Former Clinton Official Paid $26 Million by Fannie Mae Before Taxpayer Bailout Now on Obama Shortlist to Run FBI | CNSnews.com

Previously, I have offered some explanations for the financial melt-down, primarily the corruption and incompetence at Freddie Mac & Fannie Mae in failing to see the predictable consequences of their irresponsible behavior.  Some on this List have doubted that the government could possibly act so irresponsibly, including myself at one time, or that Congress actually authorized offering loans to people who could not afford homes.  So for your edification, rather droll amusement, and general information, here is Ms. Gorelick's official explanation of what Congress and Fannie were up to, and how they justified their irresponsible actions:
 

In 2001, Gorelick announced that Fannie was buying subprime loans encouraged by the Community Reinvestment Act (CRA) and bundling them as securitized financial instruments. Securities made from bundles of guaranteed mortgages were to contribute to the banking crisis later in the decade.

"Fannie Mae will buy CRA loans from lenders' portfolios; we'll package them into securities; we'll purchase CRA mortgages at the point of origination; and we'll create customized CRA-targeted securities," she said in 2001. "This expanded approach has improved liquidity in the secondary market for CRA product, and has helped our lenders leverage even more CRA lending. Lenders now have the flexibility to use their own, customized loan products."

In remarks before the American Bankers Association on Oct. 30, 2000, Gorelick explicitly how the procress would work and what Fannie Mae would do to make it feasible for banks to lend to low-income applicants.

"We will take CRA loans off your hands--we will buy them from your portfolios, or package them into securities--so you have fresh cash to make more CRA loans," she said. "Some people have assumed we don't buy tough loans. Let me correct that misimpression right now. We want your CRA loans because they help us meet our housing goals."

Now, who do you supposed provided Fannie with its "housing goals"?  Yes, if you said Congress, then you score 100% on the test.  What more can I say?  These people convict themselves out of their own mouths.  Incidentally, instead of being put into jail, Ms. Gorelick happens to be on the Anointed One's "short list" for FBI Director.  Isn't that just the perfect place for her!  I couldn't make this shit up it's so far-fetched.  Unfortunately, it is the reality of the current administration and of the one just preceding it.

http://cnsnews.com/news/article/clinton-official-embroiled-911-controver

Laissez-Faire Capitalism Not Cause of Melt-Down

The reason for the melt down was, essentially, Freddie Mac and Fannie Mae, quasi-government entities, were told by Congress to enable people who could not afford houses to make it possible for them to buy houses with little or no money down, and with zero due-diligence as to sources of income to pay the mortgages.

Lenders then were guaranteed that Freddie and Fannie would buy such mortgage notes, thus relieving the originators of those loans of any liability.

Congress put the full faith and credit behind these securitized notes now repackaged by Freddie and Fannie who in turn sold them to other investors.  I understand that many of these securities then became the linchpin for other financial instruments called derivatives.

In effect, a hundred thousand dollar mortgage might back millions of dollars in further credit, secured only by an overpriced, speculative property whose owners may have had but a couple of thousand in initial equity, if that much--about what it would cost to make a security deposit and last month's rent on an equivalent rental home.

What made this boom possible was Uncle Sam's willingness to secure these loans, when there was nothing to secure them in reality beyond speculative dreams.

This situation could not possibly happen in a capitalist system, because government would have no part to play in guaranteeing a bank's poor judgment about what constitutes a secure loan.  Historically, banks have required 20% down payment and perform a stringent "due diligence" and they would have done that in this situation had the government not required them to make easy loans in the first place and in the second to buy the bad loans as soon as they were created.

From beginning to end, this financial debacle was completely and totally the result of government policy and actions.  It was the direct result of Congress passing laws requiring that banks make bad loans.  The Bush Administration and Congress are both responsible for the ensuing catastrophe.  But keep in mind, Congress was run by Democrats and the people in charge of oversight, people such as Barney Frank, stated over and over again that these bad loans were perfectly fine and dandy and that the Bush Administration's warnings could be safely rejected. 

Bush didn't do enough, and Congress is primarily responsible, but however you come out on that score, the bottom line is that the government created this catastrophe, not private businessmen, and was caused not by under-regulation but by government policies explicitly designed to increase home ownership by people who could not afford to own homes.