Congress who've had nearly years to do so, in less than a year.
What really should have happened was a Congressional inquiry into why Treasury did not dispense the funds that were allocated to help people modify their mortgages and put someone other than Geithner in charge of that fund.
Elizabeth Warren tried to get him to explain why so little of that money was ever used for the purpose it was supposed to be used for.
He got very upset with her. But she is not the only one wondering what happened to the HAMP funds. Remember this guy, Barofsky?
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/07/20/timothy-geithner-neil-barofsky_n_1686693.html
Neil Barofsky, the congressionally appointed watchdog for the Troubled Asset Relief Program, which pumped $700 billion to banks, auto makers and homeowners after the crisis, argues in the book that the Home Affordable Modification Program introduced in early 2009 was poorly thought out and executed, opening the door for abuse.
"The hurried rollout of HAMP would soon bring with it a rash of misconduct and criminal activity," Barofsky writes. "Treasury's bungling of HAMP and its refusal to heed our warnings and those of other TARP oversight bodies resulted in the program harming many of the people it was supposed to help."
As it turned out, the main beneficiaries of the mortgage program were the banks -- a repeated theme in Barofsky's book, "Bailout: An Inside Account Of How Washington Abandoned Main Street While Rescuing Wall Street,"
I remember reading stories of people applying for the program who ended up, incredibly, being told to pay MORE not less, and thinking it was a mistake. But the solution to the financial crisis caused by major corruption, was corrupt itself.
Good for Occupy for forcing some of these banks to come to agreements as they were supposed to do, so they can stay in their homes.
= new reply since forum marked as read