Who is MOST responsible for the current financial meltdown...GOP or Democratic Senators and Representatives?
drhunt1 said 11/09, 12:24 PM
Not much was made about the causes of the financial meltdown that occured this year; early finger pointing by both sides, but the rhetoric turned away from the cause, and quickly turned to "what to do" to fix the problem. What I heard from the political right and left was that "there would be time to place blame" after the election. How convenient for those that were seriously involved in the biggest financial disaster in history; one that has shaken financial institutions globally. I write, let the blames begin! In this short debate cycle format, let's explore the root cause of the mortgage crisis, for no other reason than to identify the perpretrators, prosecute them to the full extent of the Law, and make sure this never happens again.
This is about greed, and it wasn't just on Wall Street as the politicians wanted you to believe. No, they had government backing by Bills from Congress signed into Law by former Presidents. More importantly, they had the American taxpayer to fall back on in case something went wrong. Well guess what? Mostly Dems lined their pockets with your money, and now have BO to pardon them if prosecuted. This election was about MUCH more then you think.
Proud 2 b liberal said 11/09, 04:07 PM
There is plenty of blame to go around hunt. I will head you off at the pass if you want to blame it on the Clinton (or Carter) years. Bush the staunch deregulating president has been in office for the last 8 years, and the GOP had firm control of congress from 2001 until January 2007. The GOP congress of that time span and Bush worked very well together and passed a lot of laws and bills and a lot of republican type policies were implemented with Bush not using his veto. So why the did republicans not change those policies when they had congressional control or use the regulatory power of the Bush presidency to change those "bad" things that Clinton gave us? It seem logical doesn't it, since republicans are smarter and have the better policies and since they had power, then their policies should have been implemented. And when we look at the record, we do see in fact that the republicans and Bush did use their time in power to put through a lot of pet GOP policies.
drhunt1 said 11/09, 09:03 PM
1977-Carter and his Dem Congress passed the Community Reinvestment Act. It gave incentives to lending institutions to loan money to lower income home buyers.
1995-Billy-Bob Clinton expanded the role of the CRA by expanding sub-prime mortgage writing. This was expanded in 1999 with the Gramm-Leach Act where provisions for the CRA were forced upon the Repubs in order to pass the Bill. Clinton threatened to veto the GLB bill if these provisions were not in place.
2000-The GSE's got more involved,(Fannie $ Freddie)by entering the sub-prime market themselves.
After 2000-housing bubble began to grow. Repubs, normally are deregulators, but in this situation, began calling for MORE regulation of the GSE's and CRA.
2003-Bush tried to institute more regulation;Democrats opposed. Considering that the GOP barely had the majority in Congress, it didn't take many votes to kill higher regulation.
2003-Hagel,McCain tried to increase regualtions, Democrats killed the Bill, as they did in 2005. The housing bubble was still growing. Leonard Greenspan and John Snow testified in front of a House Committee and were excoriated by Dems. Senate Dems blocked further regulation, and votes were bought.
Proud 2 b liberal said 11/09, 09:11 PM
The Carter bill and the subsequent Clinton bill were written to right a wrong in that mortgages were not being written in minority communities. It was the right thing to do at the time, and didn't get totally out of hand until the Gramm bill. It was Gramms bill as he said, ???A regulatory structure set up for banks in the 1930s needed to change because the nature of business had changed???. ???A year after the Gramm-Leach-Bliley Act repealed the old regulations, Swiss Bank UBS gobbled up brokerage house Paine Weber. Two years later, Gramm settled in as a vice chairman of UBS???s investment banking arm. Later, he became a major player in its government affairs operation. According to federal lobbying disclosure records, Gramm lobbied Congress, the Federal Reserve and the Treasury Department about banking and mortgage issues in 2005 and 2006. During those years, the mortgage industry pressed Congress to roll back strong state rules that sought to stem the rise of predatory tactics used by lenders and brokers to place homeowners in high-cost mortgages. For his work, Gramm and two other lobbyists collected $750,000 in fees from UBS???s American subsidiary. This from McCains financial advisor.
drhunt1 said 11/11, 02:06 PM
The original CRA was probably not a bad idea. Lower income families could get reasonable FHA loans and buy homes. But the door was opened for corruption, and when Clinton added new provisions, greater lender risk/reward ratios and increased govn intervention, the situation got worse. The Housing bubble began before the GLB Act, and it was the Democrats that attached greater provisions to the GLB Act for increasing CRA involvement. It was the Dems who bastardized the GLB and Clinton threatened to veto the Act if these provisions were not included. Dodd and Shumer were instrumental forces in the Senate, and Frank, Meeks, Watts, Waters ran interference for the GSE's in the House. The GOP did not have enough of a majority to pass legislation to increase regulatory oversight over Fannie and Freddie, and the vote was EXTREMELY partisan. Dems blocked Bush and then Hagel/McCain attempts at increased regulation. This is a known fact. Artur Davis (D) rep. acknowledges this fact, as did Clinton himself. Affordable housing is a good idea, but putting the taxpayer at risk is not. The Dems were on the dole from these GSE's, a known fact, to a greater degree then ANY Repub Sen or Rep. Known fact.
Proud 2 b liberal said 11/12, 06:45 AM
Oh poor republicans. There they were, all trying to regulate the free market, and those darned deregulation dems screwed it all up. Give it up hunt. You have picked and chosen very carefully to come up with some very scant examples. You have downplayed Gramms role in this whole mess, a man who has been identified as one of the biggest contributors to the whole meltdown. Republicans have been pushing for deregulation since before Reagan. And you even blew off the recent illegal move by Bush to throw away an imprtant provision of the tax law, thereby giving an extra 140 billion dollars to banks. Thats after the hefty chunk they have been given in the bailout.
Now Obama has asked Bush to use some of the bailout money to actually help US workers by saving jobs and retooling the auto industry for more fuel efficient cars. What does Bushy do? He doesn't consider it unless Obama supports him in the free trade deal with Columbia, which is surely going to lead to a further drain on jobs southward. Wake up hunty.
Do the republs really try to act when the economy starts going bad? NO! They say the fundementals of the economy are strong and that we are a nation of whiners.
Comments
Add Your Comment
LOL! I could have predicted it! You'reGod(less)...you're next. P2B will not be able to debate me on this subject, because she'll most certainly lose the debate, but as you noted, garner more votes. Denial about the issues appears to be the overriding theme on this site. Don't worry...i have more...MUCH more. Have fun in front of your PC...I'm off to exercise my 2nd amendment rights.
drhunt1 | 11/09/08
Report Offensive Comment
is that really how this site should be used? i don't like hunt either, but i would never do this..you guys are being total snobs! he isn't lying when he says the dems' pockets were lined with mortage money! just like the pub's pockets are lined with big oil money! hunt has a right to be right on this site if everyone else has a right to be left! it's not called donkey-doody.com. c'mon! you may not like what he says, but don't put your fingers in your ears, close your eyes and stick out your tongues whenever he speaks.
breakthecycle | 11/09/08
Report Offensive Comment
i shouldn't say i don't like him, i don't even know him. i meant that i don't foster the same views, and i don't like how he personally attacks people...but i always give him a chance. it's the human way.
breakthecycle | 11/09/08
Report Offensive Comment
I wish people would have waited because Hunt has yet to have a real debate. All he does it throw out a million links to you tube and wikopedia, or spouts things he has heard on FOX news. He is so blinded by ideological hatred that he cannot see two sides to a situation. I know I do not have all the answers but i am well aware that the smarter you are, the more you question how much you know.
Proud 2 b liberal | 11/09/08
Report Offensive Comment
P2B-nice try, but no Monica Lewinsky cigar for you. I was onto the information LONG before Fox or Rush started delivering the info. Just because I list a Wikipedia(note the correct spelling) link, doesn't mean the information is erroneous. And the youtube video links I listed are all well documented...and one was just a CSPAN video tape of the particulars I will list. I guess the actual words coming out of the Dems own mouth, in your world, may have been altered or 'taken out of context'? Please. You wish people would have waited? LMAO! For what? All they did was expose themselves to what the few conservatives on this site already know...multiple alias' and lock-step adherence to ANYTHING liberal...no matter what it is. They are only proving my point, thank you very much. ;o))
drhunt1 | 11/09/08
Report Offensive Comment
We are all still waiting for you to say something, or rant something or blather something. Yes, the few concervatives whi spout things like Obama is not American and He will send the secret police? You're in good company pal.
Proud 2 b liberal | 11/09/08
Report Offensive Comment
breakthecycle-thanks for the props...the truth needs to be told, even if it is rammed down their scrawny throats. I know, I know...I should be more respectful, but understand how rudely I was treated here by many...even was told I needed a bullet. I am going to list a bunch of links that will further expand on what I'm arguing above. Share them with your friends...the truth needs to be told, and political pressure on our elected officials needs to be applied to prosecute and not pardon these idiots.
drhunt1 | 11/09/08
Report Offensive Comment
check out the above reference...you can redirect once there, but contrary to what many Dems want you to believe, (at least those that have enough lnowledge to even KNOW what the CRA is), the GLB Bill was intended to restrict lending practices by centralizing banking.
drhunt1 | 11/09/08
Report Offensive Comment
Do a youtube search on 'Burning down the House'...11 min. video, good for starters.
drhunt1 | 11/09/08
Report Offensive Comment
watch the CSPAN video above...it shows Gregory Meeks at his finest...trying to rip the OFHEO chairman. Maxine Waters also demonstrates her phi beta kappa form...it's sickening. Wonder how they feel now? They are exposed.
drhunt1 | 11/09/08
Report Offensive Comment
http://www.washingtonpost.com/ac2/wp-dyn/A52625-2004Sep26?language=printer
drhunt1 | 11/09/08
Report Offensive Comment
the above link details the fact that John Kerry had Johnson, Gorelick and even Raines earmarked for his cabinet. How disastrous would THAT have been? Corruption...with a capital C!
drhunt1 | 11/09/08
Report Offensive Comment
Here is some more data from no doubt your hero Mr Reagan. December, 1982--Garn - St Germain Depository Institutions Act of 1982 enacted. This Reagan Administration initiative is designed to complete the process of giving expanded powers to federally chartered S&Ls and enables them to diversify their activities with the view of increasing profits. Major provisions include: elimination of deposit interest rate ceilings; elimination of the previous statutory limit on loan to value ratio; and expansion of the asset powers of federal S&Ls by permitting up to 40% of assets in commercial mortgages, up to 30% of assets in consumer loans, up to 10% of assets in commercial loans, and up to 10% of assets in commercial leases. CAN YOU SAY S&L CRISIS??? In the spring of 1987, the Federal Reserve Board votes 3-2 in favor of easing regulations under Glass-Steagall Act, overriding the opposition of Chairman Paul Volcker. Thomas Theobald, then vice chairman of Citicorp, argues that three "outside checks" on corporate misbehavior had emerged since 1933: "a very effective" SEC; knowledgeable investors, and "very sophisticated" rating agencies. Volcker is unconvinced, and expresses his fear that lenders will recklessly lower loan standards in pursuit of lucrative securities offerings and market bad loans to the public. For many critics, it boiled down to the issue of two different cultures - a culture of risk which was the securities business, and a culture of protection of deposits which was the culture of banking. Glass Steagall was finally burined in 2000 and with the last major regulatory impediment removed, and more importantly perhaps, not replaced with any form of updated regulation, the credit bubble accelerated, fueled heavily by the explosive growth in unregulated derivatives.
Proud 2 b liberal | 11/09/08
Report Offensive Comment
But the essence of the argument is that although Clinton signed Mr. Gramm's masterpiece (which was a republican piece of crap), it was Bush who sat on his **** and allowed things to go totally out of control, Once the last major regulatory impediment was removed, and more importantly perhaps, not replaced with any form of updated regulation, the credit bubble accelerated, fueled heavily by the explosive growth in unregulated derivatives. Therefore, the bulk of the blame lies with the policy makers and regulators who were on duty while the housing bubble inflated and Wall Street went wild ??? the Bush administration and Alan Greenspan???s Federal Reserve. Their near-religious belief in the powers of the market led them to conclude that the mere fact that a company was willing to make an investment made that investment O.K.
Proud 2 b liberal | 11/09/08
Report Offensive Comment
P2B-I'll address some of the other points of your post later...but the GLB Act was actually the brainchild of Robert Rubin. Remember him? So don't call the GLB Act a Republican POC...it was intended to overturn archaic banking regulations...but when the House Dems got ahold of it, attached further provisions for expanding the CRA, at the threat from Clinton of veto, and the threat by House dems to scuttle it. The repubs went along with the earmark...and there's NO doubt they wished they hadn't. Now...on to more research material.
drhunt1 | 11/09/08
Report Offensive Comment
http://www.brookings.edu/papers/2008/0516_credit_squeeze.aspx
drhunt1 | 11/09/08
Report Offensive CommentPost A Comment
Please keep it clean. Bad words will get filtered, and offensive comments will be removed.
CNN TOP POLITICAL STORIES
TOP STORIES on TIME.COM
TIME PHOTO ESSAYS
Photos: The Hajj Goes High-Tech
Advances in infrastructure and security improve the experience of Islam's holiest pilgrimage
( )
Athens in Flames
A massive student protest against proposed government reforms of state universities developed into major rioting in the streets of the Greek capital following the shooting of a teenage boy by riot police.
(Louisa Gouliamaki / AFP / Getty)
LOL p2bl doesn't even have to say anything to win...
Your God(ess) | 11/09/08
Report Offensive Comment