This is an information packed presentation, purely their opinions: Yet definitely something to read, IMHO.
Have a great day.
Gloria
A Projec.t of Media Matters Action Network and the Center for American Progress Action Fund
CLICK HERE FOR MORE INFO: Facts Myths Who's to Blame News Take Action Share
Bush, Wall Street, and conservative policies caused the financial crisis.
We provide the facts, debunk the myths and show who's to blame.
Greenspan Tells the Truth
Nick Anderson, Houston Chronicle from Cartoonist Group
Next Steps to Resolve the Crisis
The Treasury Department and the FDIC are close to an agreement that would have the government guarantee some distressed mortgages. That’s a good step, since stemming home foreclosures and restructuring troubled mortgages is key to slowing the downward spiral hammering financial institutions and the real American economy....
Charles Krauthammer wants to blame the financial crisis on the Community Reinvestment Act for forcing Freddie and Fannie to issue lots of minority, low-income, and distressed neighborhood sub-prime loans. That’s bunk! It was private lenders, not Fannie and Freddie that issued nearly all of the subprime mortgages and triggered the crisis. And they were not subject to the CRA at all!
According to Media Matters, Fox News’s Brit Hume and Bret Baier tried to blame Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac for the crisis, claiming on 9/24/08 that the mortgage giants were heavily involved in sub-prime lending “years ago,” seemingly implying that it was back in 2003.
According to Dean Baker, co-director of the Center for Economic and Policy Research in Washington, DC, “Fannie and Freddie got into subprime junk and helped fuel the housing bubble, but they were trailing the irrational exuberance of the private sector.
They lost market share in the years 2002-2007, as the volume of private issue mortgage backed securities exploded.” Laying blame at their feet only diverts attention from those primarily responsible for the mortgage crisis: private lenders.
Social Security Privatization: A Review of the Risks
Nearly four years ago, President George W. Bush tried to make the privatization of Social Security a cornerstone of his second term. His approach was roundly criticized by economists and Social Security experts, unpopular with the American people, and failed to even earn a vote in Congress.
*****************************************************************************
Get the Facts: The Story of the Financial Crisis
These crises were caused by calculated deregulation and the gross negligence of the Bush administration and congressional conservatives.
We are in this mess today because of the deregulatory policies and negligent leadership of President George W. Bush, his financial regulatory officials, and congressional conservatives such as Phil Gramm.
The Bush solution: cut regulations
First, Bush and the conservative mantra of deregulation encouraged the explosion of risky new financial products, and blocked them from common-sense oversight and regulation.
Second, they turned a blind eye to dire warnings that risky lending practices were spiraling out of control.
Their failure to act allowed Wall Street CEOs to recklessly gamble with other people’s money.
Now, the bubble has popped and the markets have crashed, and conservatives are desperately casting about for someone else to blame for the consequences of their failed policies.
Their efforts to pass the buck are an insult to our intelligence. Conservatives policies dominated the past eight years while this crisis grew out of control. This is the legacy of their failed policies—it is time for them to own it.
Beginning in 2000, free-market ideologues led by President Bush, Phil Gramm, and Alan Greenspan encouraged the explosion of risky new financial products and blocked the products from regulation.
Under their watch, there was an explosion in subprime mortgage lending accompanied by exponential growth in new financial derivatives such as credit-default swaps that encouraged banks and lenders to take huge risks and gamble on products that no one really understood.
People knew these products were extremely risky. Five years ago, Warren Buffett called derivatives “financial weapons of mass destruction, carrying dangers that, while now latent, are potentially lethal.”[1]
But Alan Greenspan and conservatives in Congress, led by Phil Gramm, encouraged the development of these risky new products, and blocked them from regulation. Greenspan said, “it seems superfluous” to regulate derivatives, and Gramm quietly slipped his Commodities Futures Modernization Act into a must-pass budget bill in 2000 to ensure the highly risky derivatives market would not be regulated.
As the housing bubble grew out of this risky marketplace, common-sense regulations were blocked by conservatives in Congress.
Predatory lending exploded as commercial and investment banks competed fiercely to originate more and more home mortgages by dropping their lending standards lower and lower. The more mortgages originated, the more could be bundled together as mortgage-backed securities—bonds consisting of mortgages or pools of mortgages that are sliced and diced in different ways and then sold as bonds to institutional investors around the world.
The development and sale of these mortgage-backed securities was turbocharged by the completely unregulated credit-default swaps market, which was expressly enabled by Gramm’s Commodity Futures Modernization Act.
The credit-default swaps market acted as a kind of insurance on mortgage-backed securities and collaterized debt obligations, another type of bond that included slices of mortgages and other types of debt comingled with credit-default swaps. These swaps gave these risky new bonds a blue-chip patina even though they actually were very risky securities.
Bills trying to institute common-sense regulation to discourage banks from engaging in some of the risky lending practices that led to the current crisis were frequently introduced. One such amendment was offered in 1999, 2001, and 2005, and defeated by conservatives each time.
As risky lending exploded, the Bush administration and conservatives in Congress ignored and enabled Wall Street’s reckless behavior.
All this time, the Bush administration and conservatives in Congress turned a blind eye to warnings that predatory lending was getting out of control, and that the markets of new financial products such as credit-default swaps and collaterized debt obligations were getting too hot, too risky, and too big.
Under conservative leadership, the Securities and Exchange Commission turned a blind eye as the credit-default swaps market ballooned under its nose, going from essentially zero in 2000 to $17 trillion in 2005 to over $60 trillion in 2007.[2]
In fact, in 2004, the SEC actively abetted greater risk-taking on the part of the big Wall Street investment banks by allowing them to more than triple their so-called “leverage ratio” to 40-to-1 debt-to-equity levels, up from 12-to-1 levels.
This change enabled these banks (Bear Stearns Cos., Goldman Sachs Group Inc., Lehman Brothers Holdings Inc., Merrill Lynch & Co., and Morgan Stanley) to indulge in the highly irresponsible borrowing practices that led all five of them this year to either go bankrupt, sell themselves to a bigger bank holding company, or convert themselves into a bank holding company to avoid collapse.[3]
There were plenty of warnings about the housing bubble as well.
The current chair of the Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation, Sheila C. Bair—who today is at the forefront of cleaning up the subprime mess—realized back in 2001, when she was a senior official at the U.S. Treasury Department, that lending practices were amiss in the mortgage markets. She tried to persuade mortgage lenders to adopt a best-practice code of conduct to no avail.[4]
Community activists in neighborhoods where predatory lending was most evident warned the Federal Reserve repeatedly about the rising threat of abusive subprime
loans, but Greenspan declined to act.[5] At the beginning of the decade, subprime mortgages accounted for only 6 percent of total residential mortgage originations. By 2006, subprime mortgages accounted for 25 percent of mortgage originations.[6]
Greenspan and other Bush administration regulators even refused to listen to repeated prescient warnings between 2000 and 2005 from Federal Reserve Board governor Edward Gramlich, who warned his colleagues about mounting problems in the mortgage markets.
Worse still, other federal regulatory agencies supported abusive subprime lending by pre-empting state laws protecting borrowers from lending abuses, as the Office of the Comptroller of the Currency did in 2003.[7]
While the Bush administration and conservatives ignored the warnings and continued to promote deregulation, Wall Street CEOs gambled with other people’s money.
In a few short years, this toxic combination of risky new products and no regulation transformed the financial market from a place that traded in known quantities like stocks and bonds into a market where exotic new products that no one really understood were being traded at breakneck speed.
Now the bubble has burst, the stock market is crashing, credit markets are frozen, and conservatives are looking for someone to blame.
For the past decade, the Bush administration and conservatives aided and abetted wild risk-taking on Wall Street while CEOs raked in huge profits. Now that the bubble
has burst and the market has come crashing down, they are desperately casting about for someone else to blame.
Charles Krauthammer and other conservative commentators are desperately trying to pin the blame on a 30-year-old law, the Community Reinvestment Act, which was weakened significantly by the Bush administration before the housing bubble started inflating.
Conservatives’ desperate attempts to pass the buck are an insult to our intelligence. This is their legacy of failed policies and failed leadership. It’s time for them to own it.
Citations for Measures of Prosperity chart
[1] According to the Bureau of Labor Statistics, the U.S. non-farm unemployment rate was 3.9% in September of 2000. By September of 2008, the unemployment rate had risen to 6.1%.
[2] According to the U.S Treasury Department, the United States’ national debt was $ 5,751,743,092,605.50 on January 3, 2000. By October 1, 2008, the debt had increased to $ 10,124,225,067,127.69.
[3] According to the Bureau of Labor Statistics, the U.S. city average Consumer Price Index (CPI) adjusted price for one pound of ground beef was measured as 1.483 in January of 2000 and 2.419 in September of 2008.
[4] According to the U.S. Department of Energy’s Energy Information Agency, the price of a gallon of regular conventional gasoline was $1.53 on October 23, 2000. According to the same source, the price of a gallon of regular conventional gasoline was $2.85 on October 20, 2008.
[5] According to the U.S. Department of Agriculture’s Agricultural Marketing Service, the average price of a gallon of whole milk was $2.85 in 2000. Through September 2008, the average price had increased to $3.80.
[6] According to the Bureau of Labor Statistics, the U.S. city average Consumer Price Index (CPI) adjusted price for a one dozen large grade A eggs was measured as 0.92 in September 2000 and 1.978 in September 2008.
[7] According to the Bureau of Labor Statistics, the U.S. city average Consumer Price Index (CPI) adjusted price for a one pound loaf of white bread was measured as 0.90 in 2000 and 1.38 in 2008.
[8] According to CNN, the Dow closed at 10,393.07 on October 24, 2000. At 1:45 p.m. on October 24, 2008, the Dow was at 8,292.77. [CNN, accessed 10/24/08]
Endnotes
[1] BBC News, “Buffett Warns on Investment ‘Time Bomb,’” March 4, 2003, available at http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/business/2817995.stm
[2] International Swaps and Derivatives Association, 2005 and 2007 year-end surveys. Available at http://www.isda.org/press/press031506.html and http://www.isda.org/press/.
[3] Stephen Labaton, “U.S. regulators 2004 rule let banks pile up new debt,” International Herald Tribune, October 3, 2008, available at http://www.iht.com/articles/2008/10/03/business/sec.php.
[4] Edmund L. Andrews, “Feds Shrugged as Subprime Crisis Spread,” The New York Times, December 18, 1007, available at http://www.nytimes.com/2007/12/18/business/18subprime.html.
[5] Ibid.
[6] The Federal Reserve Bank of San Francisco, “The Subprime Mortgage Market: National and Twelfth District Developments” (2007), available at http://www.frbsf.org/publications/federalreserve/annual/2007/subprime.pdf.
[7] Jonathan Fuerbringer, “Some Exemptions Are Proposed on Predatory Lending Laws,” The New York Times, August 1, 2003, available at http://query.nytimes.com/gst/fullpage.html?
res=9904E2DA153EF932A3575BC0A9659C8B63.
Posts
0 Comments Welcomed:
Post a Comment