Apparently, the Bush administration attempted to regulate Fannie and Freddie. Here’s and article from 2003.
“The Bush administration today recommended the most significant regulatory overhaul in the housing finance industry since the savings and loan crisis a decade ago.
Under the plan, disclosed at a Congressional hearing today, a new agency would be created within the Treasury Department to assume supervision of Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac, the government-sponsored companies that are the two largest players in the mortgage lending industry”
“After the hearing, Representative Michael G. Oxley, chairman of the Financial Services Committee, and Senator Richard Shelby, chairman of the Senate Banking Committee, announced their intention to draft legislation based on the administration’s proposal. Industry executives said Congress could complete action on legislation before leaving for recess in the fall. ” (they’re republicans)
“Among the groups denouncing the proposal today were the National Association of Home Builders and Congressional Democrats who fear that tighter regulation of the companies could sharply reduce their commitment to financing low-income and affordable housing.
”These two entities — Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac — are not facing any kind of financial crisis,” said Representative Barney Frank of Massachusetts, the ranking Democrat on the Financial Services Committee. ”The more people exaggerate these problems, the more pressure there is on these companies, the less we will see in terms of affordable housing.” ”
Democrats opposed the bill to help poor people and people with bad credit get loans. These of course are the people who defaulted on their loans and bankrupted the companies.
http://query.nytimes.com/gst/fullpage.html?res=9E06E3D6123BF932A2575AC0A9659C8B63&sec=&spon=&pagewanted=print
The republicans had a slim majority. It takes 60 votes to beat a fillabuster
Vincent
#1 by Jacub2d on April 28, 2010 - 7:39 pm
Sara
Leading party has majority
#2 by Kevin C on April 29, 2010 - 9:38 pm
Tammy
because they don’t want the americans to know that democrates acually run the country.
#3 by Brian on May 1, 2010 - 9:48 am
Gregory
Because he is running for President..
#4 by jonsguest12333 on May 4, 2010 - 7:27 pm
Emma
Actually you can look it up that the dems are behind a lot of these major institutions, this will come out. BO has the second most contributions from them.
#5 by Katie on May 5, 2010 - 5:28 pm
Angela
Because when something goes wrong it’s time to play the blame game… Republicans do it too when Democrats are in charge….
#6 by The Spirit of Red on May 6, 2010 - 2:55 am
Joyce
You are correct! Give big loans to people who cannot afford it, and this is what happens. Bush was against it, and the Democrats were all for it.
~
#7 by paintedhorse30 on May 8, 2010 - 7:04 pm
Manuel
You are wrong about one thing, in the last year the people who are defaulting on their loans are good hard working people who lost their jobs due to the housing crisis. These are people that had affordable mortgages. They had a savings account, but that only last so long when their are NO jobs available. It is getting worse and worse.
#8 by Sfancik on May 9, 2010 - 12:57 pm
Helen
This George Bush sounds like a socialist. We should be afraid of him. If he would have just stopped exaggerating then the market would have fixed the problem and it would have magically disappeared…I learned this from reading yahoo answers so much. And someone should call him Comrade Bush…just to emphasize the point!
#9 by ruth on May 10, 2010 - 1:06 pm
Marion
Because the issue of how the economics of these loans worked is very complex, in my opinion. Most Americans have no idea exactly what exactly is taking place and I am being currently tutored myself after being around real estate sales most of my life.
#10 by Close it! on May 11, 2010 - 10:45 am
Sandra
It’s called partisan politics. It’s done by most people on here and virtually anyone running for public office. The better question is, why are you surprised?
#11 by Moose on May 14, 2010 - 6:57 pm
Mary
Bush is to blame because on his watch Gramm pushed through deregulation and eviscerated federal examiners.
At the same time, Bush encouraged the GSE’s to relax standards and support more lending to people who could not afford it.
The result was inevitable: collapse.
#12 by Tag23 on May 14, 2010 - 8:48 pm
Sandra
He didn’t, he said in an interview with MSNBC that the economic troubles including the housing crisis {rightly so} is a bi-partisan failure.
#13 by Sjean on May 15, 2010 - 7:21 am
Helen
Because he’s desperate.
The Democrats have controlled the Congress for the last two years and that’s where laws are made.
#14 by Andrew M on May 16, 2010 - 7:13 am
Cindy
It wasn’t oversight of the companies they opposed, it was the fact that the Bush administration’s answer was a power grab.
#15 by Mad Max on May 16, 2010 - 8:15 am
Cindy
The Democrats may have opposed this bill, but it doesn’t matter since the Republicans were in charge in 2003, they had both the house, senate, and presidency.
There may have been other things in the bill that caused the Democrats to balk.
The buck stops here.
#16 by Yin -Yang on May 18, 2010 - 2:32 am
Dawn
AHHH, who is currently the President of the USA?
and when Republicans had control of the White House + Congress what did they do? Nothing!
Oh, Republicans did passed the bankruptcy Bill
#17 by builderchris on May 21, 2010 - 9:56 am
Darryl
Obama blames Bush simply to look good to poor stupid people that have to blame Bush for the pimples on their ass themselves. He is trying to get votes and that is it. There are more poor people that want free handouts than rich people so he goes after their vote. Sad but try. Statistics say the poor and undereducated people always vote democrat thinking the government is going to provide free stuff for them. It’s all a sham. In my opinion Obama is very dangerous to the overall prosperity of the United States.
#18 by Pfo on May 24, 2010 - 1:41 pm
Victoria
Obama consistently tries to repackage the truth of situations and blame them on Republicans. When the war wasn’t going so well, he would continually blame the bad state of the economy on the war. Now that it’s doing better you don’t see him going around claiming the war is all of our problems, in fact he rarely talks about Iraq at all.
#19 by Boss H on May 26, 2010 - 1:46 am
Holly
in 2003 democrats where not in control of congressor the senate. tha didn’t occur until 2007.
So they must not have tried very hard.
Why is it Bush’s fault?
hmm let us see:
Sceenario #1
John Doe is stretched to his max with bills. He is barely making all his bills. He can’t wait until he has his mortage paid offin 5 more years so he can finally relax. All of a sudden, the government led by some idiot tells him he has to pay even more for his minimum paymentson some of his bills. Now he no longer can afford his bills. simpletons chalk it up to the fact that he isn’t living within his means that got him in trouble, when he clearly was mas making it before minimum payments went up.
Scenario #2
The Chairman of the CEO warns the idiot leader that increase deficit spending is not goof for the American economy, and that ir will decrease US dollar value. The Idiot leader continues huge deficit spending. The dollar falls.
meanwhile Jane Doe who find herself able to barely cope with the government’s demands for higher minumum payment on debt, all of sudden sees ggas prices to drive to work more quadruple. food prices nearly double, and all of a sudden can no longer afford her bills. She defalts on them.
Secenario #3
Jack Doe is a hard workign man. Supports his family and puts his children through school. One day he arrives at work to find his employer must change his health care provider for a cheaper policy.
The new health care policy will not cover as much and cost jack $250 more a month. Now all of a sudden Jack finds himself in financial problems. 2 weeks later Jack’s wife gets hurt on the job. They spend nearly every dime they have to cover what Jacks health coverage no longer covers. Meanwhile bills start piling up and soem folks just claim there is no economic problem or porblem with health care in America.
Scenario #4
Georgia Doe has everything goign for her, a good job, a nce home and car. One day someone hits her and causes her to not be abe to work for 2 years. Her credit card bills are covered, but her car and house payment are not. The person who hit her has just lost their job and even thoguh the court ordered them to make payments gerogia has yet to see any money from them. The rent was due 3 months ago.
Yet soem people claim the bank should have even given her the home loan when she couldn’t afford it.
Whose fault is it?
The fault of the people who keep ignoring the problem with the economy that are here and mounting every day. While trying to bame the democrats even though Repubicans had majority control since 2003.
Whose fault is it?
The people who keep thinking drilling more was going to bring gas prices down when the real problem was the dollar value.
The people who keep voting for party who keeps claimging they are goign to ban abortion and the only thing they really do is push more of our jobs overseas!
#20 by Zap on May 26, 2010 - 3:54 am
Joe
Republicans ALWAYS try and make THEIR FAILURE out to be someone else’s fault…what they simply refuse to remember is (selective memory?…very McCain/Palin-like) that THEY held Congress for 6 YEARS of the Bush Administration and the ARM’s that are causing the problem were issued when THEY were in power (the rate changes after 3 years and the Democratic Congress has only been there for a little less than 2 years). So, it all comes down to the obvious Republican tactic…lying and distorting the facts.
#21 by qncyguy21 on May 29, 2010 - 8:49 am
Denise
in 2003 if the Repubicans wanted something to happen, it would have.
They were in control of the senate, the house, and the executive office.
The entire government melted at the words of George W Bush and anyone who opposed him was a terrorist loving lib.
How little your memory must be that you don’t remember such a short time back.
If Bush really wanted that thing passed, he would have kept pressuring congress to do so. he let it get stalled in the senate, and that is where it stayed. Mind you Repulicans were in control when it did.
#22 by Mars Hill on May 29, 2010 - 6:41 pm
Clara
Good question. The Clinton administration and his cronies (some of which are current Obama advisers and contributors) like Franklin Raines, James A. Johnson, Janet Reno, and Jamie Gorelick are to blame for much of the financial mess we are in right now, namely running Fannie Mae into the ground.
In an effort to make housing “affordable” to everyone, they created the market for the high-risk subprime loans. New regulations forced lenders into high-risk areas where they had no choice but to lower lending standards to make the loans that sound business practices had previously guarded against making, or face stiff government penalties.
Meanwhile, Fannie Mae executives received maximum bonus payouts in the millions by overestimating earnings. You can now see the domino effect this has had with corporations like AIG, who owned a large stake in Fannie Mae. President Bush and Senator McCain have pushed for change in the mortgage giant’s structure since 2002, but Congress has largely ignored them. This shouldn’t come as a surprise though considering Democrats were the biggest benefactors of Fannie and Freddie lobbying, with Christopher Dodd receiving the most in contribution money at $165,400, followed by Barack Obama at $126,349, and John Kerry at $111,000.
#23 by ObamaBot THX-1138 on June 1, 2010 - 10:44 am
Tina
Right, I believe it.