Bailout talks could drag into weekend
Emergency rate cut on the line?
By Inman News, Thursday, September 25, 2008.Congressional leaders emerged from a meeting with President Bush Thursday with no agreement on implementing a plan to buy billions in troubled assets from banks and financial institutions.
Although Democrats emerged from a long negotiating session earlier in the day with Republican lawmakers claiming to be near a consensus on legislation authorizing the plan, GOP leaders leaving the White House meeting said no agreement had been reached.
Alabama Republican Sen. Richard Shelby, who is opposed to a bailout and did not attend the earlier negotiation session, came out of the White House meeting saying there was "obviously no agreement," the Associated Press reported. Republican leaders in the House and Senate also denied a deal had been struck, AP said.
Shelby is the ranking Republican on the Senate Banking Committee, which is considering draft legislation proposed by Sen. Chris Dodd, D-Conn., that would allow the Bush administration to implement a revised version of the plan.
The Bush administration wants Congress to authorize a $700 billion debt issue to allow the government to buy up "frozen" assets that banks can't sell except at large losses, including mortgage-backed securities backed by poorly performing loans.
While Democrats say the plan should also include direct help for troubled borrowers and protections for taxpayers, some Republicans want any government program aimed at unfreezing credit markets structured differently. Some House Republicans have proposed that the government provide insurance to private companies that agree to hold frozen assets, AP reported.
The compromise Democrats are pushing would reportedly give the Treasury Department the initial authority to borrow up to $350 billion, with Congress reserving the right to veto the final $350 billion.
The Wall Street Journal's Real Time Economics blog published the text of an "agreement on principles" that was said to have come out of the negotiations that took place before the White House meeting.
The agreement "requires that any transaction include equity sharing" and that the Treasury Department "maximize and coordinate efforts to modify mortgages for homeowners at risk of foreclosure."
The agreement would also require "loan modifications for mortgages owned or controlled by the Federal Government."
Although Democrats could presumably push legislation through the House and Senate without the full cooperation of Republican lawmakers, the Bush administration would have to sign off on it. White House officials said Thursday that progress toward an agreement was being made.
One proposal Democrats had put forward that the administration is said to be particularly opposed to -- giving bankruptcy judges the power to rewrite the terms of loans on troubled borrowers' principal residences -- was not included in the agreement in principles published by the Journal.
Lawmakers from both parties said negotiations on the plan could now drag into the weekend, raising speculation that the Federal Reserve will institute an emergency cut in short-term interest rates if an agreement can't be reached.
Many of the banks and financial institutions that own assets the Bush administration wants to buy are in danger of going out of business or have cut back on lending because they cannot raise capital.
Credit markets have become increasingly stressed in recent weeks, reversing a trend in which mortgage rates fell in the aftermath of the government's decision to place mortgage financiers Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac in conservatorship. That move resolved any questions that the government would stand behind Fannie and Freddie's debt, and allowed them to continue to raise the capital needed to fund their mortgage purchases and guarantees.
***
What's your opinion? Leave your comments below or send a letter to the editor.
All rights reserved. This content may not be used or reproduced in any manner whatsoever, in part or in whole, without written permission of Inman News. Use of this content without permission is a violation of federal copyright law.

You must login or register to post a comment.
Submitted by Dan Palanza on September 26, 2008 - 7:40am.
Why is no person talking about the obvious. The Ponzi-type bonds are worth .22 to .26 cents on a dollar, based upon recent sales of large blocks. If Treasury buys them at that price, the argument is that the bank balance sheets would be too weak to bring back liquidity and lending. So Treasury might loan money to the banks commensurate with the sell off of the Ponzi-bonds and we the taxpayer would maintain a senior interest in the bank until the bank gets back on its feet. Those are simple, common-sense, transaction. So why not do that?
Because it is equally clear that persons who do not understand the 650 year old rules of double-entry bookkeeping, have created a monster of comingled right to ownership as responsibilities within the bonds themselves. The Comingling is compounded by special purpose entities that share the ownership of blocks of the bonds. And, by bets in the form of insurance against failure. Bookkeeping is double entry because the bookkeeper must (1) record a debit value of the artifact or the services in trade, and, (2) record the credit rights to ownership of that value in exchange.
The commingling makes the common-sense buy-lend pattern, above, impractical. And so Paulson, I presume is going to hand pick a solution on the fly. However that commingling will rear its head time and time again in future banking practices. The commingled patterns must be dealt with by unavoidable bankruptcies of the guilty parties. There will be no short cut to that fact. The commingling has to go. We pay the price of central banking's collapse and return to the Great Depression solution of regional commercial banks that are not allowed to gamble the depositors money on Schemes that have been with us in the Saving & Loan scandal, the Dot.Com Bubble, the Ponzi Triple A bond-scheme, Commodities Bubbles that will soon return, and the rest. Banks and gambling simply do not work.
Hopefully we are ready to accept that as proven fact. My fellow citizens are accepting that in unprecedented unanimity. We The People want no part of the Bailout.
Submitted by Wenceslao Fernandez Jr, BS, Realtor, CDPE on September 26, 2008 - 11:31am.
It's too late for "we the people" wanting or even taking any part of this recovery plan or bailout of the American (and global), economy.
We all pitched in when we bought more home we could afford, walked away from a mortgage we agreed to pay back in greed, when lenders create loan programs designed to backfire (which it is all now part of history in the making), while taking greedy profits when things seemed great, knowing all too well we might be here some day but choosing to ignore the warning signals from many (including Greenspan's "unsustainable exhuberance" remarks in several occassions) and when even greedier financiers concuct a coctail of toxic MBS instruments they themselves may not even have ever fully understood.
Now, we all must step up. The plan as originally presented was only an outline. After all, it was only 3 pages long. But its intended result has brought us to a week of deliberations which must now culminate in action - soon.
Both sides of Congress contributed to get us here in many ways. Now, both MUST get us out.
ww.MiamiRealEstateKing.com
Certified Distressed Property Expert
Miami-Dade County, Florida.