Alternately described as a bailout for bankers or a housing stabilization plan, the U.S. House of Representatives passed legislation last week that is being seen as a starting point for some government involvement in the current housing and credit crisis affecting many parts of the country.

But understanding the problem and the possible solutions is not easy. In March, a New York Times financial reporter wrote that even financially sophisticated people were having trouble understanding the crisis. The reporter wrote in the Times that he asked many Wall Street executives, "Can you try to explain this to me?" After hearing their descriptions, the reporter said his follow-up question was, "Can you try again?"

The problem is very complex. But some things are clear. A big part of the creation of the crisis was the belief that housing prices would continue rising at rapid levels, forever. A contributing factor was relatively low interest rates and encouragements to borrow by mortgage brokers and banks. At just about every level there was greed, fraud and more greed. At the governmental level there was a lack of oversight and regulation.

These factors induced many home buyers to buy more house than they could afford, based on the belief that they could simply sell a few years later and make a big profit.

Then there were the mortgage lenders who helped people get financing for houses they could not afford — with little or no evidence that the loan would be repaid. Loose lending standards have given us new terms such as "no-doc loans" no-documentation and so-called liar's loans, in which mortgage brokers looked the other way or winked at prospective buyers because they could make a fat commission for selling the mortgage, but had no incentives to be concerned with the loan being repaid.

Banks made lots of money reselling the mortgages to others, so they, too, had no reason to be concerned over the ability of the borrower to repay, because the loans were resold to Wall Street firms, where they were repackaged and resold as high-return investments.

Wall Street bankers made out selling the collateralized debt obligations (CDOs), with some traders and executives taking home multimillion-dollar bonuses during the good times.

To the vast majority of Americans who are not in default on their mortgages, did not buy a house they cannot afford, and have not missed mortgage payments, there is broad agreement that government action, using taxpayer dollars, should not reward bad behavior in the subprime mortgage mess.

The best solution is one in which the greedy, fraudulent and risk-ignorers suffer serious consequences for their actions.

President George W.Bush and others opposing the proposed bailout, or mortgage stabilization, plan passed by the House are correct to press for a plan that does not reward speculators, house-flippers, unscrupulous mortgage lenders or banks that took on overly risky loans.

And then there is the issue of consequences for those who walked away with huge profits before the bubble burst. Some home-flippers made easy money and got away scot-free. But when it comes to some unscrupulous mortgage lenders, commercial banks and investment banks, federal fraud investigations will probably ensure that they face the consequences of their actions.

The Wall Street Journal reports that federal prosecutors in the Eastern District of New York have formed a task force of federal, state and local agencies to look into mortgage fraud by brokers and securities fraud by investment bankers.

So, along with pain being felt by housing speculators and irresponsible borrowers, justice will be served if those at the highest levels of Wall Street and national mortgage companies share the pain of the current crisis by facing federal prosecution, potential jail time — and financial penalties that extract some of their massive profits from illegal and negligent business practices.

There will be, and should be, debate over whether the House legislation, authored by Rep. Barney Frank, D-Mass., puts taxpayers at too much risk and bails out banks and some homeowners. The Frank plan proposes that the Federal Housing Administration provide government insurance on some $300 billion of the most-troubled mortgages. The plan is estimated to pose a cost to taxpayers of close to $3 billion.

Most impartial observers believe a bailout is a bad idea. One Los Angeles-based attorney pointed out in an article on CNNmoney.com that lenders, brokers and homebuilders all made big profits during the buildup to the real estate bust, and now they want taxpayers to ease the pain of the bursting of the speculative bubble.

And, then there is a final concern — with the construction trades, mortgage bankers, commercial banks and Wall Street investment banks all contributing millions of dollars to Washington politicians, taxpayers should pay close attention to who their tax dollars will be bailing out.