| democrats
fail to get their vast slush fund - and then declare victory
“all the republicans on
the committee supported the bill, and all the democrats voted against
it.”- obama was present as usual
community reinvestment act
and the sub-prime mess - this mess was made by the democrats
democrats
fail to get their vast slush fund - and then declare victory
As Republicans try to clear up the mess caused
by Democrat refusals to curb Fannie
Mae and Clinton pressures to loosen the Community Reinvestment
Act, the Democrats are throwing sand in every direction as they attempt
to cover their tracks.
Meanwhile, their main interest was to try to squeeze
a Democrat slush fund out of the
difficulties for which they have been primarily responsible.
Some victory!!
“Earlier today, when House Republican leadership framed
its opposition to the bailout bill as it currently stands, a principal
objection focused on the group ACORN, which the e-mail alert called
"the scandal-tarnished 'community organizing group' "
-- with scare quotes in the original.
“They're referring to the Association of Community Organizations
for Reform Now [ACORN], a group generally allied with Democrats
and derided by the GOP as corrupt, inefficient and a front-group
for Democratic efforts on the ground.”
Apparently,
the Democrats wanted to channel 20% of any profits from the bail-out
to ACORN.
“all
the republicans on the committee supported the bill, and all the democrats
voted against it.”- obama was present
as usual
“These warnings began in earnest near the end of the Clinton
administration, especially by Secretary of the Treasury Lawrence
Summers, and were carried forward by the Bush administration, which
supported legislation that would provide stronger regulation for
Fannie and Freddie.
“But these warnings were ignored in Congress. Although there
were efforts by a number of Republicans in the House and Senate
to adopt tougher regulatory legislation -- beginning in 1999 --
these efforts were resisted by Democrats, primarily Sen. Charles
Schumer of New York and Sen. Chris Dodd of Connecticut, who is currently
the chairman of the Senate committee with jurisdiction over the
GSEs.” [Quoted from cnn.com]
“In 2005, the Senate Banking Committee, then under Republican
control, adopted a strong reform bill, introduced by Republican
Sens. Elizabeth Dole, John Sununu and Chuck Hagel, and supported
by then chairman Richard Shelby. The bill prohibited the GSEs from
holding portfolios, and gave their regulator prudential authority
(such as setting capital requirements) roughly equivalent to a bank
regulator. In light of the current financial crisis, this bill was
probably the most important piece of financial regulation before
Congress in 2005 and 2006. All the Republicans on the Committee
supported the bill, and all the Democrats voted against it. Mr.
McCain endorsed the legislation in a speech on the Senate floor.
Mr. Obama, like all other Democrats, remained silent.”
—
“If the Democrats had let the 2005 legislation come to a vote,
the huge growth in the subprime and Alt-A loan portfolios of Fannie
and Freddie could not have occurred, and the scale of the financial
meltdown would have been substantially less. The same politicians
who today decry the lack of intervention to stop excess risk taking
in 2005-2006 were the ones who blocked the only legislative effort
that could have stopped it.” [Quoted from online.wsj.com]
community
reinvestment act and the sub-prime mess - this mess was made by the
democrats
The mess has been a long time building.
Bush and McCain sought to head this mess off.
Democrats kept blocking reform.
“The mortgage and financial markets have been heavily controlled
by the federal government for decades, and that is why they failed.
“In the name of broad social welfare policy aimed at helping
everyone own a home, the federal Community Reinvestment Act forced
lenders to give loans to unqualified borrowers. Meanwhile, the corrupt
quasi-governmental entities of Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac, the artificially
low interest rates enforced by the Fed, and the semi-official policy
of bailing out institutions thought "too big to fail,"
led to the situation where millions of Americans bought homes they
couldn't afford and Wall Street funneled billions of dollars into
bad investments.” [Quoted from boston.com]
“If you want a socialistic country, then vote for Obama.”
—
“In 1977 under Jimmy Carter, Congress passed the Community
Reinvestment Act. It compelled banks to make loans to poor borrowers
who often couldn't repay them.
“Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac were created by the government
and were able to borrow at rates far lower than fully private corporations
because of the implied backing from taxpayers. In the 1990s, much-maligned
Phil Gramm fought to limit the Community Reinvestment Act's sub-prime
requirements, receiving much political jeering.
“In 2003 President Bush, due to his concerns about Freddie
Mac and Fannie Mae, requested that the House establish oversight
over these two organizations. However, Barney Frank, Democrat, shot
the proposal down as he thought it would limit the number of lower-income
folks from affordable housing with loans they could not repay. Frank
also pressured financial institutions to be very open to lending
money to any or all. Now, Pelosi and Frank want oversight on the
bailout. Oh, where were you in 1990s and again in 2003?” [Quoted
from montereyherald.com]
“As The New York Times reported in September 1999, Fannie
Mae had "been under increasing pressure from the Clinton administration
to expand mortgage loans among low and moderate income people and
felt pressure from stock holders to maintain its phenomenal growth
in profits." This was part of the Clinton administration's
rewriting of the Carter-era Community Reinvestment Act. Banks were
given strict new numerical quotas and measures that were based on
their level of "diversity" in their loan portfolios. In
order for these banks to expand or merge, they had to have a good
CRA rating. As the Times ominously noted in 1999, "In moving,
even tentatively, into this new area of lending, Fannie Mae is taking
on significantly more risk, which may not pose any difficulties
during flush economic times. But the government-subsidized corporation
may run into trouble in an economic downturn, prompting a government
rescue similar to that of the savings and loan industry in the 1980s."
" [Quoted from tennessean.com]
(add comment)
|
