ACORN CEO Bertha Lewis kissing then-New York Governor Michael Bloomberg. Image from pumabydesign001.
There was a time when ACORN – the Association of Community Organizations for Reform Now – lived by its ideals and had a bright future in the reform arena. But recent controversies which may have led to falling revenue, and hence a need for short term personal loans, will prompt ACORN to disband effective April 1. While some media critics simply view this as a rebranding of the organization, others view this as a long overdue end of a troubled era.
ACORN’s era of subprime manipulation ends
Jerry Chautin writes for The Huffington Post that ACORN may have played a significant role in the subprime mortgage mess that nearly sank America’s economy. In particular, it “pushed for more lenient benchmarks that would include all applicants. Their contention was that everyone deserves to own a home regardless of their income level or credit history.” That’s a noble sentiment, but lack of regulation and borrowers with eyes bigger than their budgets created a financial quagmire. That’s why the Wall Street Journal once claimed that ACORN and the Community Reinvestment Act “laid the foundation for the house of cards built out of subprime loans.”
ACORN admitted mistakes were made
And CEO Bertha Lewis knew that damage repair was necessary: “We will go to whatever lengths necessary to reestablish the public trust.” Lewis said this to the media when the subprime crisis was at its peak, Reuters reports. But in September of 2009: the ACORN prostitute video made its viral rounds. While James O’Keefe and company may have edited footage just enough to make the ACORN members seem guiltier than they were, the negative publicity never went away completely. The organization seemed to lack credibility.
Most of the 20 ACORN chapters have already disbanded
Add voter fraud into the already boiling mix and you can see that ACORN had problems. Despite numerous denials from ACORN, Congress voted to cut off federal funding to the community activist group and the U.S. Census Bureau terminated its partnership with ACORN. Reuters notes that a federal judge overturned the total funding prohibition, but the damage was already done.
It is unclear whether ACORN will file for bankruptcy or simply reorganize with private emergency money at this time.
Related Video:
You have misrepresented my much more balanced piece about ACORN. On a positive note, I also said the following:
"Although ACORN and the community groups pushed hard to further their own agenda, I never saw them alter documents, misrepresent loan applicants’ income or do anything illegal. Rather, they believed that the means, albeit loud and aggressive, justified the end.
And while many of its detractors would like to see ACORN disbanded, the organization has championed liberal causes for almost 40 years. They are a voice for those without a voice and take to the streets when no other avenue of recourse is available to them."
Jerry Chautin
Thank you for your reply, Mr. Chautin. I must say, your "I didn't see anything happen" neither helps me sleep at night nor disproves any allegations against ACORN. I left out that part of your piece because it's a weak argument. Granted, every piece of evidence condemning ACORN has been contested, but I find it interesting that it never… quite… made the stink disappear.
Do I think ACORN has done some good? Yes. However, their tactics – as well as other activities that appear to have been illegal, even if YOU didn't see it happen – are worthy of scorn. Rathke's connections with Self-Help Inc. and Martin Eakes, the CRA and pressuring banks to lend to people who could ill afford to repay… it's all fabrication to you? If so, tell me why you think it's all a lie. Why, if such is the case, do you think it had absolutely nothing to do with the subprime mortgage crisis. That would hold more weight than "I didn't see it happen."
Oh, by the way, this is an opinion Web site, for the most part. Opinion first, news second – and the line should be clear enough for an intelligent reader, which I'm assuming you are. I didn't realize that in expressing my opinion, I had some obligation to represent your weak argument in a "fair and balanced" manner.