| 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]
advertisement
|
