Be careful what you believe solely by looking for names, I mean, the House, after being caught the first time referring to "community organizers" and "homeowner education" in the first iteration of the 700 billion dollar bailout, to then have the Senate by name ("ACORN")attempt to allocate 20 billion dollars to the Housing arm of ACORN which is meant to help new home owners, does not help anyone believe in these bills being upfront and honest in their statements of allocations.

Of course there is a sensitivity to allocating unheard of sums as it is, this is further exacerbated by doing so to non profit organizations.

In regard to Obama's former clients this is a particularly sensitive area. Rezko is a well documented slum lord that took government funds to "refurbish" buildings but did little refurbishing.

ACORN who also had Barack Obama as their lawyer, according to an article written by one of ACORN's founders and published in Social Policy Magazine. Interestingly, once there was great public interest shown for the article it was made available only to registered users. The article can be found in volume 34 I believe and is available at www.socialpolicy.org.

The lawsuit, that then lawyer Barack Obama brought, was to assure loans would be given to people at no interest, who cannot pay them back, and for no money down, on the grounds it's a civil rights violation if the bank doesn't make the loan.

You can see how the ACORN lawsuit results in great sensitivity to anything even slightly rewarding such groups that hired Obama to carry out such a lawsuit that created loans that are worthless and eventually never saw a penny of return on the money lent. It is this appearance of hand out to ACORN by organizational identification that is in the current bill and which more than suggests a reference to ACORN as a recipient of up to 4.2 billion dollars from the stimulus plan which money would provide no jobs when going to a non-profit as these operate almost entirely on the basis of volunteers.

The 700 billion TARP Bailout, the House Bill (the original of which has been removed from govtrack) was overt in referring to "Community Oranizing" and how 65% of 20% of the funds from TARP loan payback is put into a trust and would go to this particular community organizing function, distributed to non profit groups that assist with housing issues, again describing ACORN, at least according to their historic activity and role in communities. That provision was stricken, and then a new provision surfaced once the Senate picked it up which overtly stated "to provide $20 billion to the Association of Community Organizers for Reform Now," which was quickly stricken based on republican objections because ACORN is not a financial institution with troubled assets as the TARP was meant to be used.

With the stimulus bill it appears the democrats learned their "language" lesson and the Republicans found the hole that can be used to create a virtual slush fund for these non-profit groups whose business organization does not provide much, if any, economic stimulus.

Here is the language in the current stimulus that eludes to ACORN by identification of the organization in an area of activity that ACORN's Homeowner Education Group, the principle that funds the ACORN political group, has done historically:

"For a further additional amount for ‘Community Development Fund,’ $4,190,000,000, to be used for neighborhood stabilization activities related to emergency assistance for the redevelopment of abandoned and foreclosed homes as authorized under division B, title III of the Housing and Economic Recovery Act of 2008 (Public Law 110–289), of which—

“(1) not less than $3,440,000,000 shall be allocated by a competition for which eligible entities shall be States, units of general local government, and nonprofit entities or consortia of nonprofit entities[.]”

“(2) up to $750,000,000 shall be awarded by competition to nonprofit entities or consortia of nonprofit entities to provide community stabilization assistance […]”

The use of "consortia of nonprofit entities" is not a reference to many non profit entities. There are few "consortia of nonprofit entities" such as ACORN, and even fewer still that are involved in "stabilization activities related to emergency assistance for the redevelopment of abandoned and foreclosed homes" and this is why there is this certainty this language is specifically to assure ACORN an opportunity at these funds that is less scrutinized than the current access they have to other smaller pools of funds at the state and local level that are reimbursed by the federal government. This would streamline the process specifically for entities meeting that "consortia of non profits" identification so they can get their hands on a larger pool of fund without the State and local governments as middlemen.

This access isn't bad, in and of itself, but, a consortia of non profits will suck up the whole 4.2 billion before other non profits will have a chance to even apply for them, especially one that favor has been shown to by the democrats in Congress, FannieMae, FreddieMac, and even George Bush (See below.). And this is besides the point of the money providing little if any economic stimulus.

Also understand that ACORN did receive 17 million dollars under George Bush just before he left office and irrespective of the House Minority leader, Boehner asking him to stop all funding of ACORN until the disposition of the the voter fraud cases pending in 11 states is final.

It appears to me that if there hadn't been an overt attempt by Senate democrats to give 20 billion to ACORN in the 700 billion bailout after the republicans caught the attempt to give 65% of 20% of the Tarp funds to ACORN in the original House Bailout Bill that failed, the republicans wouldn't be scrutinizing so strongly to find the one means in the law by which ACORN can appear to be receiving a special consideration by reference as "a consortia of non profit organizations" which is just to obvious a convenient special provision due to it being in the exact area of public funding that ACORN has pursued in their history of community activism.

Now I can understand not even thinking this is happening, but, I submit that if you pull out your vehicle code and look up almost any portion after the first 100 codes, you'll see that politicians are not direct, even those professing "change." They craft laws to fulfill personal and other special interests without appearing to do so as their daily job.

To emphasize the special interest connection that lawmakers are far more aware of than the general public, President Obama maintained that he had a very minimal relationship with ACORN throughout his campaign. Yet the Social Policy Magazine article I mentioned above, the one by one of the founders of ACORN, with photographs as well, entirely refutes and states otherwise.

This video, doesn't help either:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?...

I don't blame you if you can't see it, they are politicians writing these laws, lawyers studied in "the art of rhetoric" also knows as bullsh**. So I can understand entirely any reservations you have to seeing the connections and apologize for my not being better able to articulate these so you can see them.