Skip to comments.Timeline shows Bush, McCain warning Dems of financial and housing crisis; meltdown
Posted on 02/14/2010 5:10:04 PM PST by bigbob
The Bush Admin and Senator McCain warned repeatedly about Fanny Mae and Freddy Mac and what thus became the 2008 financial crisis -- starting in 2002 (and actually even earlier -- in the Clinton and Carter White Houses. Democrats resisted and kept to their party line, extending loans to people who couldn't afford them -- just like you would expect of socialists.
If anyone needs a reminder why "they must go", this is it.
Tip of the hat to our friends up Nort': http://www.proudtobecanadian.ca/
These Demorats want to destroy AMERICA annd they will bend the Truth or tear it appear to fit their agenda..
Republicans and Dims are all responsible for Freddie and Fanny - they all took money from the lobbyists to look the other way...
After this initial uptick, the two banks purchased $434 billion in securities backed by subprime loans between 2004 and 2006. The Washington Post noted this June that the GSEs' aggressive acquisitions "created a market for more such lending" by others, feeding the fire. No one knows just how big a bite the subprime mess is now taking out of the GSEs, or how much of that portfolio will ultimately go bad, but it has become axiomatic that, whatever the total, it is too much, since it will have seriously shaken confidence in these two linchpin institutions.
That June Post story focused its critical reassessment of HUD's affordable-housing goals on the department's 2004 decisionduring the Bush re-election campaignto juice them up again, pushing the target to 56 percent by 2007. From here.
And McCain should have said something about this every 20 minutes during his campaign — but said nothing. Imbecile.
What a pity McCain and Bush didn’t tell the story during October of 2008, when the crisis broke and when it was most important to tell what had actually happened.
Don’t know for certain, but I’m afraid there might have been too many sound bites of Bush bragging about his “ownership society” and about the increase in minority home ownership. And who knows what McCain might have supported over the years. The story does need to be told, but the most crucial time to tell it has already been missed.
Several are probably writing books about now.
One can argue that Bush and Co. should have done a better job on pressing this issue to get reform passed instead of just letting it die. That’s one of the failures of the Bush Administration is that they, at many times, had no back bone to push their agenda. But then again, Bush is/was a RINO.
That is the most important article that I ever posted here on FR.
Yes, bless you and I tried to ping the members I thought would read it.
yeah it was embarrassing that we had to remind mccain that he warned against freddie
And as usual Bush just sat back and let the rats lie and didn’t say a word in his own defense. He should have called a press conference and played the video for everyone to see. That is the main thing I had against Bush. He let the libs and MSM define him. He never fought back and it hurt him and us badly. It also gave us Obama.
I said to a fellow co-worker, “Karl Rove has an outstanding article in today's WSJ.”
While I was reading a couple of paragraphs of this article to her, an attorney overheard and came out of his office to see the article on my computer screen.
Bush never once vetoed a budget. Not once.
It’s his baby.
Bush gave us No Child Left Behind spending. With Ted Kennedy more drug spending.
He was a compassionate( i.e., big spending ) conservative.
My only problem with this is that Republicans had unprecedented control of government and did absolutely NOTHING to prevent this disaster. In fixing this disaster today, Democraps are solely to blame; in preventing (or fixing earlier) the GOP is to blame. I wish we had the Tea Party earlier on.
Here’s Bush in a speech, pushing home loans for totally unqualified minorities..
The BDS whiners can grumble and lie all they
want, there is always the TRUTH:
Setting the Record Straight: Six Years of Unheeded Warnings for GSE Reform
The Washington Times Fails To Research The Administration’s Efforts To Reform Fannie Mae And Freddie Mac
Fact sheet Setting the Record Straight
Fact sheet In Focus: Economy
Today, the Washington Times incorrectly accused the White House of ignoring warnings of trouble ahead for government-sponsored enterprises (GSEs) and neglecting to “adopt any reform until this summer,” when it was too late.
“Neither the White House nor Congress heeded the warnings, Fannie and Freddie retained strong bipartisan support during the 1990s and early part of this decade.” (Editorial, “Hear, See And Speak No Evil About Fannie And Freddie,” The Washington Times, 10/9/08)
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.
In fact, it was Congress that flatly rejected President Bush’s call more than five years ago to reform the GSEs. Over the years, the President’s repeated attempts to reform the supervision of these entities were thwarted by the legislative maneuvering of those who emphatically denied there were problems with the GSEs.
* 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)
* 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)
* February: The Office of Federal Housing Enterprise Oversight (OFHEO) releases a report explaining that unexpected problems at a GSE could immediately spread into financial sectors beyond the housing market.
* 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.
* 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 Mankiw explains 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)
* 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)
* 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)
* 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.
o “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)
o “[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)
o “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)
Thank you, dear STARWISE, as always.
My honor ... ;)
No, the honor is all mine, thank you. :-)
Freep-mail me to get on or off my pro-life and Catholic List:
Please ping me to note-worthy Pro-Life or Catholic threads, or other threads of general interest.
IF anyone thought the MSM was going to give Bush and McCain a platform to expose what was going on with the economy, Fannie and Fred, etc. guess again.
The Obama talking heads twist and turned the issue to carry him to the finish line in 08
Most excellent summary. Thank you.
Welcome .. :)
much needed ammo for battling the lefties...
He may not be as conservative as you or I would like, but calling him a Republican in name only is simply not accurate.
And saying he had no "backbone" after he stood practically alone in defending America and winning in Iraq is just silly.
(And there are still people on this forum who don't get it and blame Bush just like all good lefties do. Sheesh!)
When it came to domestic spending, Bush was nothing but a Democrat. If you can’t see that, then you are as blind as those who thought Obama was a moderate.
Sorry. You're wrong.
Pro-life, strong on National Security, impeccable record on judges and SC justices, strong military, stood up against the UN and World Court, strong 2nd amendment, cut taxes and never backed off - NOT a "RINO" even with the spending.
Perhaps it's your eyesight that's missing a few things, eh?
That one was ridiculous in light of the facts of his Presidency. Very few Presidents have stood stronger in the face of adversity that President Bush did.
>> When it came to domestic spending
The GOP controlled Congress failed Bush and is largely responsible for the spending, which is minor compared to the current admin. The Dem Congress of 2006 made matters worse.
I wouldn’t go so far to say that Bush governed like RINO, but he definitely straddled the Conservative/Moderate line.
Wrong as usual I see. Bush's budgets had nothing to do with the collapse of the subprime mortgage market (the subject of the thread), whether he vetoed them or not.
With Ted Kennedy more drug spending.
2003: Kennedy backs Bush's 2003 plan to add a prescription benefit to Medicare that came with a $400 billion price tag spread out over 10 years. But when Kennedy learns that the Medicare Prescription Drug and Modernization Act of 2003 would, for the first time, allow private HMOs to compete with Medicare for patients, Kennedy works to amend the bill, criticizing the proposal for Medicare competition as "an untried, untested, unworkable program.'' His efforts ultimately prove futile and he opposes the final bill. The Medicare Prescription Drug and Modernization Act of 2003 passes Congress and is signed into law by Bush on Dec. 8, 2003.
Clearly wrong. The Dems will have a larger deficit in twenty months than Bush had in eight years (two of them with Dems in control of the House and Senate).
Bush increased discretionary spending about 7% per year at worst. Obama raised it 20% last year.
IMO, the best thing to do around here is to retire the expression because its overuse has rendered the word meaningless.
The term "Conservative in Name Only" is what some of these folks mean, but again, if you look closely at Reagan, he's one too.
ping for later
Obama was an American Idol candidate who had a slobbering, lying, covering up media.
McCain was a terrible candidate, and along with Obama was campaigning against Bush
There was an overload of white guilt.
Obama got millions of illegal overseas dollars.
The economic meltdown blamed on Bush was, in fact, a Democrat meltdown
And that's just for starters.
Bush's 'not defending himself' was due to his principles regarding the presidency and his having the priority of doing his job and not dealing with his critics.
You can fault him for that as much as you want, but it was not the reason we got Obama.
Thank you, starwise and thanks again GOP_Lady and you too, ohioWfan!
Thanks, you go girl!
Thank you, onyx - I put this on my FB page too! Truth hurts....dems.
I agree that Bush is an honorable man. To a fault even. I agree, he should have had someone in there to defend him. I say he gave us Obama because he let the lie stand that he was responsible for the economic meltdown and I think that was key in Obama getting elected coming so soon before the election. Harry Reid started calling for McCain to come back to Washington and after that McCains poll numbers sunk and never came back. I think that was all planned.