No, that's wrong. The date is 1977, under the Carter Administration. That is when the Community Reinvestment Act was passed, in response to allegations of banks' "red-lining" poor and minority neighborhoods. However, this Act was only loosely enforced until 1995, when the Clinton Administration imposed additiional requirements and enforcement procedures.
Under Clinton, banks were required, under penalty of law, to make loans to a percentage of the populations living in "disadvantaged" neighborhoods. If the banks did not meet the quota requirements, they were fined and applications for permission to open new branches or make mergers or acquisitions were delayed. Community organizers were encouraged, under the law, to make formal complaints about banks to the government, and these complaints were then taken into consideration when regulatory agencies were evaluating the banks' compliance with the law.
In addition, loan money for housing and development was distributed to third-party, non-profit, community organizations to dispense - which they did, to their cronies and supporters. (Obama was heavily involved in these activities in his capacity as a "community organizer.")
In order to avoid trouble with the government and the community organizations, the banks went ahead and made loans to people who otherwise wouldn't have passed a credit check - and then sold the loans to Freddie Mac and Fannie Mae who were only to happy to pick them up (more loans on the books led to increased bonuses for Freddie Mac and Fannie Mae executives).
The chief support for Freddie Mac and Fannie Mae came from the Congressional Black Caucus and other left-wing Democrats. Freddie Mac and Fannie Mae solidified their support in Congress by making enormous contributions to lawmakers. The Senators who received the most in contributions were Chris Dodd (head of the Senate Banking Committee) and Obama.
When Bush's Treasury Secretary, John Snow, made a recommendation to Congress in 2003 that Freddie Mac and Fannie Mae be completely overhauled and placed under the Justice Department, on the grounds that there were no adequate tools to monitor them and they were severely under-capitalized, he met with furious opposition. When John McCain and two other Republican Senators co-sponsored a bill, in 2005, to impose reforms, it never made it to the floor - the Democrats threatened to filibuster. At that time, Barney Frank stated that Freddie Mac and Fannie Mae were perfectly sound and imposing restrictions on them would harm the "affordable housing" program and impede the "leverage" of the poor.
FNC is doing a cover-up - maybe they are afraid of what might happen to their broadcast license under a Democrat administration if they expose the truth.
BTTT
You nailed it. Who will tell the truth if not Fox??
‘Freeper Keeper’ bump!!
***
Thank you for the feedback. I was trying to tie it to 1977 but not sure how was done. Even with the 1977 act, would not the 1999 changes made it worse and began the downfall?
Great synopsis! Thank you!
That CRA date of 1977 is correct when this all began but there’s some fine tuning.
When this nonsense first became “law” the notion was that banks, business entities allowed to exist BECAUSE of the federal government, should be required to plow back some of their profit back into the “community”.
For many, many years, that “plow back” consisted of refurbishing inner cities, creating inner-city “malls”, new and improved waterfronts, sports centers....that type of thing.
I used to work for a company that existed only to, get this, locate places that needed “community reinvestment” and help banks finance and oversee such development.
It could be in 1999 that the Black Caucus, a group that supports that nut in Haiti by the way, got the wild-eyed notion that Community Reinvestment requirements could also be satisfied by giving home loans to those who wouldn’t normally quality. Like Cyndi the Stripper and her live-in love...Pete her pimp.
Of course then was required to have “community organizers” go out in the world, in the form of Jessie’s Rainbow Coalition and Obama’s ACORN. These new millenium mortgage brokers looked under rocks and in attics for anyone who might want to buy a nice ghetto falling apart house, maybe “flip” it for great prophet. Interesting, this sort of thing happened mostly in Ohio and Florida, two key electoral states.
Before the public has to underwrite this mess, a mess any fool with a brain could see coming, some folks should go to jail. Give me one simple reason why a gubmint entity should be giving campaign contributions to ANY candidate.
No. It’s not the fault of the Dems, no it’s not.
The Dems took advantage of an opportunity to get money from the public trough for their own fine, fine campaigns and what’s wrong with this?
Stuff like this goes on because the OPPOSITION party has not a single gonad amongst them and ALLOWS it to go on.
This is White Water on steroids.
I’m furious. Once again we had the wool pulled over our eyes and once again we paid to elect politicos who would be nowhere save for their thievery.
We got to find some guys out there with testiculars and elect them to the GOP. Or find some new Sarah Palins.
I blame the Republicans for this. They knew what was going on and they sat back and winked. Many of them were in on it.
We now effectively have a dictatorship with many or our elected representatives smiling and cheating us and we CAN’T GET RID OF THEM!
In order to avoid trouble with the government and the community organizations, the banks went ahead and made loans to people who otherwise wouldn't have passed a credit check - and then sold the loans to Freddie Mac and Fannie Mae who were only to happy to pick them up
I recallan episode(S) in the Sopranos tv that dealt with this....should be required viewing for all dims...
since they are crooks to start with.
Maybe you know the timing of this. When the Republicans barely had the majority, or it was tied, wasn’t there some rule change that occurred that made it necessary to have a super majority to get anything passed? Who initiated that rule change? I’m thinking Hillary had something to do with that. And, did this rule change cause some good and needed reforms, to be tossed?
It did change with the Dims ... they
see it as another vehicle for buying
votes, their main mission and talent.
Fantastic post, BusterBear! If we still had awards, this post would be a clear winner in the “best post of the day” category.
Thanks, snugs, for the inspiration for my snugs-related tagline.