New data released today shows that “a stunning 48 percent” of homeowners with a subprime mortgage “are behind on their payments or in foreclosure,” and that a record 5.4 million homeowners were at least one month late or in foreclosure at the end of last year. The House is currently debating a measure that could address these terrible numbers by allowing judges to “cram-down” mortgage payments for homeowners who have filed for Chapter 13 bankruptcy.

Republicans, however, are “on the warpath” against cram-downs, claiming that they will allow homeowners to “game the system” by going “straight to bankruptcy.” Watch a compilation:

So are these representatives saying that they would “go straight to bankruptcy” to lower their own mortgage payments? Before they make such a rash decision, here’s a brief description of the Chapter 13 process:

Under Chapter 13, debtors can be grilled under oath by the judge, the bankruptcy trustee and their creditors, who have every right to see the color of their insides. With bankruptcy filers’ income and outflow subject to rigorous monitoring, they give up every ounce of their financial freedom for three to five years. Once they’re out of bankruptcy they may still owe most of their secured debts, although the payments may be more bearable.

Plus, a bankruptcy can remain on your credit report for up to 10 years. Doesn’t seem so enticing any more, does it?

Far from being used to “game the system,” cram-downs will likely be a last resort for homeowners who can’t find a way to make any other option work. Under the Obama administration’s housing plan, lenders will receive $1,000 for every mortgage modification and $1,000 each year for three years if the borrower does not re-default, giving them every incentive to keep a homeowner out of bankruptcy. The housing plan also offers ample opportunity for refinancing, making bankruptcy the least appealing option for everyone involved.

As Professor Adam Levitin of Georgetown Law School wrote, cram-downs are a “form of foreclosure relief that has no cost to taxpayers, does not create moral hazard…and provides an important future defense against systemic financial system risk.” Indeed, by standing in the way of a housing fix, these Republicans are turning their backs on millions of Americans and preventing a key step toward economic recovery.

In order to responsibly fund far-reaching health reform, President Obama’s budget includes limiting to the 28% rate itemized deductions for the very richest Americans. This means that the very wealthiest taxpayers used to saving $350 in taxes per $1000 deduction would save only $280, the same as over 98% of American taxpayers with marginal tax rates at or below 28%.

There have been concerns that this proposal would adversely affect charitable contributions, which are deductible from taxes. But new numbers from the Tax Policy Center show that over 80% of individual charitable contributions are given by those at or below the 28% bracket, meaning they are totally unaffected by the proposal.

The remaining 18.2% or so would be subject to exactly the same tax benefits as those offered to over 98% of Americans.

A conservative estimate by the Center on Budget and Policy Priorities finds that this tax change would likely reduce projected charitable contributions by only 1.3%, but “help finance universal health coverage, which would greatly reduce burdens on the charitable sector to provide uncompensated health care to millions of Americans who lack insurance.”

In fact, because of the impending tax increase, Chad Alderman suggests we may see a spike in charitable giving over the next two years before the tax change kicks in, exactly the kind of counter-cyclical boost needed to get America’s charities through these tough economic times.

As Peter Orszag explains, “even to the extent that charitable contributions are affected by tax considerations, the budget contains other proposed changes (including retaining an estate tax) which will create stronger incentives for giving. Above all, though, the best way to boost charitable giving is to jumpstart the economy and raise incomes – and the purpose of the Recovery Act enacted earlier this month was to do precisely that.”