“Capture” of Regulators by Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac-Becker

 

 Political economists describe the process whereby government officials end up being the servants rather than the masters of the firms they are regulating as the “capture” by the industry of their regulators. When regulators are captured, much of what they do is motivated, consciously or not, by a desire to help the companies they are regulating, even when the social goals that the regulators should pursue are very different.

 A famous illustration of capture is given by the way airlines were regulated under the Civil Aeronautics Board (CAB) from 1940 to 1978. Large airlines of those times, like American and Delta, naturally had a strong incentive to try to keep new airlines from entering the industry. As a compliant ally of the airline industry, the CAB did not approve one new interstate airline during this almost 40-year period. Many airlines entered the industry when President Carter abolished the CAB, and some of the old standbys, such as Pan Am and Eastern, ceased operations because they could not adjust to a competitive environment.

 An economically disastrous example of the capture theory is provided by the disgraceful regulation of the two mortgages housing behemoths, Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac, before and leading up to the financial crisis. In their fascinating recent book, Reckless Endangerment, Gretchen Morgenson and Joshua Rosner explore in great detail how Fannie Mae used political connections and intimidation of anyone who stood in their way to gain a highly dominant position in the residential mortgage market. The authors’ show that various government officials, including congressmen and presidential cabinet members, closed their eyes to what these two government-supported enterprises (GSE) were doing. They allowed them to take on enormous risks, while publicly defending their behavior as not being highly risky.

 

Fannie Mae was created in 1938 as a government enterprise that purchased mortgages from banks that loaned money to homebuyers. It eventually became a private investment company regulated by the government, where investors expected that the government would help out if these companies got into trouble. By the beginning of the crisis in 2008, Fannie and Freddie held or guaranteed about half of the United States’ $12 trillion of assets in the residential mortgage market. In September 2008, both Fannie and Freddie were taken over by the federal government when they became insolvent. The loss to taxpayers is likely to be in the hundreds of billions of dollars because many of the mortgages are subprime and of little value.

 Reckless Endangerment shows how the chief executive officers of Fannie Mae furthered the reach and reduced the regulatory control over their company by assiduously courting congressmen, Fed officials, the Congressional Budget Office, high-level officials of the U.S. Treasury, the Secretary of Housing and Urban Development, and major economists. The prominent and well informed congressman, Barney Frank, gets especially sharp criticism for his continual support of Fannie and Freddie while he was initially a member, and later chairman, of the House Financial Services Committee, the powerful committee charged with oversight of the housing and financial sectors. Barney Frank remained an unwavering supporter of Fannie and Freddie until 2010, when he admitted that they should have been more closely regulated. In a bit of irony, he is a principal author of the 2010 Dodd-Frank act that attempts to reform the financial sector mainly by giving even greater discretion to the regulators.

 Fannie and Freddie had so much money and political power at their disposal that it became risky for anyone to oppose what they wanted: large increases in their holdings of subprime and other mortgages, with no questions asked. Different government agencies that were supposed to either regulate or oversee these GSEs ended up as advocates instead. Well-known economists wrote favorable articles downplaying the riskiness of the holdings of Fannie and Freddie. These articles were sometimes published in journals or other publications sponsored by these companies.

 A few government officials were brave enough to risk the wrath of Fannie and Freddie. The authors give particular praise to June O’Neill (I am proud to say she is a former student of mine), who was then head of the Congressional Budget Office. A member of her staff wrote a report that was critical of the degree of risk to taxpayers from the assets held by Fannie and Freddie. These companies tried to get June to suppress the report- she refused- and then a few members of the House of Representatives in cahoots with Fannie and Freddie subjected her to vicious attacks when she steadfastly defended the report in testimony before Congress.

 The Fed also comes in for sharp criticism by the authors. One example discussed was a Boston Fed publication in October 1992 claiming that minorities were widely discriminated against in gaining access to mortgage credit. The media, many regulators, and some economists widely praised this study as offering definitive evidence of extensive discrimination against minorities in the credit market. Fannie Mae’s head, the politically astute James A. Johnson, seized on this reaction to promote a large increase in mortgages to poor residents of African-American and Hispanic communities with bad credit histories.

 Since I had written a book on discrimination against minorities in the economy, I was curious to see how the authors reached such definite conclusions about mortgage discrimination. I became convinced after reading their study that it was deeply flawed, and failed to show what they claimed about discrimination in the market for mortgages. The theory of discrimination against minorities implies that minority applicants for mortgages would need to have better credit records and higher employment stability than comparable whites in order to obtain mortgages. This suggests that default rates would be lower and profitability higher on loans to minorities.

 The study’s authors presented no evidence to support these implications of discrimination theory. All the circumstantial evidence, and some real evidence, showed just the opposite. I published my criticisms in a column for Business Week in 1993 (reprinted on pp. 119-120 in The Economics of Life, a collection of my Business Week articles). The Boston Fed and their supporters tried defending this article against my attack and those by others, but their arguments were weak. Nevertheless, the view persisted that the Fed had “proved” widespread discrimination in the credit market against minorities, and this helped justify an expansion of mortgage loans to families with low incomes and poor employment records.

 The Fannie and Freddie story does not demonstrate that government officials, congressmen, economists, and others who sang their praises were corrupt, although undoubtedly some were. But rather that powerful companies and industries can bring massive resources to bear in promoting their interests through lobbying, congressional testimony, financial support to help political candidates win elections, attacks on critics, hiring experts to promote their views, and in many other ways. The result is, as Simon Newcomb, an outstanding American economist and astronomer of the 19^th century, said a long time ago, “one cent per year out of each inhabitant would make an annual income of $500,000. By expending a fraction of {their} profit, the proposers of policy A could make the country respond with appeals in their favor…Thus year after year every man in public life would hear what would seem to be the unanimous voice of public opinion on the side opposed to the public interests” (p. 459 of his 1885 Principles of Political Economy).

 I am not claiming that the reckless behavior of Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac was solely, or even mainly, responsible for the financial crisis. Enormous blame must go to the commercial and investment bankers who took on vastly excessive risks that endangered their companies and the economy. Nevertheless, that officials charged with overseeing Fannie and Freddie protected the interests of the companies instead of the interests of taxpayers and the general public does not only offer resounding support for the capture theory. For this capture of regulators also inflicted great harm on taxpayers, the American and world economies, and many of the families who exposed their life savings to undue risks in the mortgage market.

 

 

 

Comments

[MBT Sale]

Thanks for the cool badgees! When do we find out who the Petties nominees are???

[cheap computers]

I just stumbled upon your blog after reading your blog posts wanted to say thanks.i highly appreciate the blogger for doing this effort.

[FourLeaf]

I was always thinking,if prince charles is just an http://lanlinweddingdresses.blogspot.com fashion dresses , would 19 years old Diana marry him before kowning he has lover. Recently one of her tapes was opened to the public, she said the wedding day was the http://fashionupup.wordpress.com/2011/07/06/the-label-responsible-for-the-navy-dress-worn-by-kate black dresses in her life----“My heart was as quiet as death, I feet as a lamp waiting to be killed.”

[herbal incense]

It's all about 'Gun and Butter' and at present we just can't afford Guns. Perhaps, if we reinstitute the lost taxes, we can afford both Gun and Butter. Thanks.

[Christian Louboutin Outlet]

someday i'd like to give it a real go, but for now, this feels done but not overdone. it's loose and completely off my neck. ahhh...much better. all it took was a handful of bobby pins

[Discount Herve Leger]

Riots might be less common here because of the social and spatial distancing that protects people from marauders but also prevents people from forming organic communities with any semblance of a common social life that Europe continues to enjoy--at least for now.

[Pier 59 Studios]

Informative post..A famous illustration of capture is given by the way airlines were regulated under the Civil Aeronautics Board (CAB)in earlier 1970's..

[nike shoes]

Thanks for division this attractive post. There are some points here that I have not hear of earlier than. Perfect!Just keep your work!Once again, thanks for this useful post. This will be very helpful for me.

[günstige ugg]

"Wenn Sie es ernst meinen mit Joggen zum Chief Executive bekommen passieren, du wirst viele Stimmzettel vergessen", berichtete Tag Jones, der Vorsitzende mit Reis Uni, verbunden [url=http://www.uggkaufen.net/]günstige ugg[/url] , Universität Division mit der Politischen Technologie verbunden. "Mit wie ein Kollege mit Kongress, gibt es die unglaublich große Übereinstimmung mit unabhängig davon, ob jeder tun Ihrem derzeitigen Job und auch jemand nicht verbunden. Und es ist ein extrem unkompliziert ein einziges für den Einzelnen bewusst zu sein, wie die Arbeit Artikel über Institution. "Doch während Paul und Bachmann out besitzen über 250 Stimmen jedes einzelnen in diesem Jahr verpasst haben, sie beide gleich bekommen viel besser" Teilnahme Berichte "im Vergleich mit den jüngsten Abgeordneten-turned-Präsidentschaftskandidaten., [url=http://www.uggkaufen.net/kids-stiefel-wholesale-2.html]Kinder stiefel[/url] , an dieser Stelle aus der '08 Rennen um das Präsidentenamt, dann-Sen. Barack Obama verpasst haben über 30 Prozent aus dem Senat Stimmen. Die ultimative republikanische Kandidat, Senator Jon McCain, hatte ihre Stimme angestellt weniger als 50% der Zeit. "Sie viele Übung," Jarding zusätzliche. "Ich bekomme gar nicht gefunden, so es Probleme mit niemandem in der Politik war. ".

[nike shox r4]

Beautuful article, is very important . Have you more information about that?

[Justin Bieber Shoes]

Hi ,thanks for this post.
******The job market is constantly moving and growing and if HR professionals are not on top of this movement they and their company can be doomed. As second city alum and HR professional, I've always advocated for basic improv training not just in hr, but for all professionals in general.

[Ryan hard money lenders]

I can only one thing that should we point a finger at Fannie or Freddie? I think "no" because government also gained a lot of benefits for helping them and in the end, an investor, whose a common man has to suffer because he is sitting there with his property after spending a lot of money on it and now, he gets to know that nobody is there to take him out of that situation.

[discounted p4 laptops]

One of the options the default blogger comments lack is the option to reply to an individual comment.In fact it was one of the reasons i changed from blogger comments to Disqus comments.I have however come across a cool blogger hack that will enable comment replies for blogger.

http://www.refurbishedp4.com/

[discounted laptops]

One of the options the default blogger comments lack is the option to reply to an individual comment.In fact it was one of the reasons i changed from blogger comments to Disqus comments.I have however come across a cool blogger hack that will enable comment replies for blogger.

http://www.cheapestusedcomputers.com/

[wedding520]

例えば、プロ結婚式ドレス
のテーラーから裾は非常に基本的な裾のための$ 55の複数の層のための$ 200までの範囲かもしれないが、ウエディングドレス縫製の部屋の周りに自分の道を知っている人にとっては困難な雑用ではないかもしれません。それはすべてのガウンの構造に依存する。裾は非常に単純であるが、あなたのカラードレス 格安
は、裾でのレースがある場合、それはより広範な作業を必要とするかもしれないことに注意することができます。<

[cheapestcomputer]

Make it Easy to Comment I leave a lot of comments on a lot of blogs each week – but there is one situation where I rarely leave a comment – even if the post deserves it – blogs that require me to login before making a comment. Maybe I’m lazy (actually there’s no maybe about it) or maybe there’s something inside me that worries about giving out my personal details..

http://www.cheapestusedcomputer.com/

[Federico Pignatelli]

`In their fascinating recent book Joshua Rosner explore in great detail how Fannie Mae used political connections and intimidation of anyone who stood in their way to gain a highly dominant position in the residential mortgage market.

well i like your blog very much..

[Cheap Moncler Sale]

Having higher numbers of occupants per existing structure doesn't bode well for selling off the homes having fallen or about to fall into the laps of bankers.All of the sci-fi stories pointed to a shorter work week, more leisure time and industries developing around increased leisure time coupled with the income to enjoy it. We have nothing like that in place or even in mind. Instead those desperate for any kind of job are to work longer hours for less pay and be appreciative for their opportunity.

[Air Force One]

We have nothing like that in place or even in mind. Instead those desperate for any kind of job are to work longer hours for less pay and be appreciative for their opportunity.

[Air Max 2011]

The Occupy Movement and everyone else worried about earnings inequality should be emphasizing the need to find ways to encourage more high school dropouts and high school graduates to get the required background and study habits so that they can, and want to, continue on for a college education.

[Monster Beats Dre]

There‘s always going to be people that hurt you so what you have to do is keep on trusting and just be more careful about who you trust next time around.

[Monster Beats Studio]

As compared to the post-World War II era, Americans with high school diplomas today are much less likely to find manufacturing jobs, because there are 2-3 billion people in emerging economies with similar skills who are willing to work more cheaply in order to have a shot at attaining a middle class standard of living.

[Cheap Scarf Online]

Global demographics instruct that manufacturing job growth in nations with emerging economies will continue to outpace manufacturing job growth in America.

[Paul Smith]

Merci beaucoup pour votre article.

[Donne Russe]

Fannie Mea and Freddie had so much money and political power at their disposal that it became riskfull for anyone to oppose what they wanted!!!