Yalies Jonathan G.S. Koppell and William N. Goetzmann on WaPo's Op-Ed page:

The theory underlying the bailout plan stalled in Congress is that rescuing the finance industry will restore market stability and that the benefits will eventually trickle down to average Americans. Thus, solving the subprime mortgage crisis has morphed into a much larger challenge: reassembling the architecture of the financial markets, which seemingly requires giving the Treasury secretary nearly a trillion dollars and extraordinary latitude to pick winners and losers.

There is an easier and more politically palatable fix: Pay off all the delinquent mortgages.

The financial crisis is a liquidity crisis, yes, but it is ultimately a product of homeowner failures to pay. Unless this fundamental problem is fixed, we will continue to see -- and need to treat -- the symptoms. The proposed bailout ignores this. Yet the sum being demanded from taxpayers is almost certainly more than sufficient to pay off all currently delinquent mortgages.

Academics.... Look, there's only one problem here, as the infestment bankers running the "crisis" scam see it: The American people have a trillion dollars, which they would otherwise foolishly throw away on things like universal healthcare, or SUPERTRAINS, or solar and wind power. And the infestment bankers want that trillion, so that the American people don't make such unwise decisions. And to that end, they're inflicting financial shocks on the American people, until they give it up. It's really that simple.

Now that we've cleared the opportunistic behavior of Our Betters out of the way, we can replace outright thievery (as enacted by the Bush + Reid + Pelosi + Frank + Obama + Paulson plan) with actual public policy. This our academics understand quite well, and advocate forcefully:

Some will argue that it is grossly unfair to pay off the mortgages of borrowers who took risks and lost. In other words, why should my profligate neighbor be rewarded for overleveraging himself?

Because such unfairness is a small price to pay to avoid a rapid transition to a socialist economy, the collapse of our financial system (and its related global implications) and a frightening shift of economic power toward the executive branch.

See? Even a House Republican knuckledragger or a Paulista can love HOLC!

Implementation could follow the example of the Home Owners' Loan Corp., which in the 1930s issued new mortgages to a quarter of American homeowners. ....

Like the administration's proposal, this plan would result in the government owning assets. But these assets would be real estate, not complex derivatives whose true value would take weeks to discern.

... Combining this approach with the government's proposal could greatly benefit taxpayers. Yes, the government's swift purchase of illiquid securities would stabilize compromised financial institutions and the credit markets. But the notion that taxpayers would benefit in the long run is pure speculation, particularly if the government overpaid for the securities. On the other hand, once a government-sponsored refinancing wave kicked in, the full value of the securities in the government's portfolio would be restored, and they could be sold off in an orderly manner, with Uncle Sam taking profits that would cover the cost of the bailout.

This solution would start by helping ordinary Americans and would quickly spill over to revive the financial markets. Directly addressing the underlying cause of the crisis would help ensure that we would not be facing the same crisis again down the road. While Wall Street has only recently felt the bite of foreclosures and delinquencies, communities across the nation will face greater financial and social fallout if the foreclosure crisis continues.

Academics... What does helping ordinary Americans have to do with any of this?

When you call your Senator, be sure to mention HOLC, and direct their attention to this Op-Ed in today's Washington Post.