Business
S&P Close to $1.37B Deal Over Risky Mortgage Bond Ratings

This Oct. 9, 2011, file photo shows Standard & Poor’s rating agency in New York. Standard & Poor’s is close to a $1.37 billion settlement with the Obama administration and U.S. states over allegations it knowingly inflated its ratings of risky mortgage investments that helped trigger the financial crisis. (AP Photo/Henny Ray Abrams, File)
MARCY GORDON, AP Business Writer
WASHINGTON (AP) — Standard & Poor’s is close to a $1.37 billion settlement with the Obama administration and U.S. states over allegations it knowingly inflated its ratings of risky mortgage investments that helped trigger the financial crisis.
The credit rating agency is expected to sign an agreement to settle with the Justice Department and about 20 state attorneys general, a person familiar with the matter said Wednesday. The person spoke on condition of anonymity because the settlement isn’t finalized and hasn’t been announced. It may be completed next week, the person said.
John Piecuch, a spokesman for New York-based S&P, a division of McGraw Hill Financial Inc., said the company declined to comment.
The settlement would resolve civil charges filed nearly two years ago accusing S&P of failing to warn investors that the housing market was collapsing in 2006 because doing so would hurt its ratings business.
According to the lawsuits filed by the Justice Department and nearly two dozen states, S&P gave high ratings to the securities backed by risky mortgages because it wanted to get more business from the big banks that issued them.
The Justice Department suit against S&P was one of the Obama administration’s most aggressive actions against those deemed responsible for contributing to the worst financial crisis since the Great Depression, and it followed years of criticism that the U.S. government had failed to do enough to hold financial-market players accountable.
The Justice Department had demanded $5 billion in penalties from S&P when it sued the company in February 2013. A payment of $1.37 billion to settle the case would be less than S&P’s revenue in 2013 of $2.27 billion.
The three big rating agencies — S&P, Moody’s and Fitch — have been blamed for helping fuel the 2008 crisis by giving high ratings to high-risk mortgage securities. The high ratings made it possible for banks to sell trillions of dollars’ worth of those securities — some investors, such as pension funds, can only buy securities that carry high credit ratings.
But those investments soured when the housing market went bust in 2006.
Experts have said the Justice Department lawsuit against S&P could serve as a template for action against Fitch and Moody’s.
S&P disputed the government’s allegations when the federal suit was filed, calling the legal action “meritless” and the claims “simply not true.” The company insisted its ratings were based on a good-faith assessment of the performance of home mortgages during a time of market turmoil. S&P also accused the government of filing the lawsuit against it as “retaliation” for its downgrade of the United States’ credit rating in 2011.
The Wall Street Journal, citing unidentified people familiar with the situation, reported earlier Wednesday that the settlement amount would likely be $1.37 billion.
Last week, S&P agreed to pay the federal government, New York state and Massachusetts more than $77 million to settle separate charges by the Securities and Exchange Commission related to its ratings of high-risk mortgage securities after the crisis. The SEC had accused S&P of fraudulent misconduct, saying the company loosened standards to drum up business in 2011 and 2012.
S&P neither admitted nor denied the charges in the settlement.
Copyright 2015 The Associated Press. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten or redistributed.
Activism
OPINION: Your Voice and Vote Impact the Quality of Your Health Care
One of the most dangerous developments we’re seeing now? Deep federal cuts are being proposed to Medicaid, the life-saving health insurance program that covers nearly 80 million lower-income individuals nationwide. That is approximately 15 million Californians and about 1 million of the state’s nearly 3 million Black Californians who are at risk of losing their healthcare.

By Rhonda M. Smith, Special to California Black Media Partners
Shortly after last year’s election, I hopped into a Lyft and struck up a conversation with the driver. As we talked, the topic inevitably turned to politics. He confidently told me that he didn’t vote — not because he supported Donald Trump, but because he didn’t like Kamala Harris’ résumé. When I asked what exactly he didn’t like, he couldn’t specifically articulate his dislike or point to anything specific. In his words, he “just didn’t like her résumé.”
That moment really hit hard for me. As a Black woman, I’ve lived through enough election cycles to recognize how often uncertainty, misinformation, or political apathy keep people from voting, especially Black voters whose voices are historically left out of the conversation and whose health, economic security, and opportunities are directly impacted by the individual elected to office, and the legislative branches and political parties that push forth their agenda.
That conversation with the Lyft driver reflects a troubling surge in fear-driven politics across our country. We’ve seen White House executive orders gut federal programs meant to help our most vulnerable populations and policies that systematically exclude or harm Black and underserved communities.
One of the most dangerous developments we’re seeing now? Deep federal cuts are being proposed to Medicaid, the life-saving health insurance program that covers nearly 80 million lower-income individuals nationwide. That is approximately 15 million Californians and about 1 million of the state’s nearly 3 million Black Californians who are at risk of losing their healthcare.
Medicaid, called Medi-Cal in California, doesn’t just cover care. It protects individuals and families from medical debt, keeps rural hospitals open, creates jobs, and helps our communities thrive. Simply put; Medicaid is a lifeline for 1 in 5 Black Americans. For many, it’s the only thing standing between them and a medical emergency they can’t afford, especially with the skyrocketing costs of health care. The proposed cuts mean up to 7.2 million Black Americans could lose their healthcare coverage, making it harder for them to receive timely, life-saving care. Cuts to Medicaid would also result in fewer prenatal visits, delayed cancer screenings, unfilled prescriptions, and closures of community clinics. When healthcare is inaccessible or unaffordable, it doesn’t just harm individuals, it weakens entire communities and widens inequities.
The reality is Black Americans already face disproportionately higher rates of poorer health outcomes. Our life expectancy is nearly five years shorter in comparison to White Americans. Black pregnant people are 3.6 times more likely to die during pregnancy or postpartum than their white counterparts.
These policies don’t happen in a vacuum. They are determined by who holds power and who shows up to vote. Showing up amplifies our voices. Taking action and exercising our right to vote is how we express our power.
I urge you to start today. Call your representatives, on both sides of the aisle, and demand they protect Medicaid (Medi-Cal), the Affordable Care Act (Covered CA), and access to food assistance programs, maternal health resources, mental health services, and protect our basic freedoms and human rights. Stay informed, talk to your neighbors and register to vote.
About the Author
Rhonda M. Smith is the Executive Director of the California Black Health Network, a statewide nonprofit dedicated to advancing health equity for all Black Californians.
Black History
Henry Blair, the Second African American to Obtain a Patent
Being a successful farmer required consistent production. Blair figured out a way to increase his harvest. He did this with two inventions. His first invention was a corn planter. The planter had the same structure as a wheelbarrow, with a box to hold the seed and rakes dragging behind to cover them. This machine allowed farmers to plant their crops more economically.

By Tamara Shiloh
The debate over whether enslaved African Americans could receive U.S. Government-issued patents was still unfolding when the second African American to hold a patent, Henry Blair, received his first patent in 1834.
The first African American to receive a patent was Thomas Jennings in 1821 for his discovery of a process called dry scouring, also known as dry cleaning.
Blair was born in Glen Ross, Maryland, in 1807. He was an African American farmer who received two patents. Each patent was designed to help increase agricultural productivity.
There is very little information about his life prior to the inventions. It is known that he was a farmer who invented machines to help with planting and harvesting crops. There is no written evidence that he was a slave.
However, it is apparent that he was a businessman.
Being a successful farmer required consistent production. Blair figured out a way to increase his harvest. He did this with two inventions. His first invention was a corn planter. The planter had the same structure as a wheelbarrow, with a box to hold the seed and rakes dragging behind to cover them. This machine allowed farmers to plant their crops more economically.
Blair could not write. As a result of his illiteracy, he signed the patent with an “X”. He received his first patent for the corn planter on Oct. 14, 1834.
Two years later, taking advantage of the boost in the cotton industry, he received his second patent. This time for a cotton planter. This machine worked by splitting the ground with two shovel-like blades that were pulled along by a horse. A wheel-driven cylinder behind the blades placed seeds into the freshly plowed ground. Not only was this another economical and efficient machine. It also helped with controlling weeds and put the seeds in the ground quickly Henry Blair received his second patent on Aug. 31, 1836
During this time, the United States government passed a law that allowed patents to be granted to both free and enslaved men. However, in 1857, this law was contested by a slaveowner. He argued that slaveowners had a right to claim credit for a slave’s inventions. His argument was that since an owner’s slaves were his property, anything that a slave owned was the property of the owner also.
In 1858 the law changed, and patents were no longer given to slaves. However, the law changed again in 1871 after the Civil War. The patent law was revised to permit all American men, regardless of race, the right to patent their inventions.
Blair died in 1860.
Bo Tefu
Gov. Newsom Highlights Record-Breaking Tourism Revenue, Warns of Economic Threats from Federal Policies
“California dominates as a premier destination for travelers throughout the nation and around the globe,” said Newsom. “With diverse landscapes, top-rate attractions, and welcoming communities, California welcomes millions of visitors every year. We also recognize that our state’s progress is threatened by the economic impacts of this federal administration, and are committed to working to protect jobs and ensure all Californians benefit from a thriving tourism industry.”

By Bo Tefu, California Black Media
Last week, Gov. Gavin Newsom, along with the nonprofit organization Visit California, announced that tourism spending in California reached a record $157.3 billion in 2024, reinforcing the state’s status as the top travel destination in the United States.
The Governor made the announcement May 5, referencing Visit California’s 2024 Economic Impact Report, which highlights a 3% increase in tourism revenue over the previous year.
According to the report, California’s tourism sector supported 1.2 million jobs, generated $12.6 billion in state and local tax revenues, and created 24,000 new jobs in 2024.
“California dominates as a premier destination for travelers throughout the nation and around the globe,” said Newsom. “With diverse landscapes, top-rate attractions, and welcoming communities, California welcomes millions of visitors every year. We also recognize that our state’s progress is threatened by the economic impacts of this federal administration, and are committed to working to protect jobs and ensure all Californians benefit from a thriving tourism industry.”
Despite the gains in tourism revenue, Visit California’s revised 2025 forecast points to a 1% decline in total visitation and a 9.2% decrease in international travel. The downturn is attributed to federal economic policy and what officials are calling an impending “Trump Slump,” caused by waning global interest in traveling to the United States.
To offset projected losses, the Governor is encouraging Californians to continue traveling within the state and has launched a new campaign aimed at Canadian travelers.
-
Activism4 weeks ago
AI Is Reshaping Black Healthcare: Promise, Peril, and the Push for Improved Results in California
-
Activism4 weeks ago
Barbara Lee Accepts Victory With “Responsibility, Humility and Love”
-
Activism4 weeks ago
ESSAY: Technology and Medicine, a Primary Care Point of View
-
Activism4 weeks ago
Faces Around the Bay: Author Karen Lewis Took the ‘Detour to Straight Street’
-
Activism4 weeks ago
Newsom Fights Back as AmeriCorps Shutdown Threatens Vital Services in Black Communities
-
Arts and Culture4 weeks ago
BOOK REVIEW: Love, Rita: An American Story of Sisterhood, Joy, Loss, and Legacy
-
#NNPA BlackPress4 weeks ago
The RESISTANCE – FREEDOM NOW
-
Alameda County4 weeks ago
OUSD Supt. Chief Kyla Johnson-Trammell to Step Down on July 1