The Utter Failure of Democrats to Regulate a government Agency

Bottom line is.... the politicians brought this upon us.... all in the name of "fair" lending.
//

yep and lobbied for by the lending companies. And eagerly embraced until the house of cards started falling down.
 
Superfreak said:
That was a part of it, but it began in the late 1980's when there was a change to the Home Mortgage Disclosure Act that forced banks to gather race data on all applications.

After that was done.... the "studies" followed. The "studies" showed 'widespread discrimination' by lenders given that minorities were rejected at higer rates. Of course this had nothing to do with minorities also living in higher rates of poverty (the real culprit).

This in turn led to the beginning of the dismantling of Glass Steagall in 1992 under Bush. Then the big push by the politicians (both parties) in 1995 with the "Fair" lending act.

Finally came the 1999 GLB bill that finalized the destruction of Glass Steagall and the insanely low rates by the Fed in the 2001-2004 time frame. Lenders and borrowers then took advantage of the situation. As did the investment firms we see going under one after the other today.

Bottom line is.... the politicians brought this upon us.... all in the name of "fair" lending.
Click to expand...


I'm calling bullshit on the bolded portion. Show me the studies that showed that the "real culprit" of minorities being discriminated against was higher poverty rates. Typically, when they do these studies they control for things like that.

Also, I'm comfortable blaming the people responsible for dismantling Glass Steagal (the main force behind is McCain's leading economic advisor) and I'm comfortable blaming it on lenders and investment firms taking advantage of the situation.

But blaming "fair lending" practices is horseshit.
 
Dungheap said:
Oh, I see. So even though the Republicans were in power in both houses of Congress and the White House, it is Barney Frank's fault that Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac weren't more closely regulated in 2003 because he did not like the proposal being floated by the White House. Is that it?

And, by the way, Barney Frank introduced his own legislation in March of 2007 shortly after the Democrats took control of the House that provided for additional oversight of Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac, just not within the Treasury Department.
Click to expand...

No! I don't give a crap about your partisan bitchfest. I explained the purpose of the title. The point is the government cannot regulate what it already has under it's power and you guys are clamoring for them to control more.

Their motivation is not a sound economy or even sound practices within these institutions. It's political. And that's why this kind of failure continues.

Did Frank ever mention his reservation about it being under Treasury? The only thing in the article is his concern on how it might impact the constituency the Dems claim to represent.

BTW, I don't like the idea under any executive agency.
 
Superfreak said:
That was a part of it, but it began in the late 1980's when there was a change to the Home Mortgage Disclosure Act that forced banks to gather race data on all applications.

After that was done.... the "studies" followed. The "studies" showed 'widespread discrimination' by lenders given that minorities were rejected at higer rates. Of course this had nothing to do with minorities also living in higher rates of poverty (the real culprit).

This in turn led to the beginning of the dismantling of Glass Steagall in 1992 under Bush. Then the big push by the politicians (both parties) in 1995 with the "Fair" lending act.

Finally came the 1999 GLB bill that finalized the destruction of Glass Steagall and the insanely low rates by the Fed in the 2001-2004 time frame. Lenders and borrowers then took advantage of the situation. As did the investment firms we see going under one after the other today.

Bottom line is.... the politicians brought this upon us.... all in the name of "fair" lending.
Click to expand...
And as you have deftly pointed out there is enough blame to cover all political persuasions.
 
RStringfield said:
No! I don't give a crap about your partisan bitchfest. I explained the purpose of the title. The point is the government cannot regulate what it already has under it's power and you guys are clamoring for them to control more.

Their motivation is not a sound economy or even sound practices within these institutions. It's political. And that's why this kind of failure continues.

Did Frank ever mention his reservation about it being under Treasury? The only thing in the article is his concern on how it might impact the constituency the Dems claim to represent.

BTW, I don't like the idea under any executive agency.
Click to expand...


First of all, there is a big difference between what government cannot do and what government is unwilling to do. It is clear that many in the government were unwilling to impose the necessary controls on the industry. From this you conclude that if government won't do it, they shouldn't do anything at all. I disagree. It seems clear that the industry cannot regulate itself and the market corrections that we're seeing aren't beneficial to anyone. Sure, the market will correct the excesses but the correction can be devastating.

As for whether Frank mentioned his reservations about it being under Treasury back in 2003, I don't know. Neither do you. I'm sure he had a little bit more to say during a committee meeting or thereafter than the one sentence quoted in the Times piece. What we do know is that he was not opposed to tighter regulation of Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac as evidenced by the bill he proposed.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top