Contributors

Monday, December 08, 2008

Freddie Did What?

Remember all that talk in psycho conservative land about how Freddie Mac was all fucked up because the government was running the show? Well, it turns out (as it often does) that was all a big, steamy pile of shit.

In records obtained by the Associated Press, Freddie Mac fended off regulation by (gasp!) paying off a bunch of people in Washington to keep the government off their backs. Internal Freddie Mac budget records show $11.7 million was paid to 52 outside lobbyists and consultants in 2006. Power brokers such as former House Speaker Newt Gingrich were recruited with six-figure contracts. Freddie Mac paid the following amounts to the firms of former Republican lawmakers or ex-GOP staffers in 2006:

-Sen. Alfonse D'Amato of New York, at Park Strategies, $240,000.

-Rep. Vin Weber of Minnesota, at Clark & Weinstock, $360,297.

-Rep. Susan Molinari of New York, at Washington Group, $300,062.

-Susan Hirschmann at Williams & Jensen, former chief of staff to House Majority Leader Tom DeLay, R-Texas, $240,790.

The tactics worked - for a time. Freddie Mac was able to operate with a relatively free hand until the housing bubble ultimately burst in 2007. The internal Freddie Mac documents also show that 17 of the lobbying firms and consultants paid in 2006 were specifically directed to focus on Republicans and four on Democrats, with varying targets for the rest.

So, can someone...some conservative someone who has been bemoaning too much government interference as the cause of all our financial woes...explain to me how less regulation is the answer when it seems like less regulation was the intent and goal that got us into trouble in the first place?

11 comments:

Anonymous said...

Well thanks for giving half the story as well as cherry picking out names of firms that have republicans working for them when mentioning donations. Not actual republican politicians were listed by you - firms that have former republicans working for them were listed.

The guy you just voted for (Obama)took far more than the numbers you listed for those firms, and you know that to be true. Why don't you list all the donations and all the recipients of money from F&F? I don't expect you to since that may weaken your attempt at an insult.

If you read the whole article, further down you see this...

"The AP previously described, in October, how Freddie Mac thwarted efforts to bring a tough regulatory bill sponsored by Republican Sens. Chuck Hagel of Nebraska, John Sununu of New Hampshire, Elizabeth Dole of North Carolina and John McCain of Arizona to a full Senate vote."
---------------------------
So you talk about less regulation in psycho conservative land, then you post an article that lists the names of 4 conservatives that called for more regulation of F&F.

Topping on the cake...from the article you just linked...

"The Bush administration and Federal Reserve Chairman Alan Greenspan were sounding the alarm about the potential threat to the nation's financial health if the fortunes of the two mammoth companies turned sour. They did eventually, when they took on $1 trillion worth of subprime mortgages and when their traditional guarantee business deteriorated."

"The records obtained by the AP reflect growing concern within Freddie Mac over a chorus of criticism from Republicans worried that Freddie Mac and Fannie Mae had grown too big."

You linked to an article that does not prove your point. You linked to an article that says that Republicans were calling for more regulation of F&F. In terms of F&F, less regulatuion was the goal...OF FANNNIE AND FREDDIE, not conservatives. Like your previous post, it's all hindsight and insults. You're still taling like regulation is this black and white, monolithic concept that someone is either for or against. Has it occurred to you that there may be good regulation and bad regulation?

Mark Ward said...

"Has it occurred to you that there may be good regulation and bad regulation?"

Of course. My point is still valid, though. The main conservative line of thought...not yours...lays all of the blame on too much government interference. In addition, these same people argue that Freddie Mac as highly regulated and WANTED to be that way. The article shows that it fought hard not to be and was successful.

Anonymous said...

The company that owns my beloved Chicago Cubs filed for bankruptcy today.

Dan said...

Yes, but Newshour reported that the Cubs are not part of the bankruptcy.

Anonymous said...

"The FBI affidavit said Blagojevich had been told by an adviser "the president-elect can get Rod Blagojevich's wife on paid corporate boards in exchange for naming the president-elect's pick to the Senate."

now thats what i call change you can believe in. suckers.

Mark Ward said...

Yeah, why don't you take a look into who blew the whistle on him, sw.

Anonymous said...

that has nothing to do with the quote I posted. obama going to get the wife on corporate boards - and i thought you were against cronyism.

Mark Ward said...

Given the fact that it was Rahm Emmanuel who blew the whistle on Blagojevich, I'd like to see that afadavit

Anonymous said...

you seem to believe any other little rumor you read on the internet except for this. now you're back to believing what politicians say. either rahm turned him in or rezco is singing.

Dan said...

What the fuck does any of your prattle have to do with the topic at hand, sw? I just don't see the connection. How the hell do you fly from Freddie, Fanny and whether or not Republicans are for increased regulation to Blagojevich? I don't get it. What's the connection?

Anonymous said...

shut up dan. your topic at hand is only about 3 months old. its obvious you don't get anything. you're just mad cause obama is more of the same. deal with it.