Newsvine
  • Welcome
  • Help
  • Report Bug
  • Conversation Tracker
  • Your Column
  • Replies
  • Friends
Type Comments Since You Last CheckedArticle Source Last Checked Stop Tracking All Clear Tracking All
Advertise | AdChoices
Log In | Register
Close the Login Panel
Existing users log in below. New users please register for a free account.

New Users:

Existing Users:

E-Mail:
Password:
Forgot Password?
Please enter the e-mail address or domain name you registered with:
E-Mail/Domain:
Back to Login
Log Out
  • Top News
  • Local News
  • World
  • U.S.
  • Sports
  • Politics
  • Tech
  • Entertainment
  • Science
  • Business
  • Health
  • Odd News
  • More
    • Arts
    • Education
    • Environment
    • Fashion
    • History
    • Home & Garden
    • Not News
    • Religion
    • Travel
Visit polecolaw's column >>

POLECOLAW

Home Page
Articles Posted: 82  Links Seeded: 55
Member Since: 10/2007  Last Seen: 1/19/2012

What is Newsvine?

Updated continuously by citizens like you, Newsvine is an instant reflection of what the world is talking about at any given moment.

Get a Free Account
Help
Fun Stuff
  • Your Clippings
  • Leaderboard
  • E-Mail Alerts
  • Top of the Vine
  • Newsvine Live
  • Newsvine Archives
  • The Greenhouse
  • Recommended Articles
  • Wall of Vineness
Put a Seed Newsvine link on your own site

Subprime and the Bush Administration

Sat May 3, 2008 10:46 AM EDT
politics, bush, bailout, banks, banking, snow, treasury, credit-crisis, subprime, fdic, powell, securities-exchange-act, bair, bank-capital
By polecolaw
Advertise | AdChoices

What did the Bush Administration have to do with the credit crisis? I keep hearing people say that a president does not have very much influence on the economy and they are given too much of the credit or blame when the economy fluctuates. I disagree for two reasons. The first is that fiscal policies can have a rather dramatic and immediate impact on economic activity as the President is making clear today by touting the fiscal stimulus plan. Tax cuts and government spending certainly impact the economy in a direct and timely way. The other reason is the general regulatory oversight that each administration is responsible for. For example, who heads the SEC and what are the priorities given it by the administration? What about the Treasury Department? I believe these policies have a direct impact on economic activity and are responsible for a lot of the fluctuation in the economy as well as income distribution from one administration to another. Here is an example.

As hedge fund investor David Einhorn laid out in his recent remarks, "Private Profits and Socialized Risk" the SEC, under the Bush Administration, altered the capital requirements for broker-dealers. Einhorn concludes that the result was a lower capital requirement leading to higher leverage. The higher leverage, as we know, leads to higher risk and that higher risk culminated with the failure of Bear Stearns. So, is this why we have the credit crisis? Wait, there's more.

The SEC regulations applied to the broker-dealer world. What about the commercial banks? What have they got to do with all of this? Well, as I wrote about last October, the rules regarding commercial bank capital requirements were also altered back in 2004 through rules promulgated by the Federal Reserve and Treasury as regulators of the commercial banking system. In effect, these rules said to banks they could move loans and other assets from their balance sheets to off-balance sheet conduits and reduce their capital requirements. Banks love this because it allows them to – guess what – leverage! They set up something called a conduit that purchases assets from the bank and/or a bank customer. The conduit gets the money for the purchase by issuing securities, like commercial paper. The rating agencies rate the commercial paper based, in part, on the fact that the bank typically provides a line of credit to the conduit so that if the commercial paper market dries up the conduit can borrow to repay maturing commercial paper. This is a very general description and these structures can get very complex, but this is the basic idea. So how does this increase leverage? The rules promulgated in 2004 established that under this structure banks could provide these credit lines to back these conduits but hold only 10% of the risk based capital they would hold against the same assets if they were on the bank's balance sheet. You can find the announcement of the rules here. So, using this structure, banks can leverage their capital in multiples. Eureka – a way to get around the sound banking principals established by the regulatory framework over the past 90 years! The regulators behind these rules included the Office of the Comptroller of the Currency (Treasury), The Federal Reserve System, The Office of Thrift Supervision (Treasury), and The Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation.

Lets review. According to Mr. Einhorn, in 2004 the SEC relaxed capital rules for broker dealers, placing more of the regulatory requirements in the hands of the banks and allowing them to use more leverage than before. In the very same year the Federal Reserve and Treasury codified the rules that permitted commercial banks to leverage through off-balance sheet entities. (In case you were wondering, Congress had hearings on many of these issues as well.) All of this turned out to be extremely profitable for the banks, brokers, and rating agencies.

Suddenly, there is an incredible credit bubble that begins with loans and ends up as securities in the portfolios of, among others, the investment banks, banks, and off-balance sheet bank sponsored conduits. I wonder if there is a link between these events? Now, to be fair, the credit bubble began a little before these regulatory changes. But these changes must have accommodated a huge demand that was unsustainable. The graph accompanying this post illustrates the credit bubble I am referring to.

What really caps all of this off is the cries from many of these agency heads now about what should be done to fix this mess. For example, Sheila Bair, head of The Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation, has been calling for months for a bailout of subprime borrowers. First, back in October, she called for a freeze on interest rates for those who had adjustable rate subprime mortgages. She is now lobbying for loan modifications to reduce principal for those subprime borrowers whose mortgages exceed their property values. From her recent comments before Congress

Permanently forgiving part of the principal amount can provide a better financial result for investors than foreclosure by creating long-term, sustainable solutions that will allow borrowers to stay in their homes. This approach also has the added benefit of limiting the overall adverse affect of declining property values on communities.

In closing, Ms. Bair states

Congress, the SEC, the Treasury Department, as well as federal bank regulators have expended considerable time and effort to assure that the industry has authority under tax and accounting rules to modify loans proactively. The industry needs to demonstrate greater commitment to using those authorities.

They should be expending all the time they possibly can and they should never mention it because these agencies are collectively, in my opinion, among the most culpable groups in this entire debacle.

To be fair to Ms. Bair, she was appointed to head the FDIC in 2006, after these regulatory changes. She was, however, on the FDIC's Advisory Committee on Banking Policy. Donald Powell was FDIC Chairman in 2004, John Snow was Secretary of the Treasury, William Donaldson was Chairman of the SEC, and our old friend Alan Greenspan was Chairman of the Board of Governors of the Federal Reserve System. Who appointed these people?

  • Enjoy this article? Help vote it up the 'Vine.

Back To Top | Front Page

Published to:

  • polecolaw's Column, All of Newsvine
  • Groups: America's Need For Change, Das Krapital, DemGuys, Left of Center, Political Analysis, Pushmi-Pullyu
  • Regions: none
  • Public Discussion (11)
polecolaw

Sooner or later we need to reverse the trend where the financial industry regulates us.

  • 7 votes
Reply#1 - Sat May 3, 2008 10:49 AM EDT
Erik the Read

Add to the tools of government: The level og taxation for private people and companies. The higher the taxes, the less money people have to spend on consumer goods and on investments. Withdrawing or adding purchasing power is one of the things governments can do, thus influencing / stimulating the economy, both in periods of growth and in during economic down-turns.

  • 5 votes
Reply#2 - Sat May 3, 2008 3:13 PM EDT
polecolaw

Yes, fiscal policy is a big tool in the box. The Bush tax cuts and overall trade policies, I believe, also contributed to this debt bubble as dollars everywhere were looking for returns. That's a different article though:-)

  • 5 votes
#2.1 - Sat May 3, 2008 3:56 PM EDT
Reply
Rixar13

Thank you for your article.

  • 5 votes
Reply#3 - Sat May 3, 2008 7:21 PM EDT
ffeineandsugar

All this is great. The genie is out of the bottle, Pandora's demons are flying all around us, so now I'm left with three little letters: W. T. (your choice - I have a recommendation, but your choice). Seriously, what can be done to get the derivatives back under control, reinforce the bank capitalization and balance sheet/accounting rules, and generally restore sanity? And if we do so, who wins, and who loses?

All in all, one more reason why I'm glad I'm not McCain, Obama, or Clinton.

  • 6 votes
Reply#4 - Sun May 4, 2008 12:43 AM EDT
polecolaw

Yes, it's a fine mess we've gotten ourselves into. I think there will be some major regulatory reforms but not until the current situation is cleaned up. The Fed just increased its lending facility to banks from $100 billion to $150 billion and will now take student loan and credit card securities as collateral. That brings the total Fed infusions to around $450 billion, about half its total balance sheet.

I don't think you will see too much regulation right out of the box because the system needs to de-leverage and if you tightened up capital requirements right now there may be too many who don't meet them (just a guess). Eventually derivatives will probably be traded over an exchange with margin requirements, or at least that's how it should have been (I'm not an expert on derivatives, but the counter-party issues appear real enough and big enough to warrant this)? In any event, now that the Fed has shown it will not allow the bankruptcy of a major investment bank or, to some extent, a hedge fund it seems to me we eventually need some major regulation on leverage all around or we will just keep going through these cycles. I agree that whoever takes over from this administration has a lot of work to do.

  • 7 votes
Reply#5 - Sun May 4, 2008 9:27 AM EDT
tgolferman

Polecolaw, I forgot to mention that here locally we have mortgage and title companies going out of business. With virtually no properties being sold there is going to be a big shake out in that area. There is so much that is not being reported, because the Government and News Media believe we are sheep or cattle and will stampede if we know what is really going on. But, that too is part of the problem, when we are led to make decisions or take action based upon a lack of information the system breaks down.
Keep up the great work. Say a prayer that we get through these troubled times intact.

  • 4 votes
#5.1 - Thu May 8, 2008 3:44 PM EDT
Reply
tgolferman

Great work again polecolaw! In summary, your article indicates the Bush Administration through its regulatory appointments allowed an Enron type leverage maneuver throughout the economy.
We have a community filing for bankruptcy. The U.S.P.S. has announced layoffs to its workers, but is managing to keep it out of the news, except for the efforts of yours truly. I feel we're in more trouble than you and I can imagine. The leverage that was being utilized to keep our economy going, back in the late 1990's through to now was and is immense and as each industry begins to feel the economy's pain, the country will spiral downward at ever increasing velocity. Hang on, the ride is going to get bumpy!

  • 4 votes
Reply#6 - Thu May 8, 2008 3:31 PM EDT
polecolaw

tgolfer- Thanks for the comments. The postal service is laying off? Didn't know that. There are very troubling budget proposals going on at the SUNY University system right now too. I think the R/E bust has some state and municipal governments feeling some pain now.

This de-leveraging spiral is the scary scenario that keeps some of us worrying. For a while I was writing about all of the government efforts to bail out the mortgage crisis but at this point there are new initiatives announced almost daily and I can't keep up with them. This week alone there are more troubling signs, especially the Federal Reserve Senior Lending Officer Survey showing that banks further tightened lending standards in April.

There is a really interesting (and relatively short) working paper that compares this financial meltdown to others in the past. If interested you can find the paper here.

  • 3 votes
#6.1 - Fri May 9, 2008 10:26 PM EDT
Tedd Riggs

The postal service is laying off?

@polecolaw,
You might want to see if you can get that "fact" verified as is appeared that the postal union in King County Washington, The local postal worker and the Postmaster Generals of Both Redmond and the Main Seattle Office confirmed that is not correct. However I have been prone to error in the past, I find it hard to believe in that high a number of cases I would be off.

However that is all I have on that subject. Your article polecolaw as always was great, always sad to see cutbacks in the educational system, something we need so much. How is that plumbing inspector job coming along ? ☺

  • 4 votes
#6.2 - Sun May 11, 2008 9:23 PM EDT
polecolaw

LOL!!!!
There is another guy, with the same name as me and about the same age. He was plumbing inspector at one point and he got into trouble with the law. Periodically stories would show up in the local paper, and if you search me on the net you sometimes come across those articles. The funny thing is I would be speaking with someone I hadn't seen in a long time and they would ask "how are you" and I never realized they confused me with the "other" person. I can just hear them saying "he sounds pretty good considering the sentence!"

  • 3 votes
#6.3 - Mon May 12, 2008 3:27 PM EDT
Reply
Leave a Comment:
You're in Easy Mode. If you prefer, you can use XHTML Mode instead.
You're in XHTML Mode. If you prefer, you can use Easy Mode instead.
(XHTML tags allowed - a,b,blockquote,br,code,dd,dl,dt,del,em,h2,h3,h4,i,ins,li,ol,p,pre,q,strong,ul)
Newsvine Privacy Statement
As a new user, you may notice a few temporary content restrictions. Click here for more info.
FUN STUFF:
  • Leaderboard |
  • E-Mail Alerts |
  • Top of the Vine |
  • Newsvine Live |
  • Newsvine Archives |
  • The Greenhouse |
COMPANY STUFF:
  • Code of Honor |
  • Company Info |
  • Contact Us |
  • Jobs |
  • User Agreement |
  • Privacy Policy |
  • About our ads
LEGAL STUFF:
  • © 2005-2012 Newsvine, Inc. |
  • Newsvine® is a registered trademark of Newsvine, Inc. |
  • Newsvine is a property of msnbc.com