The Fannie And Freddie Bailout, In 10 Easy Links

If you're looking to understand today's announcement about the U.S. government swooping in to rescue mortgage agencies Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac, you could start with a New York Times article that appeared on Friday:

"Main Bank of China Is in Need of Capital"

The story detailed the problems that China's central bank faces as its investments in the American economy have turned out poorly. In a bid to finance its ongoing industrialization, China has bought some $1 trillion worth of Treasury bonds and debt from U.S. agencies. A lot of that investment has come in so-called mortgage-backed securities issued by Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac.

With Fannie and Freddie (more on them later) in serious trouble, China's central bank has also felt the pinch. At home, Fannie and Freddie's problems look like blocks of foreclosed homes in new developments. For the global economy, they look a lot scarier than that.

"Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac are so large and so interwoven in our financial system that a failure of either of them would cause great turmoil in our financial markets here at home and around the globe," Treasury Secretary Henry Paulson told the nation. "This turmoil would directly and negatively impact household wealth: from family budgets, to home values, to savings for college and retirement. A failure would affect the ability of Americans to get home loans, auto loans and other consumer credit and business finance. And a failure would be harmful to economic growth and job creation."

It's a frightening prospect, for sure, if not a very clear one. You can follow the coverage on this blog and at npr.org/economy. After the jump, we'll provide a quick primer -- 10 links to stories that need reading now.

The News About Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac:

The gist: Advisers to the federal government found the situation worse than they expected. Now the government is booting the top executives of Fannie and Freddie and moving to calm frazzled investors.

The Background:

The gist: From 2000 to 2007, Wall Street sold gajillions in mortgage-backed securities to investors who just couldn't get enough. In order to have enough of those securities to sell upstream to Wall Street, banks gave home loans to people who were iffy bets. When the loans went bad, the market went into crisis -- the subprime mortgage crisis. The housing market fell, taking with it the value of Fannie and Freddie's assets.

So What Are Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac?

The gist: The Federal Home Mortgage Corporation and the Federal National Mortgage Association are members of that rare species known as government-sponsored enterprises, or GSEs. Private shareholders own and run the companies, but they're backed up by the federal government. Fannie Mae was part of the New Deal, a Depression Era move to increase home ownership. Freddie Mac came along in 1970 to create competition.

How Big a Player Is China in Fannie and Freddie?

The gist: China is a really, really big player. The Chinese are the largest holder of Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac bonds -- the official U.S. figure on that tops $420 billion. One economist, Brad Setser of the Council on Foreign Relations, has been obsessively following China's investment in American debt. Setser writes that the real number is much higher: "Based on the pattern of revisions in past surveys and the scale of China's foreign asset growth, I would guess that China now holds between $500 and $600b of Agencies -- or about 10 percent of the outstanding stock." That would be more than 10 percent of China's gross domestic product.

How Much Will It Cost to Bail Out Fannie and Freddie?

The gist: Whatever enormous-sounding number eventually rests at the bottom line, policymakers argue that acting now will be a lot less painful than the consequences of not acting would be later. Just imagine the American economy with severely curtailed access to credit. Slate writer Daniel Gross takes the view that with the U.S. government's pledge to back Fannie and Freddie loans, millions of Americans got relatively good deals on mortgages. Now, he writes, it's time to make good on that promise. "[M]erely by signaling to the markets that it might back the GSEs' debt, the government has, over the past few decades, helped tens of millions of homeowners save some serious money," Gross writes. "Until this week, the cost of this benefit has been effectively nothing--save for some foregone taxes and the cost of regulating the companies."

Has the U.S. Economy Ever Seen the Likes of a Fannie/Freddie Bailout?

The gist: The mechanics are different, but the shock was the same in 1980, when the federal government swooped in to save the Federal Savings and Loan Insurance Corporation. Economist Bert Ely details 15 public policies that set the stage for the S&L implosion -- to the tune of $175 billion in taxpayer money. "The extraordinary cost of the S&L crisis is astounding to every taxpayer, depositor, and policymaker," Ely writes. Bailing out Fannie and Freddie could be much, much cheaper, at least relative to the current overall economy.

Where Can I Learn More?

The gist: Big news organizations like National Public Radio will continue to cover the Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac bailout. At Planet Money, we draw on the expertise of economists like Brad Setser and the blog Calculated Risk. Their work can be dense and difficult -- that's why part of our work is in translating theirs -- but it's worth the attention.

 

Comments (Send a comment)

IT IS VERY DISAPPOINTING TO KNOW THAT ONCE AGAIN WE THE TAXPAYERS OF AMERICA HAVE TO TAKE THE BURDEN OF ANOTHER FINANCIAL BAILOUT TO A INSTITUTION THAT WAS SUPPOSED TO BE MANAGED TO THE ETHICAL PRINCIPLES OF DOING GOOD BUSINESS. I MYSELF WAS TELLING MY FAMILY AND FRIENDS ABOUT THE WAY REAL ESTATE COMPANIES AND BANKING INSTITUTIONS WERE ALLOWING PEOPLE WHO COULD NOT AFFORD THE PROPERTIES THEY WERE BUYING. THIS WAS ABOUT 3-4 YEARS AGO. NOW WE ARE ALL SURPRISED ABOUT THE SITUATION THE REAL ESTATE AND MORTGAGE INDUSTRIES ARE IN? THE GOVERNMENT KNEW ABOUT THESE LOANS COMING DUE, AND WAS HOPING THE PEOPLE WHO PURCHASED THESE PROPERTIES WOULD BE ABLE TO HANDLE THE NEW PAYMENT BECAUSE EVERYONE IS SUPPOSED TO IMPROVE THEIR INCOME. BUT AS WE ALL KNOW THIS DID NOT HAPPEN AND PROPERTIES DROPPED IN VALUE, OIL SHOT-UP PAST $140.00/BARREL, DROP IN EMPLOYMENT, AND SO ON, AND SO ON. I WOULD LIKE FOR SOMEONE IN THE MORTGAGE AND REAL ESTATE INDUSTRY TO ANSWER THIS QUESTION; WHY DID YOU MOVE AWAY FROM A PRACTICE OF ALLOWING ONLY PEOPLE WITH 10-20 PERCENT DOWN, AND GOOD CREDIT RATING TO PURCHASE A HOME? IT'S A SIMPLE QUESTION BUT NO ONE HAS ASKED THEM. THEY ALLOWED FOR THESE PEOPLE TO PURCHASE A HOME WITH ONLY 3-5 PERCENT DOWN AND SHADY CREDIT SCORES. IT SEEMS TO ME THAT THEY SHOULD BE THE ONES TO HAVE TO PAY FOR IT AND THAT WE THE TAXPAYERS NOT PAY A DIME FOR SOMETHING THEY KNEW WOULD OCCUR. ALSO, BECAUSE THE BANKING INDUSTRY IS FEDERALLY INSURED, I GUESS THEY ALSO KNEW THEY WOULD GET BAILED-OUT. I WISH I WENT TO THIS SCHOOL SO I TO CAN LEARN TO GET PAID FOR MAKING BIG-BIG MISTAKES AND THEN BE ABLE TO LOOK YOU IN THE FACE AND SAY YOU NEED TO PAY ME SERVICE CHARGES WITH THAT TRANSACTION. JUST ONE DIVORCED MAN, SINGLE FATHER OF 3 DAUGHTERS OPINION.LATE.

Sent by MARTIN ALARCON JR. | 1:39 AM ET | 09-08-2008

Dear NPR, I've been folling this issue with interest but there are still some basic concepts that elude me. Was the over-issuing of mortgages like what national leaders did when not regulated - just print more money? When a government prints more money, it is bargaining that it's reputation of creditworthiness will bolster the street value of the bills. We know that is only a short term solution.
In the case of mortgages, a mortgage is like a dollar bill, and financial institutions wanted "more money" i.e., more mortages to play with, so they simply "printed more."

If this analogy is not quite right, plese correct it to show me what's really going on.

The lack of regulation, given that I can understand what's going on, indicates that names should be named, and policy's promoted by honchos like Alan Greenspan should be condemned.

Edith Johnson
Jakarta, Indonesia

Sent by Edith A. Johnson | 2:10 AM ET | 09-08-2008

Interestingly, the CEO's of both Fannie and Freddie netted *bonuses* of over $3 million last year as they drove the companies down the drain. This is obscene; the government should recall those bonuses!

Sent by Dave Klassen | 7:22 AM ET | 09-08-2008

Amen to Dave Klassen's comments above. There are many, many out there who made money on these loans without having to bother with collecting the payments. They loaned the money in the full knowledge that THEY would never have to collect a dime of the money back. Deregulation and the current administration's desire to redirect tax money to their friends have proven a costly combination to the American taxpayer.

Sent by Steve Williams | 12:33 PM ET | 09-08-2008

Why is there so little interest in examining the parallels between the past savings & loan scandal; and the federal bail-out that followed; which happened near the end of the old G.H.W.Bush administration, and the present mortgage market scandal and federal bail-out now happening: at the end of the G.W.Bush administration.
Is it possible that neither president actually understood the need for carefully-regulating our credit system? Or were both simply surrounded by too many corrupt-scoundrels?

Sent by Victor Counts | 1:27 PM ET | 09-08-2008

It is time to seriously look at solid and functional regulation. We hear so often that "free markets" will cure all, and that regulation only hampers these markets. Time and again, these "free markets" fail us - Savings & Loan, Energy (Enron), Mortgages, Credit Cards(?), health care - essentially due to greed, corruption, ignorance and the demonizing and complete absence of intelligent and forceful regulation. "Free Markets" are never free - they simply favor some over others. It is time to polish the word "regulation" and put it in its rightful place, hand-in-hand and side-by-side with Free Markets to balance them.

Sent by Rob McALeavy | 2:38 PM ET | 09-08-2008

HOVV is this take over going to affect the mortgage rates ? for those of us ready to re-mortgage? is it better to take a month to month mortgage and VVait for lovver Rates if any?

Sent by Florent L"Esperance | 2:53 PM ET | 09-08-2008

There are people responsible for this, and at several levels. First and foremost are the crooked managers and greedy consumers who willingly assumed huge amounts of risk that they knew they could never repay, and got rewarded for that.

Second, are the elected representatives (senators and representatives) who created Fannie and Freddie to push the pedal to the metal and drive rates lower, to get a happier voting public.

Finally, there is the public that voted in these clowns and will in all likelihood continue to keep them in office, well-fed and obscenely compensated for wrecking the nation.

There is a solution, merely vote against incumbents, regardless of party, each and every time you vote.

Otherwise, the people should be happy with their lot -- after all, they are responsible for it.

Sent by David Lentz | 3:09 PM ET | 09-08-2008

I understand the need to provide stability to this market and to bail out the Chinese Central Bank, but why do the Republicans always spout that they are the Party of less government and then do the exact opposite. As a SMALL shareholder of Freddie I get clobbered, the Chinese get saved, and the Republicans get away with more BS about what they stand for...

Sent by J Baker | 3:12 PM ET | 09-08-2008

Send a Comment







 (privacy policy)

NPR reserves the right to read on the air and/or publish on its Web site or in any medium now known or unknown the e-mails and letters that we receive. We may edit them for clarity or brevity and identify authors by name and location. For additional information, please consult our Terms of Use.



   
   
   
null


 
E-mail this page Print this page
 
 
 
Adam Davidson

Adam Davidson

Editorial Director

 
David Kestenbaum

David Kestenbaum

Correspondent

 
 
 

About Planet Money

Planet Money is a multimedia team covering the global economy. You can follow us on this blog and on Twitter. You can also e-mail us directly. For more information, see our Frequently Asked Questions and rules for discussion.

 
 

Archives

 
 

Search 'Planet Money'

Search for the word(s):
 
 

Get in touch:

Want to send us a note? Go for it.

 
 
 

Browse Topics

Services

Programs