And on top of that, the embattled Clinton Foundation received a $50,000 contribution from Freddie Mac, according to the Times. Plenty of blame to go aroundĪ Washington Times investigative report concluded that Freddie Mac and Fannie Mae's political action committee and individuals linked to the companies donated $75,500 to Mrs. But on top of all this, while Hillary was propping up Fannie and Freddie, she was taking contributions from their foundations. Just to make this story worse, Senator Hillary Clinton and Senator Barack Obama voted to filibuster a Republican effort to roll back Fannie and Freddie. Fannie and Freddie, by the way, cost the taxpayers $187 billion. Many bond packages were written to please Fannie and Freddie, based on the fantastical idea that home prices would never fall. So did mortgage collateral (homes) and mortgage bonds that depended on the collateral. When the Fed finally tightened, prices collapsed. Rates were held too low for too long in 2002-2005, which created asset price bubbles in housing, commodities, gold, oil, and elsewhere. It's a perfect example of liberals using government allegedly to help the poor, but the ultimate consequences were disastrous for them.Īdditionally, ultra-easy money from the Fed also played a key role. Tragically, when prices fell, lower-income folks who really could not afford these mortgages under normal credit standards, suffered massive foreclosures and personal bankruptcies. So now taxpayers were on the hook for these risky, low down-payment loans. Next, the Clinton administration's rules ordered the taxpayer-backed Fannie and Freddie to expand their quotas of risky loans from 30 percent of portfolio to 50 percent as part of a big push to expand home ownership.įannie and Freddie were securitizing these home loans and offering 100 percent taxpayer guarantees of repayment. The phrase "subprime" became commonplace. What's more, in the Clinton push to issue home loans to lower income borrowers, Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac made a common practice to virtually end credit documentation, low credit scores were disregarded, and income and job history was also thrown aside. These new HUD rules lowered down payments from the traditional 20 percent to 3 percent by 1995 and zero down-payments by 2000. If banks didn't comply with these rules, regulators reined in their ability to expand lending and deposits. Banks were effectively rewarded for throwing out sound underwriting standards and writing loans to those who were at high risk of defaulting. Under Clinton's Housing and Urban Development (HUD) secretary, Andrew Cuomo, Community Reinvestment Act regulators gave banks higher ratings for home loans made in "credit-deprived" areas. The seeds of the mortgage meltdown were planted during Bill Clinton's presidency. Personal Loans for 670 Credit Score or Lower Personal Loans for 580 Credit Score or Lower Best Debt Consolidation Loans for Bad Credit
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |
Details
AuthorWrite something about yourself. No need to be fancy, just an overview. ArchivesCategories |