I'm reminded of a Carlos Mencia television episode wherein, as character "Judge Carlos", he "takes over" a newspaper-reported case of the family of a 27 year old man who was suing an aquarium after the man went skinny-dipping with a killer whale..."Judge" Carlos said: "What part of KILLER WHALE don't you understand?".

H.R. 3915 is kind of in that nature; what part of knowing you don't have any assets or income, except maybe other and more costly credit, then borrowing any or more money on estimation you can't pay it, don't opponents of the bill understand, no matter what language you speak since it's almost universal signalling paperwork means elastic attached? Imagine if everyone who needed money had a government give it to them without strings or concern to ever-diminishing quality, because they thought spending a whole life hanging out and being entertained for free...being eternally adolescent...was the goal of society, and imagine the alternative of a government seizing on that mindset to grow it and expand it so favored developers and retailers could cash in big and need no shareholders, literally becoming princes and princesses of designing their own criticalities. Most countries in the past, that winds up with guys with epaulets and sunglasses telling you it's your turn for the harvest, comrade. 

Especially since it's like a day one business precept; likewise, anyone reading as example the Corpus Juris Secundum can tell it's well-settled that lenders take into account the assets and immediate to mid-term ability to repay, regardless of high interest for those qualified but slow to repay...it's known as establishing a perfected security interest, a step in due diligence before telling a COURT you were left holding a bag and asking the debtor to pay even though you figured they had not the means at time of credit. In such cases, it seems fair property be returned to the creditor, and the grantee be noted as unable to pay last debt but not held to the cheesy agreement.

In the case of mortgage lenders, if only the absence of Federal regulation and soft enforcements by States of their own rules left BOTH grantors and grantees out of cash, but lenders need shore-ups as they touch other financial services and we don't want more job losses or economic instability; indeed, to some degree, some lenders have just followed whatever political orthodoxy of an area, such as in Illinois.

To me, it seems fair to say those who've gotten all those loans and never paid them figuring they couldn't anyway...you got the use and benefit for a time, and you should be duly marked as non-paying but relieved of the debt outstanding and interest, but you no more than anyone else is due damages as a legal point where you have not been harmed through a creditor; many even signed pre-credit agreements to use private arbiters instead of Courts, and if they need jobs or whatever to qualify for more credit or housing, that's better than Section 8 or other Socialism, which itself should be tied to job creation or retention by local governments and meted out sparingly on tight renewable basis having limit...like unemployment insurance.

As it is, too many locals think all you need is infinite mass-produced housing and any warm bodies getting any old credit, as long as the beneficiaries and other commerce are extremely limited.

H.R. 3915 would be a step in the right direction, a tourniquet on a hemorrhaging financial market to reduce recurrences of such loss; those currently and near-term losing property through such deals should be codified as were travel industry workers after 9/11 (TEUA through TEUC-AX), thusly limited even if a large group, and assistance addressed in a special non-punitive or regulatory bill.