HOPE FOR MCCAIN: POLLS SAY HE'S CLOSING THE GAP
By DICK MORRIS & EILEEN MCGANN
Iraq isn't the only place where the surge seems to be working. John McCain's gains over the last five days are remaking the political landscape as Election Day approaches.
The double-digit leads Barack Obama held last week have evaporated, as all three of the top tracking polls (the most current and reliable measurements out there) show McCain hot on Obama's heels.
Zogby had Obama ahead by 12 points last week - now it's down to four. His margin in the Rasmussen poll has dropped from eight points to three in the last few days. Gallup shows only a two-point difference.
In each news cycle, Obama is on the defensive - staving off accusations of closet socialism and trying to wriggle out of his once overt advocacy of income redistribution. "Spreading the wealth around" has become the anti-Obama slogan - and might become the epitaph for his candidacy, just as "brainwashed" was for George Romney and "Where's the beef?" was for Gary Hart.
And, as we head to Halloween, the Rev. Jeremiah Wright's image is returning to haunt Obama. Yes, McCain refused to use the issue in his own campaign - but independent groups like goptrust.com are using funds from tens of thousands of individual donors to run ads featuring Wright and his relationship with Obama. Just yesterday, a tape surfaced in which Obama described Rev. Wright as "the best the black church has to offer."
The double dose of Obama's support for spreading the wealth around and his affiliation with the toxic Rev. Wright are eroding his once-formidable lead.
If the stock market doesn't send us all into shock again, the election could be very close - with the undecided vote looming large. The key question is: About whom are they undecided?
At the height of the financial crisis, voters couldn't decide if McCain was really a maverick or just a Bush clone. But the spotlight has shifted: It's no longer McCain who is caught in its glare, but Obama.
As the Democrat moved convincingly ahead last week, voters began to seriously consider what kind of president he'd be. Bush and McCain seemed increasingly irrelevant as people pondered whether they really want to trust Obama with this kind of power.
By this point, the nature of the undecided vote has likely shifted from people who are torn between wanting change and worrying about Obama to people who have basically decided not to back Barack but haven't sufficiently collected their thoughts to come out for McCain.
Then there's the so-called Bradley effect - where white voters lie to pollsters and say they are backing the black candidate when they're not.
To date, it's been a myth: As The Wall Street Journal reported, Tom Bradly had lost his lead in the polls by the time California voted on his bid to become governor. But it may be real this year.
Undecided voters may be reluctant to say they're not voting for Obama. They may be concealing their real intentions by saying they're undecided. (They might even not have come to grips with their intentions themselves.)
High turnout may also be a wild card. On the surface, it seems sure to bolster Obama's chances as large numbers of poorer, less educated, younger and minority voters turn out to vote for the first time.
But the swelling turnout may have gone beyond this social outreach. And, as it does, it can help McCain. After all, white voters back McCain by double digits. If the contest inspires them all to vote, Obama will lose.
So we approach Election Day with the possibility of a rerun of 2000 plainly before us. McCain has closed to a point where the race will likely be very, very close - and we'll have to stay up very, very late on Election Night.
Go to DickMorris.com to read all of Dick's columns!
Friday, October 31, 2008
Dick Morris sees a surge among ypung voters
MCCAIN SURGES AMONG YOUNG VOTERS
A massive shift in younger and older voters is roiling the presidential race according to new data from the Fox News/Opinion Dynamics Poll concluded October 28-29. Younger voters -- under 45 -- once Obama's base, now are evenly divided between the two candidates. But voters over 65 have shifted sharply to the Democrat in the past week.
Voters under 45 supported Obama by 52-38 in the Fox News poll of October 21-22. But this week's survey indicates that they now break evenly with 45% supporting Obama and 46% backing McCain. On the other hand, voters 65 and over, who had backed Obama by 46-42 last week have now shifted decisively in his favor and he now leads McCain among seniors by 54-39. Middle aged voters -- aged 45-64 -- are largely unchanged in their views. Last week they backed Obama by 48-40 and this week they still support him by 48-43.
Overall, the Fox News survey shows McCain narrowing Obama's lead from 49-40 (9 points) to 47-44 (3 points) over the past week.
The shift in the attitudes of young people may be directly related to the tax issue, brought home by a McCain advertisement featuring Joe the Plumber. Younger voters, trying to make their way in their careers, are more sensitive to changes in taxes than older people, many of whom has retired from the labor force. By attacking Obama for wanting to "spread the wealth around", the McCain camp seems to have struck a nerve among those who are entering the most productive years of their employment history.
On the other hand, seniors may be more comfortable with Obama than they have been previously and might be more accepting of his candidacy. Obama's attacks on McCain over Social Security, always a sensitive topic for the elderly may also be hitting home driving seniors into the Democratic column.
The Fox News/Opinion Dynamics survey was conducted on October 28-29 and surveyed 924 likely voters nationwide. It has a margin of error of plus or minus 3 points.
Go to DickMorris.com to read all of Dick's columns!
A massive shift in younger and older voters is roiling the presidential race according to new data from the Fox News/Opinion Dynamics Poll concluded October 28-29. Younger voters -- under 45 -- once Obama's base, now are evenly divided between the two candidates. But voters over 65 have shifted sharply to the Democrat in the past week.
Voters under 45 supported Obama by 52-38 in the Fox News poll of October 21-22. But this week's survey indicates that they now break evenly with 45% supporting Obama and 46% backing McCain. On the other hand, voters 65 and over, who had backed Obama by 46-42 last week have now shifted decisively in his favor and he now leads McCain among seniors by 54-39. Middle aged voters -- aged 45-64 -- are largely unchanged in their views. Last week they backed Obama by 48-40 and this week they still support him by 48-43.
Overall, the Fox News survey shows McCain narrowing Obama's lead from 49-40 (9 points) to 47-44 (3 points) over the past week.
The shift in the attitudes of young people may be directly related to the tax issue, brought home by a McCain advertisement featuring Joe the Plumber. Younger voters, trying to make their way in their careers, are more sensitive to changes in taxes than older people, many of whom has retired from the labor force. By attacking Obama for wanting to "spread the wealth around", the McCain camp seems to have struck a nerve among those who are entering the most productive years of their employment history.
On the other hand, seniors may be more comfortable with Obama than they have been previously and might be more accepting of his candidacy. Obama's attacks on McCain over Social Security, always a sensitive topic for the elderly may also be hitting home driving seniors into the Democratic column.
The Fox News/Opinion Dynamics survey was conducted on October 28-29 and surveyed 924 likely voters nationwide. It has a margin of error of plus or minus 3 points.
Go to DickMorris.com to read all of Dick's columns!
Friday, October 24, 2008
Dick Morris: SOCIALISM, OBAMA-STYLE
SOCIALISM, OBAMA-STYLE
The perfect storm combining the vast expansion of government's role in the American economy, a looming Obama triumph and likely huge Democratic gains in Congress augur the most serious threat of the onset of socialism the United States has faced since the New Deal. But while it became obvious that FDR's goal was to save capitalism, not to replace it, it is by no means clear that Barack Obama is similarly inclined.
As alarm bells ring incessantly, demanding government action to prevent the conflagration of our most important companies and markets, the Federal Reserve and Treasury rush to extinguish the flames with hoses filled with money. But this massive and needed public-sector intrusion into private enterprise begs the key question: After the fires are put out, will the government firefighters leave, or will they move into the companies they saved and evict their former corporate owners?
The current crisis makes it clear that the government will be invited inside the management and ownership of our top financial and corporate institutions. But it is unclear whether it will ever withdraw after the crisis has passed.
Obama's stated goal of "spreading the wealth around" may indicate an inclination to embrace European-style socialist democracy. His emphasis on promoting "fairness" in income distribution and his willingness to sacrifice economic growth by raising taxes on "the rich" all seem to point in that direction. Will Obama realize that while government is needed to prevent a crash, it is hopelessly inadequate as an engine of prosperity? Bureaucrats are neither sufficiently competent nor honest nor independent enough to make key decisions about where capital should be invested, except when it is needed to extinguish the flames of crisis.
If Obama wins and takes a solidly and overwhelmingly Democratic Congress with him -- including a filibuster-proof Senate -- we will have to entrust our system of private ownership, limited government and free enterprise to the tender mercy of the left. But the newly empowered liberals will not have to breach the walls of the private sector, justifying each new intrusion by argument and logic. Rather, they will already be inside the gates, invited there to save these institutions from their own history of greed and mismanagement. Will the left simply leave government there, effectively converting our private enterprise system, where government absorbs about a third of our GDP into a social democracy, a la Europe, where the public sector accounts for almost half of the economy?
For those who would rather not find out, it is particularly important to redouble our efforts for John McCain and to battle for each Senate seat. McCain is only seven points behind -- not an insurmountable margin. A good final week could save the free enterprise system. We owe it to our future to try.
Go to DickMorris.com to read all of Dick's columns!
By DICK MORRIS & EILEEN MCGANN
The perfect storm combining the vast expansion of government's role in the American economy, a looming Obama triumph and likely huge Democratic gains in Congress augur the most serious threat of the onset of socialism the United States has faced since the New Deal. But while it became obvious that FDR's goal was to save capitalism, not to replace it, it is by no means clear that Barack Obama is similarly inclined.
As alarm bells ring incessantly, demanding government action to prevent the conflagration of our most important companies and markets, the Federal Reserve and Treasury rush to extinguish the flames with hoses filled with money. But this massive and needed public-sector intrusion into private enterprise begs the key question: After the fires are put out, will the government firefighters leave, or will they move into the companies they saved and evict their former corporate owners?
The current crisis makes it clear that the government will be invited inside the management and ownership of our top financial and corporate institutions. But it is unclear whether it will ever withdraw after the crisis has passed.
Obama's stated goal of "spreading the wealth around" may indicate an inclination to embrace European-style socialist democracy. His emphasis on promoting "fairness" in income distribution and his willingness to sacrifice economic growth by raising taxes on "the rich" all seem to point in that direction. Will Obama realize that while government is needed to prevent a crash, it is hopelessly inadequate as an engine of prosperity? Bureaucrats are neither sufficiently competent nor honest nor independent enough to make key decisions about where capital should be invested, except when it is needed to extinguish the flames of crisis.
If Obama wins and takes a solidly and overwhelmingly Democratic Congress with him -- including a filibuster-proof Senate -- we will have to entrust our system of private ownership, limited government and free enterprise to the tender mercy of the left. But the newly empowered liberals will not have to breach the walls of the private sector, justifying each new intrusion by argument and logic. Rather, they will already be inside the gates, invited there to save these institutions from their own history of greed and mismanagement. Will the left simply leave government there, effectively converting our private enterprise system, where government absorbs about a third of our GDP into a social democracy, a la Europe, where the public sector accounts for almost half of the economy?
For those who would rather not find out, it is particularly important to redouble our efforts for John McCain and to battle for each Senate seat. McCain is only seven points behind -- not an insurmountable margin. A good final week could save the free enterprise system. We owe it to our future to try.
Go to DickMorris.com to read all of Dick's columns!
By DICK MORRIS & EILEEN MCGANN
Thursday, October 23, 2008
MCCAIN'S LAST CHANCE by Dick Morris
MCCAIN'S LAST CHANCE
By DICK MORRIS & EILEEN MCGANN
Published on DickMorris.com on October 23, 2008
Today (Thursday, October 23rd), tomorrow, and the weekend are the last chance McCain has to get back into this race. To understand why, let’s briefly recap what's happened since the conventions.
McCain left the back-to-back conventions with a lead for the first time in the presidential race. His strength was fueled by his designation of Sarah Palin and the enthusiasm she aroused in the Republican base. The Democrats, caught off guard, attacked her viciously which only reinforced the perception of a woman being victimized by a sexist left.
Then McCain lost the first two debates. Regardless of what observers think happened (we thought he lost the first and won the second), the fact is that his poll numbers deteriorated after each performance. The financial crisis extinguished any lead McCain may have had exacerbated by what must be seen, in hindsight, as the biggest mistake of his campaign - his decision to "suspend" his campaign and return to Washington to work on the bailout. McCain's subsequent docile support for the package, earmarks and all, destroyed the perception he had carefully built during his convention and subsequently of independence from Bush and of a populist antipathy to greedy Wall Street barons.
As a result of the debates, the crisis, and McCain's ineptitude, Obama surged to a lead of 7-9 points around October 13th.
Then, amazingly, McCain won the third debate. Using a populist appeal and fighting hard, he echoed the complaints of Joe the Plumber against Obama's plan to "spread the wealth around." From Wednesday, October 15 through Saturday, October 18th, McCain sliced the Obama lead to five points - an average of all the polling.
But the effect of the debate began to wear off on Sunday, October 19th and McCain began to fall back again. By now, Obama has an average lead of 7.2 points, according to realclearpolitics.com. (The AP poll showing a dead heat is the only one to show such data, unfortunately).
Much of Obama's rise this week has been due to his domination of the paid advertising. With his coffers swollen by $150 million raised in September, he can buy any available advertising time. But McCain has considerable resources at his disposal as well. For the week that started this past Tuesday, October 21st, McCain is running about four ads to every five that Obama airs in swing states.
(Technically, McCain is airing about 2500 household rating points per week as against Obama's 3300. One household rating point means that one percent of the households are watching the ad. So 2500 points in a given week suggests that each household is seeing about 25 ads per week, or about four each day. While Obama is spending more money, the difference between seeing four McCain ads and five Obama spots each day is not significant.)
And, starting on Monday of this week, McCain began running an attack ad specifically aimed at the issues first raised by Joe the Plumber. Showing footage of his chat with Obama, the McCain ad hammers home the tax issue, noting that Obama's so-called tax cut for 100 million Americans is really a welfare check for the half of them who pay no taxes. The ad is hard hitting and effective. More importantly, it is running in the clear without other McCain media to clutter up the message.
So McCain has his best ad on his best issue with as close to financial parity with Obama as he is likely to get. If, in these circumstances, he cannot gain ground during the next few days, the race will be functionally over. But if the Republicans can get traction, it could become a competitive contest again.
Godspeed John McCain.
Go to DickMorris.com to read all of Dick's columns!
By DICK MORRIS & EILEEN MCGANN
Published on DickMorris.com on October 23, 2008
Today (Thursday, October 23rd), tomorrow, and the weekend are the last chance McCain has to get back into this race. To understand why, let’s briefly recap what's happened since the conventions.
McCain left the back-to-back conventions with a lead for the first time in the presidential race. His strength was fueled by his designation of Sarah Palin and the enthusiasm she aroused in the Republican base. The Democrats, caught off guard, attacked her viciously which only reinforced the perception of a woman being victimized by a sexist left.
Then McCain lost the first two debates. Regardless of what observers think happened (we thought he lost the first and won the second), the fact is that his poll numbers deteriorated after each performance. The financial crisis extinguished any lead McCain may have had exacerbated by what must be seen, in hindsight, as the biggest mistake of his campaign - his decision to "suspend" his campaign and return to Washington to work on the bailout. McCain's subsequent docile support for the package, earmarks and all, destroyed the perception he had carefully built during his convention and subsequently of independence from Bush and of a populist antipathy to greedy Wall Street barons.
As a result of the debates, the crisis, and McCain's ineptitude, Obama surged to a lead of 7-9 points around October 13th.
Then, amazingly, McCain won the third debate. Using a populist appeal and fighting hard, he echoed the complaints of Joe the Plumber against Obama's plan to "spread the wealth around." From Wednesday, October 15 through Saturday, October 18th, McCain sliced the Obama lead to five points - an average of all the polling.
But the effect of the debate began to wear off on Sunday, October 19th and McCain began to fall back again. By now, Obama has an average lead of 7.2 points, according to realclearpolitics.com. (The AP poll showing a dead heat is the only one to show such data, unfortunately).
Much of Obama's rise this week has been due to his domination of the paid advertising. With his coffers swollen by $150 million raised in September, he can buy any available advertising time. But McCain has considerable resources at his disposal as well. For the week that started this past Tuesday, October 21st, McCain is running about four ads to every five that Obama airs in swing states.
(Technically, McCain is airing about 2500 household rating points per week as against Obama's 3300. One household rating point means that one percent of the households are watching the ad. So 2500 points in a given week suggests that each household is seeing about 25 ads per week, or about four each day. While Obama is spending more money, the difference between seeing four McCain ads and five Obama spots each day is not significant.)
And, starting on Monday of this week, McCain began running an attack ad specifically aimed at the issues first raised by Joe the Plumber. Showing footage of his chat with Obama, the McCain ad hammers home the tax issue, noting that Obama's so-called tax cut for 100 million Americans is really a welfare check for the half of them who pay no taxes. The ad is hard hitting and effective. More importantly, it is running in the clear without other McCain media to clutter up the message.
So McCain has his best ad on his best issue with as close to financial parity with Obama as he is likely to get. If, in these circumstances, he cannot gain ground during the next few days, the race will be functionally over. But if the Republicans can get traction, it could become a competitive contest again.
Godspeed John McCain.
Go to DickMorris.com to read all of Dick's columns!
Thursday, October 09, 2008
Senators’ Shady Mortgages
Senators’ Shady Mortgages
It should come as no surprise that while Americans struggle to stay in their homes, many of the powerful elites who “lead” us in Washington got special deals from the banks that issued their mortgages. Politico.com reached out to all 100 senators to find out whether they got their mortgages from embattled lender Countrywide Financial, and whether they received special terms regardless of who issued the mortgage.
Of course, many senators are wealthy enough to buy one or more homes outright.
And an amazing 33 senators have refused to answer any questions. Click here to
read the Politico article on senators’ mortage deals. And click
here to see the full survey results.
http://www.politico.com/news/stories/0608/11289.html
http://www.politico.com/homeloans/
from Lou Dobbs website CNN's page at http://loudobbs.tv.cnn.com/
It should come as no surprise that while Americans struggle to stay in their homes, many of the powerful elites who “lead” us in Washington got special deals from the banks that issued their mortgages. Politico.com reached out to all 100 senators to find out whether they got their mortgages from embattled lender Countrywide Financial, and whether they received special terms regardless of who issued the mortgage.
Of course, many senators are wealthy enough to buy one or more homes outright.
And an amazing 33 senators have refused to answer any questions. Click here to
read the Politico article on senators’ mortage deals. And click
here to see the full survey results.
http://www.politico.com/news/stories/0608/11289.html
http://www.politico.com/homeloans/
from Lou Dobbs website CNN's page at http://loudobbs.tv.cnn.com/
Monday, October 06, 2008
Barney Frank's Fannie Mae Love Connection
Media Mum on Barney Frank's Fannie Mae Love Connection
Democratic House Financial Services Committee Chair
promoted GSEs while former 'spouse' was Fannie Mae executive.
Are journalists playing favorites with some of the key political
figures involved with regulatory oversight of U.S. financial markets?
MSNBC’s Chris Matthews launched several vitriolic attacks on the
Republican Party on his Sept. 17, 2008, show, suggesting blame for Wall Street problems should be focused in a partisan way. However, he and other media have failed to thoroughly examine the Democratic side of the blame game.
Prominent Democrats ran Fannie Mae, the same government-sponsored enterprise (GSE) that donated campaign cash to top Democrats. And one of Fannie Mae’s main defenders in the House – Rep. Barney Frank, D-Mass., a recipient of more than $40,000 in campaign donations from Fannie since 1989 , was once romantically involved with a Fannie Mae executive.
The media coverage of Frank’s coziness with Fannie Mae and his pro-Fannie Mae stances has been lacking. Of the eight appearances Frank made on the three broadcasts networks between Jan. 1, 2008, and Sept. 21, 2008, none of his comments dealt with the potential conflicts of interest. Only six of the appearances dealt with the economy in general and two of those appearances,including an April 6, 2008 appearance on CBS’s “60 Minutes” were about his opposition to a manned mission to Mars.
Frank has argued that family life “should be fair game for campaign discussion,wrote the Associated Press on Sept. 2. The comment was in reference to GOP vice presidential nominee Sarah Palin and her pregnant daughter. “They’re the ones that made an issue of her family,” the Massachusetts Democrat said to the AP.
The news media have covered the relationship in the past, but there have been no mentions since 2005, according to Nexis and despite the collapse of Fannie Mae.
The July 3, 1998, Reliable Source column in The Washington Post reported Frank, who is openly gay, had a relationship with Herb Moses, an executive for the now-government controlled Fannie Mae. The column revealed the two had split up at the time but also said Frank was referring to Moses as his “spouse.
Another Washington Post report said Frank called Moses his “lover” and that the two were “still friends” after the breakup.
Frank was and remains a stalwart defender of Fannie Mae, which is now under FBI investigation along with its sister organization Freddie Mac, American International Group Inc. (NYSE:AIG) and Lehman Brothers all recently participants in government bailouts. But Frank has derailed efforts to regulate the institution, as well as denying it posed any financial risk.
Frank’s office has been unresponsive to efforts by the Business & Media Institute to comment on these potential conflicts of interest.
While the relationship reportedly ended 10 years ago, Frank was serving on the House Banking Committee the entire 10 years they were together. The committee is the primary House body which along with the Office of Federal Housing Enterprise Oversight (OFHEO) has jurisdiction over the government-sponsored enterprises.
He has served on the committee since becoming a congressman in 1981 and became the ranking Democrat on the committee in 2003. He became chairman of the committee, now called the House Financial Services Committee, in 2007.
Moses was the assistant director for product initiatives at Fannie Mae and had been at the forefront of relaxing lending restrictions at the company for rural customers, according to the Feb. 23, 1998, issue of National Mortgage News (NMN).
“Herb Moses, who helped develop many of Fannie Mae’s affordable housing and home improvement lending programs, has left the mortgage industry,” Darryl Hicks wrote for NMN.
Mr. Moses - whose last day was Feb. 13 - spent the past seven years at Fannie Mae,
most recently as director of housing initiatives. Over the course of time, he played an instrumental role in developing the company’s Title One and 203(k) home improvement lending programs.”
Hicks explained in his story how Moses orchestrated a collaborative effort betweenFannie Mae and the Department of Agriculture.
While Moses served at Fannie Mae and was Frank’s partner, Frank was actively working to support GSEs, according to several news outlets.
In 1991, Frank and former Rep. Joe Kennedy, D-Mass., lobbied for Fannie to soften rules on multi-family home mortgages although those dwellings showed a default rate twice that of single-family homes, according to the Nov. 22, 1991, Boston Globe.
BusinessWeek reported in its Nov. 14, 1994, issue that Fannie Mae called on Frank to exert his influence against a Housing & Urban Development proposal that would force the GSE to focus on minority and low-income buyers and police bias by lenders regardless of their location. Fannie Mae opposed HUD on the issue because it claimed doing so would “ignore the urban middle class.”
Moses left Fannie in 1998 to start his own pottery business. National Mortgage News called Moses a “mortgage guru” and said he developed “many of Fannie Mae's affordable housing and home improvement lending programs. Moses ended his relationship with Frank just months after he left Fannie.
Even after the relationship ended, however, Frank was a staunch defender of Fannie Mae even as other experts suggested there were serious problems building in Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac.
According to an article by Kathleen Day in the Oct. 8, 2003, Washington Post,
Frank opposed giving the Bush administration the right to approve or
disapprove business activities that “could pose risk to the taxpayers.”
He told the Post he worried the Treasury Department “would sacrifice activities
that are good for consumers in the name of lowering the companies’ market risks.”
Just a month before, Frank had aggressively thwarted reform efforts by the Bush
administration. He told The New York Times on Sept. 11, 2003, Fannie Mae and
Freddie Mac’s problems were “exaggerated,” a gross miscalculation some five
years later with costs estimated to be in the hundreds of billions.
Frank has also reaped campaign contribution benefits from Fannie Mae and its counterpart Freddie Mac. According a front page story in the Sept. 19, 2008, Investor’s Business Daily by Terry Jones, Frank has received $40,100 in campaign cash over the past two decades from the GSEs.
Frank is ranked 16th on a list that includes both houses of Congress and fifth among his colleagues in the House. According to data from the Center for Responsive Politics’ OpenSecrets.org, political action committees financed by both Freddie and Fannie have contributed $3,017,797 to members of Congress since 1989. And according to the July 16 issue of Politico, the two entities have spent a whopping $200 million to buy influence – including not only campaign donations to members of Congress, but also presidential campaigns and lobbying efforts.
Frank was asked by CNN’s John Roberts on the Sept. 22, 2008 “American Morning” about this and his opposition to reform Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac. Originally, he claimed he didn’t think the two GSEs were facing any problems when the issue first surfaced in 2003. He instead blamed the Republican-controlled Congress for their ultimate fall, failing to mention his friendly relationship with Fannie Mae and the contributions it had made to his campaign over the years.
“Yes, I did not think we were facing a crisis in 2003, but that didn't mean we didn't have to have reform,” an animated Frank said when confronted with the question. “Here’s the deal, the Republicans controlled Congress from 1995 through 2006. They did zero to reform Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac.”
However, on Sept. 17, 2008, former Bush administration Deputy Chief of Staff Karl Rove elaborated on the Bush administration’s efforts to curb abuses at the two GSEs in 2003. He told Fox News’ “Hannity & Colmes” that Frank was among the most aggressive opponents of White House attempts to reform Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac.
“All of this bad stuff on Wall Street happened because people got greedy and the greed started at Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac,” Rove said. “And I know this because five years ago, the administration was alerted by the regulator, James Lockhart, that there was insufficient authority and that these institutions – particularly Fannie – were out of control.”
“And I got to tell you, for five years, I was part of an effort at the White
House to fight this and our biggest opponents on the Hill who blocked this
every step of the way were people like Chris Dodd and Barney Frank.
And Fannie and Freddie are the $200 billion
contagion at the center of this.”
Frank has been quick to blame deregulation for some of the problems in the
financial environment, as he did on Bloomberg television’s Sept. 19 “Political
Capital with Al Hunt.” However, as earmark crusader Rep. Jeff Flake, R-Ariz. pointed out – it’s not deregulation, but it was the structure of Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac that had been guarded by Frank and other members of Congress.
“Some people point at deregulation,” Flake said to the Business & Media Institute on Sept. 23. “It’s not deregulation at all. We have for far too long shielded Fannie and Freddie for example, with the implicit and now explicit guarantee.I just found it humorous.
Flake specifically named Frank as one of the members behind
letting allegations of transgressions at the two GSEs for
slipping by without oversight from Congress.
The red flags were raised long before the government bailed out the two GSEs in August 2008. The first egregious scandal involving Fannie Mae occurred in 2004. A 2004 Wall Street Journal editorial was first to point out claims in an OFHEO report that showed accounting malpractices by the GSE.
“For years, mortgage giant Fannie Mae has produced smoothly growing earnings. And for years, observers have wondered how Fannie could manage its inherently risky portfolio without a whiff of volatility, the Oct. 4, 2004, editorial, “annie Mae Enron?” said. Now, thanks to Fannie’s regulator, we know the answer. The company was cooking the books. Big time.
By Jeff Poor
Business / Media Institute
see orginal article at www.businessandmedia.org/articles/2008/20080924145932.aspx
Democratic House Financial Services Committee Chair
promoted GSEs while former 'spouse' was Fannie Mae executive.
Are journalists playing favorites with some of the key political
figures involved with regulatory oversight of U.S. financial markets?
MSNBC’s Chris Matthews launched several vitriolic attacks on the
Republican Party on his Sept. 17, 2008, show, suggesting blame for Wall Street problems should be focused in a partisan way. However, he and other media have failed to thoroughly examine the Democratic side of the blame game.
Prominent Democrats ran Fannie Mae, the same government-sponsored enterprise (GSE) that donated campaign cash to top Democrats. And one of Fannie Mae’s main defenders in the House – Rep. Barney Frank, D-Mass., a recipient of more than $40,000 in campaign donations from Fannie since 1989 , was once romantically involved with a Fannie Mae executive.
The media coverage of Frank’s coziness with Fannie Mae and his pro-Fannie Mae stances has been lacking. Of the eight appearances Frank made on the three broadcasts networks between Jan. 1, 2008, and Sept. 21, 2008, none of his comments dealt with the potential conflicts of interest. Only six of the appearances dealt with the economy in general and two of those appearances,including an April 6, 2008 appearance on CBS’s “60 Minutes” were about his opposition to a manned mission to Mars.
Frank has argued that family life “should be fair game for campaign discussion,wrote the Associated Press on Sept. 2. The comment was in reference to GOP vice presidential nominee Sarah Palin and her pregnant daughter. “They’re the ones that made an issue of her family,” the Massachusetts Democrat said to the AP.
The news media have covered the relationship in the past, but there have been no mentions since 2005, according to Nexis and despite the collapse of Fannie Mae.
The July 3, 1998, Reliable Source column in The Washington Post reported Frank, who is openly gay, had a relationship with Herb Moses, an executive for the now-government controlled Fannie Mae. The column revealed the two had split up at the time but also said Frank was referring to Moses as his “spouse.
Another Washington Post report said Frank called Moses his “lover” and that the two were “still friends” after the breakup.
Frank was and remains a stalwart defender of Fannie Mae, which is now under FBI investigation along with its sister organization Freddie Mac, American International Group Inc. (NYSE:AIG) and Lehman Brothers all recently participants in government bailouts. But Frank has derailed efforts to regulate the institution, as well as denying it posed any financial risk.
Frank’s office has been unresponsive to efforts by the Business & Media Institute to comment on these potential conflicts of interest.
While the relationship reportedly ended 10 years ago, Frank was serving on the House Banking Committee the entire 10 years they were together. The committee is the primary House body which along with the Office of Federal Housing Enterprise Oversight (OFHEO) has jurisdiction over the government-sponsored enterprises.
He has served on the committee since becoming a congressman in 1981 and became the ranking Democrat on the committee in 2003. He became chairman of the committee, now called the House Financial Services Committee, in 2007.
Moses was the assistant director for product initiatives at Fannie Mae and had been at the forefront of relaxing lending restrictions at the company for rural customers, according to the Feb. 23, 1998, issue of National Mortgage News (NMN).
“Herb Moses, who helped develop many of Fannie Mae’s affordable housing and home improvement lending programs, has left the mortgage industry,” Darryl Hicks wrote for NMN.
Mr. Moses - whose last day was Feb. 13 - spent the past seven years at Fannie Mae,
most recently as director of housing initiatives. Over the course of time, he played an instrumental role in developing the company’s Title One and 203(k) home improvement lending programs.”
Hicks explained in his story how Moses orchestrated a collaborative effort betweenFannie Mae and the Department of Agriculture.
While Moses served at Fannie Mae and was Frank’s partner, Frank was actively working to support GSEs, according to several news outlets.
In 1991, Frank and former Rep. Joe Kennedy, D-Mass., lobbied for Fannie to soften rules on multi-family home mortgages although those dwellings showed a default rate twice that of single-family homes, according to the Nov. 22, 1991, Boston Globe.
BusinessWeek reported in its Nov. 14, 1994, issue that Fannie Mae called on Frank to exert his influence against a Housing & Urban Development proposal that would force the GSE to focus on minority and low-income buyers and police bias by lenders regardless of their location. Fannie Mae opposed HUD on the issue because it claimed doing so would “ignore the urban middle class.”
Moses left Fannie in 1998 to start his own pottery business. National Mortgage News called Moses a “mortgage guru” and said he developed “many of Fannie Mae's affordable housing and home improvement lending programs. Moses ended his relationship with Frank just months after he left Fannie.
Even after the relationship ended, however, Frank was a staunch defender of Fannie Mae even as other experts suggested there were serious problems building in Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac.
According to an article by Kathleen Day in the Oct. 8, 2003, Washington Post,
Frank opposed giving the Bush administration the right to approve or
disapprove business activities that “could pose risk to the taxpayers.”
He told the Post he worried the Treasury Department “would sacrifice activities
that are good for consumers in the name of lowering the companies’ market risks.”
Just a month before, Frank had aggressively thwarted reform efforts by the Bush
administration. He told The New York Times on Sept. 11, 2003, Fannie Mae and
Freddie Mac’s problems were “exaggerated,” a gross miscalculation some five
years later with costs estimated to be in the hundreds of billions.
Frank has also reaped campaign contribution benefits from Fannie Mae and its counterpart Freddie Mac. According a front page story in the Sept. 19, 2008, Investor’s Business Daily by Terry Jones, Frank has received $40,100 in campaign cash over the past two decades from the GSEs.
Frank is ranked 16th on a list that includes both houses of Congress and fifth among his colleagues in the House. According to data from the Center for Responsive Politics’ OpenSecrets.org, political action committees financed by both Freddie and Fannie have contributed $3,017,797 to members of Congress since 1989. And according to the July 16 issue of Politico, the two entities have spent a whopping $200 million to buy influence – including not only campaign donations to members of Congress, but also presidential campaigns and lobbying efforts.
Frank was asked by CNN’s John Roberts on the Sept. 22, 2008 “American Morning” about this and his opposition to reform Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac. Originally, he claimed he didn’t think the two GSEs were facing any problems when the issue first surfaced in 2003. He instead blamed the Republican-controlled Congress for their ultimate fall, failing to mention his friendly relationship with Fannie Mae and the contributions it had made to his campaign over the years.
“Yes, I did not think we were facing a crisis in 2003, but that didn't mean we didn't have to have reform,” an animated Frank said when confronted with the question. “Here’s the deal, the Republicans controlled Congress from 1995 through 2006. They did zero to reform Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac.”
However, on Sept. 17, 2008, former Bush administration Deputy Chief of Staff Karl Rove elaborated on the Bush administration’s efforts to curb abuses at the two GSEs in 2003. He told Fox News’ “Hannity & Colmes” that Frank was among the most aggressive opponents of White House attempts to reform Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac.
“All of this bad stuff on Wall Street happened because people got greedy and the greed started at Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac,” Rove said. “And I know this because five years ago, the administration was alerted by the regulator, James Lockhart, that there was insufficient authority and that these institutions – particularly Fannie – were out of control.”
“And I got to tell you, for five years, I was part of an effort at the White
House to fight this and our biggest opponents on the Hill who blocked this
every step of the way were people like Chris Dodd and Barney Frank.
And Fannie and Freddie are the $200 billion
contagion at the center of this.”
Frank has been quick to blame deregulation for some of the problems in the
financial environment, as he did on Bloomberg television’s Sept. 19 “Political
Capital with Al Hunt.” However, as earmark crusader Rep. Jeff Flake, R-Ariz. pointed out – it’s not deregulation, but it was the structure of Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac that had been guarded by Frank and other members of Congress.
“Some people point at deregulation,” Flake said to the Business & Media Institute on Sept. 23. “It’s not deregulation at all. We have for far too long shielded Fannie and Freddie for example, with the implicit and now explicit guarantee.I just found it humorous.
Flake specifically named Frank as one of the members behind
letting allegations of transgressions at the two GSEs for
slipping by without oversight from Congress.
The red flags were raised long before the government bailed out the two GSEs in August 2008. The first egregious scandal involving Fannie Mae occurred in 2004. A 2004 Wall Street Journal editorial was first to point out claims in an OFHEO report that showed accounting malpractices by the GSE.
“For years, mortgage giant Fannie Mae has produced smoothly growing earnings. And for years, observers have wondered how Fannie could manage its inherently risky portfolio without a whiff of volatility, the Oct. 4, 2004, editorial, “annie Mae Enron?” said. Now, thanks to Fannie’s regulator, we know the answer. The company was cooking the books. Big time.
By Jeff Poor
Business / Media Institute
see orginal article at www.businessandmedia.org/articles/2008/20080924145932.aspx
Friday, October 03, 2008
Thursday, October 02, 2008
wonder how much Senator Chris Dodd profited from the bailout ?
wonder how much Senator Chris Dodd profited from the bailout ?
I thought he got most of his PAC $$ from the banking lobbyists.
Senator Chris Dodd (D-CT), Chairman of the Senate Banking, Housing, and Urban Affairs Committee,
I thought he got most of his PAC $$ from the banking lobbyists.
Senator Chris Dodd (D-CT), Chairman of the Senate Banking, Housing, and Urban Affairs Committee,
Rep Barr, the other white meat outshines obama and mccain on wallstreet bailout
Rep Barr, the other white meat outshines obama and mccain on wallstreet bailout
I can't see a difference between Mccain and Obama on this wall street problem.
If that Paulson is soo smart, why didn't he see this bullshit coming ?
see more on Rep Barr at www.bobbarr2008.com
I can't see a difference between Mccain and Obama on this wall street problem.
If that Paulson is soo smart, why didn't he see this bullshit coming ?
see more on Rep Barr at www.bobbarr2008.com
Wednesday, October 01, 2008
what the fuck, senate going in the wrong direction with that federal checkbook.
what the fuck, senate going in the wrong direction with that federal checkbook.
how many of those shitheads are up for re election in November
bad deal for taxpayers.
www.mccainalert.com
how many of those shitheads are up for re election in November
bad deal for taxpayers.
www.mccainalert.com
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)