Showing posts with label barneyfrank. Show all posts
Showing posts with label barneyfrank. Show all posts
Might Barney Frank actually lose his re-election to Congress?

Might Barney Frank actually lose his re-election to Congress?

If even Reuters notices that Frank could lose, my guess is that this seeming long shot is possible.

Massachusetts has already been the scene of one of the year's biggest upsets, when Republican Scott Brown won a special election for the U.S. Senate seat held for almost five decades by a Democratic Party pillar, the late Edward Kennedy.

"If Barney Frank loses, it would be as significant as Scott Brown's win. You would really begin to see the depths of this anti-government sentiment," said Marc Landy, professor of political science at Boston College. . . .

American voters are in a surly mood over the weak economy, unemployment near 10 percent and the state of the housing market as banks face scrutiny over how they handled the paperwork in home foreclosures across the country.

Frank, 70, has been chairman of the powerful House Financial Services Committee for almost four years.

He helped to broker the $700 billion fund to bail out banks at the height of the financial crisis and he promoted legislation to slow foreclosures and keep afloat Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac, the federally controlled companies that own or guarantee more than half of the $11 trillion in U.S. mortgages. . . .
Barney Frank breaks fundraising promises

Barney Frank breaks fundraising promises

Given how much money the Federal government and Barney Frank gave to financial institutions and given that he oversees their regulations, there is good reason for Mr. Frank not to take money from these financial institutions who took TARP money. But that promise is so 2009:

U.S. Rep. Barney Frank, in an intensifying clash with GOP upstart Sean Bielat, has pledged not to take campaign cash from lenders that got federal bailouts — yet has raked in more than $40,000 from bank execs and special interests connected to the staggering government loans, a Herald review found.

Frank vowed in February 2009 that he wouldn’t accept campaign donations from banks that received money under the $700 billion Troubled Asset Relief Program (TARP) or political action committees tied to such institutions.

But Frank has hauled in thousands from top execs at Bank of America, Citizens Bank, Wainwright Bank, JP Morgan Chase and other institutions that received billions in TARP money.

Just yesterday, Frank made new campaign finance disclosures showing he received $17,000 from top executives of Bank of America — including $2,000 from CEO Brian Moynihan. B of A received $45 billion in bailout money. In all, Frank has hauled in at least $27,000 since 2009 from bank execs — and $13,000 from PACs — connected to banks that received TARP funding, including:

• $5,000 earlier this month from the Bank of America Corp. Federal PAC;

• $10,000 in August and September from the Bipartisan PAC/Bank of New York Mellon Corp.; Mellon received $3 billion from TARP;

• $2,000 in June 2009 from the Financial Services Roundtable PAC, which counts TARP recipients B of A, JP Morgan Chase and Wells Fargo among its members; and

• $1,000 in March from U.S. Bancorp PAC; the Minnesota-based bank received more than $6 billion in TARP funds. . . .
Barney Frank Finally Being Called on the Carpet for protecting Freddie Mac and Fannie Mae

Barney Frank Finally Being Called on the Carpet for protecting Freddie Mac and Fannie Mae

This story gets some of the historical facts wrong about the mortgage crisis. For example, it fails to note that Barney Frank's statement was in response to the Bush Administration's attempt to curtail Freddie Mac and Fannie Mae's risky behavior. Still it is about time that Barney Frank is being called to task for his actions in creating the financial mess.

Remarks about Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac by U.S. Rep. Barney Frank, D-Mass., during a 2003 committee hearing have become a campaign issue in 2010.

Frank said then that the two government enterprises were strong enough to withstand any threats -- and that if they did get into trouble they would not get a government bailout. Sean Bielat, the Republican seeking Frank's seat, has a clip from 2003 on his campaign Web site, "Retire Barney," and Frank has been struggling to explain himself, The Boston Globe reports.

Frank acknowledges what he said in 2003 was "wrong on both counts." He said he was defending Fannie and Freddie because he was afraid the Bush administration wanted to shut them down. . . .


Conservative Michael Graham has this piece in the Boston Herald:

Has any congressman ever wreaked so much economic damage on his nation?

Even Frank admits that he had “ideological blinders” about Freddie/Fannie. His push to put the taxpayer on the hook for high-risk loans to special-interest borrowers was done in the name of liberal politics, not economic rationality.

He now claims he just didn’t know any better. But everybody knew better in the summer of 2008 when Frank claimed “Freddie and Fannie are not in danger.”

Two months later they were bankrupt.

Here’s just one frightening phrase from a memo in Frank’s congressional committee: Fannie and Freddie participated in transactions “that would not normally be considered to be economically viable.”

“Not considered economically viable” could be Frank’s campaign motto. From opposing Reaganomics to opposing welfare reform to opposing the Bush tax cuts, Frank’s been wrong on nearly every major issue since taking office in 1980.

Then there’s Frank’s (ahem) winning personality. Voters looking for a shaken hand or a well-kissed baby shouldn’t count on Barney. He’s branded himself as the “congressman most likely to scream at you as if he forgot to take his meds.”

Many voters remember Frank insulting a Lyndon LaRouche fan at a town hall (“Talking to you is like talking to a dining room table!”). But not long after he attacked the intelligence of a Harvard law student for asking legitimate questions about Frank’s role in the financial meltdown.

Cruel, cutting and cranky - is there really a political market for this? . . . .
What is the impact of this on Banks' willingness to lend?: "Barney Frank threatens to stop foreclosures

What is the impact of this on Banks' willingness to lend?: "Barney Frank threatens to stop foreclosures

Do these politicians understand that they help a few people out in the short run and really damage the loan market in the long run? Statements from Barney Frank and the President cause damage even if no bill is ever passed. From the AP:

A senior House Democrat threatened banks Wednesday that if they don't volunteer to save more homeowners from foreclosure, Congress will make them.
In a sternly worded statement, Rep. Barney Frank said Congress will revive legislation that would let bankruptcy judges write down a person's monthly mortgage payment if the number of loan modifications remain low.

Frank, chairman of the House Financial Services Committee, also said his committee won't consider legislation to help banks lend unless there is a "significant increase" in mortgage modifications.

Frank's statement was aimed at adding momentum to a deal struck Tuesday between Treasury Secretary Timothy Geithner and more than two dozen mortgage companies. The two sides agreed to set the goal of adjusting 500,000 loans by Nov. 1.

But it was far from clear whether that would happen.

Loan servicers say they are still trying to play catch up to a deluge of customer requests by hiring and training thousands of new employees. Banks also are trying to sort through which customers face a legitimate financial hardship.

Also, many loans have been bundled and sold to investors as securities, complicating efforts to modify the terms.

Congress tried earlier this spring to pass legislation that would give people a chance to keep their homes by filing for bankruptcy. But while President Barack Obama said he supported the measure, he did little to see it through and it was defeated amid an aggressive lobbying effort by banks. . . . .
Barney Frank and Anthony Weiner want Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac to relax mortgage lending rules

Barney Frank and Anthony Weiner want Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac to relax mortgage lending rules

This is very depressing. Nothing seems to have been learned by these politicians.

Two U.S. Democratic lawmakers want Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac to relax recently tightened standards for mortgages on new condominiums, saying they could threaten the viability of some developments and slow the housing-market recovery, the Wall Street Journal said.

In March, Fannie Mae said it would no longer guarantee mortgages on condos in buildings where fewer than 70 percent of the units have been sold, up from 51 percent, the paper said. Freddie Mac is due to implement similar policies next month, the paper said.

In a letter to the CEO's of both companies, Representatives Barney Frank, the chairman of the House Financial Services Committee, and Anthony Weiner warned that a 70 percent sales threshold "may be too onerous" and could lead condo buyers to shun new developments, according to the paper. . . .


This is what I wrote about these types of regulations over a year ago.

The WSJ points this out:

Back when the housing mania was taking off, Massachusetts Congressman Barney Frank famously said he wanted Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac to "roll the dice" in the name of affordable housing. That didn't turn out so well, but Mr. Frank has since only accumulated more power. And now he is returning to the scene of the calamity -- with your money. He and New York Representative Anthony Weiner have sent a letter to the heads of Fannie and Freddie exhorting them to lower lending standards for condo buyers.

You read that right. After two years of telling us how lax lending standards drove up the market and led to loans that should never have been made, Mr. Frank wants Fannie and Freddie to take more risk in condo developments with high percentages of unsold units, high delinquency rates or high concentrations of ownership within the development. . . .
So much for Obama's promise that business decisions would drive GM's decisions

So much for Obama's promise that business decisions would drive GM's decisions

From the Hill:

Rep Barney Frank (D-Mass.) won a stay of execution on Thursday for a General Motors plant in his district that the automaker had announced it would close.

No other lawmaker has managed to halt the GM ax. As chairman of the House Financial Services Committee Frank oversees the government's bailout program, known as TARP. Frank's staff said the lawmaker spokes with GM CEO Fritz Henderson on Wednesday and convinced him to keep the Norton, Mass. plant open for at least 14 months.

GM announced Monday in its bankruptcy and restructuring plans it would close of nine of its plants and idle three others. The automaker said it would also shutter three service and parts operations by the end of the year — one of which is in Frank's district.

"I greatly appreciate General Motors' willingness to take into consideration the wider needs of the company and especially the community," Frank said in a statement. "Keeping the facility open for this extra time gives workers a chance to look at other opportunities, while at the same time continuing to provide for their families." . . . .


From Bloomberg, here is teh administration's choice to run GM:

Edward E. Whitacre Jr. built AT&T Inc. into the biggest U.S. provider of telephone service over a 43-year-career. By his own admission, he becomes chairman of General Motors Corp. knowing nothing about the auto industry. . . . . . “I don’t know anything about cars,” Whitacre, 67, said yesterday in an interview after his appointment. “A business is a business, and I think I can learn about cars. I’m not that old, and I think the business principles are the same.” . . . .