McCain and Palin on bailouts: We need fundamental reform
posted at 2:20 pm on September 9, 2008 by Ed Morrissey
Share on Facebook | regular view
John McCain and Sarah Palin co-authored a Wall Street Journal essay regarding the bailout of Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac, which will cost taxpayers hundreds of billions of dollars. Both campaigns have reluctantly supported Treasury Secretary Henry Paulson’s decision to pull the trigger on the government takeover of both organizations, as they had declined into insolvency or close enough to make the margin irrelevant. However, as McCain and Palin insist, this shows the folly of government-sponsored entities in what should be a free market:
Enduring reform of Fannie and Freddie is a key first step. We will make sure that they are permanently restructured and downsized, and no longer use taxpayer backing to serve lobbyists, management, boards and shareholders.
Treasury has broadly followed the McCain plan, outlined months ago, and gets at the short-term heart of the problem. That plan reinforces the federal commitment to meet our obligations and get this mess behind us. It replaces management and board members. It requires that shareholders take losses first. It puts taxpayers first in line for any repayments. And it terminates future lobbying, which was one of the primary contributors to this great debacle.
Along with the commitment of taxpayers’ dollars, we should make market reforms to help ensure that we do not face this problem again. We will make sure the marketplace understands its obligations. Homeowners must be able to understand the terms and obligations of their mortgages. In return, they have an obligation to provide truthful financial information, and should be subject to penalty if they do not. Policies must be in place to ensure that homeowners provide a responsible down payment of equity in the initial purchase of a loan. In the future, Fannie, Freddie or any government organization should never insure a loan when the homeowner doesn’t have enough of his or her own capital in the investment.
These two GSEs combined the worst of private- and public-sector management. They took far more risks than appropriate because they knew they could rely on government intervention if they got into trouble. Rather than reform their management processes, they spent hundreds of millions of dollars lobbying Congress for a laissez-faire approach to their business despite the sweetheart lending rates and federal support they received. Meanwhile, they paid their executives extravagantly, with Obama adviser Jim Johnson having hidden most of his $21 million in compensation from the shareholders.
The government doesn’t need to prop up GSEs in a free market lending environment. John McCain himself made this point in July. He said that one consequence of the bailout he saw as inevitable should be the abandonment of this model:
Even with those terms, sticking Main Street Americans with Wall Street’s bill is a shame on Washington. If elected, I’ll continue my crusade for the right reform of the institutions: making them go away. I will get real regulation that limits their ability to borrow, shrinks their size until they are no longer a threat to our economy, and privatizes and eliminates their links to the government.
The lack of accountability and the removal of risk both led to irresponsible practices and corrupt behavior within both GSEs. Had Freddie and Fannie been actual private enterprises, they would have had to fix those problems in a competitive market, and a failure would have left a larger number of competitors to pick up the pieces.
While Treasury spends our money on this failure, Congress should ensure that they do not allow a repeat of the same structure that caused it. McCain has been a strong voice on this issue for some time, and hopefully people will begin listening to it.
You must be logged in to post a comment.

















Blowback
Note from Hot Air management: This section is for comments from Hot Air's community of registered readers. Please don't assume that Hot Air management agrees with or otherwise endorses any particular comment just because we let it stand. A reminder: Anyone who fails to comply with our terms of use may lose their posting privilege.
Trackbacks/Pings
Trackback URL
Comments
Comment pages:
Remove CEO training wheels no more bailouts….
sven10077 on September 9, 2008 at 2:23 PM
This was very smart of the McCampaign. I love the aggressive nature they have taken on issues.
If elected, I hope they will investigate the laundry list of crooks involved in this mess. Barney Frank is one.
carbon_footprint on September 9, 2008 at 2:25 PM
KentAllard on September 9, 2008 at 2:26 PM
Truly, this campaign is becoming a thing of beauty to watch.
Typhoon on September 9, 2008 at 2:27 PM
So, Obama was what, 3rd in money from Fannie/Freddie Mac in the Senate, and his one of his advisors* made $21M off of them?
Oh yeah, that’s change we can believe in…
*I’ve read in a few places that Jim Johnson was seriously considered for the VP role, before another scandal knocked him out of the consideration.
18-1 on September 9, 2008 at 2:27 PM
Jim Johnson is another.
carbon_footprint on September 9, 2008 at 2:28 PM
Needs the red meat picture, Ed. This is how the ticket represents itself and that’s what is driving interest.
a capella on September 9, 2008 at 2:29 PM
No I am fairly certain it WILL cost us hundreds of billions….
Bush did not take the keys for a “maybe”.
sven10077 on September 9, 2008 at 2:29 PM
Obama is a true lightweight that hasn’t a clue how the government runs the country. The devil is in the details, and Obama is greener than goat $hit. He won’r be able to reform anything that matters in a positive way because of his inexperience in the real world of government.
saiga on September 9, 2008 at 2:29 PM
Change we can afford…
beatcanvas on September 9, 2008 at 2:30 PM
Jamie Gerelick is another.
carbon_footprint on September 9, 2008 at 2:31 PM
This is very good–this is what we need to see much more of. To win this, they’re going to have to, as a famous general once said, “Be there firstest with the mostest.” They have to keep Obama reacting…this is a position he’s not used to being in…keep hammering away at the issues…force him to address real issues and not talking points.
Good going–now–keep it up!
Matt Helm on September 9, 2008 at 2:31 PM
Yeah if he tries to play the “why didn’t you do anything about it?”
McCain gets to tee off on him and say, “well if there’s one thing I’ve learned in that time is convincing 100 people to agree for real change is hard Barry….you ain’t pegged that yet?”
sven10077 on September 9, 2008 at 2:32 PM
Fannie Mae has been following Countrywide Mortgage, buying up the homes Countrywide forecloses on, covering the loans Countrywide bought from shady mortgage companies like AFS. If anyone – and hopefully it will be McCain-Palin – starts investigating this mess, they better be wearing a good pair of waders.
AubieJon on September 9, 2008 at 2:33 PM
This is the best paragraph:
Its good that they’re willing to tell the truth and not let homeowners off the hook for taking stupid mortgages.
jimmy the notable on September 9, 2008 at 2:33 PM
Big Mac and the Huntress want financial markets reform?
Hank Paulson’s already proposed it!
Eat your eyes out:
http://www.ustreas.gov/offices/domestic-finance/regulatory-blueprint/
and
http://www.ustreas.gov/press/releases/reports/pwgpolicystatemktturmoil_03122008.pdf
Shirotayama on September 9, 2008 at 2:33 PM
So about that Palin “gaffe”…
yeah…
Damiano on September 9, 2008 at 2:33 PM
You better buckle up…It will soon get a lot bumpier. The higher you go, the thinner the air and the sharper the knives. Miss sara is going to have to dance like Fred Astair if she is going to keep from getting knicked.
saiga on September 9, 2008 at 2:33 PM
Louis J. Freeh ring a bell?
carbon_footprint on September 9, 2008 at 2:34 PM
Amen!
Jason Lewis was in for Rush yesterday and did an excellent job discussing the Fannie-Freddie issue. Here’s to taking away any implicit government backing from these operations.
batter on September 9, 2008 at 2:35 PM
There is a major gaffe in this WSJ article:
They write that this is a cost to taxpayers.
evenfarer on September 9, 2008 at 2:35 PM
Dont forget this LA Times article which shows that Obama got the lion’s share of Fanny/freddie Lobby money
William Amos on September 9, 2008 at 2:36 PM
Lewis is pretty good explaining economics and politics on the radio
jp on September 9, 2008 at 2:37 PM
You are a master in the art of shamanism, I presume.
semloh on September 9, 2008 at 2:39 PM
Yeah, man, this whole article is one humongous gaffe. I can’t believe Huffpo isn’t all over it.
jimmy the notable on September 9, 2008 at 2:39 PM
the political backstory here is these companies were run by partisian, corrupt Dems(one was Obama’s top economic advisor). They got fired by Govt. yesterday and both CEO’s were replaced by CEO’s with republican ties.
it was more Enron style accounting, the legacy of the Clinton Administration
jp on September 9, 2008 at 2:40 PM
Unfortunately, this plan is full of half measures and platitudes. McCain/Palin, like most of D.C, don’t really understand how Fannie and Freddie dominate the market. This plan is a lot of nice talk but it misses a crucial point. To truly reform these two they must be broken up. Here is how I viewed it.
mike volpe on September 9, 2008 at 2:40 PM
More like a simple seer.
The donks are in deep, they got entrenched when Bill opened the flood gates for risky loans. They will be thrilled to throw our money at it.
If President Bush has one grievous wound it is his inability to use the veto pen to say “no you’re crazy” on overspending.
1+1=s…..
sven10077 on September 9, 2008 at 2:43 PM
First thin Sara-Cuda should sell that ridiculous building.
Second: get rid of the multi-million retirment packages for the totally crooked, completely incompetent high administration Fannie and Freddie people.
SOME ONE(S) SHOULD GO TO JAIL OVER THIS.
stenwin77 on September 9, 2008 at 2:43 PM
Somehow, you can bet it will cost the taxpayers somehow. Lost revenue, legal fees, Government employee man hours, or something.
saiga on September 9, 2008 at 2:43 PM
I will agree on Obama on one issue, and I think it is important to bring up.
The CEO’s and executives should get no golden parachutes, none. They ran this thing into the ground, they should not be rewarded. I will be very disappointed if these “criminals” are rewarded in any way. In fact I see nothing wrong with taking there retirement and throwing it into the pot to lessen the impact. Once that is done, you can bet the executives will be self regulating. Right now, big deal they get millions of bailout and the little man gets stuck.
In fact as free market as I am, I don’t thing any executive that has a publicly traded company should receive any benefits if that company goes bankrupt, or loses vast amount of money that forces it to re-organize. They get nothing, nada…
right2bright on September 9, 2008 at 2:46 PM
Here’s the bottom line:
U.S. financial market regulation is DESPERATELY behind-the-times. Obsolete and antiquated. Rooted in the shocks of 1929 and the 1930’s Great Depression.
(No, I am NOT blasting my country, I love my country and I simply happen to be working in an area where we’re trying to improve it!)
What do I mean? U.S. financial regulation is broken out by function: Banking as one silo, Insurance as another silo (and one that is regulated only at state level, not federal), securities, and futures.
Meaning, we have a Federal Reserve, FDIC, SEC, Commodities & Futures Trading Commission, Comptroller of the Currency, Office of Thrift Supervision, FHA, FHFA, etc., etc., etc.
Result: Surpreme silo-ization, poor information and policy and crisis response coordination, and excessive cost burden to financial companies with inadequate oversight over business behavior remaining on the up & up. Which led to the financial crisis we’re in right now.
Essentially, it makes it harder for U.S. financial market players to compete with foreign players. Which means lost jobs and lost investment in the U.S. when that’s exactly what we DON’T want.
What’s happened with financial regulation is EXACTLY the same thing that happened with Intelligence/Law Enforcement/Military (National Security), with Energy Policy, and with Education: We’ve collectively been sitting on our A@@es as the world has evolved around us and done absolutely NOTHING about it.
And now, the U.S. is stuck playing catch-up.
All I can say is, I sure hope Johnny Mac and Sarah-cuda can think…and ACT…more proactively than their predecessors did. They’ve got my vote…I just hope they do the right things.
Shirotayama on September 9, 2008 at 2:47 PM
It’s intention.
JiangxiDad on September 9, 2008 at 2:47 PM
It was meant as a joke ^^
evenfarer on September 9, 2008 at 2:47 PM
To those who don’t think it will cost taxpayers anything, they’re GSEs… they already are costing us billions…… sheesh!
MNDavenotPC on September 9, 2008 at 2:48 PM
Thanks for reminding us.
McCain and Palin should return any money received from these pacs immediately.
right2bright on September 9, 2008 at 2:48 PM
Socialist gimmicks don’t work in America. McCain and Palin are on the money in this piece. Too much government involvement causes disastrous results in which the taxpayers are the ones being punished.
jencab on September 9, 2008 at 2:48 PM
I would just mention that just about every person in the world with half a brain knew that these entities were misvaluing assets just by the fact that they took no-doc loans. How does one price something without documentation? The business schools usually give the funniest answers to questions like this, and the ivies the funniest of those.
progressoverpeace on September 9, 2008 at 2:48 PM
Yep. Jason Lewis’ take on this was break it up into several of fully private companies and give absolutely no implicit taxpayer backing.
The question is how any such plan will get through Congress with the likes of Rangel et al. certain to block what is a significant funding source for Democrat operatives.
batter on September 9, 2008 at 2:49 PM
Obama’s tax strategies make it very clear that his economic policies are pure, uadulterated and unabashed Socialism.
jeanie on September 9, 2008 at 2:52 PM
It will cost several hundred billion. It may cost as much as 2.5 trillion.
MarkTheGreat on September 9, 2008 at 2:54 PM
There are other high level Clintonoids and other Democrat hacks involved, too.
Jamie Gorelick (sound familiar?)
Louis Freeh
Harold Ickes
Rahm Emanuel
Susan Molinari
Franklin D. Raines
Robert Zoelli
Dr.Cwac.Cwac on September 9, 2008 at 2:54 PM
First of all, I proposed breaking them up in July so all these so called experts are just following my lead. All kidding aside, Alan Greespan also said the same thing in early August. He said we nationalize them, capitalize them, privatize them, and then break them up into five to ten smaller companies.
If McCain/Palin don’t take this necessary step, then it isn’t enough. I don’t know what they need but I know that Sherman Anti Trust gives them the power to do it.
If Democrats really want to obstruct a plan to break up a monopoly that is their business, but they will then be siding with big business.
I have been in mortgages for a long time, and these two act as though they are a monopoly. They are in desperate need of more competition.
mike volpe on September 9, 2008 at 2:55 PM
“Redundant Inadequacy”
That’s the existing financial regulatory framework in a nutshell.
Shirotayama on September 9, 2008 at 2:55 PM
Higher bond yields and a weaker dollar could outweigh the short term benefit to the country, although obviously not the benefit to the political campaigns.
It depends on the longer term impact of the bailout on US bond yields. The spread between yields on Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac mortgage bonds and treasury bonds will clearly narrow sharply as the government guarantee becomes explicit. Therefore if long term US bond yields hold steady or fall then mortgage costs will come down. But if long bond yields rise substantially the impact on housing and the economy will make a bad situation even worse.
KentAllard on September 9, 2008 at 2:55 PM
Agree 100% with this assessment.
Shirotayama on September 9, 2008 at 2:57 PM
Yes, Emanuel and Ickes!
carbon_footprint on September 9, 2008 at 2:57 PM
After the government bails out FM&FM they should be forced to sell or auction off every loan they have to truly private entities and recoup as much of our money as possible. Then dissolve the entire FM&FM business and turn their headquarters into a prison for all the scumbags that perpetrated this fraud and crime on us. All of the CEOs and CFOs etc. assets should be seized. They should not be getting severence pay. They should be charged and imprisoned.
roninacreage on September 9, 2008 at 2:57 PM
On e-bay?
MarkTheGreat on September 9, 2008 at 2:58 PM
Who has benefited the most from this mess?
Democrats?
Oh sorry, not supposed to connect the dots. If it is a “D” – the pass if free. If it is an “R” it is war.
Enron anyone?
kybowexar on September 9, 2008 at 2:59 PM
Liberal response: McCain wrote it and Palin just got coffee and made xerox copies! And she probably served moose burgers for lunch!
Mr_Magoo on September 9, 2008 at 2:59 PM
You are an even greater master in the art of shamanism, I can only presume.
semloh on September 9, 2008 at 3:00 PM
The challenge will be getting responsible adults into Congress to allow them to act. Without Congress, nothing will happen.
Common Sense on September 9, 2008 at 3:02 PM
I’m positively giddy about this election cycle. Haven’t felt this way since my first vote.
I absolutely agree with this though.
It would be beyond compare to also send Pelosi and Reed packin’
Marine_Bio on September 9, 2008 at 3:12 PM
What is Obama saying about this, what needs to be done?
(crickets)
Maybe he has learned his lesson, and is waiting for McCain’s response so he knows what to say.
OC Chuck on September 9, 2008 at 3:13 PM
WDE.
misterpeasea on September 9, 2008 at 3:14 PM
Penalties MUST be a part of the other side as well, this is systemic corruption and deceit.
Too many lenders and closers fudge numbers. The realtors do it a lot too, they do it in order to make, or save, a sale.
.
Remember the illegal alien in CA that bought a $600,000.00 house while earning TWELVE BUCKS (yes-$12.00) an hour???
Think about that.
It had to be pushed thru with everyone’s knowledge, everyone that touched the paper knew.
That’s just one tiny example.
shooter on September 9, 2008 at 3:29 PM
Here’s my recommendation:
It should be a felony to directly lobby any officers of these companies (if they continue to exist) for any reason.
urbancenturion on September 9, 2008 at 3:48 PM
I second the motion.
urbancenturion on September 9, 2008 at 3:50 PM
Wrong. It needs to be explicit non-backing.
Also, I’ve heard the leftist press whine about the impact on the shareholders of these “companies”–are you bloody kidding me? Any fool “invested” in these companies should lose their shirt. Post haste!
urbancenturion on September 9, 2008 at 3:55 PM
Get real, Ed.
The one thing Congress does effectively is to compound problems.
P.S. I’m starting to be very sympathetic to groups that want to be out from under the onus of the fed gubbmint.
VolMagic on September 9, 2008 at 3:55 PM
If Mac want’s to avoid being nailed on an anti-Vet snafu, he might want to qualify this to avoid criticizing VA loans for veterans who after years or decades of service are most usually somewhat behind the power curve on capital and may never have had the opportunity to own a home their entire period of service. I truly doubt it was his intent, but enterprising liberals might use it.
Maquis on September 9, 2008 at 3:55 PM
Stop bailing and let them sink.
Stephen Macklin on September 9, 2008 at 3:59 PM
misterpeasea on September 9, 2008 at 3:14 PM
WDE to you, too!!!
AubieJon on September 9, 2008 at 4:01 PM
Barney Frank was just on Cavuto. Frank was in a full blown panic trying to steer blame away from the democrats. Barney was not a happy person.
rockhauler on September 9, 2008 at 4:46 PM
LOL. Would love to have seen Barney sweating over this. It’s an epic scandal if the Republicans have the sense to push it. Republicans including Richard Baker, Spencer Bachus, Jim Leach, Chuck Hagel, and Richard Shelby toiled for years trying to do something about these Leviathans and were beaten back by Democrats at every turn. They were throwing money around Washington like candy. I know a heck of a lot about this and I am outraged by the whole thing. In fact, I am going to write a book about it.
rockmom on September 9, 2008 at 4:53 PM
It is a systemic problem… but its a twisty one.
They are able to buy loans, and then package them to investors ONLY because they have been implicitly backed by the US Government…
Take that backing away, and there is no reason for them to even exist. Loan companies will have to sell those loans, in packages, to investors directly, or carry them themselves.
Without that backing, the need for a middle entity ceases to exist.
I would also like to point out that it is the Federal Reserve Board who oversees the rules on these “banks”… they helped create the problem, but now we are trusting them with fixing it? And giving them a BLANK check with which to do so???
Romeo13 on September 9, 2008 at 4:54 PM
Fannie owns most of those Countrywide loans. Countrywide sold 80% of its production to Fannie, and the subprime loans it did not sell to Fannie it packaged into securities that Fannie bought. The two companies came close to cornering the mortgage market and now tht it has crashed, you and I and our children are stuck with the bill.
rockmom on September 9, 2008 at 5:00 PM
After the backing of Chrysler, which remained an American company… oh… wait it finally sold out to Daimler-Benz… hmmm…
Well the S&L’s really benefitted from government oversight… what’s that? Oh, required federal backing and had guys like Keating running around? So sorry!
I have pretty much had it with bailouts of companies ‘too large to fail’. There is no such thing. It is an excuse to pay off political cronies with the taxpayer’s money.
Good government is spare and lean government, not one out to ‘help you’, like the IRS. Always there to help, no?
The more I read of Thomas Paine, the more I become disenchanted with modern politics. Government is, indeed, the punisher, and it is unwise to hand it much to do.
ajacksonian on September 9, 2008 at 5:50 PM
Romeo13 at 4:54 pm:
You’re incorrect, sir. State-chartered banks participating in federal deposit insurance (i.e., the FDIC system) are currently subject to both state and federal supervision. If the state-chartered bank is a member of the Federal Reserve System, the Federal Reserve administers federal oversight. Otherwise, if the bank is not a member of the Federal Reserve system (and they do exist), the FDIC oversees state-chartered banks.
Shirotayama on September 9, 2008 at 5:56 PM
Ajacksonian:
Whoever said the IRS is “there to help”?
IRS exists for a very specific set of reasons, centered on providing federal government with a revenue stream to continue operating:
1) Administer and enforce the tax law Congress passes
2) Help taxpayers comply with the law and pay their congressionally mandated taxes
3) Come shake you down if you haven’t filed properly and/or paid your taxes
Shirotayama on September 9, 2008 at 5:58 PM
Hey, how about getting rid of the Department of Education too?
PattyJ on September 9, 2008 at 7:09 PM
QUIT LOANING MONEY TO BUMS, LOSERS!!!
jaleach on September 10, 2008 at 5:53 AM
Comment pages: