Originally Posted by JP5

I've already provided the bill and the information on who blocked it from going forward. If you guys want to keep your heads buried in the sand, I can't help ya.

Originally Posted by JP5

.....in 2005:

“John McCain. 25 May 2005, speaking to the Senate:

Mr. President, this week Fannie Mae’s regulator reported that the company’s quarterly reports of profit growth over the past few years were “illusions deliberately and systematically created” by the company’s senior management, which resulted in a $10.6 billion accounting scandal.

The Office of Federal Housing Enterprise Oversight’s report goes on to say that Fannie Mae employees deliberately and intentionally manipulated financial reports to hit earnings targets in order to trigger bonuses for senior executives. In the case of Franklin Raines, Fannie Mae’s former chief executive officer, OFHEO’s report shows that over half of Mr. Raines’ compensation for the 6 years through 2003 was directly tied to meeting earnings targets. The report of financial misconduct at Fannie Mae echoes the deeply troubling $5 billion profit restatement at Freddie Mac.

The OFHEO report also states that Fannie Mae used its political power to lobby Congress in an effort to interfere with the regulator’s examination of the company’s accounting problems. This report comes some weeks after Freddie Mac paid a record $3.8 million fine in a settlement with the Federal Election Commission and restated lobbying disclosure reports from 2004 to 2005. These are entities that have demonstrated over and over again that they are deeply in need of reform.

For years I have been concerned about the regulatory structure that governs Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac–known as Government-sponsored entities or GSEs–and the sheer magnitude of these companies and the role they play in the housing market. OFHEO’s report this week does nothing to ease these concerns. In fact, the report does quite the contrary. OFHEO’s report solidifies my view that the GSEs need to be reformed without delay.

I join as a cosponsor of the Federal Housing Enterprise Regulatory Reform Act of 2005, S. 190, to underscore my support for quick passage of GSE regulatory reform legislation. If Congress does not act, American taxpayers will continue to be exposed to the enormous risk that Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac pose to the housing market, the overall financial system, and the economy as a whole.

I urge my colleagues to support swift action on this GSE reform legislation.”
....Senator John McCain, May 25, 2005.......OVER 3 YEARS AGO!!!!

He was ignored. The legislation was blocked by Democrats, with the assistance of a few Republicans. Senator Chris Dodd, Chairman of the Banking Committee was getting his pockets lined by Country Wide, and laughingly running a no-chance campaign for President while Wall Street burned.
http://macsmind.com/wordpress/2008/0...bama-got-rich/

So----can ANY of the Obama supporters on this forum show us where Obama saw this coming and asked for support in getting it fixed----as McCain did more than 3 years ago?

Originally Posted by JP5

Let's recap who was for what:

"The administration’s position has always been that: it is dangerous to concentrate nearly 50 percent of all U.S. residential mortgage debt in two institutions (i.e., Fannie and Freddie) since its value fluctuates with changes in interest rates. They believed a crisis could develop if they fail to hedge their interest rate risk properly; a restriction on their portfolio level would reduce such risk; and, consequently, the new regulator should be directed to limit their portfolios “to the level needed to assemble and guarantee mortgage-backed securities for sale to others” (which could reduce their combined holdings from $1.5 trillion to a few hundred billion dollars). Fannie’s and Freddie’s supporters argued “that their large purchases of mortgages and mortgage-backed securities stabilize the market in times of turmoil.”
http://www.law.com/jsp/nylj/PubArtic...=1202422148681

Well, obviously the supporters of Fannie and Freddie were just proven el-wrong-O. There's an old saying......"Lead, or get out of the way!" Since Democrats have been wrong and have no clue how to lead on this, they need to get out of the way. NOW, before they screw it up AGAIN.

Originally Posted by Think for myself

Do you have a shred of evidence to even suggest that Democrats blocked this? Just the tiniest bit?

Lst time I checked, 3 years ago the Democrats did not control Congress. I would love to see the logic that provides the argument that they some how derailed this bill.

Originally Posted by JP5

I've already provided the bill and the information on who blocked it from going forward. If you guys want to keep your heads buried in the sand, I can't help ya.

Originally Posted by Mack

Please name the specific parts of the bill that would have averted this crisis. You have provided no evidence that this bill would have reduced the amount of sub-primes being loaned out or reduce the risks associated with fluctuation housing prices and interest rates. Fannie and Freddie failed due to 3 reasons. Bad mortgages to start with, plummeting home values, and to a small extent higher interest rates. Please show how the Republicans addressed any of these 3 problems.

Originally Posted by Rebellion

The 2003 bill adovcated oversight and the 2005 bill advocated oversight. Specifically

Sets forth operating, administrative, and regulatory provisions of the Agency, including provisions respecting: (1) assessment authority; (2) authority to limit nonmission-related assets; (3) minimum and critical capital levels; (4) risk-based capital test; (5) capital classifications and undercapitalized enterprises; (6) enforcement actions and penalties; (7) golden parachutes; and ( reporting. All three highlighted items are obviously applicable. The first relates to Mission related investing such as lending more to the poor. EXACTLY what happened here. The second highlighted item is obviously applicable, but mostly as it relates to the third and most important. http://www.ofheo.gov/media/archive/d...s/RBCFinal.pdf
Feel free to peruse the entire 568 page report, but essentially risked based capital test ensures that both entities are well enough capitalized to survive a 10-year stretch of bad loans. That obviously did not occur because neither entity was able to police itself.

Originally Posted by justabubba

whose money were fannie mae and freddie mac playing with, jp
with recent results that should not be a trick question

even palin understands OPM

so, why do we have uncle sugar guaranteeing the losses while private share holders reap the profits?

are you saying that was not the situation when the republican party controlled the white house, the senate and the house of representatives?

Originally Posted by Rebellion

The 2003 bill adovcated oversight and the 2005 bill advocated oversight. Specifically

Sets forth operating, administrative, and regulatory provisions of the Agency, including provisions respecting: (1) assessment authority; (2) authority to limit nonmission-related assets; (3) minimum and critical capital levels; (4) risk-based capital test; (5) capital classifications and undercapitalized enterprises; (6) enforcement actions and penalties; (7) golden parachutes; and ( reporting. All three highlighted items are obviously applicable. The first relates to Mission related investing such as lending more to the poor. EXACTLY what happened here. The second highlighted item is obviously applicable, but mostly as it relates to the third and most important. http://www.ofheo.gov/media/archive/d...s/RBCFinal.pdf
Feel free to peruse the entire 568 page report, but essentially risked based capital test ensures that both entities are well enough capitalized to survive a 10-year stretch of bad loans. That obviously did not occur because neither entity was able to police itself.