Fitch Managing Director David Weinfurter said the NCRC’s filing “is fully without merit, and Fitch intends to defend itself vigorously.” Moody’s had no immediate comment.惠譽董事總經理大衛Weinfurter說，憲法審議委員會提交的文件“是完全沒有法律依據，以及惠譽打算積極地保衛自己。 ”穆迪公司沒有立即發表評論。

The filing cites multiple studies that found that African Americans and Latinos received a disproportionate share of subprime loans during the housing boom years.這份文件列舉多個研究發現，美國黑人和拉丁裔收到了不合比例的次級抵押貸款在房地產市場的繁榮年。 A Federal Reserve study in 2006 estimated that 45% of mortgages extended to Latinos and 55% of loans to African Americans were subprime — a utilization rate “three to four times that of non-Hispanic whites.”美國聯邦儲備銀行在2006年的研究估計， 45 ％的抵押貸款擴大到拉美裔和55 ％的貸款，以非裔美國人優-一個使用率“ 3至4倍，非西班牙裔白人。 ”

“Had subprime loans been distributed equitably,” the complaint estimates, “losses for whites would be 44.5% higher and losses for people of color would be about 24% lower.” “如果次級抵押貸款被公平分配， ”投訴估計“ ，白人的損失將是44.5 ％更高，人民的損失顏色將約24 ％低得多。 ”

A third rating firm with heavy involvement in the subprime boom, Standard & Poor’s Corp., was not named in the complaint but has been “in discussions” with the NCRC, said David Berenbaum, the group’s executive vice president.第三個評級公司，重型參與優熱潮，標準普爾公司，不點名的投訴，但一直是“討論”與憲法審議委員會，大衛比倫包姆說，該集團的執行副總裁。 If the discussions with S&P prove “unsatisfactory,” he said, the company could be the subject of a separate action.如果討論標準普爾證明“不滿意， ”他說，該公司可能會受到一個單獨的行動。

The NCRC filed its complaint with the Department of Housing and Urban Development’s fair housing and equal opportunity unit.該憲法審議委員會遞交了申訴部與住房和城市發展的公平住房和平等機會單位。 After a review, HUD could either dismiss the allegations or refer the case to the Justice Department of the incoming Obama administration for litigation next year.經過審查，平視顯示器可以撤銷指控或將案件移交司法部新任奧巴馬行政訴訟明年。 If HUD fails to respond adequately, the NCRC says it may file a federal civil lawsuit.如果平視顯示器未能作出適當的反應，在憲法審議委員會表示，它可能文件聯邦民事訴訟。

The civil rights complaint is the latest in a series of lawsuits, regulatory investigations and congressional criticism of the rating firms’ roles and conduct during the mortgage bond heyday years of 2003-05.公民權利的投訴是最新了一系列的法律訴訟，監管部門的調查和國會的批評，評級公司的作用和進行期間，抵押債券全盛時期的2003-05年。 In dollar terms, subprime and so-called Alt-A no-documentation loans accounted for 32% of all mortgage originations in 2005.以美元計算，次級和所謂的老無文件貸款佔32 ％的所有抵押貸款在2005年。 Their share had been 10% two years before.其份額已經10 ％的前兩年。 Virtually all of those high-risk loans were sold to Wall Street firms for inclusion in complex bond structures that were resold, often in bits and pieces, to pension funds and financial institutions.幾乎所有的這些高風險貸款出售給華爾街公司列入複雜的債券結構，轉售，往往是在位和作品，以養老基金和金融機構。

The traditional function of the rating firms has been that of Wall Street’s “gatekeepers,” evaluating the risks involved in the collateral backing bonds.傳統功能的評級公司一直是華爾街的“看門人” ，評估所涉及的風險抵押支持債券。 Their assignment of investment-grade ratings to securities based on high-risk mortgages — and their subsequent mass lowering of those ratings as default losses piled up — has earned them scorching criticism from investors, regulators and Congress.他們轉讓的投資級評級的證券的基礎上的高風險抵押貸款-並隨後將其大規模降低這些評級作為默認的損失堆積了-他們贏得了比賽的批評投資者，管理者和國會。

Much of the criticism focused on the fact that the firms are paid lucrative fees for their ratings by bond issuers themselves — not investors — thereby creating potential conflicts of interest.大部分的批評集中於一個事實，即企業是有利可圖的費用支付其評級由債券發行人本身-而不是投資者-從而創造潛在的利益衝突。 The firms also competed with one another to rate subprime loan securitizations, creating additional pressure to provide the most favorable possible ratings.該公司還競爭互相利率抵押貸款證券化，創造更多的壓力，提供了最有利的可能等級。

The Securities and Exchange Commission investigated the rating firms this year and found “serious shortcomings” at Moody’s, Fitch and S&P, including lack of oversight of conflicts of interest.美國證券交易委員會的調查，評價公司今年發現“嚴重缺陷”穆迪，惠譽和標準普爾，包括缺乏監督的利益衝突。 Investigators also turned up evidence that employees apparently knew that some of the mortgage pools they were rating were potentially toxic.調查人員還發現的證據表明，員工顯然知道，一些抵押貸款池他們評級有可能有毒。

In one instant-message exchange, an analyst reportedly called a deal “ridiculous.在一個即時信息交流，據說一位分析師所謂的協議“荒謬的。 . 。 . 。 . 。 We should not be rating it.” A colleague responded: “We rate every deal.我們不應該評價它。 “一位同事回答道： ”我們每處理率。 It could be structured by cows and we would rate it.”這可能是結構性的牛，我們將率它。 “

Critics such as Berenbaum contend that without mass securitizations of high-risk mortgages — with stamps of approval from the rating firms — far fewer subprime loans would have been made, and far fewer minority home buyers would have ended up in foreclosure.批評如倫包姆認為，沒有大規模證券化的高風險抵押貸款-與郵票批准的評級公司-少得多次優抵押貸款將已經作出，而且要少得多少數購房者會已經結束了贖回。