It makes Obama look bad, thats why. If instead we looked at changes in unemployment since taking office, Obama would be high up there and most Democrats would he higher than most Republicans...so we dont look at that. We are trying to stay fair and balanced
I'm using your numbers.Earlier, you said Bush asked 17 times in 2008, but now you show only 7. Typo?Looks like healthmyths finally understood he was beaten and slinked away.
I said NOTHING about Frank "opposing"! I used FRANK's OWN words where HE SAID HE OPPOSED it!!!
Don't the American people deserve to know that Democrat Barney Frank, then ranking member and now chairman of the House Financial Services Committee, said, " I want to roll the dice a little bit more in this situation towards subsidized housing"?
Rep. Maxine Waters insisted,
"we do not have a crisis at Freddie Mac, and in particular at Fannie Mae, under the outstanding leadership of Mr. Frank Raines"?
Much if not all of that could have been prevented by a bill cosponsored by John McCain and supported by all the Republicans
and opposed by all the Democrats in the Senate Banking Committee in 2005.
That bill, which the Democrats stopped from passing, would have prohibited the GSEs from speculating on the mortgage-based securities they packaged.
The GSEs' mission allegedly justifying their quasi-governmental status was to package or securitize such mortgages, but the lion's share of their profits—which determined top executives' bonuses—came from speculation.
Democrats Were Wrong on Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac
Many prominent Democrats,including House Finance Chairman Barney Frank, opposed any legislation correcting the risks posed by GSEs.
* House Financial Services Committee Chairman Barney Frank (D-MA) criticized the President's warning saying:
"these two entities - Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac - are not facing any kind of financial crisis .
The more people exaggerate these problems,
the more pressure there is on these companies, the less we will see in terms of affordable housing."...
(Stephen Labaton, "New Agency Proposed To Oversee Freddie Mac And Fannie Mae," New York Times, 9/11/03)
* Senate Committee on Banking, Housing and Urban Affairs Chairman Christopher Dodd also ignored the President's warnings and called on him to "immediately reconsider his ill-advised" position. Eric Dash,
"Fannie Mae's Offer To Help Ease Credit Squeeze is Rejected, As Critics Complain Of Opportunism," New York Times, 8/11/07)
So again NOT MY words you idiot!
You fuckin' liar. You said...
"Many prominent Democrats, including House Finance Chairman Barney Frank, opposed any legislation correcting the risks posed by GSEs."
... Barney Frank didn't chair that committee until 2007, at which time, he sponsored a GSE reform bill you claim he was "opposed to." To support your lies, you then quote him from years earlier where he said he wanted to, "roll the dice a bit more, but then falsely claim he said he was opposed to GSE reform.
And ..... you still haven't answered my question.... when did Bush first ask Congress for GSE reform?
Starting in 2001... See below from this LINK!
Setting the Record Straight: Six Years of Unheeded Warnings for GSE Reform
By the way you could increase your creditability by providing LINKS to your guesses!
2001
April: The Administration's FY02 budget declares that the size of Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac is "a potential problem," because "financial trouble of a large GSE could cause strong repercussions in financial markets, affecting Federally insured entities and economic activity." (2002 Budget Analytic Perspectives, pg. 142)
2002
May: The Office of Management and Budget (OMB) calls for the disclosure and corporate governance principles contained in the President's 10-point plan for corporate responsibility to apply to Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac. (OMB Prompt Letter to OFHEO, 5/29/02)
2003
September: Then-Treasury Secretary John Snow testifies before the House Financial Services Committee to recommend that Congress enact "legislation to create a new Federal agency to regulate and supervise the financial activities of our housing-related government sponsored enterprises" and set prudent and appropriate minimum capital adequacy requirements.
2004
- September: Then-House Financial Services Committee Ranking Member Barney Frank (D-MA) strongly disagrees with the Administration's assessment, saying "these two entities – Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac – are not facing any kind of financial crisis … The more people exaggerate these problems, the more pressure there is on these companies, the less we will see in terms of affordable housing." (Stephen Labaton, "New Agency Proposed To Oversee Freddie Mac And Fannie Mae," The New York Times, 9/11/03)
- October: Senator Thomas Carper (D-DE) refuses to acknowledge any necessity for GSE reforms, saying "if it ain't broke, don't fix it." (Sen. Carper, Hearing of Senate Committee on Banking, Housing, and Urban Affairs, 10/16/03)
- November: Then-Council of the Economic Advisers (CEA) Chairman Greg Mankiwexplains that any "legislation to reform GSE regulation should empower the new regulator with sufficient strength and credibility to reduce systemic risk." To reduce the potential for systemic instability, the regulator would have "broad authority to set both risk-based and minimum capital standards" and "receivership powers necessary to wind down the affairs of a troubled GSE." (N. Gregory Mankiw, Remarks At The Conference Of State Bank Supervisors State Banking Summit And Leadership, 11/6/03)
2005
- February: The President's FY05 Budget again highlights the risk posed by the explosive growth of the GSEs and their low levels of required capital and calls for creation of a new, world-class regulator: "The Administration has determined that the safety and soundness regulators of the housing GSEs lack sufficient power and stature to meet their responsibilities, and therefore … should be replaced with a new strengthened regulator." (2005 Budget Analytic Perspectives, pg. 83)
- February: Then-CEA Chairman Mankiw cautions Congress to "not take [the financial market's] strength for granted." Again, the call from the Administration was to reduce this risk by "ensuring that the housing GSEs are overseen by an effective regulator." (N. Gregory Mankiw, Op-Ed, "Keeping Fannie And Freddie's House In Order," Financial Times, 2/24/04)
- April: Rep. Frank ignores the warnings, accusing the Administration of creating an "artificial issue." At a speech to the Mortgage Bankers Association conference, Rep. Frank said "people tend to pay their mortgages. I don't think we are in any remote danger here. This focus on receivership, I think, is intended to create fears that aren't there." ("Frank: GSE Failure A Phony Issue," American Banker, 4/21/04)
- June: Then-Treasury Deputy Secretary Samuel Bodman spotlights the risk posed by the GSEs and calls for reform, saying "We do not have a world-class system of supervision of the housing government sponsored enterprises (GSEs), even though the importance of the housing financial system that the GSEs serve demands the best in supervision to ensure the long-term vitality of that system. Therefore, the Administration has called for a new, first class, regulatory supervisor for the three housing GSEs: Fannie Mae, Freddie Mac, and the Federal Home Loan Banking System." (Samuel Bodman, House Financial Services Subcommittee on Oversight and Investigations Testimony, 6/16/04)
2007
- April: Then-Secretary Snow repeats his call for GSE reform, saying "Events that have transpired since I testified before this Committee in 2003 reinforce concerns over the systemic risks posed by the GSEs and further highlight the need for real GSE reform to ensure that our housing finance system remains a strong and vibrant source of funding for expanding homeownership opportunities in America … Half-measures will only exacerbate the risks to our financial system." (Secretary John W. Snow, "Testimony Before The U.S. House Financial Services Committee," 4/13/05)
- July: Then-Minority Leader Harry Reid rejects legislation reforming GSEs, "while I favor improving oversight by our federal housing regulators to ensure safety and soundness, we cannot pass legislation that could limit Americans from owning homes and potentially harm our economy in the process." ("Dems Rip New Fannie Mae Regulatory Measure," United Press International, 7/28/05)
2008
- August: President Bush emphatically calls on Congress to pass a reform package for Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac, saying "first things first when it comes to those two institutions. Congress needs to get them reformed, get them streamlined, get them focused, and then I will consider other options." (President George W. Bush, Press Conference, the White House, 8/9/07)
- August: Senate Committee on Banking, Housing and Urban Affairs Chairman Christopher Dodd ignores the President's warnings and calls on him to "immediately reconsider his ill-advised" position. (Eric Dash, "Fannie Mae's Offer To Help Ease Credit Squeeze Is Rejected, As Critics Complain Of Opportunism," The New York Times, 8/11/07)
- December: President Bush again warns Congress of the need to pass legislation reforming GSEs, saying "These institutions provide liquidity in the mortgage market that benefits millions of homeowners, and it is vital they operate safely and operate soundly. So I've called on Congress to pass legislation that strengthens independent regulation of the GSEs – and ensures they focus on their important housing mission. The GSE reform bill passed by the House earlier this year is a good start. But the Senate has not acted. And the United States Senate needs to pass this legislation soon." (President George W. Bush, Discusses Housing, the White House, 12/6/07)
- February: Assistant Treasury Secretary David Nason reiterates the urgency of reforms, saying "A new regulatory structure for the housing GSEs is essential if these entities are to continue to perform their public mission successfully." (David Nason, Testimony On Reforming GSE Regulation, Senate Committee On Banking, Housing And Urban Affairs, 2/7/08)
- March: President Bush calls on Congress to take action and "move forward with reforms on Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac. They need to continue to modernize the FHA, as well as allow State housing agencies to issue tax-free bonds to homeowners to refinance their mortgages." (President George W. Bush, Remarks To The Economic Club Of New York, New York, NY, 3/14/08)
- April: President Bush urges Congress to pass the much needed legislation and "modernize Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac. [There are] constructive things Congress can do that will encourage the housing market to correct quickly by … helping people stay in their homes." (President George W. Bush, Meeting With Cabinet, the White House, 4/14/08)
- May: President Bush issues several pleas to Congress to pass legislation reforming Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac before the situation deteriorates further.
"Americans are concerned about making their mortgage payments and keeping their homes. Yet Congress has failed to pass legislation I have repeatedly requested to modernize the Federal Housing Administration that will help more families stay in their homes, reform Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac to ensure they focus on their housing mission, and allow state housing agencies to issue tax-free bonds to refinance sub-prime loans." (President George W. Bush, Radio Address, 5/3/08)
"[T]he government ought to be helping creditworthy people stay in their homes. And one way we can do that – and Congress is making progress on this – is the reform of Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac. That reform will come with a strong, independent regulator." (President George W. Bush, Meeting With The Secretary Of The Treasury, the White House, 5/19/08)
"Congress needs to pass legislation to modernize the Federal Housing Administration, reform Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac to ensure they focus on their housing mission, and allow State housing agencies to issue tax-free bonds to refinance subprime loans." (President George W. Bush, Radio Address, 5/31/08)- June: As foreclosure rates continued to rise in the first quarter, the President once again asks Congress to take the necessary measures to address this challenge, saying "we need to pass legislation to reform Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac." (President George W. Bush, Remarks At Swearing In Ceremony For Secretary Of Housing And Urban Development, Washington, D.C., 6/6/08)
- July: Congress heeds the President's call for action and passes reform legislation for Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac as it becomes clear that the institutions are failing.
- September: Democrats in Congress forget their previous objections to GSE reforms, as Senator Dodd questions "why weren't we doing more, why did we wait almost a year before there were any significant steps taken to try to deal with this problem? … I have a lot of questions about where was the administration over the last eight years." (Dawn Kopecki, "Fannie Mae, Freddie 'House Of Cards' Prompts Takeover," Bloomberg, 9/9/08)
At any rate, what the fuck is wrong with you? You show Bush asking since 2001 but you blame Democrats who didn't take over Congress until 2007.
Thanks for highlighting why Republicans get the blame for the meltdown.
UNLIKE you I quote the people. I don't make up the numbers!
For many years the President and his Administration have not only warned of the systemic consequences of financial turmoil at a housing government-sponsored enterprise (GSE) but also put forward thoughtful plans to reduce the risk that either Fannie Mae or Freddie Mac would encounter such difficulties. President Bush publicly called for GSE reform 17 times in 2008 alone before Congress acted.
Here at IBD, we've done more than a dozen pieces — most recently, in yesterday's paper — detailing how rewrites of the Community Reinvestment Act in 1995 under President Clinton, along with major regulatory changes pushed by the White House in the late 1990s, created the boom in subprime lending, the surge in exotic and highly risky mortgage-backed securities, and the housing boom whose government-fed excesses led to inevitable collapse.
Despite this clear record, we're now besieged by enterprising journalists blaming Republican "deregulation" or the president's failure to recognize the seriousness of the problem or act. But these claims fall apart, as a partial history of the last decade shows.
Bush's first budget, written in 2001 — seven years ago — called runaway subprime lending by the government-sponsored enterprises Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac "a potential problem" and warned of "strong repercussions in financial markets."
In 2003, Bush's Treasury secretary, John Snow, proposed what the New York Times called "the most significant regulatory overhaul in the housing finance industry since the savings and loan crisis a decade ago." Did Democrats in Congress welcome it? Hardly.
"I do not think we are facing any kind of a crisis," declared Rep. Barney Frank, D-Mass., in a response typical of those who viewed Fannie and Freddie as a party patronage machine that the GOP was trying to dismantle. "If it ain't broke, don't fix it," added Sen. Thomas Carper, D-Del.
Bush Called For Reform of Fannie Mae & Freddie Mac 17 Times in 2008 Alone... Dems Ignored Warnings - The Gateway Pundit
In the Wall Street Journal, Senior Advisor to President Bush, Karl Rove explained:
Sen. Charles Schumer of New York dismissed Mr. Bush’s “safety and soundness concerns” as “a straw man.” “If it ain’t broke, don’t fix it,” was the helpful advice of both Sen. Thomas Carper of Delaware and Rep. Maxine Waters of California. Rep. Gregory Meeks of New York berated a Bush official at a hearing, saying, “I am just pissed off” at the administration for raising the issue…
The more the president [Bush] pushed for reform, the more [mortgages] they bought. Peter Wallison of the American Enterprise Institute and Charles Calomiris of the Columbia Business School suggest $1 trillion of this debt was subprime and “liar loans,” almost all bought between 2005 and 2007. This bulk-up in risky paper made it possible for banks to lend imprudently on a massive scale.
FANNY & FREDDIE: What Really Happened in 2008?
I'm using your numbers.
You said it was 17 times but you showed only 7.
And again, you said Bush started asking for reform in 2001 but didn't get it until 2008 .... remind me again ... which party controlled Congress for most of those years?
Maybe you can answer the question... Which party controlled Congress for most of those years between 2001 and 2008? After that challenge, answer the question what GSE reform bills did Barney Frank block?I'm using your numbers.
You said it was 17 times but you showed only 7.
And again, you said Bush started asking for reform in 2001 but didn't get it until 2008 .... remind me again ... which party controlled Congress for most of those years?
you were given proof that Republicans asked for reform long before the economy tanked. YOu were shown it was Democrats OBSTRUCTING reform. you are the same losers who cry that the Democrat MAJORITY for all of Bush's last two years was helpless to do anything about the economy. You are the same losers who cry that the Democrat MAJORITY FOR ALL OF OBAMA'S FIRST TWO YEARS was "obstructed" by Republicans.
now you're here implying that the Republican majority could have gotten the reform that was needed
it is just so typical of you
I'm using your numbers.Earlier, you said Bush asked 17 times in 2008, but now you show only 7. Typo?
At any rate, what the fuck is wrong with you? You show Bush asking since 2001 but you blame Democrats who didn't take over Congress until 2007.
Thanks for highlighting why Republicans get the blame for the meltdown.
UNLIKE you I quote the people. I don't make up the numbers!
For many years the President and his Administration have not only warned of the systemic consequences of financial turmoil at a housing government-sponsored enterprise (GSE) but also put forward thoughtful plans to reduce the risk that either Fannie Mae or Freddie Mac would encounter such difficulties. President Bush publicly called for GSE reform 17 times in 2008 alone before Congress acted.
Here at IBD, we've done more than a dozen pieces — most recently, in yesterday's paper — detailing how rewrites of the Community Reinvestment Act in 1995 under President Clinton, along with major regulatory changes pushed by the White House in the late 1990s, created the boom in subprime lending, the surge in exotic and highly risky mortgage-backed securities, and the housing boom whose government-fed excesses led to inevitable collapse.
Despite this clear record, we're now besieged by enterprising journalists blaming Republican "deregulation" or the president's failure to recognize the seriousness of the problem or act. But these claims fall apart, as a partial history of the last decade shows.
Bush's first budget, written in 2001 — seven years ago — called runaway subprime lending by the government-sponsored enterprises Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac "a potential problem" and warned of "strong repercussions in financial markets."
In 2003, Bush's Treasury secretary, John Snow, proposed what the New York Times called "the most significant regulatory overhaul in the housing finance industry since the savings and loan crisis a decade ago." Did Democrats in Congress welcome it? Hardly.
"I do not think we are facing any kind of a crisis," declared Rep. Barney Frank, D-Mass., in a response typical of those who viewed Fannie and Freddie as a party patronage machine that the GOP was trying to dismantle. "If it ain't broke, don't fix it," added Sen. Thomas Carper, D-Del.
Bush Called For Reform of Fannie Mae & Freddie Mac 17 Times in 2008 Alone... Dems Ignored Warnings - The Gateway Pundit
In the Wall Street Journal, Senior Advisor to President Bush, Karl Rove explained:
Sen. Charles Schumer of New York dismissed Mr. Bush’s “safety and soundness concerns” as “a straw man.” “If it ain’t broke, don’t fix it,” was the helpful advice of both Sen. Thomas Carper of Delaware and Rep. Maxine Waters of California. Rep. Gregory Meeks of New York berated a Bush official at a hearing, saying, “I am just pissed off” at the administration for raising the issue…
The more the president [Bush] pushed for reform, the more [mortgages] they bought. Peter Wallison of the American Enterprise Institute and Charles Calomiris of the Columbia Business School suggest $1 trillion of this debt was subprime and “liar loans,” almost all bought between 2005 and 2007. This bulk-up in risky paper made it possible for banks to lend imprudently on a massive scale.
FANNY & FREDDIE: What Really Happened in 2008?
You said it was 17 times but you showed only 7.
And again, you said Bush started asking for reform in 2001 but didn't get it until 2008 .... remind me again ... which party controlled Congress for most of those years?
Maybe you can answer the question... Which party controlled Congress for most of those years between 2001 and 2008? After that challenge, answer the question what GSE reform bills did Barney Frank block?I'm using your numbers.
You said it was 17 times but you showed only 7.
And again, you said Bush started asking for reform in 2001 but didn't get it until 2008 .... remind me again ... which party controlled Congress for most of those years?
you were given proof that Republicans asked for reform long before the economy tanked. YOu were shown it was Democrats OBSTRUCTING reform. you are the same losers who cry that the Democrat MAJORITY for all of Bush's last two years was helpless to do anything about the economy. You are the same losers who cry that the Democrat MAJORITY FOR ALL OF OBAMA'S FIRST TWO YEARS was "obstructed" by Republicans.
now you're here implying that the Republican majority could have gotten the reform that was needed
it is just so typical of you
Thanks for playing.
Maybe you can answer the question... Which party controlled Congress for most of those years between 2001 and 2008? After that challenge, answer the question what GSE reform bills did Barney Frank block?I'm using your numbers.
You said it was 17 times but you showed only 7.
And again, you said Bush started asking for reform in 2001 but didn't get it until 2008 .... remind me again ... which party controlled Congress for most of those years?
you were given proof that Republicans asked for reform long before the economy tanked. YOu were shown it was Democrats OBSTRUCTING reform. you are the same losers who cry that the Democrat MAJORITY for all of Bush's last two years was helpless to do anything about the economy. You are the same losers who cry that the Democrat MAJORITY FOR ALL OF OBAMA'S FIRST TWO YEARS was "obstructed" by Republicans.
now you're here implying that the Republican majority could have gotten the reform that was needed
it is just so typical of you
Thanks for playing.
i dont need to play; cuz i know you're a coward. but since we're on the subject; what corporate subsidies did Democrats even TRY to end in their 4 years as a majority of BOTH chambers of Congress?
by the way from DAY ONE in 2007 the Democrat majority was BIGGER THAN ANY REPUBLICAN MAJORITY BUSH HAD; and even DID have that FILIBUSTER-PROOF for 13 weeks. which is 13 weeks longer than Bush had.
thanks for playing though.
Maybe you can answer the question... Which party controlled Congress for most of those years between 2001 and 2008? After that challenge, answer the question what GSE reform bills did Barney Frank block?I'm using your numbers.
You said it was 17 times but you showed only 7.
And again, you said Bush started asking for reform in 2001 but didn't get it until 2008 .... remind me again ... which party controlled Congress for most of those years?
you were given proof that Republicans asked for reform long before the economy tanked. YOu were shown it was Democrats OBSTRUCTING reform. you are the same losers who cry that the Democrat MAJORITY for all of Bush's last two years was helpless to do anything about the economy. You are the same losers who cry that the Democrat MAJORITY FOR ALL OF OBAMA'S FIRST TWO YEARS was "obstructed" by Republicans.
now you're here implying that the Republican majority could have gotten the reform that was needed
it is just so typical of you
Thanks for playing.
i dont need to play; cuz i know you're a coward. but since we're on the subject; what corporate subsidies did Democrats even TRY to end in their 4 years as a majority of BOTH chambers of Congress?
by the way from DAY ONE in 2007 the Democrat majority was BIGGER THAN ANY REPUBLICAN MAJORITY BUSH HAD; and even DID have that FILIBUSTER-PROOF for 13 weeks. which is 13 weeks longer than Bush had.
thanks for playing though.
Notice how bedwetter doesn't want to answer my questions but does want to deflect.
How come?
Who controlled the Congress for most of those years and what Bill did Barney Frank block?
Bush to Republicans... "Thanks to our policies, home ownership in America is at an all-time high."
The answers to my questions were ....Maybe you can answer the question... Which party controlled Congress for most of those years between 2001 and 2008? After that challenge, answer the question what GSE reform bills did Barney Frank block?I'm using your numbers.
You said it was 17 times but you showed only 7.
And again, you said Bush started asking for reform in 2001 but didn't get it until 2008 .... remind me again ... which party controlled Congress for most of those years?
you were given proof that Republicans asked for reform long before the economy tanked. YOu were shown it was Democrats OBSTRUCTING reform. you are the same losers who cry that the Democrat MAJORITY for all of Bush's last two years was helpless to do anything about the economy. You are the same losers who cry that the Democrat MAJORITY FOR ALL OF OBAMA'S FIRST TWO YEARS was "obstructed" by Republicans.
now you're here implying that the Republican majority could have gotten the reform that was needed
it is just so typical of you
Thanks for playing.
i dont need to play; cuz i know you're a coward. but since we're on the subject; what corporate subsidies did Democrats even TRY to end in their 4 years as a majority of BOTH chambers of Congress?
by the way from DAY ONE in 2007 the Democrat majority was BIGGER THAN ANY REPUBLICAN MAJORITY BUSH HAD; and even DID have that FILIBUSTER-PROOF for 13 weeks. which is 13 weeks longer than Bush had.
thanks for playing though.
Notice how bedwetter doesn't want to answer my questions but does want to deflect.
How come?
Who controlled the Congress for most of those years and what Bill did Barney Frank block?
how am i deflecting idiot? i'm using YOUR logic
thanks for playing.........
The answers to my questions were ....Maybe you can answer the question... Which party controlled Congress for most of those years between 2001 and 2008? After that challenge, answer the question what GSE reform bills did Barney Frank block?
Thanks for playing.
i dont need to play; cuz i know you're a coward. but since we're on the subject; what corporate subsidies did Democrats even TRY to end in their 4 years as a majority of BOTH chambers of Congress?
by the way from DAY ONE in 2007 the Democrat majority was BIGGER THAN ANY REPUBLICAN MAJORITY BUSH HAD; and even DID have that FILIBUSTER-PROOF for 13 weeks. which is 13 weeks longer than Bush had.
thanks for playing though.
Notice how bedwetter doesn't want to answer my questions but does want to deflect.
How come?
Who controlled the Congress for most of those years and what Bill did Barney Frank block?
how am i deflecting idiot? i'm using YOUR logic
thanks for playing.........
1. Republican
2. None
Again, thanks for playin'!
I'm using your numbers.Earlier, you said Bush asked 17 times in 2008, but now you show only 7. Typo?
At any rate, what the fuck is wrong with you? You show Bush asking since 2001 but you blame Democrats who didn't take over Congress until 2007.
Thanks for highlighting why Republicans get the blame for the meltdown.
UNLIKE you I quote the people. I don't make up the numbers!
For many years the President and his Administration have not only warned of the systemic consequences of financial turmoil at a housing government-sponsored enterprise (GSE) but also put forward thoughtful plans to reduce the risk that either Fannie Mae or Freddie Mac would encounter such difficulties. President Bush publicly called for GSE reform 17 times in 2008 alone before Congress acted.
Here at IBD, we've done more than a dozen pieces — most recently, in yesterday's paper — detailing how rewrites of the Community Reinvestment Act in 1995 under President Clinton, along with major regulatory changes pushed by the White House in the late 1990s, created the boom in subprime lending, the surge in exotic and highly risky mortgage-backed securities, and the housing boom whose government-fed excesses led to inevitable collapse.
Despite this clear record, we're now besieged by enterprising journalists blaming Republican "deregulation" or the president's failure to recognize the seriousness of the problem or act. But these claims fall apart, as a partial history of the last decade shows.
Bush's first budget, written in 2001 — seven years ago — called runaway subprime lending by the government-sponsored enterprises Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac "a potential problem" and warned of "strong repercussions in financial markets."
In 2003, Bush's Treasury secretary, John Snow, proposed what the New York Times called "the most significant regulatory overhaul in the housing finance industry since the savings and loan crisis a decade ago." Did Democrats in Congress welcome it? Hardly.
"I do not think we are facing any kind of a crisis," declared Rep. Barney Frank, D-Mass., in a response typical of those who viewed Fannie and Freddie as a party patronage machine that the GOP was trying to dismantle. "If it ain't broke, don't fix it," added Sen. Thomas Carper, D-Del.
Bush Called For Reform of Fannie Mae & Freddie Mac 17 Times in 2008 Alone... Dems Ignored Warnings - The Gateway Pundit
In the Wall Street Journal, Senior Advisor to President Bush, Karl Rove explained:
Sen. Charles Schumer of New York dismissed Mr. Bush’s “safety and soundness concerns” as “a straw man.” “If it ain’t broke, don’t fix it,” was the helpful advice of both Sen. Thomas Carper of Delaware and Rep. Maxine Waters of California. Rep. Gregory Meeks of New York berated a Bush official at a hearing, saying, “I am just pissed off” at the administration for raising the issue…
The more the president [Bush] pushed for reform, the more [mortgages] they bought. Peter Wallison of the American Enterprise Institute and Charles Calomiris of the Columbia Business School suggest $1 trillion of this debt was subprime and “liar loans,” almost all bought between 2005 and 2007. This bulk-up in risky paper made it possible for banks to lend imprudently on a massive scale.
FANNY & FREDDIE: What Really Happened in 2008?
You said it was 17 times but you showed only 7.
And again, you said Bush started asking for reform in 2001 but didn't get it until 2008 .... remind me again ... which party controlled Congress for most of those years?
GEEZ... are you that stupid???
I never SAID...You said it was 17 times but you showed only 7.
The statement is clearly made by others that :
"Over the past six years, the President and his Administration have not only warned of the systemic consequences of failure to reform GSEs but also put forward thoughtful plans to reduce the risk that either Fannie Mae or Freddie Mac would encounter such difficulties.
President Bush publicly called for GSE reform at least 17 times in 2008 alone before Congress acted.
The above quote: "publicly called for GSE reform at least 17 times in 2008 alone"!
There were 17 times in public speeches, press conferences ANYWHERE the President spoke or wrote when he asked in 2008 17 times for GSE reform!
YOU idiot....
The material that you count "7" had NOTHING to do with Bush's 17 times in 2008 alone where he spoke/wrote regarding GSE reform!
DO YOU a poster person for the density of skull thickness of FFOs... DO YOU comprehend the difference????
BUSH publicly called for GSE reform 17 times in 2008!
NOW do you comprehend with your limited mental acuity the distinction????
GEEZ please, PLEASE continue to show the rest of the forum your truly inability to comprehend very simple concepts.
Bush "publicly called 17 times for GSE reforms" and this is in addition to the quotes of others from 2001 to 2008 for GSE reforms that
Barney and the Democrats refused to pass... primarily because after Barney left Congress he went to work for one !
Volcker Rule Will Benefit These Firms," was a 2013 headline at The Street, a financial publication, which explained, "implementation of consumer banking laws in through the Dodd-Frank bank reform legislation has been cumbersome for the large banks, but has allowed lenders such as Discover Financial Services and Signature Bank to gain market share." Investor's Business Daily reported that Dodd-Frank was helping Signature lure talented bankers away from the big banks.
There are many ways, big and small, in which Frank's interventionism has been good for banks.
Signature, in its announcement of Frank's hire, pointed out his central role in the 2008 bailout. The announcement called Frank, "instrumental in crafting the short-term $550 billion rescue plan in response to the nation's financial crisis." (Signature, to its credit, was one of the first banks to return its bailout money.
Barney Frank joins a bank
I'm using your numbers.Earlier, you said Bush asked 17 times in 2008, but now you show only 7. Typo?
At any rate, what the fuck is wrong with you? You show Bush asking since 2001 but you blame Democrats who didn't take over Congress until 2007.
Thanks for highlighting why Republicans get the blame for the meltdown.
UNLIKE you I quote the people. I don't make up the numbers!
For many years the President and his Administration have not only warned of the systemic consequences of financial turmoil at a housing government-sponsored enterprise (GSE) but also put forward thoughtful plans to reduce the risk that either Fannie Mae or Freddie Mac would encounter such difficulties. President Bush publicly called for GSE reform 17 times in 2008 alone before Congress acted.
Here at IBD, we've done more than a dozen pieces — most recently, in yesterday's paper — detailing how rewrites of the Community Reinvestment Act in 1995 under President Clinton, along with major regulatory changes pushed by the White House in the late 1990s, created the boom in subprime lending, the surge in exotic and highly risky mortgage-backed securities, and the housing boom whose government-fed excesses led to inevitable collapse.
Despite this clear record, we're now besieged by enterprising journalists blaming Republican "deregulation" or the president's failure to recognize the seriousness of the problem or act. But these claims fall apart, as a partial history of the last decade shows.
Bush's first budget, written in 2001 — seven years ago — called runaway subprime lending by the government-sponsored enterprises Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac "a potential problem" and warned of "strong repercussions in financial markets."
In 2003, Bush's Treasury secretary, John Snow, proposed what the New York Times called "the most significant regulatory overhaul in the housing finance industry since the savings and loan crisis a decade ago." Did Democrats in Congress welcome it? Hardly.
"I do not think we are facing any kind of a crisis," declared Rep. Barney Frank, D-Mass., in a response typical of those who viewed Fannie and Freddie as a party patronage machine that the GOP was trying to dismantle. "If it ain't broke, don't fix it," added Sen. Thomas Carper, D-Del.
Bush Called For Reform of Fannie Mae & Freddie Mac 17 Times in 2008 Alone... Dems Ignored Warnings - The Gateway Pundit
In the Wall Street Journal, Senior Advisor to President Bush, Karl Rove explained:
Sen. Charles Schumer of New York dismissed Mr. Bush’s “safety and soundness concerns” as “a straw man.” “If it ain’t broke, don’t fix it,” was the helpful advice of both Sen. Thomas Carper of Delaware and Rep. Maxine Waters of California. Rep. Gregory Meeks of New York berated a Bush official at a hearing, saying, “I am just pissed off” at the administration for raising the issue…
The more the president [Bush] pushed for reform, the more [mortgages] they bought. Peter Wallison of the American Enterprise Institute and Charles Calomiris of the Columbia Business School suggest $1 trillion of this debt was subprime and “liar loans,” almost all bought between 2005 and 2007. This bulk-up in risky paper made it possible for banks to lend imprudently on a massive scale.
FANNY & FREDDIE: What Really Happened in 2008?
You said it was 17 times but you showed only 7.
And again, you said Bush started asking for reform in 2001 but didn't get it until 2008 .... remind me again ... which party controlled Congress for most of those years?
GEEZ... are you that stupid???
I never SAID...You said it was 17 times but you showed only 7.
The statement is clearly made by others that :
"Over the past six years, the President and his Administration have not only warned of the systemic consequences of failure to reform GSEs but also put forward thoughtful plans to reduce the risk that either Fannie Mae or Freddie Mac would encounter such difficulties.
President Bush publicly called for GSE reform at least 17 times in 2008 alone before Congress acted.
The above quote: "publicly called for GSE reform at least 17 times in 2008 alone"!
There were 17 times in public speeches, press conferences ANYWHERE the President spoke or wrote when he asked in 2008 17 times for GSE reform!
YOU idiot....
The material that you count "7" had NOTHING to do with Bush's 17 times in 2008 alone where he spoke/wrote regarding GSE reform!
DO YOU a poster person for the density of skull thickness of FFOs... DO YOU comprehend the difference????
BUSH publicly called for GSE reform 17 times in 2008!
NOW do you comprehend with your limited mental acuity the distinction????
GEEZ please, PLEASE continue to show the rest of the forum your truly inability to comprehend very simple concepts.
Bush "publicly called 17 times for GSE reforms" and this is in addition to the quotes of others from 2001 to 2008 for GSE reforms that
Barney and the Democrats refused to pass... primarily because after Barney left Congress he went to work for one !
Volcker Rule Will Benefit These Firms," was a 2013 headline at The Street, a financial publication, which explained, "implementation of consumer banking laws in through the Dodd-Frank bank reform legislation has been cumbersome for the large banks, but has allowed lenders such as Discover Financial Services and Signature Bank to gain market share." Investor's Business Daily reported that Dodd-Frank was helping Signature lure talented bankers away from the big banks.
There are many ways, big and small, in which Frank's interventionism has been good for banks.
Signature, in its announcement of Frank's hire, pointed out his central role in the 2008 bailout. The announcement called Frank, "instrumental in crafting the short-term $550 billion rescue plan in response to the nation's financial crisis." (Signature, to its credit, was one of the first banks to return its bailout money.
Barney Frank joins a bank
You haven't named which Republican policies Bush was refreshing
It apparently stung so bad, you've used it back at me repeatedly. 
I'm using your numbers.Earlier, you said Bush asked 17 times in 2008, but now you show only 7. Typo?
At any rate, what the fuck is wrong with you? You show Bush asking since 2001 but you blame Democrats who didn't take over Congress until 2007.
Thanks for highlighting why Republicans get the blame for the meltdown.
UNLIKE you I quote the people. I don't make up the numbers!
For many years the President and his Administration have not only warned of the systemic consequences of financial turmoil at a housing government-sponsored enterprise (GSE) but also put forward thoughtful plans to reduce the risk that either Fannie Mae or Freddie Mac would encounter such difficulties. President Bush publicly called for GSE reform 17 times in 2008 alone before Congress acted.
Here at IBD, we've done more than a dozen pieces — most recently, in yesterday's paper — detailing how rewrites of the Community Reinvestment Act in 1995 under President Clinton, along with major regulatory changes pushed by the White House in the late 1990s, created the boom in subprime lending, the surge in exotic and highly risky mortgage-backed securities, and the housing boom whose government-fed excesses led to inevitable collapse.
Despite this clear record, we're now besieged by enterprising journalists blaming Republican "deregulation" or the president's failure to recognize the seriousness of the problem or act. But these claims fall apart, as a partial history of the last decade shows.
Bush's first budget, written in 2001 — seven years ago — called runaway subprime lending by the government-sponsored enterprises Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac "a potential problem" and warned of "strong repercussions in financial markets."
In 2003, Bush's Treasury secretary, John Snow, proposed what the New York Times called "the most significant regulatory overhaul in the housing finance industry since the savings and loan crisis a decade ago." Did Democrats in Congress welcome it? Hardly.
"I do not think we are facing any kind of a crisis," declared Rep. Barney Frank, D-Mass., in a response typical of those who viewed Fannie and Freddie as a party patronage machine that the GOP was trying to dismantle. "If it ain't broke, don't fix it," added Sen. Thomas Carper, D-Del.
Bush Called For Reform of Fannie Mae & Freddie Mac 17 Times in 2008 Alone... Dems Ignored Warnings - The Gateway Pundit
In the Wall Street Journal, Senior Advisor to President Bush, Karl Rove explained:
Sen. Charles Schumer of New York dismissed Mr. Bush’s “safety and soundness concerns” as “a straw man.” “If it ain’t broke, don’t fix it,” was the helpful advice of both Sen. Thomas Carper of Delaware and Rep. Maxine Waters of California. Rep. Gregory Meeks of New York berated a Bush official at a hearing, saying, “I am just pissed off” at the administration for raising the issue…
The more the president [Bush] pushed for reform, the more [mortgages] they bought. Peter Wallison of the American Enterprise Institute and Charles Calomiris of the Columbia Business School suggest $1 trillion of this debt was subprime and “liar loans,” almost all bought between 2005 and 2007. This bulk-up in risky paper made it possible for banks to lend imprudently on a massive scale.
FANNY & FREDDIE: What Really Happened in 2008?
You said it was 17 times but you showed only 7.
And again, you said Bush started asking for reform in 2001 but didn't get it until 2008 .... remind me again ... which party controlled Congress for most of those years?
GEEZ... are you that stupid???
I never SAID...You said it was 17 times but you showed only 7.
The statement is clearly made by others that :
"Over the past six years, the President and his Administration have not only warned of the systemic consequences of failure to reform GSEs but also put forward thoughtful plans to reduce the risk that either Fannie Mae or Freddie Mac would encounter such difficulties.
President Bush publicly called for GSE reform at least 17 times in 2008 alone before Congress acted.
The above quote: "publicly called for GSE reform at least 17 times in 2008 alone"!
There were 17 times in public speeches, press conferences ANYWHERE the President spoke or wrote when he asked in 2008 17 times for GSE reform!
YOU idiot....
The material that you count "7" had NOTHING to do with Bush's 17 times in 2008 alone where he spoke/wrote regarding GSE reform!
DO YOU a poster person for the density of skull thickness of FFOs... DO YOU comprehend the difference????
BUSH publicly called for GSE reform 17 times in 2008!
NOW do you comprehend with your limited mental acuity the distinction????
GEEZ please, PLEASE continue to show the rest of the forum your truly inability to comprehend very simple concepts.
Bush "publicly called 17 times for GSE reforms" and this is in addition to the quotes of others from 2001 to 2008 for GSE reforms that
Barney and the Democrats refused to pass... primarily because after Barney left Congress he went to work for one !
Volcker Rule Will Benefit These Firms," was a 2013 headline at The Street, a financial publication, which explained, "implementation of consumer banking laws in through the Dodd-Frank bank reform legislation has been cumbersome for the large banks, but has allowed lenders such as Discover Financial Services and Signature Bank to gain market share." Investor's Business Daily reported that Dodd-Frank was helping Signature lure talented bankers away from the big banks.
There are many ways, big and small, in which Frank's interventionism has been good for banks.
Signature, in its announcement of Frank's hire, pointed out his central role in the 2008 bailout. The announcement called Frank, "instrumental in crafting the short-term $550 billion rescue plan in response to the nation's financial crisis." (Signature, to its credit, was one of the first banks to return its bailout money.
Barney Frank joins a bank
