Background.

Some posters have been mildly prodded for expressing some of their passionate political views on TOTV. I understand but don't totally agree that it is a bad thing. I believe that many TOTV positions are intransient and not likely to be swayed one way or the other, accordingly, political motivations are doubtful. However, I do see a positive aspect of "ranting" and "railing" and "yadda yadda" as concerns the cathartic purging of anger and disdain at government's inability to do the people's work. I actually enjoy the challenges that some antagonists offer. Those that do not, have the option not to participate. I have also learned much from those who offered opinions inconsistent with my own and I thank them for that. In truth, but not to loudly, I don't want to encourge them, they actually swayed me on some well articulated points. So don't count me with those timid soles that follow the herd, tone down the passion and opt for the lofty, boring, intellectual rhetoric of the elite. To the point.

Fingerpointing.

I agree in part that concerning today's economic crisis, we need to stop the fingerpointing and work on solutions. As noble and commendable as that sounds, I sometimes think it is a diversion by some, to take the focus off the facts. Many partisans would like nothing better. The reason I digress to the "fingerpointing" is simple. The same politicians who can be identified as complicit in creating the problem are the same ones who now claim their going to fix it. That's like sending the Jesse James gang back into the bank to find out who robbed it. It makes fingerpointing fair game from my perspective. I choose not to take my eye off ball and the source of the problem until the criminals in Congress who created the meltdown are removed from the ranks of those who are investigating the failures and working on solutions. I might add that the Democrats do not hold a monopoly on blame for the crisis. There are plenty of Republicans up to their $500.00 neckties as well. The facts are what they are. Soooo, here it is again:

NY Times - 2003

The Bush administration today recommended the most significant regulatory overhaul in the housing finance industry since the savings and loan crisis a decade ago.

The plan is an acknowledgment by the administration that oversight of Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac -- which together have issued more than $1.5 trillion in outstanding debt -- is broken.

The proposal is the opening act in one of the biggest and most significant lobbying battles of the Congressional session

Among the groups denouncing the proposal today were the National Association of Home Builders and Congressional Democrats who fear that tighter regulation of the companies could sharply reduce their commitment to financing low-income and affordable housing.

''These two entities -- Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac -- are not facing any kind of financial crisis,'' said Representative Barney Frank of Massachusetts, the ranking Democrat on the Financial Services Committee.

The Democrats were successful in blocking Bush.

Please read the whole story here.

http://query.nytimes.com/gst/fullpag...gewanted=print

The four highest rewarded beneficiaries of Fannie Mae Freddy Mac political generosity were.

1. Dodd, Christopher J
S
D-CT
$133,900

2. Kerry, John
S
D-MA
$111,000

3. Obama, Barack
S
D-IL
$105,849

4. Clinton, Hillary
S
D-NY
$75,550

The entire list that also includes Nancy Pelosi and some Republicans can be found at:

http://www.opensecrets.org/news/2008...-of-fanni.html

Bush tried for reform in 2003 and was blocked. The reform that would have substantially mitigated the "meltdown" never happened.


P.S. In case you were wondering about Open Secrets

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/OpenSecrets.org

Kahuna, I would love to hear your point of view on the Times article. Your banking background would lend an insightful perspective. -----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Last edited by cabo35; 09-17-2008 at 08:06 AM.

How did I know you would think it was the Dems fault.....

Did you miss the bills that Obama tried to get passed I wonder how that happened..or maybe they didn't mention that on Fox Noise.

Remember Phil Gramm...ever heard of the Glass Stegal Act.

Originally Posted by cabo35

Background.

Some posters have been mildly prodded for expressing some of their passionate political views on TOTV. I understand but don't totally agree that it is a bad thing. I believe that many TOTV positions are intransient and not likely to be swayed one way or the other, accordingly, political motivations are doubtful. However, I do see a positive aspect of "ranting" and "railing" and "yadda yadda" as concerns the cathartic purging of anger and disdain at government's inability to do the people's work. I actually enjoy the challenges that some antagonists offer. Those that do not, have the option not to participate. I have also learned much from those who offered opinions inconsistent with my own and I thank them for that. In truth, but not to loudly, I don't want to encourge them, they actually swayed me on some well articulated points. So don't count me with those timid soles that follow the herd, tone down the passion and opt for the lofty, boring, intellectual rhetoric of the elite. To the point.

Fingerpointing.

I agree in part that concerning today's economic crisis, we need to stop the fingerpointing and work on solutions. As noble and commendable as that sounds, I sometimes think it is a diversion by some, to take the focus off the facts. Many partisans would like nothing better. The reason I digress to the "fingerpointing" is simple. The same politicians who can be identified as complicit in creating the problem are the same ones who now claim their going to fix it. That's like sending the Jesse James gang back into the bank to find out who robbed it. It makes fingerpointing fair game from my perspective. I choose not to take my eye off ball and the source of the problem until the criminals in Congress who created the meltdown are removed from the ranks of those who are investigating the failures and working on solutions. I might add that the Democrats do not hold a monopoly on blame for the crisis. There are plenty of Republicans up to their $500.00 neckties as well. The facts are what they are. Soooo, here it is again:

NY Times - 2003

The Bush administration today recommended the most significant regulatory overhaul in the housing finance industry since the savings and loan crisis a decade ago.

The plan is an acknowledgment by the administration that oversight of Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac -- which together have issued more than $1.5 trillion in outstanding debt -- is broken.

The proposal is the opening act in one of the biggest and most significant lobbying battles of the Congressional session

Among the groups denouncing the proposal today were the National Association of Home Builders and Congressional Democrats who fear that tighter regulation of the companies could sharply reduce their commitment to financing low-income and affordable housing.

''These two entities -- Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac -- are not facing any kind of financial crisis,'' said Representative Barney Frank of Massachusetts, the ranking Democrat on the Financial Services Committee.

The Democrats were successful in blocking Bush.

Please read the whole story here.

http://query.nytimes.com/gst/fullpag...gewanted=print

The four highest rewarded beneficiaries of Fannie Mae Freddy Mac political generosity were.

1. Dodd, Christopher J
S
D-CT
$133,900

2. Kerry, John
S
D-MA
$111,000

3. Obama, Barack
S
D-IL
$105,849

4. Clinton, Hillary
S
D-NY
$75,550

The entire list that also includes Nancy Pelosi and some Republicans can be found at:

http://www.opensecrets.org/news/2008...-of-fanni.html

Bush tried for reform in 2003 and was blocked. The reform that would have substantially mitigated the "meltdown" never happened.


P.S. In case you were wondering about Open Secrets

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/OpenSecrets.org

Kahuna, I would love to hear your point of view on the Times article. Your banking background would lend an insightful perspective. -----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Last edited by cabo35; 09-17-2008 at 08:06 AM.

Read it and weep....

http://www.motherjones.com/mojoblog/...e_freddie.html


http://graphics8.nytimes.com/images/...ie.graphic.jpg

Where are the "Fair and Balanced Posts"

Cabo - I know you don't like cut and paste, but I think this is a strong rebuttal to your stirring the pot. Please remember Republicans controlled both the House and Senate in 2003.

Republican Congress Talked About Financial Reform, But Did Nothing
Thursday September 18, 2008
According to the New York Times, in September 2003 the Bush Administration "recommended the most significant regulatory overhaul in the housing finance industry since the savings and loan crisis a decade ago." (tip)
The plan is an acknowledgment by the administration that oversight of Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac -- which together have issued more than $1.5 trillion in outstanding debt -- is broken. A report by outside investigators in July concluded that Freddie Mac manipulated its accounting to mislead investors, and critics have said Fannie Mae does not adequately hedge against rising interest rates...

After the hearing, Representative Michael G. Oxley, chairman of the Financial Services Committee, and Senator Richard Shelby, chairman of the Senate Banking Committee, announced their intention to draft legislation based on the administration's proposal. Industry executives said Congress could complete action on legislation before leaving for recess in the fall.
The President's call came after "a Freddie Mac accounting scandal" in July.

"It seems that Congress doesn't have the stomach to do anything substantial,'' said Marshall Front, president of Front Barnett Associates LLC, which manages $1.5 billion in Chicago, including shares of Fannie Mae. (quote from July 2003)
It seems Mr. Front was correct.

In 2003, Republicans controlled both branches of Congress (108th) and the White House. What happened to Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac regulatory reform under Republican leadership? Nothing.

Here's what I found when I searched THOMAS for the phrase Fannie Mae for the 108th Congress (2003-2004): eight bills .... but only six appear to relate to this topic, per their title. Of those six, only one was introduced after the White House weighed in (at least rhetorically) in September ... and the prime sponsor of that bill was a Democrat. The other bills seem to have resulted from the July scandal. No bill moved out of committee.

H.R.2022 introduced on 7 May 2003 by Rep. Christopher Shays (R-CT,4).
Title: To extend the registration and reporting requirements of the Federal securities laws to certain housing-related Government-sponsored enterprises, and for other purposes.
Latest Major Action: 5/23/2003 Referred to House subcommittee. Status: Referred to the Subcommittee on Capital Markets, Insurance and Government Sponsored Enterprises.
H.R.2117 introduced 23 May 2003 by Rep. Pete Fortney (D-CA,13).
Title: To amend the Federal National Mortgage Association Charter Act and the Federal Home Loan Mortgage Corporation Act to remove certain competitive advantages granted to the housing-related government-sponsored enterprises relative to other secondary mortgage market enterprises, and for other purposes.
Latest Major Action: 5/23/2003 Referred to House subcommittee. Status: Referred to the Subcommittee on Capital Markets, Insurance and Government Sponsored Enterprises.
H.R.2575 introduced on 24 June 2003 by Rep. Richard H Baker (R-LA,6).
Title: To reform the regulation of certain housing-related Government-sponsored enterprises, and for other purposes.
Latest Major Action: 9/25/2003 House committee/subcommittee actions. Status: Committee Hearings Held.
H.R.2803 introduced on 21 July 2003 by Rep. Edward R Royce (R-CA,40).
Title: To establish the Office of Housing Finance Oversight in the Department of the Treasury to ensure the financial safety and soundness of Fannie Mae, Freddie Mac, and the Federal home loan banks.
Latest Major Action: 8/4/2003 Referred to House subcommittee. Status: Referred to the Subcommittee on Capital Markets, Insurance and Government Sponsored Enterprises.
H.R.2897 introduced on 25 July 2003 by Rep. Julia Carson (D-IN,7)
Title: To end homelessness in the United States.
Latest Major Action: 8/25/2003 Referred to House subcommittee. Status: Referred to the Subcommittee on Housing and Community Opportunity.
S.1508, introduced 31 July 2003 by Sen Chuck Hagel (R-NE).
Title: A bill to address regulation of secondary mortgage market enterprises, and for other purposes.
Latest Major Action: 4/1/2004 Senate committee/subcommittee actions. Status: Committee on Banking, Housing, and Urban Affairs. Ordered to be reported with an amendment in the nature of a substitute favorably.
S.1656, introduced 23 September 2003 by Sen Jon S. Corzine (D-NJ).
Title: A bill to address regulation of secondary mortgage market enterprises, and for other purposes.
Latest Major Action: 9/25/2003 Referred to Senate committee. Status: Read twice and referred to the Committee on Banking, Housing, and Urban Affairs.
H.R.3507 introduced 18 November 2003 by Rep. Brad Sherman (D-CA,27).
Title: To expand homeownership opportunities in States having high housing costs.
Latest Major Action: 1/2/2004 Referred to House subcommittee. Status: Referred to the Subcommittee on Capital Markets, Insurance and Government Sponsored Enterprises.
Clearly, in 2003 and 2004 the issue of finance reform was not a priority of the White House or Congressional Republicans.

In the 109th Congress (2005-2006), the House overwhelmingly approved (331 to 90) HR 1461, The Federal Housing Finance Reform Act, designed "to create a stronger regulator for Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac." The Senate, still controlled by Republicans lagged the House in taking action. It is not clear if this was a lack of Republican leadership or blockage by Democratic leadership (filibuster threats). (Shout if you have links to illustrate this impasse.)

HR 1461 remained stalled in the Senate: last action, 31 October 2005, referred to the Committee on Banking, Housing, and Urban Affairs.

On 31 July 2007, after the Democrats obtained control of the Congress in the November 2006 election, House Speaker Nancy Pelosi introduced HR 3221, a "bill to provide needed housing reform and for other purposes." Among other things, the bill granted the newly formed Federal Housing Finance Agency "supervisory and regulatory authority over Fannie Mae, Freddie Mac, and the federal home loan banks (enterprises)" (per CRS analysis).

Pelosi's bill became Public Law 110-140 on 19 December 2007.

I forgot to say the Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac contributions were from employees and their families made to Obama - not the company funds.

Cologal, nice to know there are still "passionate posters" out there. I said quite clearly in my post, I might add that the Democrats do not hold a monopoly on blame for the crisis. There are plenty of Republicans up to their $500.00 neckties as well.. Your suggestion that I'm just blaming democrats is erroneous.

Regarding Glass Stegal, you motivated me to do a little research and I learned that Phil Gramm was a co-sponsor of a bill that repealed Glass Stegal. That act involved restrictions on the banking industry. What you didn't mention in your post was that Bill Clinton signed it. That would be the Democrat Bill Clinton.

Conn8757, interesting information. It almost seems like Congress deliberately muddles, clouds and confuses frequently redundant legislation. I believe the key legislation that had its roots referred to in the NY Times article is, Federal Housing Enterprise Regulatory Reform Act of 2005. McCain was a co-sponsor. Chuck Hagel was the prime mover. Their all listed on the link below. As I understand it, this was the legislation that Bush wanted in 2003.

Regarding the Republican control issue, everything I have vetted suggests the democratic leadership, especially Barney Frank and Chris Dodd, took the rank and file to the woodshed, brought them into line and convinced a sufficient amount of pliant Republicans to cross party lines and block the proposal.

I posted the contributions from Fannie Mae and Freddy Mac connected to the 2003 proposal. Cologal did her homework and established that McCain and company received political donations as well. I'm not sure they were connected with the 2003 proposal and did not buy McCain's vote....to the best of my knowledge. I believe Cologal's research concerned 2008 contributions ...not the 2003 in issue. Yes, I do mischievously enjoy stirring the pot. Keep posting.

http://www.govtrack.us/congress/bill.xpd?bill=s109-190

So when was the last time we had to form a Resolution Trust to do a big takeover?

Regarding the Republican control issue, everything I have vetted suggests the democratic leadership, especially Barney Frank and Chris Dodd, took the rank and file to the woodshed, brought them into line.

I am not sure the statement above is correct. If you look at the link it was introduced but never voted on.

So when was the last time we had to form a Resolution Trust to do a big takeover?
__________________________________________________ ___________________

Late 80's for the S&L

I used the word "spin" because that's the way the American public seems to prefer being communicated with by politicians. Most of us don't want to bother really understanding problems or issues. "Just give me the soundbite" seems to satisfy us.

On the back and forth allegations of who did what to whom in which Congress and who got the most money from lobbyists, two facts really pop off the pages for me...

First, special interests using an army of lobbyists effect the work of Congress moreso than us taxpayers. Until there is some really restrictive legislation regarding campaign finance reform, it's not going to change. I hate to say that--but that's the way it is.

The other factor that seems to underly the inability of any administration or Congress in the last couple of decades from accomplishing anything meaningful is the intense partisanship and polarization of all of our elected officials. Those must be some pretty sweet jobs, sitting in the halls of the Capitol and the White House, because almost all of the elected officials from both parties will do almost anything to satisfy their "base" constituencies and keep those jobs for a long, long time. The problem is that the bases are growing farther and farther apart in the narrowness and positions of their idealologies. We have a bunch of elected officials who really like their jobs and will do anything to satisfy their "bases". The result is that nothing meaningful happens in Washington, regardless of the party in power. The rules of the House and Senate have been so purposely complicated that it would take an almost impossible to achieve majority to accomplish anything. It seems to me that the only way out of this morass of polarized inaction is term limits. I'd even go so far as to say that one term is plenty for any of them. That'll never get legislated, so maybe an option is that WE throw them all out every election and start over with a new bunch every election. Maybe something would come of that. Certainly it couldn't be worse.

In the meantime, I think everyone who is cutting and pasting all the great stuff that "their" guys said or did and why the other guys blocked it--save the bandwidth and don't waste everyone's time. Until we get rid of the special interest lobbyists and shorten up the terms of elected officials to make their jobs less attractive, not much is going to happen regardless of who's elected or which party is in control.

P.S. It doesn't take a banking background to figure out how our government really works. You just have to try to follow the money.

Cologal, good point, I stand corrected. You are right they, did not vote on the legislation in 2003.

Originally Posted by cabo35

Cologal, good point, I stand corrected. You are right they, did not vote on the legislation in 2003.

Thanks....have a good weekend...and if you play golf hit a few for me.