What does that have to do with the topic? Those people are fucked regardless.
Remember how Obama literally bribed people into purchasing homes that he knew damn well, or has chosen a advisers that are utterly incompetent, would further depreciate, likely for far more than the bribe? Or how about how he, which he continues to this day, refuses to go after them for blatant and provable crimes or at the absolute least claw back their illgotten gains as to not give incentive to do it again? How about the FDIC taking over a bank and finding their assets worth half of what the bank valued them at? You give that a try and see how it works out for you, wanna know how it worked out for the banksters? How about sworn testimony in front of Congress admitting fraud by one of the top banksters yet somehow not even a peep about an investigation (shouldn't an admission make an indictment rather easy to get?)? I could go on and on.
Bottom line: Bush and Obama are owned by the same people. Its not that one is less or more bad on this particular subject, they are the exact same damned thing. Sure their might be differences in what they say but not what they actually do.
At any rate, back on topic, what do people that are going to be foreclosed on regardless of what is done, short of propping up the entire housing market which I argue is impossible, have to do with the topic at hand?
There's a continuum of people from hopelessly underwater to underwater but still able to make it in the current situation. I'm sorry if I didn't make that clear. Whatever their reasons, many underwater buyers will hold on when they can, but that doesn't mean they can successfully rent their places out, either, for a variety of reasons I offered above.
Right now making the whole 20% down scenario reality will just depress prices much further faster, discouraging holdouts, encouraging strategic default.
The whole homebuyer credit was about reducing inventories, favoring current home owners, bankers and investors, no doubt, but being underwater isn't a horribly big deal if it's something the buyer can afford. Many buyers don't care about that because they don't plan on going anywhere and their new fixed rate 30 year note is something they can truly afford. When TCO is nearly the same as rent, it makes sense, because rent goes up while payments on fixed rate mortgages never do.
The bailout was a done deal before Obama took office, something he basically inherited, warts and all. And Bankers' testimony before Congress isn't admissible in a court of law, because they haven't been mirandized, something they know full well. It's also prejudicial to juries. Talking a case and making one are very different.
I've never been happy with the bailout, but it was the best we were going to get with the Bush Admin in power. When the bankers, who basically run Washington, fell to their knees, the Bush Admin was right there to stand 'em back up, return them to glory in return for obvious financial support for their party's candidates.
The best answer, nationalizing the bastards, sacking the bankers and the shareholders, cleaning up their balance sheets and selling them back into the market never was on the table for ideological reasons. Handing out money to welfare moms so they can feed their kids is not OK, but handing out billions to Wall St so they can keep their place in the Hamptons clearly is, in a wonderful and magical Reaganomic sort of way. Extreme wealth has extreme privileges for Republicans, obviously.