Morris falsely claimed Frank "killed" Bush's "proposed measures to rein in Fannie Mae"
SUMMARY: Dick Morris falsely claimed that "in the 2000s, when Bush proposed measures to rein in Fannie Mae, Barney Frank killed them." In fact, for much of the 2000s, Frank had no power to "kill[] ... measures" -- Republicans controlled the House, and Frank sponsored a bill to enhance oversight of Fannie and Freddie soon after Democrats took over the House in 2007.
During the April 8 edition of Fox News' The O'Reilly Factor, contributor Dick Morris falsely claimed that "in the 2000s, when Bush proposed measures to rein in Fannie Mae, [Rep.] Barney Frank [D-MA] killed them." In fact, for much of the 2000s, Frank had no power to "kill[]" measures -- Republicans controlled the House and could have passed legislation regarding Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac in the House without any Democratic support. Yet during President Bush's tenure, Congress did not pass oversight legislation for Fannie and Freddie until after Democrats gained a majority in both houses of Congress in 2007. Moreover, Frank supported efforts to enhance regulatory oversight on Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac in 2005 and passed regulatory oversight reform after becoming chairman of the House Financial Services Committee in 2007.
Previously, O'Reilly Factor host Bill O'Reilly similarly falsely claimed that "the Democrats in charge of the finance committees" resisted efforts by the Bush administration to regulate the mortgage industry and Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac in particular.
As Media Matters for America has repeatedly noted, in early 2007, as the new chairman of the House Financial Services Committee, Frank sponsored H.R. 1427, a bill to create the Federal Housing Finance Agency (FHFA), granting that agency "general supervisory and regulatory authority over" Fannie and Freddie and directing it to reform the companies' business practices and regulate their exposure to credit and market risk. The FHFA was eventually created after Congress incorporated provisions that House Speaker Nancy Pelosi (D-CA) said were "similar" to those of H.R. 1427 into the Housing and Economic Recovery Act of 2008, which Bush signed into law on July 30, 2008.
Furthermore, before taking over the House Financial Services Committee chairmanship, Frank worked with committee chairman Rep. Michael Oxley (R-OH) on the Federal Housing Finance Reform Act of 2005, which would have established the FHFA to replace the Office of Federal Housing Enterprise Oversight (OFHEO) as overseer of the activities of Fannie and Freddie. After voting for the bill in committee, Frank voted against final passage of the bill on the House floor, stating that he was doing so because an amendment added to the bill on the House floor imposed restrictions on the kinds of nonprofit organizations that could receive funding under the bill.
From the April 8 edition of Fox News' The O'Reilly Factor:
O'REILLY: Now for the top story tonight: reaction to all this. With us, the purveyor of the perspicacious website DickMorris.com, Dick Morris. So, I -- you know, I thought the kid did a nice job with Barney, you know? I mean, the fact of the matter is that party politics and ideology are so strong in America right now, if you're a liberal Democrat, no matter what they do, you won't challenge him.
MORRIS: Well, the kid's entitled to an answer to his question, so let's give it to him. What Barney Frank did was in the 1990s, he and the Democrats went to Fannie Mae and said, "You are not buying up enough mortgages of poor people. We want you to buy up 42 percent of your mortgages to be of poor people," and then they raised it to 50. And Fannie Mae said, "They can't put any money down." And Barney Frank and Chris Dodd said, "It's OK. Don't let it matter. Don't require any money down." So they gave mortgages they shouldn't have given, where people didn't have any investment.
O'REILLY: OK. And that's an easy explanation.
MORRIS: Yeah, easy answer. And then, when -- in the 2000s, when Bush proposed measures to rein in Fannie Mae, Barney Frank killed them.
Earth to Bill and the toesucker!!!!
Congressman Frank was a member of the minority party in the house from 1994 until 2006.
Here's the key:
They know their audience.
Bush pushed for home ownership of lower income minorities
What your video shows is that Bush was playing both sides of the fence, he was touting home ownership and minority programs at the same time he was trying to regulate Fannie and Freddie. And for that he is culpable , but he is not alone. There are plenty of videos to watch that show the dems opposing regulation, which to this day is something they deny. Here is just one http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cMnSp4qEXNM&feature=related As I have said repeatedly, both parties, 2 presidents and a number of other factors are behind this mess. it is not as simple as blaming one person or party. And I did note in the video you presented Bush did call for help with a down payment for qualified minorities, not just anyone .
it is not as simple as blaming one person or party
Yes it is. Who was in complete control of government for 6 years when this crisis was festering? I don't remember the Dem's fillibustering anything regarding fannie/freddie.
Your comments show you are ill informed on this subject. The festering began in the Clinton admin when lending standards were thrown out the window and most if not all of the deregulation took place. Can you refute that statement. Secondly the reps did not have a large enough majority in either house of congress to pass anything without dem support, look up the facts. Thirdly, Frank and others (Waters , Schummer) repeatedly opposed regulation http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CTbIb75JdwY&feature=related http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1RZVw3no2A4&feature=related http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hxMInSfanqg There are other videos too
You admit that Reps held both Houses (fact), but then claim that Dems somehow held the power (not a fact)? Do you listen to yourself (under review)?
Anyway, lending standards were not "thrown out the window", they were removing the practice of banks red-lining certain areas that were predominantly poor, minority areas and saying that banks had to treat everyone equal. Bottom line, Morris claim that Frank "killed" anything while a member of a distinctly minority party is ridiculous. If the Reps had truly wanted something done they had both Houses and the WH for 6 years and did nothing!! So, is Barney that all-powerful or were Reps that weak?
I guess the Rep's just wanna forget that past 8 years. Time to find a new boogeyman. Frank, ACORN, CRA seem to be the targets now.
Do you even know what the balance was in the senate from 2000 to 2004?, look it up it might surprise you. And you might want to take a look at the regulatory changes that took place during the Clinton admin http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Community_Reinvestment_Act Another factor is the racism charges that the dems would wheel out everytime the reps tried to reform. Did you watch the videos of Frank and Waters objecting to reform. Maybe you think those videos are actors hired by the reps and Fox just to get your darling dems. Wow another vast right wing conspiracy. You stated that if the reps had wanted something done they could have just done it. Well how come Pelosi could not get the first stimulus bill passed without the reps? After all she had a larger majority . You are just blind and do not want to know what really happened, the perfect democratic voter.
Do you even know what the bal. was in the Senate from 2000 to 2004?? Since you seem to be using this as some sort of backup for your statements,maybe you should revisit it .you might want to look up the House also. You know as well as we do, it started during the Clinton administration, but under a republican controled congress, and the purpose was to give the less fortunate some slack. When the morgage giants realized the fortunes that could be made,they went $ sign crazy. Lets not act like a Hannity here.
You are exactly right, it did start with the Clinton admin, I have said that all along in other threads. And yes the deregulation that passed was rep sponsored and co-sponsored by dems. So the reps are to blame also, no doubt about it. But towards the end of the Clinton years he claims that he tried to reform Fannie and Freddie but was blocked by the dems. Bush and other reps also tried in the early years of his admin but again was blocked by the dems. Eventually they gave up and hopped aboard the gravy train. My point has always been that they are both to blame. Bush and Greenspan have had the honesty to own up and accept some of the blame. The like of Frank, Pelosi, Dodd , Waters and other dems have not. They are liars
The festering began in the Clinton admin when lending standards were thrown out the window and most if not all of the deregulation took place.
Are you trying to make me and my lot look good, or are you just stupid?
1) Standards were loosened by a REPUBLICAN LEGISLATION while they had a REPUBLICAN MAJORITY in CONGRESS.
2) DEREGULATION is part of the REPUBLICAN AND CONSERVATIVE PHILOSPHIES. There's nothing LIBERAL about it.
3) That CLINTON signed these into law is why a lot of LIberals (like myself) don't really consider him a liberal, or even that good a President. But his faults are all directly proportionate to whatever extent he went along with the REPUBLICANS and their philosophy!!!
You are blaming Clinton for signing YOUR PARTIES legislation??!! We are CRITICIZING him for the same reason!!! It's still YOUR PARTY and the REPUBLICAN/CONSERVATIVE PHILOSPHY that made this happen! A conservative principal doesn't become a liberal one just because Clinton was duped or bullied into signing it into law. In reality (where those of us with BRAINS live) it actually makes Clinton more moderate or even more right-wing. Eitehr way, it's still YOUR PARTIES LEGISLATION AND ECONOMIC PHILOSPHY that's to blame!!!
Why do you con's always make it SO EASY?
You are actually mostly correct, I never exonerated the reps, that is just want you think I said. But the rep sponsored deregulation was co-sponsored by dems and passed with almost no democratic opposition. In the Senate , the Commodity Futures Modernization act was passed with no dem opposition in the senate and in the house, there was more rep opposition to it than dems. And Clinton signed the bill into law, no argument from him either. So while the bill was rep sponsored it was passed with democratic support and signed by a dem pres.And while you like to praise your own brains your knowledge of what actually happened is limited at best and is limited to what MMFA tells you in those short little clips. try doing some research on your own some time.
Clinton signed these bills GOP backed bills because they were veto proof (the Gramm-Leach-Bliley Act had 90 votes in the Senate, 362 in the House). So shame on Democrats in both houses of congress for going along with the bankrupt ideologies of their GOP overlords.
Randy
Except that, even if Dems opposed it, in words, they were powerless to actually oppose it if the republicans had really wanted it to become law. Apparently, they didn't. It's easy to try and pawn this off on Barney Frank, but it's a farce. He was not in a position to stop anything, nor were any of the other dems in the House. They were the minority party, and in the House, as we all know, they have no power really. The majority party can roll over them. So if this were so important, how come the republicans didn't get it enacted?
i wonder what dick is getting for repeating this crap
Has anyone watched the evolution of the neocon bizaro world explanation as to why we in this financial crisis?
Make whole crisis about Fannie and Freddie. This is because it is easier to put in the Democrats lap, and blame poor people for the financial crisis...they also have the unrelated "regulation" suggestions of Bush (which they don't know the details) so they can say Bush tried to stop this crisis but the Democrats wouldn't let him.
It only makes sense to now move on to the next step and blame Frank openly as the source for the Financial crisis. Anything to avoid talking about the truth. Why is Dick Morris still on TV? Oh yeah...Fox exists.
Dick Morris is a liar.
Will someone please give Morris that one last mint? Then he'll explode all over Shamity or Billdo, and we'll be rid of him.
It's only whaffer thin...
I remember well how Bush and the Republican's cowered in the presence of Barney Frank and the minority Democrats.
i say that whether it is false or not on dick morris's part.barney frank,and several other people sensitive to the race issue killed it.i believe barney had a personal friend,that was involved.this not a race,or lover issue.it was sound bussiness thinking.i never voted for bush ,and i won't lower my intelligence to watch o'rielly.good business is smart bussiness,
Joseph,
I think you missed the point. Barney Frank didn't have the power to kill anything.
Morris is a fool. What makes him a person to listen to on any front? I am wondering who is going to have the first attack: Morris, Limboss, Beck, Hannity or Orally. One of them is bound to explode any day now with all the vitriol they expend. Let's not leave out the ladies, they just won't have the same kind of heart attacks as the men.
As I've pointed out countless times, the extent to which Clinton is to blame is directly proportional to the extent that he went along with REPUBLICANS. It's still they're legislation and philosophy that's at fault.
And as many have pointed out: Frank was in the minority, and one that the republicans regularly abused, even in the SENATE, where [the minority] still has SOME power. They could have passed legislation without a sigle deomcratic vote in the house. That is a FACT. What's more, whne they were finally in power, increased oversight of Fannie and Freddie was one of the first things that Frank and the Democrats passed. It was just too late by then to be effective.
So stop trying to create the illusion of balance, or "lot's of blame to go around." That's a cop-out. This is about GREED. Rampant Wall Street GREED that the REPUBLICANS wanted to regulate LESS. That's what created this messs. Period. Done and done.
The fact that a bitter former Clinton staffer with a known foot fetish is the man the GOP uses to further their agenda helps to explain why the future of that party is in such dire shape. That's the best they can do in the credibility department?
Let me put it this way...
Would YOU want this man on OUR side?
Conservatives continue to use the Fannie and Freddie diversion tactic. The problem was Wall Street and the lack of regulation of it. We need to regulate Wall Street but for some reason the Obama administration is resisting it. Also, we need to start breaking up these "too large to fail" financial institutions.
Dick, Dick, Dick...please lie about things less easily disproven than this. I know. For his next trick, he'll claim the earth is flat and gravity is a liberal myth. Once a hack, always a hack.
Randy
Dick Morris is such a liar that whoever gives him airtime contaminates themself.
The blame game is a diversion from the real facts that the banks giving out loans without documentation were criminal. The securitizing and subsequent ratings were fraudulent. The guarantees of these securities were total abandonmnet of sound fiduciary responsibility. The bad loans given out in huge numbers were an example of banks being greedy and deceitful, criminally.