{"database": "press", "table": "releases", "rows": [["https://web.archive.org/web/20141205201904/http://goodlatte.house.gov/press_releases/617", "GOODLATTE & HENSARLING TO AG: WHY DOES JUSTICE DEPT. REQUIRE BANKS TO DONATE TO ACTIVIST GROUPS?", "2014-11-25", "2014", "2014-11", "Republican", "House", "VA", "Robert Goodlatte", "G000289", "web.archive.org", null, null, "legacy", "GOODLATTE & HENSARLING TO AG: WHY DOES JUSTICE DEPT. REQUIRE BANKS TO DONATE TO ACTIVIST GROUPS? \n                      \n                      \tWASHINGTON, D.C. \u2013 House Judiciary Committee Chairman Bob Goodlatte (R-Va.) and House Financial Services Chairman Jeb Hensarling (R-Tex.) wrote a letter to Attorney General Eric Holder requesting information about two questionable terms in the Justice Department\u2019s recent mortgage-lending settlement agreements with two major banks.\n                      \n                      \tThe Department\u2019s most recent settlements with Bank of America and Citigroup required millions of dollars in minimum donations to activist groups from an approved list, which includes La Raza and NeighborWorks, which has been described as \u201cfund(ing) a national network of left-wing community organizers operating in the mold of Acorn.\u201d\n                      \n                      \tIn addition, as an incentive for donations above the minimum to these groups, settling banks earn two dollars\u2019 worth of credit against their Department-mandated consumer relief commitment for every one dollar donated. As stated in the letter, \u201c[T]hese startling terms in the Justice Department\u2019s two latest settlements make them look less like consumer relief and more like bank \u2018shakedowns\u2019 to benefit special interest groups.\u201d\n                      \n                      \tRead more about the unprecedented terms of the Justice Department\u2019s mortgage-lending settlements in the text of the letter to Attorney General Holder below:\n                      \n                      \tDear Attorney General Holder:\u00a0\n                      \n                      \tWe request information about the Justice Department\u2019s mortgage-lending lawsuits and whether they actually deliver redress to consumers genuinely harmed.\n                      \n                      \tRelief for these consumers is long overdue, yet the Justice Department\u2019s record settlements have left homeowners disappointed. It seems that the alleged victims are not the primary beneficiaries of these multi-billion dollar settlements. \u00a0Instead, the terms in the Justice Department\u2019s two latest settlements look less like consumer relief and more like a scheme to funnel money to politically favored special interest groups.\n                      \n                      \tFirst, the settling banks must donate a minimum of $150 million to activist groups like La Raza and NeighborWorks, which funds a national network of community organizers. \u00a0Second, for each dollar donated above the minimum, banks earn two dollars\u2019 worth of credit against their overall consumer relief commitment. \u00a0By contrast, direct forms of consumer relief, such as loan modifications, earn only dollar-for-dollar credit. \u00a0This makes donations to activist groups far more attractive to banks than providing direct relief to injured consumers. \u00a0As a result, the settlements appear to serve as a vehicle for funding activist groups rather than as a means of securing relief for consumers actually harmed.\n                      \n                      \tOn July 14, 2014, the Justice Department announced a $7 billion mortgage-lending settlement with Citigroup that included $2.5 billion in \u201cconsumer relief.\u201d \u00a0In its press release touting the settlement, the Department described the relief as \u201cinnovative\u201d and as going beyond the \u201cprincipal reductions and loan modifications . . . built into previous resolutions.\u201d The details of this relief were contained in Annex 2 of the agreement. \u00a0Menu item 4F of the annex requires a minimum $10 million in donations to HUD-approved \u201chousing counseling agencies,\u201d which include La Raza and NeighborWorks. \u00a0Menu items 4D and 4E require an additional minimum $40 million in donations for housing-related organizations, including \u201clegal aid\u201d and community development \u201cnon-profits.\u201d\n                      \n                      \tFor every dollar donated above the $50 million minimum, Citigroup will earn two dollars\u2019 worth of credit against its $2.5 billion consumer relief commitment. \u00a0By contrast, for direct forms of consumer relief, like principal forgiveness, the base credit is merely dollar-for-dollar.\n                      \n                      \tNearly identical terms appear in the Department\u2019s August 21, 2014 settlement with Bank of America (BoA). \u00a0This settlement, which the Department has described as \u201chistoric,\u201d demands a minimum of $100 million in donations to housing-related organizations, including counseling agencies, \u201clegal aid\u201d organizations and community development \u201cnon-profits.\u201d \u00a0For every dollar donated above the minimum, BoA\u2019s credit against its overall $7 billion consumer relief obligation is two-for-one. \u00a0Again, the base credit for direct forms of consumer relief is just dollar-for-dollar.\n                      \n                      \tThese terms appear unprecedented. \u00a0The Department\u2019s November 2013 mortgage-lending settlement with J.P. Morgan Chase, for example, included only direct forms of consumer relief. \u00a0Certain previous agreements, including during the George W. Bush Administration, provided that any funds remaining after all consumer injury had been redressed could go to third-party groups. \u00a0But that is far different from earmarking mandatory minimum donations to activist groups as central provisions of settlements, and giving banks twice the incentive to funnel settlement funds to third-party groups instead of to harmed consumers.\n                      \n                      \tIn light of these concerns, we request that the Department conduct a briefing for the Judiciary and Financial Services Committees as soon as possible on the foregoing settlement terms and ask that you provide the following answers and information before the briefing and no later than December 9, 2014:\n                       \n                      \t\n                      \t\tIdentify the individuals who were involved in making the decision to depart from the J.P. Morgan Chase settlement format and add the mandatory donations and two-for-one credit terms to the Citigroup and BoA settlements, and in the subsequent implementation of those settlement terms.\n                      \t\n                      \t\tWere non-profits that stood to gain involved in any manner in that decision? \u00a0If so, which ones and to what extent?\n                      \t\n                      \t\tWere any White House officials involved in the decision? \u00a0If so, who and to what extent?\n                      \t\n                      \t\tDid Citigroup or BoA ever receive any formal or informal guidance from the Department or the White House regarding which particular groups should receive donations?\n                      \t\n                      \t\tPlease provide all communications relating to what became the \u201cCommunity Reinvestment and Neighborhood Stabilization\u201d provisions in the Citigroup and BoA settlements. \u00a0Please also provide any communications discussing similar terms as part of the J.P. Morgan Chase settlement discussions.\n                       \n                      \n                      \tThank you for your prompt attention to this request.", 1, "2026-03-30T12:14:52Z", "2026-03-30T12:14:52Z"]], "columns": ["url", "title", "date", "year", "month", "party", "chamber", "state", "member_name", "bioguide_id", "domain", "scraper", "source", "date_source", "text", "has_text", "collected_at", "updated_at"], "primary_keys": ["url"], "primary_key_values": ["https://web.archive.org/web/20141205201904/http://goodlatte.house.gov/press_releases/617"], "units": {}, "query_ms": 0.8047118317335844, "source": "dwillis/congress-press", "source_url": "https://github.com/dwillis/congress-press", "license": "MIT", "license_url": "https://github.com/dwillis/congress-press/blob/main/LICENSE"}