==Tell that to the authors of the Lobbyist Registration Act, The Attorney Registration Act, The Charitable Solicitation Act, and others.

I agree. I think those fees are wrong as well, but no one has stepped up to challenge it. But if you go back to Murdock v. Pennsylvaina, the Court struck down fees on protected activity. And it was cited in Heller.

==The test of the fee’s constitutionality is whether it is necessary, reasonable, and directly related.

That part depends on how core it is to the right. They can’t charge you for a permit to stand on a corner with a bullhorn. But they can charge you for a parade permit. And using a fee for other than administration of what is allowed becomes a tax, which is being challenged in New York and CA.

In Illinois you have a tax on the license, the FOID, then in Chicago you have the CFP $100 and the costs to get it, $125-$150, plus the registration costs which I think is $20. So just to own a handgun in Chicago, with the Mayor new tax your looking at $325. Just for ownership in the home. That I think becomes excessive

==Unless I’m mistaken, the court’s have upheld the legality of registration, or atleast not struck it down.

Correct, they have not struck a registration scheme, and I beleive the court would find a no fee no hassle form of it consitutional.

==After all, it goes back to like 1792.

If you say that state’s have the right to require registration, that kind of presumes the right to raise revenue for managing a registration system.

BTW Todd, that was all a question :D

You’re an honest and reasonable chap and have followed these recent court cases better than anyone I know.

It’s not $25 bil in cash, much of it is in credits and offsets. And the devil(s) are in the details.

There’s a whole bunch of reasons this is a really sorry deal for taxpayers. What they don’t tell you is that most of the mortgage mods are actually going to be on 1st mortgages, which the banks don’t own. They’ve been securitized (MBS, anyone?) and sold to investors, with a substantial portion going to Fannie and Freddie.

Guess who backstops Fannie and Freddie for any losses? We, the taxpayers. So this is really just another bank bailout!

And there’s more….

Thanks for nothing, Lisa. You sold us out.

Just another reason why we should have a progressive income tax. I recognize that the poor do spend more on gambling/cigarettes/alcohol/drugs, but keeping the stuff off the market causes a bigger problem. So the poor are going to have to take one for the team or learn to dodge the bullet. Meanwhile, we make sure that the rest of the tax code doesn’t weigh more heavily on the impoverished.

===The mob will never go out of business. There will always be something around for gangs to make an illegal buck off of.===

There are illegal activities that are supported by some of the populace, like drugs and gambling. But then there are other illegal activities, like racketeering and burglary, that are purely menaces to society. By forcing the mob into actions that are purely menaces to society, you take away the support from the fringes of society. And that is going to lower the amount of people who join up and force the mob into using more difficult methods of making money.

Guess that blindness by wishful thinking. I WISH her office would consider releasing 10% - 20% of those funds for other services.

It’s definitely Friday… mentally and physically. I’m out!

The bigger causes: secondary markets and derivative trading that flew out of control because any regulators either did not catch up, or were removed in the 80’s and 90’s, entry into mortgage lending by personal finance companies with no expertise (Countrywide, Household) start up mortgage brokerage companies that directly misled and defrauded both customers and lending banks, (many of whom no longer even exist), invention of new markets and credit default swaps by big insurance companies (like AIG) based on nothing but empty valuation and speculation (Dick Grasso, who ran the NYSE, calls this the “on-line casino”), ratings agencies who were blind, keeping investors in the dark. A classic and clear case of an entirely “free market” without proper boundaries to protect all of its participants.

Unfortunately these other players, who caused more of this disaster than even the banks, and paid themselves handsomely, aren’t as easy to catch and make accountable. As Obama said, no one is saying this is fair to homeowners, but it’s a step in the right direction.