President-elect Obama has promised close oversight of the Troubled Asset Relief Program money that Congress has not yet released. (Charles Dharapak/AP)
Obama pushes to redirect bailout
He aims to expand access to the remaining $350 billion in TARP funding.
By Peter Grier | Staff writer of The Christian Science Monitor/ January 13, 2009 edition
Reporter Peter Grier discusses the tussle in Washington over how to spend the remaining money in the government’s $700 billion financial bailout fund.
Reporter Peter Grier
Washington
Coming soon to the US Treasury: a financial rescue effort that’s closely controlled by government regulators and is aimed at homeowners, small businesses, and auto buyers, as well as banks.
That’s what incoming Obama administration officials are telling Congress, anyway, as they push for lawmakers to release the second half of the $700 billion bailout fund approved in October. In essence, the Obama team is trying to reboot and rebrand an effort that many Democrats have criticized as too secretive and too focused on helping Wall Street.
Critics of the way the bailout has been run so far “want to make sure the money gets to people and does something,” says Connel Fullenkamp, an associate professor of economics at Duke University in Durham, N.C.
On Jan. 12, on behalf of President-elect Obama, President Bush asked Congress for access to the remaining $350 billion of the cash lawmakers authorized for the Troubled Asset Relief Program (TARP). It indicates that Mr. Obama may be worried about more trouble in US credit markets.
“It is clear that the financial system, although improved from where it was in September, is still fragile,” Obama said Jan. 12.
But approval to get the cash isn’t a foregone conclusion. In the House of Representatives, for instance, Rep. Barney Frank (D) of Massachusetts, chairman of the Financial Services Committee, has introduced a bill to impose oversight restrictions on the bailout fund and to require that at least $40 billion be used for preventing home foreclosures. That legislation might have to pass before TARP funds are released, say some lawmakers.
Representative Frank’s conditions mirror things that Obama has said he will do. Incoming White House economic adviser Lawrence Summers sent lawmakers a letter this week that pledged the Obama administration will lay “tough and transparent conditions” on firms that get taxpayer cash. Obama will use TARP to help “reduce mortgage payments for economically stressed but responsible homeowners,” wrote Mr. Summers.
That is all well and good, but Frank is not satisfied.
“Many of us have a great deal of confidence in the Obama administration, but I am prepared here to draw on the wisdom of a previous Republican president: We will trust but verify,” said Frank at a Jan. 9 hearing, echoing a phrase Ronald Reagan used when describing superpower arms treaties.
From the first, Treasury Secretary Henry Paulson and other Bush administration officials said their top priority for TARP was saving the US financial system. To them, this meant saving the institutions that make up that system.
The Treasury has, under a capital investment program, injected $189 billion in 257 financial institutions around the country, Neel Kashkari, assistant secretary of the Treasury for financial stability, said Tuesday in a speech at Georgetown University.
Add in TARP funds separately allocated to insurance giant AIG and to Citigroup, and the amount committed so far nears about $330 billion. Add the $19 billion pledged to Detroit automakers on top of that, and the Bush administration now has just about spent the first $350 billion of the rescue fund’s $700 billion total.
The Treasury Department now is developing tools to measure whether banks that took TARP money in fact are increasing lending, Mr. Kashkari said. But to critics, that effort comes too little, too late, as the Bush administration has handed out money to banks without requiring how the funds be used.
“We have to put strings on the TARP,” says Peter Morici, an economist at the University of Maryland.
What the Obama team should do is require that financial firms refocus on the securitization market, says Dr. Morici. The flow of mortgages, credit-card debt, student loans, and other consumer loans packaged into securities and sold by banks to long-term investors is clogged, he says, and must be restarted.
Duke’s Dr. Fullenkamp agrees that the credit system remains clogged. But to free up lending, he says, the Obama administration should return to the Treasury’s original bailout idea and buy toxic mortgage-based assets from financial institutions. More direct government involvement would be a mistake, he says.
In the Senate, majority leader Harry Reid said he was encouraged by Obama’s efforts to require greater accountability for use of TARP funds. Minority leader Mitch McConnell was skeptical, but left open the possibility that he could be persuaded.
( More stories )
Comments
2. RayinAK@aol.com | 01.13.09
FIXING THIS ECONOMIC MESS
The economic collapse our nation is experiencing today was experienced before by the oil producing states when the price of oil fell below $10 per barrel in 1986.
Louisiana and Texas were hit hard but Alaska was the state hit the hardest. On average, between 1986 and 1990, real property across Alaska fell to less than half of its former value. Rental properties fell by two-thirds. Some condos fell to 20 percent of their original cost.
In perspective, during the Great Depression of the 1930s, one-fourth of the banks in the U.S. failed. In Alaska, between 1986 and 1990, three-fourths of Alaska’s banks failed.
As a commercial real estate investment broker for 35 years, I have made a living studying and predicting the economics of real estate. When Alaska’s economy collapsed, I watched as real estate and/or the mortgage backed paper (mortgages and/or notes secured by deeds of trust) that came with it moved through paralyzed and collapsing banks into the hands of an overwhelmed FDIC and back into the marketplace.
I saw a few become very rich while thousands lost everything. One person bought his non-performing mortgage (a nonperforming note secured by a deed of trust) from the FDIC for 1 percent of what he owed on his mortgage — from his originating bank. Five years before buying his note, the bank had been in disarray and was unable to deal with foreclosing on his property when its rental income ceased to meet his required payments.
Two years after that, the FDIC took over his bank. Three years after the takeover, he bought a “non-performing note,” — his own mortgage, one of those “toxic securities” we now hear about — paying one cent on the dollar for his note which originated five years earlier with a three million dollar face value.
To read the rest of this story see below or go to: http://alaskareport.com/news19/x61867_economy_metcalfe.htm
3. John Woodall | 01.14.09
I don’t understand the view that it could be a good long-term investment for taxpayers to purchase various troubled assets at a steep discount if private investor entities are unwilling to purchase said assets for the same discount. Taxpayers got lucky with Chrysler and made a profit. Do we really think that will happen again? I’m in the real estate industry, and I see a lot of loans that are worth exactly zero ($0.00) and anyone who pays more than that is a financial fool.
4. VIRGINIA C | 01.17.09
I think the public need to take into accountability how and what they spend and be responsible and reasonable and learn to say NO! Inflation brings debts when overpriced homes and such are bought. That’s when taxes go up and if the people would learn to say NO, the prices would come down and the whole country would be priced down in size and then, would be reasonable for everyone. When you use plastic to buy something, make sure you pay it off and avoid finance charges.Then the whole country wouldn’t need to have these government bail outs or house closings. NO is a good word and then hunker down and feel the peace of living in your own and paid for life style.NO debts and that’s a very good feeling! Just say NO !
5. Sandy | 01.19.09
Hope Frank’s iron fist is a match with Obama’s velvet glove and that the two will deliver a one-two in all the right places!
Trackbacks/Pingbacks
Leave a Comment
We do not publish all comments, and we do not publish comments immediately. The comments feature is a forum to discuss the ideas in our stories. Constructive debate - even pointed disagreement - is welcome, but personal attacks on other commenters are not, and will not be published.
Tip: Do not write a novel. Keep it short. We will not publish lengthy comments. Come up with your own statements. This is not a place to cut and paste an email you received. If we recognize it as such, we won't post it.
Please do not post any comments that are commercial in nature or that violate copyrights.
Finally, we will not publish any comments that we regard as obscene, defamatory, or intended to incite violence.





1. Sheridan | 01.13.09
Those of us who take an interest in the chaos that is mounting daily, deserve to know where each and every dollar of the bail out money is going and what benefit it is providing in words we can understand.