IBJNews

Key House Republican praises Obama housing plan

Back to TopCommentsE-mailPrintBookmark and Share

The Obama administration's plan to gradually dissolve ailing housing giants Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac and to shrink the government's role in the mortgage market drew praise from House Republicans on Tuesday. The GOP chairman of the House Financial Services Committee called the proposal a good starting point for bipartisan negotiations over a housing overhaul.

The positive reaction came as Treasury Secretary Timothy Geithner told the committee that the Obama administration wants Congress to approve legislation within two years that would slowly dismantle Fannie and Freddie.

"Our hope is Congress will work with us to find a consensus for a long-term solution," Geithner told the lawmakers.

The positive words came at a hearing held three weeks after the Obama administration released a report calling for a stark reduction of the federal role in housing. The nation's housing market has been battered in recent years by low home prices and vast numbers of foreclosures, and politicians from both parties want to find a way to have private lenders — not the government — bear more of the burden.

"You don't want to run a system where the taxpayer is on the hook when things go bad," Geithner said.

Even so, it is unclear whether major legislation such as this could be approved during next year's presidential election campaign, when partisan divisions intensify.

Fannie and Freddie guarantee or own about half of all U.S. mortgages. Along with other federal agencies, they played a role in nearly 9 of 10 new mortgages over the past year, as private lenders have remained nervous about making new loans. The two companies nearly collapsed in 2008 as the housing market crumbled, but have been kept alive with $150 billion — so far — in taxpayer dollars.

As part of its plan for slowly eliminating Fannie and Freddie, the administration wants to lower the size of mortgages they can buy and raise the fees it charges — proposals designed to help private lenders move back into the mortgage market.

"The cost of a mortgage is going to be higher in the future," Geithner said.

In a written statement aides distributed at the hearing, committee Chairman Spencer Bachus, R-Ala., said the administration had included many GOP ideas in its plan.

"House Republicans are ready and willing to sit down with you, Mr. Secretary, and other administration officials, and our Senate colleagues as soon as possible to craft legislation to produce a comprehensive housing finance reform plan," it said.

Rep. Scott Garrett, R-N.J., another member of the committee, also noted the common ground between Republicans and the administration's plan, including the phase out of Fannie and Freddie and the move toward a privately financed mortgage system.

"I believe there is an opportunity for us to reach broad based consensus," Garrett said.

Democrats, many of whom have worried that the administration plan will make it harder for many families to get mortgages, spent less time praising Geithner.

The top Democrat on the committee, Rep. Barney Frank, D-Mass., criticized Republicans for failing to rally behind a single bill overhauling Fannie and Freddie, noting that the GOP criticized Democrats severely last year when the two companies were ignored by the financial overhaul law they enacted.

And Rep. David Scott, D-Ga., suggested the administration's plan might risk a situation where the private lending market does not provide enough money for the demand for mortgages.

Geithner warned the committee that a failure by Congress to enact legislation in two years would worry the financial markets and leave serious problems unaddressed.

In an apparent warning to some Republicans who want to quickly pull the government out of its role in supporting the mortgage system, Geithner also warned in his prepared statement that acting too fast would hurt as well.

While we are confident that the steps we have laid out follow the right path, haste would be counterproductive — possibly destabilizing the housing finance market or even disrupting the broader recovery," Geithner said.

Congress is trying to decide how to reshape the federal role in the housing market, which remains weak, with low prices and huge numbers of foreclosures in Florida, parts of the Southwest and other regions. While both political parties concede that changes are needed to protect taxpayers and revive private lending, Republicans tend to want to move more strongly while Democrats express more concerns about maintaining the government's role in helping lower-income families.

To wind down Fannie's and Freddie's roles in the market, the administration also wants to take steps for which it does not need congressional action, such as decreasing the size of loans the two companies may buy. Geithner also reiterated administration plans to constrict the Federal Housing Administration's role in making loans. Some Democrats and consumer advocacy groups have complained that such actions will make it harder for many families to purchase homes.

The administration's report offered three options for overhauling Fannie and Freddie. One would limit the government to helping poor and middle-class borrowers through agencies like the FHA. The second would have the government back private mortgages, but mostly during times of economic crisis. The third would have the government "reinsure" some mortgage investments that are already guaranteed by private insurers.

The two companies buy mortgages from banks and other primary lenders, package them together and sell them with a guarantee that investors would be repaid in case of default. That system helps keep interest rates lower and provides lenders with fresh cash to make additional loans.

ADVERTISEMENT

  • the wolf back in the chicken coop
    Obama,Barney Frank and Chris Dodd are the main reason we had the housing crisis.The Government allowing loans to buyers that had no incomes. The media just plain wants to forget that fact. Anything they have to do with the fix, will damn sure cost the taxpayers more. Not everyone in America can afford a house, wants to own one, or should own one.
    The illegals in Chicago found out they could get a loan,0% down, live in a nice house for more than 2 years and not pay a darn dime before getting the boot. They said "why would we rent amigo"!
    This country is great. Lets go back and have the local banks make the loans,like they did before, even if you have to put 10- 20 % down.
    If you have some skin in the property, you will be a better buyer. The retired folks might even make more that .05% interest on their Money market accounts or CDS's and be able to eat again.
  • What did Obama Dream up to Replace Them?
    All of us know that Obama would never takes steps to get the government out of the housing market! There's a catch! Whatever it will be, you can rest assured that it will be bigger, more socialist, will increase the national debt, and deliberately dimantle our democracy. This is NOT good news people! Wake up! NOW!!!!

Post a comment to this story

COMMENTS POLICY
We reserve the right to remove any post that we feel is obscene, profane, vulgar, racist, sexually explicit, abusive, or hateful.
 
You are legally responsible for what you post and your anonymity is not guaranteed.
 
Posts that insult, defame, threaten, harass or abuse other readers or people mentioned in IBJ editorial content are also subject to removal. Please respect the privacy of individuals and refrain from posting personal information.
 
No solicitations, spamming or advertisements are allowed. Readers may post links to other informational websites that are relevant to the topic at hand, but please do not link to objectionable material.
 
We may remove messages that are unrelated to the topic, encourage illegal activity, use all capital letters or are unreadable.
 

Messages that are flagged by readers as objectionable will be reviewed and may or may not be removed. Please do not flag a post simply because you disagree with it.

Sponsored by
ADVERTISEMENT

facebook - twitter on Facebook & Twitter

Follow on TwitterFollow IBJ on Facebook:
Follow on TwitterFollow IBJ's Tweets on these topics:
 
Subscribe to IBJ
  1. I am not by any means judging whether this is a good or bad project. It's pretty simple, the developers are not showing a hardship or need for this economic incentive. It is a vacant field, the easiest for development, and the developer already has the money to invest $26 million for construction. If they can afford that, they can afford to pay property taxes just like the rest of the residents do. As well, an average of $15/hour is an absolute joke in terms of economic development. Get in high paying jobs and maybe there's a different story. But that's the problem with this ask, it is speculative and users are just not known.

  2. Shouldn't this be a museum

  3. I don't have a problem with higher taxes, since it is obvious that our city is not adequately funded. And Ballard doesn't want to admit it, but he has increased taxes indirectly by 1) selling assets and spending the money, 2) letting now private entities increase user fees which were previously capped, 3) by spending reserves, and 4) by heavy dependence on TIFs. At the end, these are all indirect tax increases since someone will eventually have to pay for them. It's mathematics. You put property tax caps ("tax cut"), but you don't cut expenditures (justifiably so), so you increase taxes indirectly.

  4. Marijuana is the safest natural drug grown. Addiction is never physical. Marijuana health benefits are far more reaching then synthesized drugs. Abbott, Lilly, and the thousands of others create poisons and label them as medication. There is no current manufactured drug on the market that does not pose immediate and long term threat to the human anatomy. Certainly the potency of marijuana has increased by hybrids and growing techniques. However, Alcohol has been proven to destroy more families, relationships, cause more deaths and injuries in addition to the damage done to the body. Many confrontations such as domestic violence and other crimes can be attributed to alcohol. The criminal activities and injustices that surround marijuana exists because it is illegal in much of the world. If legalized throughout the world you would see a dramatic decrease in such activities and a savings to many countries for legal prosecutions, incarceration etc in regards to marijuana. It indeed can create wealth for the government by collecting taxes, creating jobs, etc.... I personally do not partake. I do hope it is legalized throughout the world.

  5. Build the resevoir. If built this will provide jobs and a reason to visit Anderson. The city needs to do something to differentiate itself from other cities in the area. Kudos to people with vision that are backing this project.

ADVERTISEMENT