White House philosophy stoked mortgage bonfire

[WA_Vol]

Just wondering what the point is of starting a poll where you never intend to acknowledge the results.

If the majority of people think Congress is to blame I'm suppose to agree with them?

 

[WA_Vol]

Anybody looking to oversimplify this set of economic circumstances and saddle a particular party with the blame is biased.

If one party has control of both Congress and the White House during a critical period when this problem needed to be addressed and didn't then yes I think they should get blame.

Republicans had control of the White House from 2000-2008 and Congress from 1992-2006 they had plenty of opportunities to address this and didn't. The whole focus of ths administration was Iraq when it should have been problems at home.

 

[therealUT]

I agree with most of what you said there.

However Bush lost the support of the people when he went into Iraq. Bush let this housing mess go to the back burner. His whole administration was focused on fighting a war on the other side of the globe while ignoring the problems at home until it was too late.

I did not realize that our Federal Government is restricted to pursuing only one activity at a time...
Posted via VolNation Mobile

 

[MG1968]

If one party has control of both Congress and the White House during a critical period when this problem needed to be addressed and didn't then yes I think they should get blame.

Republicans had control of the White House from 2000-2008 and Congress from 1992-2006 they had plenty of opportunities to address this and didn't. The whole focus of ths administration was Iraq when it should have been problems at home.

you keep getting that wrong, any particular reason why you choose to ignore the democrat majorities in both houses of congress for the first two years of the Clinton Administration?

oh, and Bill Clinton was President until January 21, 2001.

 

[volinbham]

I don't dispute Congress had a role, what I dispute is that the Republicans in Congress aren't at fault.

They had control of Congress in 01 and 03 when "supposedly" Bush tried to push reforms through according to your YouTube link. How often does a Republican Congress not back a Republican President. Use your head, that was a garbage story.

It makes you look biased when you try to blame the democrats for this mess. The republicans controlled Congress from 94-06 and the White House from 01-08 and you want to lay this on the democrats? They haven't had the power to be responsible for this.

Reread my posts - I'm blaming a whole range of folks. You started the thread by putting the blame squarely on Bush - I guess that makes you look biased by your standards.

Also, if you examine the stories about Congress you'll see near uniform action by Dems to block the Bush attempts at reform - clearly some Reps sided with the Dems but to absolve the Dem Congress is absurd.

 

[WA_Vol]

Reread my posts - I'm blaming a whole range of folks. You started the thread by putting the blame squarely on Bush - I guess that makes you look biased by your standards.

Also, if you examine the stories about Congress you'll see near uniform action by Dems to block the Bush attempts at reform - clearly some Reps sided with the Dems but to absolve the Dem Congress is absurd.

Explain to me how the Democrats blocked this, when Congress was a Republican majority for Bush's first 6 years?

Some of the Democrats are at fault, i.e. Frank, but it's a cop out when the Republicans have a majority in Congress.

Bush was in better position then anyone to address this. He could have made reforming this industry a cornerstone of his Presidency, instead he focused most of his attention on Iraq.

You can't ignore a problem for 8 years and then when it can no longer be ignored say its not your fault.

 

[KB5252]

Bush was in better position then anyone to address this. He could have made reforming this industry a cornerstone of his Presidency, instead he chose to focus most of his administrations attention on Iraq. I think he should deservedly get most of the blame.

What about those who told us, the American people, that there was no problem what so ever when Bush and several other high profile repubs wanted to look into the situation? Would they not own at least as much responsibility as Bush? I place blame squarely on all involved, through many presidencies.

It looks like you aren't being very objective here.

 

[WA_Vol]

The Republicans have held the White House for 8 years, 2000-2008.
The Repubicans held Congress for 12 years, 1994-2006.

How do you not blame the majority party in government for not addressing this?

 

[KB5252]

The Republicans have held the White House for 8 years, 2000-2008.
The Repubicans held Congress for 12 years, 1994-2006.

How do you not blame the majority party in government for not addressing this?

For the reasons I stated above. That is why I stated it as a failure of government, period. During this same time do you really think that had democrats proposed something be done about this the repubs would have balked?

It is all about playing politics and as i stated both sides are guilty. There was an attempt made four or five years ago to address this issue and there were democrats who claimed it was a witch hunt and that nothing was wrong, that repubs were inventing the problem and implied racism in doing so.

Also even though dems may have been in the minority where were their attempts to address the issue? Had they pounded their fists on their desks and demanded action to no avail your case might hold water here.

 

[BigPapaVol]

For the reasons I stated above. That is why I stated it as a failure of government, period. During this same time do you really think that had democrats proposed something be done about this the repubs would have balked?

It is all about playing politics and as i stated both sides are guilty. There was an attempt made four or five years ago to address this issue and there were democrats who claimed it was a witch hunt and that nothing was wrong, that repubs were inventing the problem and implied racism in doing so.

it was also a massive failure of investor due diligence

 

[KB5252]

it was also a massive failure of investor due diligence

Absolutely.

 

[MG1968]

The Republicans have held the White House for 8 years, 2000-2008.
The Repubicans held Congress for 12 years, 1994-2006.

How do you not blame the majority party in government for not addressing this?

you finally got the Congressional time line correct, but continue for forget that Bill Clinton was President for every single day of the year 2000.

also, the 1994-2006 GOP majorities were never similar to the majorities the dems will have on January 20th. Democrats could stall legislation in committee and have it never see a floor vote. Remember Bush's Judicial nominees?

 

[WA_Vol]

you finally got the Congressional time line correct, but continue for forget that Bill Clinton was President for every single day of the year 2000.

also, the 1994-2006 GOP majorities were never similar to the majorities the dems will have on January 20th. Democrats could stall legislation in committee and have it never see a floor vote. Remember Bush's Judicial nominees?

You blame Clinton but you won't blame Bush and your not biased?

 

[MG1968]

Bush deserves some criticism, sure. Is he solely to blame? no, not even close.

are you square on the time lines yet? Bush has been President since January 2001.

I freely admit my bias, but that doesn't keep me from detecting the BS that you're attempting to perpetrate with your "blame bush early, often and only" garbage.

 

[WA_Vol]

Bush deserves some criticism, sure. Is he solely to blame? no, not even close.

are you square on the time lines yet? Bush has been President since January 2001.

I freely admit my bias, but that doesn't keep me from detecting the BS that you're attempting to perpetrate with your "blame bush early, often and only" garbage.

Bush deserves more blame then anyone. When you point the finger at Clinton, or Carter, or a Democratic Congressmen, all your doing is trying to cloud the issue.

When your the CEO of a company and the company loses money or fails then that CEO takes responsibilty. He doesn't blame someone who was CEO 8 years ago or 30 years ago, he's held responsible. But that's your peculiar line of logic that your using.

So when Clinton would have added all these new regulations to prevent banks from making bad loans, that was going to stop Bush and the Republican Congress when they took office and proceeded to make it easier to get home loans? That was one of Bush's major pushes, increase home ownership. We see how that worked out.

 

[WA_Vol]

From 2004:

Bush pushes home ownership opportunities for minorities - The Boston Globe

PHOENIX -- President Bush traveled to two swing states with sizable Hispanic populations yesterday and talked up his proposals to increase home ownership opportunities for minorities.
"Not enough minorities own their own homes," the president said during a stop at a carpenters' training center in Phoenix, which followed a talk about home ownership at the New Mexico State Fairgrounds in Albuquerque. "And it seems to me it makes sense to encourage all to own homes."
In New Mexico and Arizona, Bush gave a modified version of what has become his standard campaign speech, including two topics his administration considers of particular interest to Hispanics: immigration and housing. He announced that the minority home ownership rate edged above 50 percent for the first time at the end of last year, and told audiences that his administration will continue to work to close the "minority home ownership gap," in which the percentage of white homeowners exceeds the percentage of minorities who own their own homes.
White House officials have frequently noted the continuing increase in minority home ownership rates, linking it yesterday with the president's call in June 2002 to increase the number of minority homeowners by 5.5 million by the end of this decade.

I guess a democratic congressman held a gun to his head and forced him to give that speech.

 

[MG1968]

ok, fine.

when the economy goes to hell under your hero Obama, don't come in here bitching about how it's all the Bush administration's fault.

spreading the blame around to the people who richly deserve it isn't "clouding" the issue, it's called intellectual honesty.

 

[MG1968]

Just the Facts: The Administration's Unheeded Warnings About the Systemic Risk Posed by the GSEs

For many years the President and his Administration have not only warned of the systemic consequences of financial turmoil at a housing government-sponsored enterprise (GSE) but also put forward thoughtful plans to reduce the risk that either Fannie Mae or Freddie Mac would encounter such difficulties. President Bush publicly called for GSE reform 17 times in 2008 alone before Congress acted. Unfortunately, these warnings went unheeded, as the President's repeated attempts to reform the supervision of these entities were thwarted by the legislative maneuvering of those who emphatically denied there were problems.

001

April: The Administration's FY02 budget declares that the size of Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac is "a potential problem," because "financial trouble of a large GSE could cause strong repercussions in financial markets, affecting Federally insured entities and economic activity."

2002

May: The President calls for the disclosure and corporate governance principles contained in his 10-point plan for corporate responsibility to apply to Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac. (OMB Prompt Letter to OFHEO, 5/29/02)

and so on.

edit: and btw, private home ownership is a bedrock philosophy of capitalism and conservatism. I don't think Bush wanted people with 30k/year incomes buying 300k dollar homes. True capitalism would have prevented the subprime loan market from ever being created. Fannie and Freddie prevented capitalism from working, Barney Frank and Chris Dodd and ACORN prevented capitalism from working.

 

[GAVol]

From 2004:

Bush pushes home ownership opportunities for minorities - The Boston Globe



I guess a democratic congressman held a gun to his head and forced him to give that speech.

...and about 30 seconds on Google yields this statement released by HUD back in the mid 90s at the direction of Bill Clinton and Henry Cisneros.

For many potential homebuyers, the lack of cash available to accumulate the required downpayment and closing costs is the major impediment to purchasing a home. Other households do not have sufficient available income to to make the monthly payments on mortgages financed at market interest rates for standard loan terms. Financing strategies, fueled by the creativity and resources of the private and public sectors, should address both of these financial barriers to homeownership.

This isn't to say that Clinton deserves more or less blame than Bush. The point is that this was a widely held - and very politically correct - belief. It never really occurred to anyone that the process would be so heavily abused or that estate values would plummet to the degree that they did.

 

[KB5252]

...and about 30 seconds on Google yields this statement released by HUD back in the mid 90s at the direction of Bill Clinton and Henry Cisneros.


This isn't to say that Clinton deserves more or less blame than Bush. The point is that this was a widely held - and very politically correct - belief. It never really occurred to anyone that the process would be so heavily abused or that estate values would plummet to the degree that they did.

Damn you for injecting logic and facts that proclaim it is anything other than Bush's fault and not a failure of government to act in general and buyers buying more than they could pay for and so on. It is much easier for some to believe the blame falls on one person, especially when they can't stand that individual.

 

[WA_Vol]

...and about 30 seconds on Google yields this statement released by HUD back in the mid 90s at the direction of Bill Clinton and Henry Cisneros.


This isn't to say that Clinton deserves more or less blame than Bush. The point is that this was a widely held - and very politically correct - belief. It never really occurred to anyone that the process would be so heavily abused or that estate values would plummet to the degree that they did.

Damn you for injecting logic and facts that proclaim it is anything other than Bush's fault and not a failure of government to act in general and buyers buying more than they could pay for and so on. It is much easier for some to believe the blame falls on one person, especially when they can't stand that individual.

Bush made increasing home ownership a fundamental part of his campaign for re-election. Show me where Clinton did that?

There were numerous warnings giving to Bush about the dangers of this, from Greenspan on, and Bush ignored them.

 

[MG1968]

Bush made increasing home ownership a fundamental part of his campaign for re-election. Show me where Clinton did that?

There were numerous warnings giving to Bush about the dangers of this, from Greenspan on, and Bush ignored them.

wow, you just completely ignored links to articles where Bush sought reform of the mortgage market while at the same time continue the spin that Bush's desire for increased home ownership meant that he wanted more and more unqualified people buying homes they couldn't afford.

 

[KB5252]

Bush made increasing home ownership a fundamental part of his campaign for re-election. Show me where Clinton did that?

There were numerous warnings giving to Bush about this, from Greenspan on, and Bush ignored them.

I have already stated he has some portion of blame assigned to him. You put your blinders on and attribute blame solely on him all you want. If you want to forget those prominent members of the democratic party told us "there is no problem", the republicans are making it up and so on.

Just put your head in the sand and believe what you want to, you will be in good company, apparently just like you those who were overseeing Freddie and Fannie agree with you, only they were wrong.....hhhhmmmmm, interesting.

 

[WA_Vol]

That's my problem, "some portion of blame" should be "most of the blame" for this failed policy.

Again from 2004, USATODAY.com - Bush ties his economic policies to home ownership

"We want more people owning their own home in America," Bush said. His goal is to have 5.5 million minority homeowners in the country by the end of the decade.
Touting his tax cuts as the economy's savior — and pointing to the strong housing market as proof — Bush said "more people own their own home now than ever." More than 50% of minorities owned their own homes in the last three months of 2003 for the first time ever, the president said.

Home ownership is the focus of another Bush appearance Friday in Phoenix as the president tries to offset Democratic criticism about lackluster job creation in the recovering economy. He was visiting a carpenter training center and talking to three first time home buyers, a construction foreman and Dough McCarron, the president of the United Brotherhood of Carpenters and Joiners of America.

Bush's talk of promoting an "ownership society," the idea that Americans own their own homes and own and manage their own health care and retirement plans and small businesses, is a key re-election campaign theme.

Late last year, Bush signed the American Dream Down Payment Act to help families that can afford monthly mortgage payments but not the down payment or closing costs associated with buying a house. The legislation authorizes $200 million a year in down payment assistance to at least 40,000 low-income families.

That really sounds like a President who was pushing reforms in the mortgage industry. But that's how you try to portray Bush.

 

[MG1968]

That's my problem, "some portion" should be "most of" the responsiblity for this failed policy.

Again from 2004, USATODAY.com - Bush ties his economic policies to home ownership



That really sounds like a President who was pushing reforms in the mortgage industry. But that's how you try to portray Bush. Absolutely ridiculous.

read the last paragraph of the article you quoted very carefully.

Late last year, Bush signed the American Dream Down Payment Act to help families that can afford monthly mortgage payments but not the down payment or closing costs associated with buying a house. The legislation authorizes $200 million a year in down payment assistance to at least 40,000 low-income families.

now, tell me how that philosophy is in any way akin to mortgages being offered to people who can't possibly make their payments.