The problem with the ACORN report on housing-secured lending is that, like the FRB reports before it, the desired and intended premise was that some borrowers are denied credit merely because of race, ethnicity, and other prohibited factors. However, the report does not do a true comparison of borrowers' FICO scores, debt-to-income (DTI) ratios, loan-to-value (LTV) ratios, and other presumed factors which underlie the report premise. A white borrower with a FICO score of 775 and manageable DTI and LTV ratios would likely be granted an "A"-rate loan, while a borrower (of any color or ethnicity) with a FICO score of 582, and with high DTI and LTV ratios, would likely be denied credit. This is common sense. The industry is driven by investors, and the investors set the criteria for selection and purchase of loans. The real way to resolve the lending dilemma is through financial literacy training. Consumers need to better understand debt management and its affect on credit status and getting the best loan rate. The ACORNs of the world overlook this important issue. What banker today who is competent and who wants to promote optimal earnings would deny a borrower with strong credit, income and debt ratios simply because of the borrower's race, gender or ethnicity? It doesn't happen. Let's see a report of comparable FICO scores and ratios, and you'll see that ALL borrowers -- regardless of race or ethnicity -- are treated similarly.