Opinion

[Print]  [Email]        

Roots of financial crisis in Clinton housing policy

By: Examiner Newspapers
-
September 15, 2008

Barack Obama held the Bush administration responsible yesterday for what he calls “the most serious financial crisis since the Great Depression.” Obama is hopelessly wrong on the facts. One need look no further than The Washington Examiner and The Washington Post to see that the roots of this crisis sprouted during the Clinton administration’s politically motivated effort in the 1990s to use Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac to expand home ownership. Fannie and Freddie are Government-Sponsored Entities (GSEs) that dominate the U.S. mortgage market. Fannie was created during the New Deal, while Freddie came into being in 1970. According to the Post, Fannie and Freddie have “enjoyed the nearest thing to a license to print money” because they are private companies that offer investors government-backed – i.e. taxpayer - guarantees against loss. Fannie and Freddie increase the amount of money available for mortgages by buying mortgages on the secondary market, pooling them, then selling them as mortgage-backed securities to investors on the open market.

In an oped article published on these pages last February, former Wall Streeter Robert Cox noted that “in response to political pressure at the time, the GSEs took steps to make homeownership more affordable for lower-income Americans and those with a poor credit history.” Those steps encouraged riskier mortgage lending by minimizing the role of credit histories in lending decisions, loosening required debt-to-equity ratios to allow  borrowers to make small or even no down payments at all, and encouraging lenders the use of floating or adjustable interest-rate mortgages, including those with low “teasers.” Home ownership rates soared to historic highs and all was well as long as home prices increased and lenders could comfortably convert floating-rate mortgages to fixed-rate obligations. Then home values declined. Lenders foreclosed when buyers missed payments as adjustable mortgage rates increased. When the mortgage-backed securities plunged in value as a result, Fannie and Freddie turned to Congress to cover the losses.

This result was entirely predictable, as the Post detailed in a front-page story on Sunday. Towards the end of the Clinton administration, some officials worried about letting Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac continue their loose-lending policies. Then, Treasury undersecretary Gary Gensler alerted Congress to the risk in 2000, but the Republican-controlled Senate and House did nothing. Since then, Bush officials have occasionally but only meekly advocated reforms. When the current crisis presented an opportunity to force needed reforms, Bush caved to demands of the Democratic Congress to bail out Fannie and Freddie with tax dollars. Thus, Fannie and Freddie illustrate a familiar truth: Government regulation too frequently ends up simply adding to the already excessive burdens heaped on federal taxpayers.

 



Most Popular Headlines


To view this site, you need to have Flash Player 8.0 or later installed. Click here to get the latest Flash player.


 


 



 

Reader Comments

All comments on this page are subject to our Terms of Use and do not necessarily reflect the views of the Examiner or its staff.

Joe

Sep 16, 2008

OK, I basically agree with this. But why didn't Chris Dodd do anything about Fannie and Freddie after he ascended to the Chair of the Senate Banking Committee? Chairman Dodd had the last clear opportunity to fix the problem, but he dropped the ball.

 

Jody

Sep 19, 2008

Because Chris Dodd made millions of dollars off of under-the-table "negotiating."

 

Mike

Sep 22, 2008

Chris Dodd, Barney Frank, Barack Obama got campaign donations from Fannie and Freddie executives. It was their personal slush fund. Obama received $126,349 from Freddie Mac and Fannie Mae. This places him in second place. 1. Chris Dodd, Democratic, Connecticut, $165,400 2. Barack Obama, Democratic, Illinois, $126,349 3. John Kerry, Democratic, Massachusetts, $111,000 11. Harry Reid, Democratic, Nevada, $77,000 14. Nancy Pelosi, Democratic, California, $56,250 26. Barney Frank, Democratic, Massachusetts, $42,360 Source: Update: Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac Invest in Lawmakers OpenSecrets.org, Center for Responsive Politics Published by Lindsay Renick Mayer on September 11, 2008, http://www.opensecrets.org/news/2008/09/update-fannie-mae-and-freddie.html

 

RtheK

Sep 23, 2008

You need to Google George Bush, OCC, and Eliott Spitzer. Bush ENCOURAGED or at least failed to prevent predatory loan practices--

 

Betty

Sep 29, 2008

...interesting reading...

 

JOSEPH

Oct 4, 2008

WHY DOES NO ONE IN THAT TOWN HAVE THE GUTS TO BRING THIS KIND OF POLITICAL CORRUPTION THAT RAN RAMPANT IN THE CLINTON AND CARTER ADMINISTRATIONS. HOLLYWOOD HATES BUSH AND SOME OF THE HATE IS MISPLACED. IF EVERYONE COULD GET POLITICS OUT OF THIS MESS THEY COULD SEE THEM FOR WHAT THEY WERE. ARKANSAS TRAILER TRASH. AND THEY WANT TO PUT OBAMA IN TO FIX THIS MESS. I GUESS WE`LL BE GOING DOWN THIS SAME ROAD IN ABOUT 12 TO FIFTEEN YEARS IF OBAMA`S ELECTED.

 

Tim Freeman

Oct 4, 2008

Mike, you list a number of politicians that have taken money from fannie and fredie, why did you decide to leave the republicans out? You would have a little credibility if you gave a complete list.

 

Tim

Oct 4, 2008

Bottom line, this is a deregulation prolem. Oversight does not matter if there is no regulation. Deregulation is a republican issue. McCain is a big dereg guy. We can not have unchecked capitolism with ouot returning to the middle ages.

 

wlad

Oct 11, 2008

Isn't author of this piece contradicting himself a little? He starts with "Barack Obama held the Bush administration responsible[...] Obama is hopelessly wrong on the facts" but ends with "Towards the end of the Clinton administration, some officials worried about letting Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac continue their loose-lending policies. Then, Treasury undersecretary Gary Gensler alerted Congress to the risk in 2000, but the Republican-controlled Senate and House did nothing." and finally "Since then, Bush officials have occasionally but only meekly advocated reforms." so who is really to blame? It sure isn't the Clinton administration, since even though their policies encouraged wild lending, it was the _banks_ who ate the bait and profited the most (and ignored the risks they were taking). Bush had 8 years to do something about it. So who's really 'hopelessly wrong on the facts'?

 

nobailout101

Nov 24, 2008

Bringing this back to the "Clinton Administration" is a ture but short sighted. The real big blunder came in 1999 when the Republican run Congress voted to over-turn Glass-Segal by a 2/3 majority making it Veto-proof. Go to www.stoptheoutrage.org and help us peice this mess together from a purple prospective. Mistakes were made on BOTH sides of the isle. Let's weed out the BS and fix this MESS!

 

nobailout101

Nov 24, 2008

Bringing this back to the "Clinton Administration" is a ture but short sighted. The real big blunder came in 1999 when the Republican run Congress voted to over-turn Glass-Segal by a 2/3 majority making it Veto-proof. Go to www.stoptheoutrage.org and help us peice this mess together from a purple prospective. Mistakes were made on BOTH sides of the isle. Let's weed out the BS and fix this MESS!

 


Post a comment


Email:
(This will not be displayed or shared. Privacy Policy)

Display Name:

Comment:




Sports

Raptors sign first-round pick DeRozan

The Toronto Raptors have signed forward DeMar DeRozan, the No. 9 pick in the draft. Full story

Economy

State's largest paper loses 7 percent of work force

The publisher of The Courier-Journal says the newspaper has eliminated 44 jobs, or 7 percent of its work force, as part of a broader reduction across Gannett Co. Inc.'s local newspaper division. Full story

Entertainment

Judge temporarily bans release of sex tape starring 'Real Housewives of New Jersey' woman

One of the stars of Bravo's television series "Real Housewives of New Jersey" went to court Wednesday to avoid getting a little more exposure than she wanted. Full story