Fannie and Freddie were blind to the bubble
Last Modified: Saturday, September 6, 2008 at 10:04 p.m.
WASHINGTON — Mortgage giants Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac — despite their robust cadre of economists and mortgage experts — failed to heed warnings that the most dramatic housing bubble in U.S. history would burst.
AP Business Writer
WASHINGTON (AP) -- The historic takeover of Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac, which could come as soon as Sunday, moved to the forefront of the presidential campaign Saturday as candidates and congressional leaders seized on the enormous implications for taxpayers and the economy.
Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac together hold or back half of the nation's mortgage debt, and have played an increasingly important role in the real estate market since the credit crisis started in August 2007. A government bailout could cost taxpayers around $25 billion, according to the Congressional Budget Office.
Treasury Secretary Henry Paulson and two other regulators are working on a plan to put the troubled mortgage finance companies into a conservatorship, and remove Fannie Mae CEO Daniel Mudd and Freddie Mac CEO Richard Syron, according to Rep. Barney Frank, D-Mass., the chairman of the House Financial Services Committee.
The government is expected to control the two companies at least a year as it evaluates and debates whether Fannie and Freddie should remain government-run entities or be restructured in some fashion, Frank said in an interview.
At a rally in Colorado Springs, Col., Republican vice presidential nominee Sarah Palin said, "They've gotten too big and too expensive to the taxpayers. The McCain-Palin administration will make them smaller and smarter and more effective for homeowners who need help."
Democratic nominee Barack Obama, speaking in Terre Haute, Ind., said, "These entities are so big and they're so tied into the housing market that it is probably true that we have to take steps to make sure they don't just collapse, because the housing market, which is already weakened, would be in even worse shape if we didn't take some steps."
News of the likely government takeover Friday followed a report by the Mortgage Bankers Association that more than 4 million American homeowners with a mortgage, a record 9 percent, were either behind on their payments or in foreclosure at the end of June.
That confirmed what investors saw in Fannie and Freddie's recent financial results: trouble in the mortgage market has shifted to homeowners who had solid credit but took out exotic loans with little or no proof of their income and assets.
Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac lost a combined $3.1 billion between April and June. Half of their credit losses came from these types of risky loans with ballooning monthly payments.
While both companies said they had enough resources to withstand the losses, many investors believe their financial cushions could wither away as defaults and foreclosures mount.
Frank said the companies' financial picture was better than Wall Street investors assumed, but "it just plainly became clear that elements of the market wouldn't' accept that."
The epic decision highlights the size of the threats facing the housing market and the economy. On Friday, Nevada regulators shut down Silver State Bank, the 11th failure this year of a federally insured bank. And earlier this year, the government orchestrated the takeover of investment bank Bear Stearns by JP Morgan Chase.
"Any government action must help to strengthen our economy, which is suffering a crisis brought on by the administration's failure to stop predatory lending," said Sen. Chris Dodd, D-Conn., who chairs the Senate Committee on Banking, Housing, and Urban Affairs. "Any intervention also must minimize the cost to American taxpayers, and should not put other financial institutions at risk."
The crisis surrounding Fannie and Freddie promises to be a major challenge for the next president.
The role the two companies play in the U.S. mortgage market has grown dramatically over the past year as other lenders collapsed under the weight of bad subprime loans. The companies guaranteed about three-quarters of all new mortgages in the second quarter of this year, up from under 40 percent in 2006, according to the trade publication Inside Mortgage Finance.
Federal Reserve Chairman Ben Bernanke, Treasury Secretary Henry Paulson and James Lockhart, the companies' chief regulator, met Friday afternoon with the top executives from the mortgage companies and informed them of the government's plan to put the companies into a conservatorship as early as this weekend.
In July, Congress passed a plan to provide unlimited government loans to Fannie and Freddie and to purchase stock in the companies if needed. Critics say the open-ended nature of the rescue package could expose taxpayers to billions of dollars of potential losses.
Fannie Mae was created by the government in 1938, and was turned into a public company 30 years later. Freddie Mac was established in 1970 to provide competition for Fannie.
The companies — particularly Freddie Mac — didn’t raise enough cash to reassure Wall Street that they would be able to withstand a severe downturn in U.S. home prices.
Federal regulators after scouring the companies’ books with aid from investment bank Morgan Stanley — believe the companies pushed accounting conventions when calculating their financial cushion against losses, a person briefed on the matter said Saturday. The person declined to be named because details of the government’s actions were not yet public.
As their losses started rising at alarming rates over the past year, investors gradually lost confidence, forcing the government’s historic takeover of the two companies, which could be announced as soon as Sunday and was expected to include the ouster of top executives.
Rep. Barney Frank, D-Mass., the chairman of the House Financial Services Committee, said in an interview Saturday that the companies’ financial picture was better than investors assumed, but “it just plainly became clear that elements of the market wouldn’t accept that.”
Investors have had reasons to feel jittery.
On Friday, the Mortgage Bankers Association said that more than 4 million American homeowners with a mortgage, a record 9 percent, were either behind on their payments or in foreclosure at the end of June.
Also on Friday, Nevada regulators shut down Silver State Bank, the 11th failure this year of a federally insured bank. In July, regulators seized IndyMac, which had $19 billion in deposits. And earlier this year, the government orchestrated the takeover of investment bank Bear Stearns Cos. by JPMorgan Chase & Co.
Treasury Secretary Henry Paulson has been in contact in recent weeks with foreign governments that hold billions of dollars of Fannie and Freddie debt to reassure them that the United States recognizes the importance of the two companies.
Nevertheless, the Bank of China said in late August that it cut back its portfolio of the Fannie and Freddie’s debt by about one quarter since the end of June.
Washington-based Fannie and McLean, Va.-based Freddie are the engines behind a complex process of buying, bundling and selling mortgages that remains a mystery to millions of Americans whose home loans pass through this system. Together Fannie and Freddie hold or guarantee about $5 trillion in mortgage debt — about half of the nation’s total.
They traditionally backed the safest loans, 30-year fixed rate mortgages that required a down payment of at least 20 percent. But in recent years, they lowered their standards dramatically, matching a decline fueled by Wall Street banks that backed the now-defunct subprime lending industry.
Armando Falcon, who clashed frequently with the companies during his six years as Fannie and Freddie’s chief government regulator, said in an interview last month that the companies’ woes are similar to the downfall of other major corporate titans like Enron and WorldCom earlier this decade. “It boils down to a whole lot of greed and arrogance,” he said.
The companies, he said, took advantage of the perception on Wall Street that the government would stand behind them in a time of crisis, as is now the case.
With that implied government backing, the companies generated large profits for years, but ultimately took on too much risk, causing investors to lose faith in their ability to navigate the historic housing bust.
Economists who long warned the housing boom could not last are baffled that the companies were not better prepared for what they saw as an inevitable downturn.
“How could you look at an enormous rise in prices and not think there was a potential for them to fall?” said Christopher Thornberg, a principal with Beacon Economics in Los Angeles.
Another longtime proponent of the housing bubble concept is Dean Baker, co-director of the Washington-based Center for Economic and Policy Research. He recalls several occasions when he debated top Fannie and Freddie economists, who dismissed the idea that U.S. home prices could decline.
“Even if they didn’t want to listen to me, they should have at least thought this could be a possibility,” he said.
Plummeting home prices are the key to Fannie and Freddie’s troubles. As prices fall — as much as 25 percent over the past 12 months in Las Vegas, Miami, Phoenix and Los Angeles — the value of mortgages the companies hold on their books drops. That means Fannie and Freddie are recovering far less money through foreclosure sales.
While a government intervention had been expected for weeks, its timing came as a surprise.
The companies had been able to raise money through regular debt sales, but analysts say the Treasury Department likely grew concerned that foreign investors were pulling back.
“The main goal is to inject confidence into the foreign debt markets to ensure that the flow of capital to the mortgage market continues,” said Howard Glaser, a Washington-based mortgage industry consultant who has worked for both Fannie and Freddie.
Freddie Mac in particular has had investors and analysts fearful for months. The company, led by CEO Richard Syron, promised to raise $5.5 billion earlier this year to shore up its finances, but failed to do so, and its sinking share price has since made it all but impossible for the company to raise that money from private investors.
Fannie Mae executives are likely to have resisted the proposed takeover because the company’s financial condition isn’t as dire as its sibling company, said Bert Ely, an Alexandria, Va.-based banking industry consultant.
But the government would still have to take over both companies, he said, to allow them to borrow money at the same rates.
“In order to level the playing field between the two companies, you’ve got to take over both of them,” said Ely, a longtime critic of the two companies.
Fannie Mae was created by the government in 1938, and was turned into a shareholder-owned company 30 years later. Freddie Mac was established in 1970 to provide competition for Fannie.
While Fannie and Freddie generally had higher standards for lenders than the subprime mortgage companies that started going belly-up at the end of 2006, the duo lowered their standards during the housing boom and bought securities linked to riskier loans.
Even as the subprime mortgage market collapsed, Fannie and Freddie kept backing risky so-called Alt-A loans, which were made to borrowers with solid credit but little proof of their incomes, or small or no down payments.
For Fannie and Freddie, these Alt-A loans made up roughly 10 percent of their portfolios but accounted for more than half of their credit losses in the second quarter. The souring loans were concentrated in California, Florida, Nevada and Arizona, where speculation was rampant, prices soared and homeowners stretched to the financial limit to afford a home.
Events Calendar More Events Submit Event
- Couples cheer church's 'seven days of sex'
- U.S. 64 widening project takes another step forward
- Sheriff getting six new vehicles
- Message in bottle tossed off NJ in 1969 found in NC
- HHS, East get ready for Friday’s big games
- Woman rings bell to honor husband's memory
- Crowd gets a look at Etowah/Horse Shoe plans
- Chappell, Laughter know how to coach 'em up
- Wintry weather gives way to sunny skies
- Space heater likely cause of fire
- Jews of Mumbai, a Tiny and Eclectic Group, Suddenly Reconsider Their Serene Existence 2 hrs ago
- Hawaii Endorses Plan for Electric Cars 2 hrs ago
- Pursuing U.S. Aid, G.M. Accepts Need for Drastic Cuts 2 hrs ago
- Expert Panel Seeks Changes in Training of Medical Residents 2 hrs ago
- UnitedHealth to Insure the Right to Insurance 2 hrs ago
- Web Marketing That Hopes to Learn What Attracts a Click 2 hrs ago
- Yahoo’s Stock Jumps on Report of Buyout Interest 2 hrs ago
- College May Become Unaffordable for Most in U.S. 2 hrs ago
- Orphaned Boy Is Focus at Hostages’ Funeral 2 hrs ago
- In November, Shoppers Cut Spending Even More 2 hrs ago

Comments
Post a comment | View all comments on this topic.
September 9, 2008 10:50:25 pm
Foreclosures are bonanzas for PREDATORY LENDERS because, among other things, these kinds of foreclosures enable UNLAWFUL PROPERTY FLIPPING, and enables Investors to be misled concerning housing market profits. FRAUDULENT foreclosures causes scores of people to unlawfully lose ownership of the properties, the IRS to be cheated, and abets Securities fraud. ((Irrefutable proof of two sample lenders / mortgage companies which fits this scenario are Freddie Mac and Wells Fargo.)
In fact, Congress needs to seek the whereabouts of perhaps billions of dollars and massive amounts of real estate that winds up in the collector attorneys' possession -as well as examine the scores of attorney bankruptcy court frauds. Despite many probes into factors of the mortgage crisis, there has been almost no investigation of the most lethal mortgage mess component: foreclosure attorneys debt collection abuses and judicial collusion. Such attorneys deliberately file foreclosures naming defunct mortgage companies, or companies which no longer hold the notes; or affix collectors' fees exceeding "Acceleration Clauses." If homeowners sue for "Unfair Debt Collection Practices," collectors make more $$ through protracted litigations. Additionally, some collectors file in Bankruptcy Court falsified motions to "Lift Stay" pleadings for purposes of accomplishing SIMULATED AUCTIONS of real estate properties.
A rational look at overall results from use of debt collectors shows that neither agencies which hire them, nor the people from whom debts are collected are better off. Even the IRS's debt collection program wrought only $31 million of its projected $185 million. "IRS Tax Advocate Renews Criticism of Private Collectors"
Link
Furthermore, because in States like Louisiana, mortgage companies like Wells Fargo and Freddie Mac greatly benefit from fraudulent foreclosures, ANY representation about $$$ billion dollar losses because of people defaulting on mortgages SHOULD BE WEIGHED against what these mortgage companies pay in legal expenses to law firms which outmaneuver -and even persecute people who file court proceedings in opposition to fraudulent foreclosures and repossessions. Moreover, Freddie Mac's real estate racketeering was
Post a comment | View all comments