http://www.aei.org/publications/pubID.22514/pub_detail.asp

In what turned out to be a huge strategic error, Fannie and Freddie
chose to fight legislation in the Senate Banking Committee that
embodied the administration's minimum requirements, particularly the
receivership provision, in the late spring of 2004. The companies
called in their chits and managed to obtain solid Democratic
opposition to the bill crafted by the committee's chairman, Richard
Shelby (R-Ala.). The committee also watered down the receivership
provision. The partisan nature of the vote to send the bill to the
floor virtually assured that it would not be taken up in the Senate
unless Fannie and Freddie relented in their opposition, and the
administration opposed the committee bill because of the weakened
receivership language. Administration spokesmen warned the companies
that if they continued to oppose the bill in 2004 there would be a
tougher version in 2005, but Fannie and Freddie would not budge. It
may be that the GSEs were banking on the defeat of President George W.
Bush and on the assumption that a Democratic president would abandon
the effort to pass tougher regulation. If that was their thinking, it
was an exceedingly costly error.

On Mon, Sep 22, 2008 at 1:53 PM, William Bowen <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>> You were wrong then and you are still wrong now
>
> prove it.
>
>

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~|
Adobe® ColdFusion® 8 software 8 is the most important and dramatic release to 
date
Get the Free Trial
http://ad.doubleclick.net/clk;203748912;27390454;j

Archive: 
http://www.houseoffusion.com/groups/CF-Community/message.cfm/messageid:270450
Subscription: http://www.houseoffusion.com/groups/CF-Community/subscribe.cfm
Unsubscribe: 
http://www.houseoffusion.com/cf_lists/unsubscribe.cfm?user=11502.10531.5

Reply via email to