Author Topic: A Reason to Vote FOR McCain: Take taxpayers off hook for rot at Fannie, Freddie  (Read 3423 times)

roo_ster

  • Kakistocracy--It's What's For Dinner.
  • friend
  • Senior Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 21,225
  • Hoist the black flag, and begin slitting throats
Dayum straight.

I despise the crony capitalism that a large fed.gov fosters.

I also despise the moral hazard of bailing out of companies that took not just risk, but foolish and immoral risk.




Take taxpayers off hook for rot at Fannie, Freddie

By John McCain, Special to the Times

Published Wednesday, July 23, 2008 5:42 PM

Americans should be outraged at the latest sweetheart deal in Washington. Congress will put U.S. taxpayers on the hook for potentially hundreds of billions of dollars to bail out Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac. It's a tribute to what these two institutions  which most Americans have never heard of  have bought with more than $170-million worth of lobbyists in the past decade.

With combined obligations of roughly $5-trillion, the rapid failure of Fannie and Freddie would be a threat to mortgage markets and financial markets as a whole. Because of that threat, I support taking the unfortunate but necessary steps needed to keep the financial troubles at these two companies from further squeezing American families. But let us not forget that the threat that Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac pose to financial markets is a tribute to crony capitalism that reflects the power of the Washington establishment.

Fannie and Freddie buy home loans from lending institutions and reissue them as marketable securities  creating a liquid market for mortgage debt that lowers borrowing costs for prospective homeowners. The two institutions have easy access to borrow at low interest rates because they were originally government agencies and continue to be viewed as being backed by the government. The irony is that by bailing them out, Congress is about to make that perception a reality, even though government backing is no longer needed for their original mission. There are lots of banks, savings and loans, and other financial institutions that can do this job.

Fannie and Freddie are the poster children for a lack of transparency and accountability. Fannie Mae employees deliberately manipulated financial reports to trigger bonuses for senior executives. Freddie Mac manipulated its earnings by $5-billion. They've misled us about their accounting, and now they are endangering financial markets. More than two years ago, I said: "If Congress does not act, American taxpayers will continue to be exposed to the enormous risk that Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac pose." Fannie and Freddie's lobbyists succeeded; Congress failed to act. They've stayed in business, grown, and profited mightily by showering money on lobbyists and favors on the Washington establishment. Now the bill has come due.

What should be done? We are stuck with the reality that they have grown so large that we must support Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac through the current rough spell. But if a dime of taxpayer money ends up being directly invested, the management and the board should immediately be replaced, multimillion dollar salaries should be cut, and bonuses and other compensation should be eliminated. They should cease all lobbying activities and drop all payments to outside lobbyists. And taxpayers should be first in line for any repayments.

Even with those terms, sticking Main Street Americans with Wall Street's bill is a shame on Washington. If elected, I'll continue my crusade for the right reform of the institutions: making them go away. I will get real regulation that limits their ability to borrow, shrinks their size until they are no longer a threat to our economy, and privatizes and eliminates their links to the government.

It's time to get America on the right track by creating the jobs that will build a strong foundation under our housing markets. We need to address the high cost of gasoline and other energy sources, and transform health care to be cheaper, higher quality and built around the needs of patients. But most of all, we need to reform Washington and wrest control from the special interests that have created this problem.

John McCain, a U.S. senator from Arizona, is the presumptive Republican candidate for president.
Regards,

roo_ster

“Fallacies do not cease to be fallacies because they become fashions.”
----G.K. Chesterton

AZRedhawk44

  • friends
  • Senior Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 13,978
John, I'm surprised by you.  Truly.

This is way too Paulian to come from you.  I'm baffled here, trying to figure out how this helps strangle the 1st or 2nd Amendments, or how it brings in more illegals into the country.

This actually brings me closer to voting for you.  Now just take this same stance towards Social Security, and make a statement that you support the right of an American to privately transfer his property to another buyer without government interference.
"But whether the Constitution really be one thing, or another, this much is certain - that it has either authorized such a government as we have had, or has been powerless to prevent it. In either case, it is unfit to exist."
--Lysander Spooner

I reject your authoritah!

Headless Thompson Gunner

  • friend
  • Senior Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 8,517
Scary, but I agree with McCain completely.  Freddie and Fannie can't be allowed to fail today, but over the long term they really, really need to be dismantled.  


Manedwolf

  • friend
  • Senior Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 14,516
Lock the entrance door. Let the shoppers still in the store finish and leave, but no new customers coming in. When the last one leaves, turn off the lights.

Any reason why that wouldn't work?

Headless Thompson Gunner

  • friend
  • Senior Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 8,517
John, I'm surprised by you.  Truly.

This is way too Paulian to come from you.  I'm baffled here, trying to figure out how this helps strangle the 1st or 2nd Amendments, or how it brings in more illegals into the country.

This actually brings me closer to voting for you.  Now just take this same stance towards Social Security, and make a statement that you support the right of an American to privately transfer his property to another buyer without government interference.
It's not Paulian at all.  It's far too reasonable and pragmatic to be Paulian.

Paulian would be screaming about fiat money and gold and hyperinflation.  Paulian would be demanding that Freddie and Fannie be destroyed immediately in ways that would bring down the entire banking industry.  This McCain bit does none of that.

alex_trebek

  • friend
  • Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 462
Please correct me if I am wrong here....

The bill in question is H.R. 3221.

According to govtrack, McCain didn't bother to show up and vote on this bill.  To be fair, neither did Obama.

http://www.govtrack.us/congress/vote.xpd?vote=s2008-35

Just more pandering, and lip service to traditional conservatism.  If he really cared about this he would of showed up and voted.  The senate was split down the middle on this issue, and only passed it by two votes.


I understand being busy on the campaign trail and all, but he should of just kept his mouth shut.

Headless Thompson Gunner

  • friend
  • Senior Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 8,517
Lock the entrance door. Let the shoppers still in the store finish and leave, but no new customers coming in. When the last one leaves, turn off the lights.

Any reason why that wouldn't work?
Not really.

The "customers already inside the store" are probably more than Freddie and Fannie can handle, though.  It's hard to say just what they own and how much risk they're exposed to, but it's probably enough to break them.

I've been thinking that maybe the best thing to do with Freddie and Fannie is simply to pt all of their existing assets and liabilities into some sort of government trust.  Let their assets pay for as much of their liabilities as possible, and make up any difference with federal money.  That's probably cheaper than the bailouts they're going to need.  But above all, close them down and don't let them operate any longer.

There are three sticking points here, though.  First, nationalizing any private corporation is a Bad Idea, even a couple of pretend-private corporations like Freddie and Fannie.  Second, what do you do with the shareholders?  Third, it'd make a real mess of what's left of the housing market.  But these are comparatively minor issues. They're a small price to pay to get the government out of the mortgage business and get back to some semblance of a free market in lending.

Headless Thompson Gunner

  • friend
  • Senior Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 8,517
Please correct me if I am wrong here....

The bill in question is H.R. 3221.

According to govtrack, McCain didn't bother to show up and vote on this bill.  To be fair, neither did Obama.

http://www.govtrack.us/congress/vote.xpd?vote=s2008-35

Just more pandering, and lip service to traditional conservatism.  If he really cared about this he would of showed up and voted.  The senate was split down the middle on this issue, and only passed it by two votes.


I understand being busy on the campaign trail and all, but he should of just kept his mouth shut.
The bailout passed by overwhelming majorities in both houses.  There was no point for either of them to show up and vote.

MechAg94

  • friend
  • Senior Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 33,807
They also need to stop saddling them with bad debt taken from other banks to keep them afloat. 
“It is much more important to kill bad bills than to pass good ones.”  ― Calvin Coolidge

alex_trebek

  • friend
  • Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 462
Please correct me if I am wrong here....

The bill in question is H.R. 3221.

According to govtrack, McCain didn't bother to show up and vote on this bill.  To be fair, neither did Obama.

http://www.govtrack.us/congress/vote.xpd?vote=s2008-35

Just more pandering, and lip service to traditional conservatism.  If he really cared about this he would of showed up and voted.  The senate was split down the middle on this issue, and only passed it by two votes.


I understand being busy on the campaign trail and all, but he should of just kept his mouth shut.
The bailout passed by overwhelming majorities in both houses.  There was no point for either of them to show up and vote.

Except to put your money where your mouth is.  Using a similar argument, one could decide not to vote for McCain if Obama has a significant lead close to the election. 

Regardless of the bill's support, he shouldn't be condemning it if he didn't vote against it.  It will only make him look like an idiot later on.

Waitone

  • friend
  • Senior Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 3,133
Reads good but given McCain's Maverick Act can he be believed?  I would have felt better about the bailout (which I oppose in principle but support as a matter of reality) if there had been an exhortation for the FBI et al to get busy and bring the crooks to justice.  As it stands now those who are responsible and therefore enriched themselves profoundly are free to wander off.
"Men, it has been well said, think in herds. It will be seen that they go mad in herds, while they only recover their senses slowly, and one by one."
- Charles Mackay, Scottish journalist, circa 1841

"Our society is run by insane people for insane objectives. I think we're being run by maniacs for maniacal ends and I think I'm liable to be put away as insane for expressing that. That's what's insane about it." - John Lennon

longeyes

  • friend
  • Senior Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 5,405
Jim Rogers says let them fail.  I agree with him.

They have already failed but we want to pretend they haven't rather than look at the whys of the situation and to hold responsible those who should be, a rich mixture of financial crooks and misguided social do-gooders.  The usual story.
"Domari nolo."

Thug: What you lookin' at old man?
Walt Kowalski: Ever notice how you come across somebody once in a while you shouldn't have messed with? That's me.

Molon Labe.

The Annoyed Man

  • New Member
  • Posts: 1
Please correct me if I am wrong here....

The bill in question is H.R. 3221.

According to govtrack, McCain didn't bother to show up and vote on this bill.  To be fair, neither did Obama.

http://www.govtrack.us/congress/vote.xpd?vote=s2008-35

Just more pandering, and lip service to traditional conservatism.  If he really cared about this he would of showed up and voted.  The senate was split down the middle on this issue, and only passed it by two votes.


I understand being busy on the campaign trail and all, but he should of just kept his mouth shut.
The bailout passed by overwhelming majorities in both houses.  There was no point for either of them to show up and vote.

Except to put your money where your mouth is.  Using a similar argument, one could decide not to vote for McCain if Obama has a significant lead close to the election. 

Regardless of the bill's support, he shouldn't be condemning it if he didn't vote against it.  It will only make him look like an idiot later on.

I think John learned that trick from Barack.