The Wall Street Journal reports,
The Securities Industry and Financial Markets Association, Wall Street’s main lobbying group, said in a proposal submitted to the Obama administration on Wednesday that the government couldn’t completely exit the mortgage market without sending costs sharply higher for consumers.
As a consumer, are you anxious to keep Freddie and Fannie there to hold down costs for you? Well, you should be glad that the Securities Industry and Financial Markets Association is there to speak on your behalf. After all, they have no self-interest involved in steering the mortgage financing system through Wall Street. They just care about you. And when Congress votes to structure Freddie and Fannie along the lines that these helpful folks suggest, it is because Congress cares about you, too.
Thanks to Kevin Villani, via email, for the pointer.
[UPDATE: Megan McArdle is in a similar mood.]
READER COMMENTS
PJens
Jul 22 2010 at 7:55pm
As a taxpayer, I am not anxious to see Freddie and Frannie continue business as usual with ever increasing federal subsidy. I could really use Congress helping me less, especially with bailouts and subsidized programs.
aez
Jul 22 2010 at 8:02pm
Beautifully savage. Thank you for the catharsis.
William Barghest
Jul 22 2010 at 8:08pm
bravo.
DCPI
Jul 22 2010 at 11:14pm
I am surprised that this is not getting more attention at a time when politicians are criticising Wall Street not making loans:
From Anusha Shrivastava, Dow Jones Newswire
[Original link changed and properly credited–Econlib Ed.]
Joe in Morgantown
Jul 23 2010 at 9:33am
Kling hits another home run. Well done, sir!
Aaron
Jul 23 2010 at 11:11am
Shouldn’t it read:
Brian Clendinen
Jul 23 2010 at 5:41pm
Honestly with the exception of stripping the Derivates language from the bill. I would of compromised on the Financial Reform bill and voted for it if it included total elimination of Freddie and Fannie. The cost and risk the financial bill presents is only a small fraction of what Freddie and Fannie present. Or so I think, considering the amount of critical decision making the bill leaves up to regulators I could be totally wrong. The bill is to complex and vague for anyone to have any reasonable idea what the full extent of the impact will be.
Freddie and Fannie underwrite what something 70%+ of all primary mortgages on primary homes now (not sure where to get the most recent figures)?
Guy Noir
Jul 30 2010 at 5:50pm
Perhaps, for the peanut gallery, you might want to put [smirk] or [sarcasm alert] into your text. I picked up the obvious sarcasm, as did many in your audience. I’m sure some think you are actually happy that “Securities Industry and Financial Markets Association is there to speak on your behalf”. I think we have plenty to say, aside from what these lobbyists wish to say.
Also, having spent years actually working for the NASD, I do not think the quality of government regulators is somehow going to magically rise, and therefore allow for all the centralized decision making the new regulations envision. We do know, however, that the SEC does not have to respond to FOIA requests thus making it very difficult to figure out WHY they screwed up.
Comments are closed.