1999 SW2: Problem with door locks making noise and not locking

Discussion in 'Saturn S-series' started by SW2 1999, Aug 20, 2009.

  1. SW2 1999

    SW2 1999 Guest

    The noise is coming from the passenger door and is not operation the door
    lock/unlock latches on the door next to the door handle inside. It sounds
    like if it were a worm drive setup that the drive is skipping up and over
    the gear and grabbing it. At any rate, however it is setup, it is not
    working. It also seemed like it was a stuck relay before as it drained the
    battery down to a dead nothing. It would not even take a charge from my 10
    amp charger. It would kick out the circuit breaker on the charger. Took the
    battery to Interstate as it is a 60 month just short of a year old. They
    told me that the reason it would not take a charge and kicked out the
    breaker was that,..... he explained that it is like a water hose with a kink
    in it. Not sure I understood the analogy but I left the battery there and
    with their setup it took a charge and held at 12.XX
    Still don't know what is wrong with the SW2 though... I am looking for some
    help here in that area. I took the fuse out of the r/h fuse box on the
    passenger side under the radio on the kick panel. I did not take the one out
    from the main box up under the hood in front of the master cylinder. With
    the one fuse out, the remote will still make the doors attempt to
    unlock/lock. Does the other fuse have to be out to completely open the
    circuit? I am not sure where to start looking on this and even at this point
    what really to look for. Do I need to take a door panel off? Keep in mind
    that I want to leave that as a last resort with all other options of looking
    for the cause of the problem exhausted...

    Just to throw in my 2 cents with regard to all of the damn belly aching
    about Saturn, The Obama nation (actually spelled Abomination) is one F&%@#ed
    UP situation that we all have to deal with for the next four years. The ones
    that are still 'sticking by his side' know they made a mistake. They just
    will not admit to it. They never will.... Doesn't matter if they do or not.
    We are all in the same sinking ship... Anly the stupid rats aren't jumping
    SW2 1999, Aug 20, 2009
  2. No, that would be the republican-generated credit swap meltdown.
    Ouroboros Rex, Aug 26, 2009
  3. SW2 1999

    SteveT Guest

    No, the (GW) Bush administration wanted to regulate Fannie Mae and Fredddie
    Mac, it was principally the other side that stopped them from doing that.
    FWIW, I was on the side of the Dems -- I don't think it's up to government
    or agencies thereof to impose such arbitrary regulation but rather up to the
    parties to such arrangements to recognize the dangers; government's role
    should be limited to providing legal frameworks for enforcing contracts and
    adding to information to facilitate informed participation.
    SteveT, Aug 27, 2009
  4. At the time, there was a republican majority in Congress. Nothing could
    have stopped them from doing that if they had wanted to. The dems couldn't
    even get bills to the floor. And, unfortunately, the repubs had passed
    their zero downpayment initiative a year or two earlier at Bush's request -
    by the time the meltdown occurred, some 40% of F&F's business consisted of
    such loans.

    FWIW, I was on the side of the Dems -- I don't think
    In fact, it was republican deregulation that brought the situation about.

    Phil Gramm slipped the Commodities Futures Modernization Act
    into a 2000 omnibus bill at the last minute, and Bush and Co. passed the
    American Dream Downpayment Initiative in 2003.

    "...Since the creation of the Federal Reserve, Congress has been passing
    laws in an effort to correct problems caused by the flawed monetary system.
    But that all changed in 1999 when lobbyists wrote the "Commodity Futures
    Modernization Act" and gave it to lawmakers for consideration.

    The bill had little chance of a hearing, but while the Republican Congress
    was deadlocked with the Democrats in an effort to pass a budget, the Act was
    slipped into a budget compromise. Sponsored by Rep. Thomas Ewing [R-IL] and
    cosponsored by Rep. Tom Bliley (R-VA) Rep. Larry Combest (R-TX) Rep. John
    LaFalce (D-NY) Rep. James Leach (R-IA) the bill went to the Senate without

    The budget compromise later went to the Senate and then to President Bill
    Clinton for his signature. The Commodity Futures Modernization Act of 2000
    was signed into law on December 21, 2000. The purpose was to allow new
    financial products called swaps to be unregulated. Neither the SEC nor he
    Commodity Futures Trading Commission (CFTC) would be able to regulate them."


    "Today we are taking action to bring many thousands of Americans closer to
    the great goal of owning a home," said President Bush. "These funds will
    help American families achieve their goals, strengthen our communities, and
    our entire nation."

    "This is a good day for thousands of families who have only dreamed about
    sharing in the American Dream of homeownership," said Jackson. "Not only
    will this law allow thousands of hard-working Americans to unlock the door
    to homeownership, it will also help close the gap that separates minority
    households from the rest of the country when it comes to owning a home to
    call their own."

    High downpayment and closing costs represent the most significant barrier to
    homeownership for first-time homebuyers. The American Dream Downpayment Act
    will provide a maximum downpayment assistance grant of either $10,000 or six
    percent of the purchase price of the home, whichever is greater. In
    addition, the Bush Administration is committed to reforming the homebuying
    process that would lower closing costs by approximately $700 per loan,
    further stimulating homeownership for all Americans..."

    And don't forget Gramm-Leach-Bliley, another Phil Gramm gem, which allowed
    banks to become brokers.


    "On November 4, 1999, Congress passed sweeping legislation that will
    dramatically reshape the financial services industry by removing barriers
    between banks, insurance companies, and investment firms which have existed
    since the Great Depression. President Clinton is expected to sign this
    historic legislation...."

    "...Permits bank holding companies that qualify as Financial Holding
    Companies ("FHC") to engage in an expanded array of activities, and to
    acquire companies engaged in such activities, that are financial in nature,
    incidental to, or complementary to financial activities, subject to certain
    Federal Reserve Board restrictions. For example, the Act designates the
    following as permissible FHC activities: underwriting; dealing and market
    making without any revenue limitation (such as sponsoring and distributing
    all types of mutual funds); operating investment companies; insurance
    underwriting and agency activities; merchant banking; and insurance company
    portfolio investments. "
    Ouroboros Rex, Aug 31, 2009
  5. SW2 1999

    SteveT Guest

    You're seem very skilled at selecting from among the facts those you
    wish to present, far more than I have been so far! :) <grin> Since there are
    almost always two sides to every story, you are at least partly correct:

    [noting, parenthetically, that _USA Today_ is far from being a right-leaning


    "The bill barring most regulation of derivative trading was inserted into an
    11,000-page budget measure that became law as the nation was focused on the
    disputed 2000 presidential election. It was sponsored by Republican Sens.
    Phil Gramm of Texas and Richard Lugar of Indiana - with support from
    Democrats, the Clinton administration and then-Federal Reserve chairman Alan
    Greenspan. Few opposed it.

    "Sen. Tom Harkin, an Iowa Democrat who help negotiate the bill for
    Democrats, says he put aside his qualms because Wall Street and Greenspan
    were adamant that less regulation would help the stock market.


    "A bill barring derivatives from being regulated as futures contracts passed
    the House in October 2000, by a vote of 377-4.


    "2. Protecting Fannie, Freddie

    "In 2005, Congress rejected a Republican-sponsored bill aimed at curbing
    risky investments by mortgage giants Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac, thanks to
    resistance from mostly Democrats. It was the latest in a string of
    unsuccessful attempts to rein in the two agencies. In this case, Congress
    ignored Greenspan's warning about the financial risks Fannie and Freddie
    were taking on."

    For more complete (and unfiltered) thoughts, also see hits at
    And always take anything you read with at least a modicum of NaCl.
    SteveT, Sep 2, 2009
Ask a Question

Want to reply to this thread or ask your own question?

You'll need to choose a username for the site, which only take a couple of moments (here). After that, you can post your question and our members will help you out.