Mr. Lang must be an idiot. If President Bush wanted to tighten regulations, and his party had the majority in the House, why didn't the Republicans just outvote those darned Democrats and do it?? Oh, because they were afraid of a rebuke!! Oh, no!! Not another rebuke!!! Puh-leeze.

First of all, it's the Community Reinvestment Act (CRA), and, yes, it was passed in 1977. If Mr. Lang is going to discredit it, at least he could get its name right.

It's purpose was to make sure that loans were available to all segments of a community and to eliminate such discriminatory credit practices as requiring borrowers of a certain race to come up with higher down payments, and redlining. Redlining is when a bank will literally draw a line around a neighborhood and refuse to lend within the "redlined" area. It works hand in hand with the Fair Housing Act, which makes sure that nobody is denied housing based on sex or race, etc.

CRA in no way, shape or form recommends sub-prime lending. If a community has a non-profit affordable housing advocacy group, and a bank sponsors and attends a seminar given by that group, that would comply with CRA. If a government agency provides low-interest loans within the community, and the bank provides support to that agency, that complies with CRA. If a housing advocacy group offers a class for first-time home buyers, and a bank underwrites the cost of everyone's tuition, that counts for CRA. In addition, a bank must show that it does not discriminate against any applicants. That's all they have to do regarding CRA, and direct lending isn't necessarily even a piece of it.

Although many would like to point a finger at such programs as the cause for the current fiscal crisis, they were put in place to make sure that the same credit was made available to everyone and that credit decisions were fair and balanced.