Liberals what de regulation did bush do to cause the housing crises?

The event that created the sub prime mortgage world, but more importantly the mortgage becoming a diravitive was signed into law 11/12/1999. an event that I agreed with, greed took the event and has caused the pain, not Clinton
But to blame W for this is sick

Clinton repeal of Glass-Steagall faulty as seen today
Written on March 17th, 2008 in Government Positions


This is just one of our articles referencing the financial crisis, crash of the housing market, subprime, and more:


Even as the Fed helped to stabilize the situation over the weekend, the stock market is down again on Monday morning. What is alarming from our standpoint is that CIT, Lehman, and National City Corporation all are down – by 25 to 31 percent as we write this. Liquidity questions surround Lehman after what we learned from Bear Sterns. Even JPMorgan needed help and considerations from the Fed to buy Bear Sterns for a reported $2 a share.

This issue now goes far beyond the mortgage blues of some lenders. There is no way that crazy wild-eyed mortgage brokers with lax standards could cause worldwide problems like this. President Bill Clinton repealed the Glass-Steagall Act which had prevented the coupling of investment banking and lending. To be exact, on November 12, 1999, President Bill Clinton signed into law the Gramm-Leach-Bliley Act, which repealed the Glass-Steagall Act of 1933. One of the effects of the repeal is it allowed commercial and investment banks to consolidate. Economists have criticized the action.

Of course economists criticized the way in which the Bush administration manufactured money by allowing anybody and everybody the opportunity to buy or refinance homes. Economist Robert Kuttner has criticized the repeal of the Glass-Steagall Act as contributing to the 2007 subprime mortgage financial crisis.




Are you aware that the broker definitions in Gramm leach biliely were held up by the Cox SEC under Bush right up until he left office?
 
http://www.dechert.com/library/FS17_12-06.pdf


Congress enacted GLB in 1999, but , dispite mulitiple efforts, the SEC had not adopted the rules implimenting section 3(a)(4)(B).

They held back the broker definitions for YEARS.






http://www.sec.gov/news/press/2007/2007-198.htm



Joint Release
Securities and Exchange Commission
Board of Governors of the Federal Reserve System
2007-198

FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE
Agencies Adopt Final Rules to Implement the Bank 'Broker' Provisions of the Gramm-Leach-Bliley Act
Washington, D.C., Sept. 24, 2007 - The Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) and Board of Governors of the Federal Reserve System (Board) on Monday announced the adoption of final joint rules to implement the "broker" exceptions for banks under Section 3(a)(4) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934. These exceptions were adopted as part of the Gramm-Leach-Bliley Act of 1999 (GLB Act). The SEC and the Board approved the final rules at separate open meetings held on September 19, 2007, and September 24, 2007, respectively.

The Board and SEC issued proposed rules for comment in December 2006. The final rules are similar to the proposed rules in overall scope and approach. In response to comments, the agencies also have modified the rules in several important respects to make the rules more workable and less burdensome. These changes are discussed in detail in the attached notice, which will be published in the Federal Register shortly.




Now realise the bill Clinton signed was never fully implimented.

The SEC under Bush used all sorts of stall tactics to hold up the rules in the bill to control who brokers could be.

They purposely left a void which allowed the banks to make ANYONE a broker and they picked dupes to sell the subprime laced securities to unsuspecting buyers.

The banks made mountains of money writing and then selling off this crap and the "brokers" very likely had NO idea what the laws were and what was in the shit sandwhiches the banks loaded up with sb prime.


The Bill Clinton signed had protectoions in it which could have prevented this mess, The Bush SEC CHOSE to not impliment the proitections for YEARS>
 
Last edited:
Republicans passed the 2.4 trillion dollar tax failure through reconciliation.

Republicans pased the "drugs for votes" bill costing trillions more, again through reconciliation.

Republicans hid the cost of the so called "War in Iraq".

Republicans did nothing for the survivors from Katrina.

And yet, all of these things are the "fault" of the Democrats. The lion's share of our national debt came through "reconciliation". And yet it's the Democrat's fault.

Lessons from the Medicare Prescription Drug Benefit vote

The chief actuary of Medicare, Rick Foster, had scored the legislation as costing more than $500 billion. The Bush administration suppressed his report, in a move the Government Accounting Office later judged "illegal.” (we now know the cost is in the trillions. Remember, the Iraq war was going to cost LESS then 200 billion. Republicans only know lies.)

And yet, with Democrats powerless to stop a Republican Party run rampant, it's still the Democrats "fault".
 
Rdean please read my post and help me spread the word on how the Bush SEC gamed the bill Clinton signed.

Clinton would likely not have ever signed that bill without the protections in it.

The Cox run SEC gamed the bill to allow the banks to have no broker rules.
 
Bush isn't to blame.

Hovever, the Glass-Steagal act was repealed by a Republican-controlled congress, in a bill that was designed and constructed by said Republican congress, the Gramm–Leach–Bliley Act (GLB), also known as the Financial Services Modernization Act of 1999.

Gramm–Leach–Bliley Act

The prime architect of the legislation was Sen Phil Gramm, the man John McCain picked for his chief financial advisor in his 2008 presidential run.

The only thing Clinton did was sign it after it was finished, and considering the position he was in at the time, it didn't matter whether he signed it or not, as a veto would have never been upheld.

Trying to blame the repeal of Glass-Steagal on Clinton would be laughable, if it weren't simply another example of disinformation by the right-wing propaganda machine.

Way to rewrite history though. Hell, while your at it, why don't you credit Clinton with spearheading the Monica Lewinsky investigation?
 
Last edited:
Why was this legislation enacted you might ask? The answer, as usual, has to do with corporate cronyism and Legislators working hand in hand with people who wanted to break the law to make a lot of money.

The Gramm–Leach–Bliley Act allowed commercial banks, investment banks, securities firms, and insurance companies to consolidate. For example, Citicorp (a commercial bank holding company) merged with Travelers Group (an insurance company) in 1998 to form the conglomerate Citigroup, a corporation combining banking, securities and insurance services under a house of brands that included Citibank, Smith Barney, Primerica, and Travelers. This combination, announced in 1998, would have violated the Glass–Steagall Act and the Bank Holding Company Act of 1956 by combining securities, insurance, and banking, if not for a temporary waiver process. The law was passed to legalize these mergers on a permanent basis. GLB also repealed Glass–Steagall's conflict of interest prohibitions "against simultaneous service by any officer, director, or employee of a securities firm as an officer, director, or employee of any member bank."

But hey, blame Clinton, or Bush, don't let the facts get in the way.

Personally I think Phil Gramm should be in jail for this, but there's no way Congress will ever police it's own actions.
 
The bill he signed had protections in it that the Bush Cox SEC stalled the implimentation of.

They did it on purpose.
 
Not one of you will respond to this evidence?



Scary scary facts huh guys.


Your fighting and voting to have your country distroyed by the wealthy
 
Last edited:
Bush wasn't a legislative "de-regulator", he was one that gutted the agencies that oversaw regulation. Additionally he appointed people to head these agencies that either had no idea what they were doing, or looked the other way while some very serious calamities were in the works.

The only video I need to post.

[ame=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_MGT_cSi7Rs]YouTube - ‪Shocking Video Unearthed Democrats in their own words Covering up the Fannie Mae, Freddie Mac Scam that caused our Economic Crisis‬‏[/ame]

Let's repeat it
[ame=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_MGT_cSi7Rs]YouTube - ‪Shocking Video Unearthed Democrats in their own words Covering up the Fannie Mae, Freddie Mac Scam that caused our Economic Crisis‬‏[/ame]
 
Not one of you will respond to this evidence?



Scary scary facts huh guys.


Your fighting and voting to have your country distroyed by the wealthy

[ame=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_MGT_cSi7Rs]YouTube - ‪Shocking Video Unearthed Democrats in their own words Covering up the Fannie Mae, Freddie Mac Scam that caused our Economic Crisis‬‏[/ame]
 
The bill he signed had protections in it that the Bush Cox SEC stalled the implimentation of.

They did it on purpose.

[ame=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_MGT_cSi7Rs]YouTube - ‪Shocking Video Unearthed Democrats in their own words Covering up the Fannie Mae, Freddie Mac Scam that caused our Economic Crisis‬‏[/ame]
 
The community reinvestment act is to blame for the housing bubble...

not even close... there was nothing in the CRA requiring banks to lend money to unqualified borrowers. all it did was stop redlining, which basically was banks not lending in minority areas, no matter how qualified the borrowers.

them bundling bad debt and playing a shell game among themselves was the problem.

then they encouraged borrowers to overextend and take out the equity from their homes..

they'd say, refinance... then put the money into fixing up the house.. .it will increase the value of the house. then they'd give them ARM's and say, don't worry... as soon as the rate balloons, we'll refi you again.

so what happened to these borrowers five years later when the rate exploided, is that the value had dropped out of the market as the banks started to implode, and money dried up.. so you had people who now owed more on their houses than the houses were worth so they couldn't refi... they couldn't afford to pay... and they had a property that sucked away all of their life savings.

i know that it behooves extremists to look for simple and simplistic answers, but there was a lot of failure that led to the crash... mostly from not enforcing bank regs.
 
Bush isn't to blame.

Hovever, the Glass-Steagal act was repealed by a Republican-controlled congress, in a bill that was designed and constructed by said Republican congress, the Gramm–Leach–Bliley Act (GLB), also known as the Financial Services Modernization Act of 1999.

Gramm–Leach–Bliley Act

The prime architect of the legislation was Sen Phil Gramm, the man John McCain picked for his chief financial advisor in his 2008 presidential run.

The only thing Clinton did was sign it after it was finished, and considering the position he was in at the time, it didn't matter whether he signed it or not, as a veto would have never been upheld.

Trying to blame the repeal of Glass-Steagal on Clinton would be laughable, if it weren't simply another example of disinformation by the right-wing propaganda machine.

Way to rewrite history though. Hell, while your at it, why don't you credit Clinton with spearheading the Monica Lewinsky investigation?

If i recall the bill had close to a 90% approval
Please be accurate in your threads

The bill then moved to a joint conference committee to work out the differences between the Senate and House versions. Democrats agreed to support the bill after Republicans agreed to strengthen provisions of the anti-redlining Community Reinvestment Act and address certain privacy concerns; the conference committee then finished its work by the beginning of November.[9][13] On November 4, the final bill resolving the differences was passed by the Senate 90-8,[14][15] and by the House 362-57.[16][17] The legislation was signed into law by President Clinton on November 12, 1999.[18]
 
The community reinvestment act is to blame for the housing bubble...

not even close... there was nothing in the CRA requiring banks to lend money to unqualified borrowers. all it did was stop redlining, which basically was banks not lending in minority areas, no matter how qualified the borrowers.

them bundling bad debt and playing a shell game among themselves was the problem.

then they encouraged borrowers to overextend and take out the equity from their homes..

they'd say, refinance... then put the money into fixing up the house.. .it will increase the value of the house. then they'd give them ARM's and say, don't worry... as soon as the rate balloons, we'll refi you again.

so what happened to these borrowers five years later when the rate exploided, is that the value had dropped out of the market as the banks started to implode, and money dried up.. so you had people who now owed more on their houses than the houses were worth so they couldn't refi... they couldn't afford to pay... and they had a property that sucked away all of their life savings.

i know that it behooves extremists to look for simple and simplistic answers, but there was a lot of failure that led to the crash... mostly from not enforcing bank regs.


Your saying the CRA had nothing to do with it, but your saying that allowing these banks to bundle these loans up caused it?

GREED caused this mess and nothing else
People made those choices to purchase and to make the loan
Did you do it?
I did not
 
The community reinvestment act is to blame for the housing bubble...

not even close... there was nothing in the CRA requiring banks to lend money to unqualified borrowers. all it did was stop redlining, which basically was banks not lending in minority areas, no matter how qualified the borrowers.

them bundling bad debt and playing a shell game among themselves was the problem.

then they encouraged borrowers to overextend and take out the equity from their homes..

they'd say, refinance... then put the money into fixing up the house.. .it will increase the value of the house. then they'd give them ARM's and say, don't worry... as soon as the rate balloons, we'll refi you again.

so what happened to these borrowers five years later when the rate exploided, is that the value had dropped out of the market as the banks started to implode, and money dried up.. so you had people who now owed more on their houses than the houses were worth so they couldn't refi... they couldn't afford to pay... and they had a property that sucked away all of their life savings.

i know that it behooves extremists to look for simple and simplistic answers, but there was a lot of failure that led to the crash... mostly from not enforcing bank regs.

Obama Sued Citibank Under CRA to Force it to Make Bad Loans – UPDATED

Obama Sued Citibank Under CRA to Force it to Make Bad Loans – UPDATED « The IUSB Vision Weblog
 
The right will never accept what really caused this mess.

It was their historically failed ideas of "letting the market deside" our future.
 
The right will never accept what really caused this mess.

It was their historically failed ideas of "letting the market deside" our future.

every loan that was made with false information people broke the law
Its called bank fraud
thats not letting the market decide anything
lets not forget the number of people who were in it just to flip houses
 
The right will never accept what really caused this mess.

It was their historically failed ideas of "letting the market deside" our future.

[ame=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_MGT_cSi7Rs]YouTube - ‪Shocking Video Unearthed Democrats in their own words Covering up the Fannie Mae, Freddie Mac Scam that caused our Economic Crisis‬‏[/ame]
 

Forum List

Back
Top