Network News

X My Profile
View More Activity

Posted at 1:30 PM ET, 02/11/2011

Reactions to Obama's plan to restructure the housing market

By Sarah Halzack


The Obama administration released a white paper on Friday that proposes winding down mortgage giants Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac and lessening the government's role in the housing finance system.

The Post's Zachary Goldfarb has a full report on the plan and its potential impact.

The long-anticipated report has prompted responses and assessments from politicians and industry groups in Washington and beyond. Here's a look at some of them.

Senate Banking Committee Chairman Tim Johnson, a Democrat from South Carolina, didn't stake out a position on Obama's plan but said in a statement that he is studying it:

"I am reviewing the new report, and look forward to working with my colleagues and the White House to find bipartisan consensus around sound policy solutions that protect homeowners, investors, renters and the American taxpayers."

On the other side of the aisle, Rep. Randy Neugebauer (R-Texas), chairman of the House Financial Services Subcommittee on Oversight and Investigations, said he is pleased that Obama's proposals reduce the role for government in the mortgage industry:

"I am encouraged with the Obama Administration's acknowledgement that there needs to be significantly more private market participation and private capital in the housing finance market, and their proposed steps to wind down Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac. There are many aspects of the plan that are aligned with my own suggestions."

John Taylor, president and chief executive of National Community Reinvestment Coalition, gave a mixed assessment of the proposal:

"There is universal agreement with the principle that people who cannot afford homeownership shouldn't be put in an unsustainable loan. However, the Administration's proposal may be overly narrowing the window of opportunity for many blue collar and low- and moderate-income people from realizing their dream of homeownership. We appreciate the Administration's efforts to address the critical need for expanded affordable rental housing.

Tom Deutsch, head of the American Securitization Forum, offered this take:

"We are pleased the Administration understands the importance of proceeding thoughtfully and deliberately in reducing the government's role in the housing market. We also want to make sure that whatever emerges from this process enables the private sector to fully utilize securitization vehicles. Securitization is key to ensuring the housing market and American homebuyers have access to adequate liquidity at a reasonable cost."

An alliance of civil rights organizations was critical of two of the options the administration laid out and expressed reservations about the third. The following is an excerpt from a joint statement issued by National Council of La Raza, National Fair Housing Alliance, Center for Responsible Lending, The Opportunity Agenda, NAACP, National Coalition for Asian Pacific American Community Development, National Urban League, National People's Action, the Kirwan Institute, Bazelon Center for Mental Health Law, PolicyLink and Poverty & Race Research Action Council:

"In its report, the Administration pledges to ensure that all communities and families have access to capital needed for sustainable homeownership and a range of rental options. Of the three options that the Administration proposes, the first two, which call for complete and near-complete privatization, will entirely fail to meet this goal and will instead marginalize communities of color. Congress should reject these two options. The third option, offering catastrophic reinsurance, inspires more confidence than the first two, but lacks important details as to how it would serve all Americans well. As the debate moves ahead and final decisions are made, our civil rights organizations will fight to secure sound lending policies for all Americans, ensuring that the families who have long been poorly served by the market will finally have a fair shot."

By Sarah Halzack  | February 11, 2011; 1:30 PM ET
Categories:  Congress, Housing, Small business, U.S. Economy  
Save & Share:  Send E-mail   Facebook   Twitter   Digg   Yahoo Buzz   StumbleUpon   Technorati   Google Buzz   Previous: Mubarak resignation lifts U.S. stocks
Next: Federal Reserve board member: U.S. investigation into mortgage servicing has found 'widespread weakness'


Mortgage refinancing means re-funding the mortgage loan with better terms as well as conditions, most likely from a different lender. It is one way to save money. Search online for 123 Mortgage Refinance they found me 3.1% refinance rate and also gave free analysis of my mortgage.

Posted by: betsyclark369 | February 12, 2011 6:52 AM | Report abuse

10% down is a good start. A better plan would be to combine the higher down payment with a greater allowance for IRA money to go into your own house. Currently you can use up to 10,000 (lifetime) for a home purchase so increasing that would certainly help. I also think that homeowners that take the mortgage interest rate deduction should have to pay capital gains taxes on their homes when they sell. Or you could forego the interest rate deduction and then you would not have to pay capital gains.

Posted by: Anonymous | February 12, 2011 11:35 AM | Report abuse

Post a Comment

We encourage users to analyze, comment on and even challenge's articles, blogs, reviews and multimedia features.

User reviews and comments that include profanity or personal attacks or other inappropriate comments or material will be removed from the site. Additionally, entries that are unsigned or contain "signatures" by someone other than the actual author will be removed. Finally, we will take steps to block users who violate any of our posting standards, terms of use or privacy policies or any other policies governing this site. Please review the full rules governing commentaries and discussions.

characters remaining

RSS Feed
Subscribe to The Post

© 2011 The Washington Post Company