Subprime mortgages have been portrayed on many fronts as the main cause of the meltdown of the United States housing market.

Perhaps that's true in some states, but results from a new study reveal that "subprimes" have not been the main contributing factor to home foreclosures in Pennsylvania. And perhaps residents of some other states, like residents of the Keystone State, have been misled about the reasons for their foreclosure statistics.

Five hundred Pennsylvanians who participated in the study in question, which was commissioned by the Pennsylvania Association of Realtors, provided a revelation that no doubt surprised many of the purported experts who fixed the chief blame for the housing crisis on the subprime mortgage instruments that came back to haunt many homeowners.

Only 14 percent of participants in the study, which was listed as having a margin of error of plus-4 or minus-4, were carrying a subprime mortgage when they got into financial trouble. The circumstances that triggered the foreclosures in most cases were loss of a job and medical bills.

In fact, 57 percent of those sampled in the study said their household had experienced a wage earner's job loss in the 12 months prior to foreclosure, while 47 percent said they had been the victim of unexpected medical expenses.

Thirty-six percent indicated they had other "unexpected bills" as well.

Thus, subprime mortgages have played only a minor role in this state's foreclosures.

Some people might have suspicions about the accuracy of the study since it was commissioned by an organization tied to the housing market — not an organization totally independent of that market. The study was funded by a grant from the National Association of Realtors.

However, it was a Florida-based polling firm — Strategic Guidance Systems — that conducted the survey, not a firm based in this state. And, the state Realtors association had an honest objective in seeking the information, which was to better understand the impact of foreclosures on individual Pennsylvanians.

If the state association had suspicions about the housing-meltdown blame that has been put forth on many fronts since the crisis began, the study confirmed that those suspicions were well-founded.

Of the households surveyed, 41 percent held prime fixed-rate mortgages and 12 percent had prime adjustable-rate loans.

The study also provided some other — unfortunately, troubling — details that should not only be of interest to Realtors, but also to bankers and mortgage company officials, as well as the public in general.

A total of 91 percent of those surveyed said they attempted to contact their lender about possible solutions to their pending foreclosure, but 48 percent alleged that their lenders were "not at all" willing to work with them to resolve their problem.

Thirty percent of those who worked with their lenders said it made no difference, and 19 percent said working with their lenders "made things worse."

Another aspect of the study that is interesting to note is that most of those surveyed were not young couples just starting out who did not fully understand the financial dangers tied to home ownership and carrying a hefty mortgage. Most of the survey respondents were between the ages of 40 and 59 and, at the time of their foreclosures, 71 percent had lived in their home for more than five years.

It's important for people of Pennsylvania and elsewhere to know the reasons for problems that occur. However, the reasons that are presented should accurately depict what really has taken place or currently is in play.

From the study in question, it's clear that the foreclosure problem is deeper than most officials up to now have been willing to acknowledge.

One of the big reasons for the problem is that Pennsylvania leaders have been unable to attract new business and industry at the rate that is necessary for the commonwealth to thrive.

Politicians have no power to keep their constituents free of illness, but governmental leaders should acknowledge their failures first, before casting blame on others — even if, as in the case of subprime mortgages, they have an easy target toward which to deflect criticism.