October 08, 2008
Lending money to poor people doesn't make you poor. Lending money poorly to rich people does
We've now entered a new stage of the financial crisis: the ritual assigning of blame. It began in earnest with Monday's congressional roasting of Lehman Bros. CEO Richard Fuld and continued on Tuesday with Capitol Hill solons delving into the failure of AIG. On the Republican side of Congress, in the right-wing financial media (which is to say the financial media), and in certain parts of the op-ed-o-sphere, there's a consensus emerging that the whole mess should be laid at the feet of Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac, the failed mortgage giants, and the Community Reinvestment Act, a law passed during the Carter administration. The CRA, which was amended in the 1990s and this decade, requires banks—which had a long, distinguished history of not making loans to minorities—to make more efforts to do so.The thesis is laid out almost daily on the Wall Street Journal editorial page, in the National Review, and on the campaign trail. John McCain said yesterday, "Bad mortgages were being backed by Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac, and it was only a matter of time before a contagion of unsustainable debt began to spread." Washington Post columnist Charles Krauthammer provides an excellent example, writing that "much of this crisis was brought upon us by the good intentions of good people." He continues: "For decades, starting with Jimmy Carter's Community Reinvestment Act of 1977, there has been bipartisan agreement to use government power to expand homeownership to people who had been shut out for economic reasons or, sometimes, because of racial and ethnic discrimination. What could be a more worthy cause? But it led to tremendous pressure on Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac—which in turn pressured banks and other lenders—to extend mortgages to people who were borrowing over their heads. That's called subprime lending. It lies at the root of our current calamity." The subtext: If only Congress didn't force banks to lend money to poor minorities, the Dow would be well on its way to 36,000. Or, as Fox Business Channel's Neil Cavuto put it, "I don't remember a clarion call that said: Fannie and Freddie are a disaster. Loaning to minorities and risky folks is a disaster."
more from Slate here.
Posted by Morgan Meis at 12:59 PM | Permalink






Comments
I thought this article over at clusterstock.com was an informative and convincing rebuttal to the claim that the CRA is to blame for this mortgage mess.
link: http://www.clusterstock.com/2008/10/oh-that-s-right-it-was-all-fannie-mae-s-fault
Posted by: Karl | Oct 8, 2008 6:52:01 PM
Let's be honest--
The Bush regime turned the White House into a cheap bordello, where the corporate whores and pimps have raped the public, and then looted their resources.
The ploy now, through Paulson and the gang, is not to be the last one out as this pyramid scheme collapses, and he now has the right to dictate who will win and fail among the psychopaths.
The suicide economy is putting a gun to it's head.
Posted by: Dave Ranning | Oct 8, 2008 9:43:25 PM
prospect
See also www.gangsofamerica.com on government by corporatism without any of, by or for the people.
Dave,
I think the White House, the courts and the Congress had a head start on the misfeasance and malfeasance accelerated by the Bush torture regime.
CMI
Posted by: CriticalMassI | Oct 8, 2008 9:54:08 PM
CM--
I agree--
When Reagan open the casino in the 1980's with no rules except the one with the least moral compass wins, the suicide economy has been petal to the metal.
Posted by: Dave Ranning | Oct 8, 2008 11:27:45 PM
When Reagan open the casino in the 1980's with no rules except the one with the least moral compass wins, the suicide economy has been petal to the metal.
So, how does your sophisticated theory involving "Reagan" explain all the other boom/bust/banking crises that have occurred throughout history?
Posted by: Wade Nichols | Oct 9, 2008 10:10:41 PM
Post a comment