Townhall.com, Where Your Opinion Counts
Talk Radio:   Bill Bennett   Mike Gallagher   Dennis Prager   Michael Medved   Hugh Hewitt   
BREAKING NEWS  LeftArrow - Townhall.com : Conservative, Political, Republican   RightArrow - Townhall.com : Conservative, Political, Republican  
Columns, funnies & more in your inbox!
  • Check the boxes and send us your email address to receveive your free newsletter
  • Your daily must-read of conservative columns, cartoons and news. Coulter, Sowell, Krauthammer and more.
  • Townhall.com’s weekly inside scoop on what’s happening behind the scenes in the world of politics. When news breaks, we report.
  • Signup to receive the latest daily Townhall cartoons
Tuesday, August 05, 2008
Dan Gainor :: Townhall.com Columnist
Fannie Mae, Freddie Mac: Boondoggle, Bias, Bailout & Billions
by Dan Gainor
Vote on It:
Average Vote:
[+] Text [-]
 
Poll
What was the biggest suprise of Election Day?



Six years.

That’s how long it took for the Fannie Mae/Freddie Mac crisis to grow from warning sign to $25-billion bailout.

In most cases, six years is ample warning. We won WWII in less time. But when The Wall Street Journal compared Fannie Mae to Enron in February, 2002, no one wanted to listen. Most of Washington had their hands too deep in the Fannie Mae/Freddie Mac piggy banks to work on the problem. And though other print outlets followed the Journal, the network news shows waited until a bailout was a foregone conclusion to do much reporting.

A day late and a dollar short? Try more than 2,000 days. That works out to $114 million short – per day. And The Washington Post estimates that $25-billion bailout tab could go much higher. “[T]here is an outside chance the companies could call upon Treasury for more than $100 billion,” the paper reported before the bailout was approved.

Even that is just the beginning. Overall, the tab for this governmental failure is closer to $150 billion when you count in fines for executives, fines for the two organizations, accounting restatements, stock losses and bailout. That’s right – governmental failure. Fannie and Freddie aren’t typical public companies. They are Government Sponsored Enterprises.

By comparison, the folks at Enron were rank amateurs. But they were only politically connected. Fannie and Freddie operated for years under what was an implied guarantee that the government would help them in troubled times.

Thanks to a do-nothing Congress and the ignore-everything networks, that implied guarantee is now an actual fact. And every one of us is on the hook for it.

The Journal did its best to let us know year in and year out. A 2004 editorial about Fannie said “the company was cooking the books. Big time.” That’s not especially subtle. In the future, maybe the paper should include USA Today style graphics so network anchors can understand.

The Journal wasn’t a voice in the wilderness. The nation’s most well-known financial newspaper was joined by then-Federal Reserve Chairman Alan Greenspan. He told lawmakers in 2004 there was a need for “preventive action” “sooner rather than later.”

We were comparative latecomers. The Business & Media Institute warned about Fannie Mae in early 2005 – still three years before it really hit the fan. It was obvious at that point that this was a major story being updated almost daily. But that didn’t matter. Fannie and Freddie kept restating earnings in the billions of dollars, the stock was plummeting and the network news shows were talking … Enron.

At the peak of the respective scandals of Enron and Fannie Mae, network news shows only focused on Enron. A search for “Enron” yielded 3,017 hits in LexisNexis, compared to just 37 hits for “Fannie Mae.” That search counted ABC, CBS, NBC and CNN. Continued...

1 2
| Full Article & Comments | Next >
Share:
Vote on It:
Average Vote:
 
About The Author
Dan Gainor is The Boone Pickens Free Market Fellow and director of the Media Research Center’s Business & Media Institute.
 
TOWNHALL DAILY: Sign up today and receive Townhall.com daily lineup delivered each morning to your inbox.
Re: Hate to break it to you...
"The offered bailout was nothing more than an effort to prop up market confidence. People who trade in these securities needed to know the Fed was truely there. You can't allow something to go implied for decades and then skip out."

I hope you're right about that Jim, otherwise, we might be looking at $5 a gallon gas - more inflation, to pay for this bailout.

The bigger question for the left
who place their faith in government...e.g. there is not enough regulation, we need more regulation? Is....who regulates the regulators?

As I said, in one big circle jerk, the treasury dept is seeking advise from Morgan Stanley!?!? Call it the blind leading the blind (although I don't think they are all that blind).


What we really need is a return to hard money, and not the fiat money system established by democrats and supported by republicans.
Sign Up to Post Your CommentsSign Up to Post Your Comments
If you are already registered, click here to login. Otherwise, please take a few seconds to register with Townhall.com. Once you sign up, you’ll be able to post your comments immediately, use the action center, get podcasts, and more!
Note: Fields marked with a red asterisk (*) are required.
Salutation:
First Name:
*
Last Name:
*
Email:
*
Nickname:
*
Note: Nick name will be shown when you post comments.
Address 1:
*
Address 2:
City:
*
State:
*
Zip:
*
Phone:
      
Your daily must-read of conservative columns, cartoons and news. Coulter, Sowell, Krauthammer and more.
(Bi-Weekly) We highlight the best opportunities from our partners for surveys, action items and more.