire that occurred.  In November, there were two others.

After conducting three different tests two weeks ago, the NHTSA found that the Volt’s battery either caught fire or began to smoke in two out of the three.

So that’s three Volt fires – all in the hands of the Obama Administration, all after crashes.

But Obama’s GM now says they’ve fixed the problem – and the Obama Administration has (shocker) given GM the good-to-go.

So all is well, right?

Ummm, no.  There were in fact three other, private-owner Volt fires.  None of which involved Volts that were in crashes.

—–

There was the Volt that in April burst into flames – twice.  These were the fires that led to Obama’s NHTSA beginning its investigation.

And then in November another Volt leapt into flames.  While Obama’s NHTSA was still investigating – but after the NHTSA-Obama Administration-GM cover-up had come to light (get it?).

The home that garaged this particular immolated Volt gets its power from Duke Energy – which after the fire felt compelled to issue a warning:

Duke Energy officials want anyone who has a (Volt) charging station to stop using it until they know the devices are safe.

So the charging station is at least suspect.  (So too the charging station cable?)

We still have no idea what caused these fires.  The only thing we do know is that they were not caused by crashes – because these cars were never in crashes.

So why did Obama’s NHTSA, the Obama Administration and Obama’s GM singularly focus on (but one of three) post-crash Volt fires?

When none of these three privately-owned combustible Volts had been in accidents?

We – still – don’t know.  Anything.

But don’t worry: The Obama Administration has declared that the Obama-owned GM Chevy Volt is perfectly safe – just in time for Obama’s reelection campaign.

And GM’s new Volt ad campaign, which is pretty much entitled:

If You Don’t Like the Volt, You Don’t Like America

Don’t you feel safer?

Romney fits right into the Left’s absurd anti-capitalism, “robber baron,” Occupy Wall Street anti-1%-er, scorched earth storyline.

Romney is very wealthy, which for Obama and his Democrats is the height of eee-vill (except – these Donkeys are mostly rich…).  Never mind that Romney’s wealth is right in line with many past Presidents and candidates – including 2004 Democrat nominee John Kerry.  (The difference?  Romney earned it, Kerry married it.)

And as Romney recently told us, he these days pays the 15% capital gains tax rate – rather than the (absurdly) higher income tax rates those of us receiving salaries do.  Never mind that this is perfectly legal (and good fiscal policy, and “fair”) – it is culled right from the Leftist, Warren Buffett “I pay less in taxes than my secretary” fraudulent script.

—–

How did Romney make his coin?  Via the epitome of eeeee-villll free market entities – the venture capital firm.  His was, of course, Bain Capital.

Yes, Bain sometimes invests in failing companies.  Some of which they determine to be not worth saving, so down they go.  Welcome to Reality, Boys and Girls.

See, President Obama – it’s kind of like your “investing” in Solyndra, and Fisker, and Beacon Power, and….  Only President Obama – yours never work out.  And Bain would never dump money into such absurd companies or concepts.  And Bain uses their own coin, not ours.

Bain has created far more jobs than they’ve closed down – which again makes them the polar opposite of Obama, Inc.  There is no Staples, Sports Authority or myriad other Bain-like successes to which Obama can point and say “See, my government ‘investment’ did that.”

“‘Shovel-ready’ wasn’t as shovel-ready as we expected.”  And “created or saved” doesn’t cut it – and fooled only the foolish.

—–

And, of course, the Obama Administration is chock full of Wall Street 1%-ers.  Whom they vilify and legislatively assault by day – and shake down for campaign cash by night.  Heck, Democrats receive more contributions from Bain Capital than do Republicans.  Obama has his own self received $80,000 from Romney’s old digs.

And the new Obama Administration acting Director of the Office of Management and Budget, Jeffrey Zients, worked for Bain Capital.

And behold Obama, Inc. campaign adviser Stephanie Cutter.  Who just wrote a scathing memo about Romney’s Bain days – subtitled “Profit at Any Cost.”

Cutter sounded like a sworn enemy of private equity.  Except a few years ago, she was a spokeswoman for J.C. Flowers, a private-equity firm….

Presumably Cutter wanted to be as well compensated as possible, by J.C. Flowers and the “several Fortune 500 companies” her communications firm served, according to her bio.

Just another poster-child for Obama, Inc.’s “Poverty for Thee – Not for Me,” DC-Wall Street Nexis.

For Obama, Inc., Bain’s good for campaign fodder – and campaign cash.  And, as it turns out, even more than that.

—–

We’ve just discussed Bain Capital investing – vis a vis Obama, Inc. “investing.”

One of the biggest Taxpayer Money “investments” is the $50+ billion in General Motors (GM).  Which has been an unmitigated disaster.

President Obama once promised us we’d make money on the auto bailout – then had to begrudgingly up the (admitted to) loss from $14.3 billion to $23.6 billion.  And We the Taxpayers still own 500 million shares of GM stock – which is tanking.  So that loss number still has growth potential.

GM is foundering because they insist on doing fabulous things like overproduce the unprofitable, unpopular, combustible Chevy Volt.  And in 2010 file for more green non-energy “energy patents – a la Solyndra, Fisker, etc. – than any other company in America.

As GM continued to sink like a stone, guess who Obama’s Auto Task Force asked for assistance in trying to turn around their colossal automotive failure?

Why, Romney’s ex- Bain Capital – and their fellow Wall Streeters.

Oops.

Obama Administration officials working on a turnaround of General Motors and Chrysler asked for advice from the consulting firm Bain & Company, among other consulting firms, speaking to partners there at least twice, according to multiple sources familiar with the conversations.

In addition, a partner at Bain & Company later detailed his advice on the auto companies when he was contacted for a follow-up review by the office of the inspector general for TARP, according to that office.

—–

Obama will this year be trying to convince We the People to give him four more years in the White House.

Not because of anything he’s done – because what he’s done has been atrocious – but to prevent an evil 1%-er from succeeding him.

And if that proposed successor is Romney, Obama, Inc. has the anti-Bain Capital dossier already prepared and at the ready.

But when it came down to it, Obama, Inc. had to admit that they had with GM (and just about everything else) absolutely no idea what they were doing.

And they had to go to…Bain Capital, and their fellow eeee-villl Wall Streeters, to ask for help in trying to salvage their incredible failure.

Whose expert advice he desperately sought as he amateurishly blew up General Motors – and our $50+ billion.

The attempted spoonful-of-sugar to help force down the bad Progressive medicine they are pushing.

Which brings us to General Motors (GM) and one of the Leftist ideological windmills at which they tilt – the Chevy Volt.

We the Taxpayers have spent billions subsidizing the Volt.  And continue subsidizing it still.

We bailed out GM ($50 billion) and Chrysler to the tune of $83 billion.  On which the Obama Administration now admits we’ll lose (at least) $23.6 billion.  (President Obama once upon a time promised us we’d actually make money on the deal.)

We the Taxpayers are still stuck holding 500 million shares of GM stock – on which we are poised to lose tens of billions of dollars more.

But you know what makes all of this terrible-ness so much less worse?  GM spent some of our money on – the Chevy Volt official song and music video:

Don’t you feel better?

The GM-official “GMVolt” YouTube video page description of which reads as follows:

Chevrolet’s official Chevy Volt fun and educational song set to a historical collage of developments and progress as captured on the website GM-Volt.com.

“Educational” – like the aforementioned government elementary school songs are “educational.”

Now, a defense could be proffered that companies write songs and cut videos for advertising purposes all the time.  Fine and true.  That being said, this Volt song was (as far as I can find) never made into an actual ad.

GM’s official YouTube posting of it has only (as of this writing) 30,048 views.  And it does not appear on the aforementioned GM-Volt.com’s video page.

The song is a total (if unintentional for GM) joke – and we get that it is.  This is not the end of the world.  It is just another ridiculous aspect of the ridiculous from-the-start Chevy Volt – and auto bailout.

And the joke gets worse.

At the 2009 Los Angeles Auto Show, GM also gave us – the Chevy Volt Dancers:

A troupe with a routine devised to accompany the Chevy Volt tune.

Just what every car company needs – a band with a floor show.

Do not attempt to operate heavy machinery for up to 24 hours after viewing either of these videos.  If you’ve watched both, you may want to contact your physician.

—–

All of this is yet another reason to be thankful that We the People have spent nearly $60 billion propping up General Motors and subsidizing the Chevy Volt.

Don’t you feel thankful?

A must-read courtesy of James Pethokoukis at The American:

This could be just the beginning. If President Barack Obama’s legally dodgy appointment of Richard Cordray to head the consumer finance agency should stick, it may open the door to more such actions. Here’s Jaret Seiberg of the Washington Research Group:

To us, the most important takeaway from a recess appointment of Cordray is that the President could use this same maneuver to put a housing advocate in charge of FHFA.

And why is that important? The Federal Housing Finance Agency is the regulator and conservator of Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac. And the FHFA currently has an acting director, Edward DeMarco. If Obama replaces him with a “housing advocate” via the same recess appointment process, here’s what might happen next, according to Seiberg:

That could lead to a mass refinancing program for agency-backed mortgages that would go well beyond the existing HARP program. That could hurt agency MBS pricing and result in higher financing costs going forward. Yet it also could be a big boost for the economy and housing going into the election.

Indeed, my sources tell me the Obama administration has been eager to implement just such a plan, but needs to have its own man heading the FHFA to make it happen. The plan would be modeled after one originally devised by Columbia University economists Glenn Hubbard (a campaign adviser to Mitt Romney and AEI visiting scholar) and Christopher Mayer. In recent congressional testimony, Mayer described how the mass refinancing plan would work:

Under our plan, every homeowner with a GSE mortgage can refinance his or her mortgage with a new mortgage at a current fixed of 4.20 percent or less. … To qualify, the homeowner must be current on his or her mortgage or become so for at least three months. … Other than being current, we would impose no other qualification or application, except for the intention to accept the new rate (that is, no appraisal, no income verification, no tax returns, etc.).

Mayer estimates that some $3.7 trillion of mortgages would be refinanced. That’s right, this would be the Mother of All Mortgage Refinancing Plans. It would help roughly 30 million borrowers save $75 billion to $80 billion a year.

Much, much more here.