Andylusion
Platinum Member
So was Barney Frank to blame for our woes? There are two lines of argument here, and neither is all that compelling. The first contention is that Frank failed to exercise diligent oversight of Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac as the housing bubble swelled. Theres something to this, though its worth noting that Frank was in the congressional minority for most of the period in question. The second argument is that Frank and other Democrats by promoting policies to boost affordable housing somehow caused the subprime mess and financial collapse. That argument is especially hard to square with the facts.
First, its true that Frank was hardly Fannie and Freddies biggest critic. Nor did he spot the housing bubble. Back in 2003, as the Examiners Philip Klein points out, Frank said that the government-sponsored entities were not in any sort of crisis. The more people exaggerate these problems, Frank told the New York Times, the more pressure there is on these companies, the less we will see in terms of affordable housing. Not the most prescient of comments. (Note, however, that in 2003, Fannie and Freddie werent yet heavily involved in the mortgage-backed security market. They were actually losing market share to private banks, as the chart on right from researchers at the University of North Carolina shows.) -- Barney Frank didn?t cause the housing crisis - The Washington Post
Well first, Barney Frank is on record as saying there was no bubble, and that he planned to continue to push for easier home ownership.
[ame=http://youtu.be/6coIcgdgF5U]Barney Frank 2005: "This is not a housing bubble, it wont collapse" - YouTube[/ame]
So that's not a matter of debate, it's just a flat out fact.
Second, the claim that Fannie and Freddie were not heavily involved in Sub-prime loans, is just flat out wrong.
They were both heavily heavily involved in sub-prime loans.
FHFA Conservator?s Report ? Why Fannie Mae And Freddie Mac Failed | Problem Bank List
According to the conservator's report, almost 40% of all of Fannie and Freddies mortgages were sub-prime by 2003. That's balls deep into sub-prime in my book.
The reason some people claim Fannie and Freddie were not buying up so many sub-prime loans, is because they deliberately hid the number of sub-prime loans, by categorizing them as Alt-A. But Alt-A *IS* a sub-prime loan.
Additionally, a lot of people seem to forget that Fannie and Freddie are not only in the business of buying loans. They also securitize loans.
A private mortgage lender will make a loan. Then they bundle that loan together with a bunch of others, and make a Mortgage Backed Security.
They take this security, and have Freddie or Fannie, stamp their guarantee on that MBS, and then sell it on the open market.
Half of all the losses Freddie and Fannie had, were not from Mortgages they owned, but rather mortgages they guaranteed.
When people look at their portfolio and say 'they were not involved', they simply don't know what they are talking about. They only owned a small fraction of the sub-prime loans, yes. But their stamp of approval was on hundreds of billions of dollars worth in the market.