It’s
Not as Though Anyone Saw It Coming
by
Vin Suprynowicz
by Vin Suprynowicz
DIGG THIS
Whos
to blame for the current meltdown of the financial sector, caused
by the dependence of so many corporate balance sheets on defaulting
home mortgages?
Since the White
house has been occupied by a Republican and one with low
approval ratings, at that for the past eight years, many
may be inclined to agree with Democratic House Speaker Nancy Pelosi
that the fault lies with failed Republican do-nothing policies.
(She would have said laissez-faire, but she knows her
constituents would assume she was referring to a kinky new sex club.)
In fact, the
Community Reinvestment Act of 1977 was enacted by a Democratic Congress
and signed by Democrat Jimmy Carter, and it was under Democrat Bill
Clinton in 1995 that the real regulatory pressure began to build
on Americas banks to meet regulatory quotas for loan-making
to unqualified buyers in low-income communities well-meaning
social policy (home ownership is nice; it may even be a right)
enforced by requiring bankers to take the very billion-dollar risks
which have now come home to roost.
There were
plenty of warnings that too much of this bad debt was piling up
especially at mortgage giants Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac.
But the Wall
Street Journal reports that in the year 2000, when Rep. Richard
Baker proposed Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac reform, powerful Democrat
Barney Frank dismissed it as unnecessary. The New York Times reports
that a Bush administration proposal in 2003 to reform Fannie Mae
and Freddie Mac found Rep. Frank insisting I do not believe
that were facing any kind of crisis.
Warned in April
of 2004 that Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac could collapse, Rep. Barney
Frank replied I think Wall Street will get over it.
Over in the
Senate, the biggest recipients of financial largesse from employees
and political action committees of Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac over
their careers have been not George Bush and John McCain, but Democratic
Senate Banking Committee Chairman Chris Dodd ($165,000) and Democratic
presidential nominee Barack Obama ($125,000), followed by Hillary
Clinton and John Kerry, Democrats.
WHO are the
friends of the fat-cat bankers?
(Note last
weeks original bailout plan included tens of billions of dollars
for non-profit affordable housing advocacy outfits including
Sen. Obamas longtime patron, Acorn. And that Sen.
Obamas advisor on banking and mortgage matters is Franklin
Raines, former head of Fannie Mae.)
Yet at the
same time Sen. Obama was pocketing money from these institutions,
some far-sighted Republicans including John McCain (yes, I was surprised,
too) were fighting to reform them.
One of
the major government privileges granted to GSEs is a line of credit
with the United States Treasury, Republican Congressman Ron
Paul of Texas warned the House Financial Services Committee in September
of 2003. According to some estimates, the line of credit may
be worth over $2 billion. This explicit promise by the Treasury
to bail out GSEs in times of economic difficulty helps the GSEs
attract investors who are willing to settle for lower yields than
they would demand in the absence of the subsidy.
Thus,
the line of credit distorts the allocation of capital, Rep.
Paul continued. More importantly, the line of credit is a
promise on behalf of the government to engage in a huge unconstitutional
and immoral income transfer from working Americans to holders of
GSE debt.
Sen. McCain
was another leading advocate of reform of the Government-Sponsored
Entities (GSEs) back when there was still time.
For years
I have been concerned about the regulatory structure that governs
Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac
and the sheer magnitude of these
companies and the role they play in the housing market,
Sen. McCain said on the Senate floor on May 25, 2006. The
GSEs need to be reformed without delay.
This
week Fannie Maes regulator reported that the companys
quarterly reports of profit growth over the past few years were
illusions deliberately and systematically created by
the companys senior management, which resulted in a $10.6
billion accounting scandal, Sen. McCain continued. If
Congress does not act, American taxpayers will continue to be exposed
to the enormous risk that Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac pose to the
housing market, the overall financial system, and the economy as
a whole.
That was three
years ago. But the well-paid Democrats refused to listen, back when
there was still time. And so the Federal Housing Enterprise Regulatory
Reform Act of 2005 co-sponsored by Sen. McCain went
nowhere.
Yes, plenty
of Sen. McCains fellow Republicans share the blame. Porker
Team B has controlled either the White House or the
Congress or both for much of the past eight years. Even faced with
Democratic foot-dragging, why didnt Republicans act to repeal
the Democratic mandates that encouraged and even required these
risky loans?
For that matter,
even today with near unanimity that the nation faces a crisis
why hasnt Congress done the equivalent of plugging
the leaks before starting to bail the boat? Why havent they
repealed the poisonous Community Reinvestment Act of 1977, along
with all the ancillary banking regulations piled on under Bill Clinton
in the late 1990s, which not merely allowed but actually REQUIRED
banks to demonstrate to government regulators that theyd extended
credit to a sufficient number of minority borrowers,
even if that meant allowing those borrowers to use their welfare
and unemployment checks to qualify for a loan?
Perhaps for
the same reason we should not believe Mr. Obama (in the Sept. 26
debate) or any other Washington politician who currently promises
the taxpayers can expect to get a return on their bailout
investment.
The
way you get a return after buying a non-performing loan
is to repossess the collateral property and re-sell it. But imagine
the hue and cry of racism from the race hustlers if
it turns out close to 50 percent of the defaulting properties to
be repossessed belong to blacks and other minorities thanks
to 30 years of Democratic policies that implied (wrongly) that minority
Americans couldnt work hard enough and save enough to actually
afford home ownership.
Black home
ownership rates increased nicely from the 1920s through the 1950s
up until the birth of the current welfare state, in the 1960s.
It was only at that point that liberals decided the only way blacks
would ever afford homes was if their oh-so-well-intentioned patrons
arm-twisted the banks into give them loans they couldnt really
afford.
How has that
worked out?
October
6, 2008
Vin
Suprynowicz [send
him mail] is assistant editorial page editor of the daily Las
Vegas Review-Journal and author of The
Black Arrow.
Copyright
© 2008 Vin Suprynowicz
Vin
Suprynowicz Archives
|