Superbad.

It would be nice to think that that word only applied to last year's hit movie and had comedic appeal. Sadly, "Superbad" also is an appropriate word for Congress' solution to the housing crisis. And it's no laughing matter.

Before explaining, however, it is imperative to make a clear distinction between two words: "homeowner" versus "borrower."

A "homeowner" is someone who does not have a mortgage. They own their home free and clear from any bank loans and their only responsibility is to keep paying the annual real estate taxes, in order to stay in that home.

A "borrower," on the other hand, has a legal interest in the property but they owe a monthly payment to a bank. Many times, a "borrower" is incorrectly identified as a "homeowner." The two are not the same.

With that being said, Congress has instituted a significant shift toward assisting borrowers who have fallen on tough times. No one can argue that, with rising fuel prices and the cost of food skyrocketing, times are not tough.

However, shouldn't blame also fall squarely upon the shoulders of the borrowers who knew they were over-paying just to keep up with their neighbors? Isn't part of being a responsible borrower knowing how to save some money for inflation or to buy groceries?

To be sure, there are bad lenders that made bad loans, some of which even were fraudulent. Those lenders should be penalized to the fullest extent of the law and be shut down. Borrowers who were a victim of fraudulent lending practices deserve to have their loans adjusted.

However, what about the borrowers who simply overpaid and knew that things would be tight on their wallet? Should taxpayers bail them out, and should the taxpayer also bail out the lenders who made unprecedented profits from the loans? No way.

But that's what Congress is proposing.

The plot thickens, though. New laws are being written to further extend the bailout.

In an April press release, HUD announced that it would begin helping borrowers who were in adjustable rate mortgages and have missed two consecutive mortgage payments. They would need 3 percent equity in their house, too. Huh?

Isn't one of the basic elements of lending to make loans to people who can pay on time? Additionally, shouldn't a borrower have some "skin in the game," as they say? Three percent equity doesn't even cover half the realtor's commission if the loan should foreclose. And you're going to pay for it whether you like it or not, dear taxpayer.

The question, though, really is this: What are we going to do for the rest of the country that didn't overspend, yet has the same interest rate as the borrower who couldn't pay on time? Why is their rate going to be the same as conscientious consumers who underspent and actually (gasp) have some money in the bank just in case times get tough?

We're going to do nothing. Conscientious consumers are going to pay for their peers' poor judgment.

Why is this happening? Simply put, Wall Street lines the pockets of politicians every year to help them get re-elected. In turn, politicians ensure that Wall Street insiders make billions of dollars. Last year alone, more than $9 million was contributed by companies involved in finance/insurance/real estate to just the House Finance Committee. That's a lot of money going toward governance, folks.

Who is going to benefit from the bailout? You guessed it; Wall Street, of course. The same folks who created the mess have been assigned the dubious honor of fixing things. They will proudly refinance these loans into a new mortgage pool, complete with a three-year prepayment penalty, plus first dibs on any equity gained when the borrower sells the house.

By the way, there is a tax incentive for banks to "write down" balances on loans that exceed the appraised value of the house. Accountants love write-downs, and Wall Street is full ofaccountants.

The Federal Housing Administration (FHA) is the government agency charged with "fixing" this little mess. By its own admission, FHA is operating in the red this year. If things go the way Congress is proposing, the agency will fall short by about a billion bucks. That's where you step in, dear taxpayer.

Don't be fooled by your elected officials who state that "taxpayers won't pay a dime for this response to the housing crisis." You already are paying for it, and will start to pay more if Congress pressures the Bush administration to approve this senseless bill that benefits few, if any, hard-working, penny-pinching Americans.

I am a free-market capitalist. Let the markets work this thing out rather than have the government meddle in a risk-based economic system.

Risk equals reward. That's finance 101, and by eliminating the element of risk, Wall Street has every incentive to gamble loosely with someone else's money.

And that's just superbad.

Christian Ola is a Butler Eagle columnist and has 16 years' experience in mortgage lending, as a mortgage auditor, underwriter and small business owner. He also teaches finance at Butler County Community College.