PlainBillCongress, translated.Legislation. Context. Public interest.Committee on the Judiciary. Hearings held.
Congressional Research Service
Version 00 · Introduced in Senate · Nov 17, 2008
Homeowner Assistance and Taxpayer Protection Act - Amends the Emergency Economic Stabilization Act of 2008 (EESA), with respect to mortgages acquired by the Secretary of the Treasury, to direct the Secretary to use authority to require (currently, encourage) the servicers of the underlying mortgages to take advantage of the HOPE for Homeowners Program under the National Housing Act or other available programs to minimize foreclosures. Requires federal property managers holding, owning, or controlling mortgages, mortgage backed securities, and other assets secured by residential real estate to do likewise.
Directs a federal property manager to require (currently, encourage) loan servicers to implement specified loan modifications in any case in which the property manager does not own a residential mortgage loan, but holds an interest in obligations or pools of obligations secured by residential mortgage loans.
Requires lenders to participate in HOPE for Homeowners Program when homeowners elect to participate.
Showing the opening paragraphs of the official summary.
Amends Chapter 13 (Adjustment of Debts of an Individual with Regular Income) of the federal bankruptcy code to allow a debtor's plan to modify an allowed secured claim secured by the debtor's principal residence (mortgage), if, after deduction of permitted expenses, the debtor has insufficient remaining current monthly income to retain possession of the residence by curing a default and maintaining payments while the case is pending.
Waives the credit counseling requirement for a debtor whose home is in foreclosure.
Waives the liaibility of the debtor and the debtor's estate for certain fees arising in connection with a claim secured by the debtor's principal residence.
Amends EESA to prohibit financial institutions from which troubled assets are purchased by the Secretary from paying increased dividends until such time as the troubled assets are no longer owned by the Secretary.
Requires that dividends be reduced to pay for excessive executive compensation in the case of any such financial institution.
People & committees
Sen. Durbin, Richard J. [D-IL] · D–IL
Legislative record
A procedural vote is different from passage. Passage in one chamber does not establish enactment. Explore the glossary.
Committee on the Judiciary. Hearings held.
Read twice and referred to the Committee on the Judiciary. (text of measure as introduced: CR S10600-10601)
Sponsor introductory remarks on measure. (CR S10599-10600)
Introduced in Senate
Primary sources
Text links open the official source. We currently store references to these documents.
Source last updated: Aug 10, 2026. Consult Congress.gov for the current record.
AI Conversation Starters
Choose a perspective, copy a prompt, and paste it into your preferred AI. Each prompt includes the bill version and available official source links, and asks for counterarguments as well as supporting evidence.
Analyze S.3690 as objectively as possible. Explain its main provisions, who would be affected, possible benefits and harms, implementation, exceptions, and uncertainties. Present the strongest arguments for and against it, and identify evidence needed to assess its public impact.
Examine S.3690 through a progressive lens, focusing on fairness, access, economic inequality, and effects on vulnerable communities. Explain potential benefits, costs, and unintended consequences. Consider the strongest counterarguments and distinguish stated goals from demonstrated outcomes.
Examine S.3690 through a conservative lens, focusing on fiscal responsibility, institutional stability, federalism, and the scope of government. Explain potential benefits, costs, and unintended consequences. Consider the strongest counterarguments and any provisions that challenge this perspective.
Examine S.3690 through a civil-liberties and limited-government lens. Consider individual rights, privacy, voluntary choice, accountability, and government power. Explain tradeoffs, possible safeguards, and the strongest counterarguments without assuming the proposal is beneficial or harmful.