Rich wrote: "Note that this is on the Opinion page, but it seems rather 
straightforward and factual by a guy who knows his topic."

Here is another interesting article.  It has a similar thesis, EXCEPT it 
explores the role of Congress, finds the point at which Congress tried to act 
(and then places blame on those for failing.

http://www.bloomberg.com/apps/news?pid=newsarchive&sid=aSKSoiNbnQY0

It's a pretty interesting article.  Here is the most important part:


"What happened next was extraordinary. For the first time in history, a serious 
Fannie and Freddie reform bill was passed by the Senate Banking 
Committee<http://banking.senate.gov/public/>. The bill gave a regulator power 
to crack down, and would have required the companies to eliminate their 
investments in risky assets.

Different World

If that bill had become law, then the world today would be different. In 2005, 
2006 and 2007, a blizzard of terrible mortgage paper fluttered out of the 
Fannie and Freddie clouds, burying many of our oldest and most venerable 
institutions. Without their checkbooks keeping the market liquid and buying up 
excess supply, the market would likely have not existed.

But the bill didn't become law, for a simple reason: Democrats opposed it on a 
party-line vote in the committee, signaling that this would be a partisan 
issue. Republicans, tied in knots by the tight Democratic opposition, couldn't 
even get the Senate to vote on the matter.

That such a reckless political stand could have been taken by the Democrats was 
obscene even then. Wallison 
wrote<http://www.aei.org/publications/pubID.22514/pub_detail.asp> at the time: 
``It is a classic case of socializing the risk while privatizing the profit. 
The Democrats and the few Republicans who oppose portfolio limitations could 
not possibly do so if their constituents understood what they were doing.''

Mounds of Materials

Now that the collapse has occurred, the roadblock built by Senate Democrats in 
2005 is unforgivable. Many who opposed the bill doubtlessly did so for 
honorable reasons. Fannie and Freddie provided mounds of materials defending 
their practices. Perhaps some found their propaganda convincing.

But we now know that many of the senators who protected Fannie and Freddie, 
including Barack 
Obama<http://search.bloomberg.com/search?q=Barack+Obama&site=wnews&client=wnews&proxystylesheet=wnews&output=xml_no_dtd&ie=UTF-8&oe=UTF-8&filter=p&getfields=wnnis&sort=date:D:S:d1>,
 Hillary 
Clinton<http://search.bloomberg.com/search?q=Hillary+Clinton&site=wnews&client=wnews&proxystylesheet=wnews&output=xml_no_dtd&ie=UTF-8&oe=UTF-8&filter=p&getfields=wnnis&sort=date:D:S:d1>
 and Christopher 
Dodd<http://search.bloomberg.com/search?q=Christopher+Dodd&site=wnews&client=wnews&proxystylesheet=wnews&output=xml_no_dtd&ie=UTF-8&oe=UTF-8&filter=p&getfields=wnnis&sort=date:D:S:d1>,
 have received mind-boggling levels of financial support from them over the 
years."

There has been a lot of talk about who is to blame for this crisis. A look back 
at the story of 2005 makes the answer pretty clear.

Oh, and there is one little footnote to the story that's worth keeping in mind 
while Democrats point fingers between now and Nov. 4: Senator John 
McCain<http://search.bloomberg.com/search?q=John+McCain&site=wnews&client=wnews&proxystylesheet=wnews&output=xml_no_dtd&ie=UTF-8&oe=UTF-8&filter=p&getfields=wnnis&sort=date:D:S:d1>
 was one of the three cosponsors of 
S.190<http://thomas.loc.gov/cgi-bin/bdquery/z?d109:SN00190:@@@P>, the bill that 
would have averted this mess.
Donald H. Snook
1990 Volvo 240DL (with a McCain sticker on it).
_______________________________________
http://www.okiebenz.com
For new parts see official list sponsor: http://www.buymbparts.com/
For used parts email [EMAIL PROTECTED]

To Unsubscribe or change delivery options go to:
http://okiebenz.com/mailman/listinfo/mercedes_okiebenz.com

Reply via email to