|
Boom,
bust & bank bailout
By
Alan Shapiro
To the Teacher:
Americans
everywhere are feeling the effects of the housing bust that followed the housing
boom, though many more personally and keenly than others. Economists and financial
experts have differing analyses of what happened and why, though there is general
agreement that easy credit, subprime mortgages and their securitization, lax or
even no government regulation, and unfair, at times fraudulent, lending practices
played significant roles. Below
are some suggestions for student inquiries into this issue and introductory snapshots
of Americans who are experiencing the effects of the housing bust. Following that
are two student readings on (1) what fueled the housing boom, the warnings that
were ignored, the financial collapse that followed, and the government bailout
of banks that caused the crisis, and (2) the impact on those facing foreclosure,
the financial industry's political clout with lawmakers, which has kept many of
those facing foreclosure from getting help they need, and recent investigations
that uncovered predatory lending practices. Discussion questions follow the reading.
See the introduction for suggestions for further inquiry. See
the high school section of www.teachablemoment.org for earlier sets of materials
on the financial and economic crises.
For
discussion and later inquiries
Ask
students what they know about the housing boom and bust. What
questions do they have? How might these questions be answered? These
questions may be answered in the readings; others may be useful later for student
inquiries. Make a note of what students are misinformed about; this too might
be useful for future inquiries.
Introduction:
The human
face of foreclosure
"Bad
economy puts more people on streets" "The
tears begin and her voice trembles as Ruth Martinez remembers the first few days
of her new world
.Her husband had lost his job, and the stress drove them
apart. Then Martinez was evicted. Suddenly, her car was her home. And she was
afraid to ask for help
. "Rudy
Salinas finds them in cars, under bridges, in abandoned homes, and even in protected
trenches artfully dug by the military veterans who put survival skills learned
in Iraq and Afghanistan to use in America's inner cities
. "In
my eight years of doing this I have never come across as many people who've told
us they have never been homeless before," said Salinas, the director of community
outreach for People Assisting the Homeless in Los Angeles. (www.cnn.com,
5/8/09) "It's
a little scary" "On
Bainbridge Street in the predominantly black Bedford-Stuyvesant section of Brooklyn
.a
visitor can identify homes in jeopardy by the cracked stoops, broken windowsills
and tilting chimneys. Alexia Billiart, 33, who is black, and her husband, who
is white, moved a year ago
into a handsome row house in Bedford-Stuyvesant. "Across
the street, two foreclosed homes have fallen vacant, and a nearby apartment building
stands broken and padlocked
.'We figured we'd move here and participate in
the rebirth of this block,' said Ms. Billiart, who works for a financial planning
firm. 'It seems to be going backward; it's a little scary.'" ("Minorities
Hit Hardest as New York Foreclosures Rise," New York Times, 5/16/09) "Children
of foreclosure falling behind in school" "Some
of the people hit hardest by this bad economy are the youngest
.These are
the children whose families have had to move, sometimes more than once. The youngsters
are pulled out of school, often leaving their friends behind without even saying
goodbye. "Nine-year-old
Kenia, who is in the fourth grade at Fairview Elementary School in Modesto, California,
said that is what happened to her. She is new to the school, having moved to the
area just a few months ago. She said it is really hard and she misses her friends."
(www.cnn.org, 2/27/09) "Renters,
too, can face the hit of foreclosure" "Losing
a home to foreclosure can be devastating. Typically, homeowners come to mind when
we think of foreclosure. But the fact is, many foreclosed properties are places
that renters call home, too. Recently, a father of five from Clackamas County
called a Legal Aid office. His landlord owns all the houses on the street, and
every one is in foreclosure-many of them are sitting vacant. "The
father wants to continue paying rent, but the landlord's bank won't accept his
payment and is pushing him to move out. 'What should I do?' he asked the Legal
Aid office. Unfortunately, there's no good answer under Oregon law." (www.oregonlive.com,
5/5/09)
Student
Reading 1: "Bad banking decisions" and who made them
The
housing boom
"What
should I do?" is a question on the lips of millions of Americans on the brink
of foreclosure or homeless because of foreclosure. They are victims of a housing
boom that began early in the new century and then collapsed. Low
interest rates and easy-to-pay mortgages stimulated a demand for houses, especially
among people who had never owned one. Many had financial problems that stood in
the way: limited incomes, debt, poor credit histories, inability to make a down
payment. But
none of these problems prevented them from getting a "subprime" mortgage,
or low, adjustable rate mortgage. An adjustable rate mortgage might require people
to pay no more than interest on the mortgage for two years. Then the "adjustable"
part would kick in -- sharply rising payments. Too many buyers did not understand
what they were getting into. Some mortgage brokers helped them not understand.
Some were crooks. Rumpelstiltskin
spun straw into gold. Financial wizards at major banks and investment houses spun
subprime mortgages into packages called "securities." They sold these
securities to investors around the world. Essentially they were selling investors
the promise of the new homebuyers' future mortgage payments-but they often misrepresented
the risky nature of those mortgages. For
awhile, everyone was making money on this explosion of subprime mortgages. Most
of the lenders of hundreds of billions of dollars for sub-prime mortgages were
giant banks--JPMorgan Chase, Citigroup, Bank of America, Wells Fargo. A
study by the Center for Public Integrity called "Who's Behind the Meltdown"
documents how lawmakers "essentially ignored repeated warnings that high-cost
loans represented a systemic risk to the American economy." (www.publicintegrity.org,
5/6/09) Treasury Secretary Timothy Geithner, who was head of the New York Federal
Reserve during the housing bubble and was in a position to warn of its consequences,
now says, "The financial crisis was caused in large part by significant gaps
in the oversight of the markets." (5/13/09) A
major reason for the lack of oversight was that beginning in the 1980s, banks
spent nearly $370 billion lobbying Congress successfully to weaken oversight and
regulation of their behavior. (www.pbs.org/moyers/journal,
5/8/09) For
a while, large numbers of house buyers kept pumping up prices. Financial wizards
and ordinary homebuyers shared the delusion that prices would keep rising indefinitely.
Even homebuyers who couldn't really afford their mortgage found that they could
sell their home after awhile for significantly more than they had paid for it--so
they kept on buying, and bankers kept on selling, risky mortgages.
Alan Greenspan, who was Federal Reserve chairman at the time, later admitted in
congressional testimony that he was "shocked" at how "mistaken"
he had been in believing that "the self-interests of
banks and others"
would ensure their "protecting their own shareholders and their
firms."
He and Congress should have required oversight and regulation to prevent "systemic
risk to the American economy." The
Bust Beginning
in 2007, the first signs of serious trouble appeared. In an overstuffed housing
market, prices fell. Homeowners with sub-prime mortgages could not make rising
payments, could not borrow money on declining home values, and could not sell
their homes. Home foreclosures mounted. Banks
began to founder under the weight of mortgage-backed securities whose value was
sinking and which they could not sell. By the fall of 2008, the Bush administration's
Treasury Secretary Henry Paulsen announced that financial collapse was imminent.
The banks of America were "too big to fail." A Troubled Asset Relief
Program (TARP) was essential to keep them from drowning under the weight of the
sinking value of sub-prime securities nobody would buy. Billions in taxpayer money
was essential to bail them out. TARP
bailout money Citigroup:
$45 billion Bank of America: $45 billion Wells Fargo: $25 billion Additional
billions went to such other big financial institutions as Goldman Sachs, Morgan
Stanley, MetLife, and GMAC. And then, recently, tens of billions more to Citigroup,
Bank of America and Wells Fargo after regulators finished examining their books.
"The
mega-banks that funded the subprime industry were not victims of an unforeseen
financial collapse, as they have sometimes portrayed themselves. These banks were
deliberate enablers that bankrolled the type of lending that's now threatening
the financial system," said Bill Buzenberg, Executive Director of the Center
for Public Integrity The
banks made nearly 7.2 million subprime loans from 2005 through 2007, a period
marking the peak and collapse of the subprime boom, the Center's analysis reported.
"The banks
made huge profits while their executives collected handsome
bonuses until the bottom fell out of the real estate market." During the
peak, "At least 21 of the top 25 subprime lenders were financed by banks
that received bailout money-through direct ownership, credit agreements, or huge
purchases of loans for securitization." No
bailout for homeowners The
worst sufferers are not the mega-banks. They are families being pushed out of
their homes or in imminent danger of losing them through foreclosures. They are
millions of other Americans who had nothing to do with the housing boom, but lost
jobs, health insurance and pensions in the severe recession that came when the
boom went bust. "Why is it in this country, in America, that we can
find hundreds of billions of taxpayers' dollars from hard-working people all over
the United States to come to the rescue of bad banking decisions, rotten investments,
mortgages that were fraudulent on their face, but can't summon the political will
to do something about 8 million families in America who are going to face foreclosure?
That is where we are."-Senator Richard Durbin (IL, D) (www.pbs.org/moyers/journal,
5/8/09)
For
discussion 1.
What questions do students have about the reading? How might they be answered?
2.
What fueled the housing boom? Why were banks willing to lend to buyers who
might not be able to pay their debts after a couple of years?
3. What
happened to the regulations banks had been required to observe earlier and why?
4.
Why has the government pumped billions into bank bailouts to prevent them
from collapsing?
5. The mega-banks were not "victims of an
unforeseen financial collapse....These banks were deliberate enablers"
of the kind of lending "now threatening the financial system," according
to the Center for Public Integrity. Do you agree? Why or why not?
6.
What does Senator Durbin think about the bailout? Do you agree? Why or why
not?
Student
Reading 2: The Senate, mega-banks, rising foreclosures
Banking
power and "the sanctity of contracts" "The
banks-hard to believe in a time when we're facing a banking crisis
that many
of the banks created-are still the most powerful lobby on Capitol Hill. And they
frankly own the place."-Senator Durbin, an Illinois Democrat, in a radio
interview, 4/27/09. The
senator was upset and angry because the Senate was about to vote down his plan
to help homeowners facing foreclosure if their mortgage institution would not.
The plan would have allowed bankruptcy judges to qualify the homeowners for a
mortgage at a lower interest rate or even at a lower principal that would reduce
it to fair market value. This kind of help is available today for wealthy people
who want to buy vacation homes, farms or ranches, according to Durbin.
"The people who
brought this crisis to us are the ones that are dictating policy," Senator
Durbin charged in an interview with Bill Moyers on PBS. "The banking industry
fought
me all the way
.Some won't even sit at the table. The American Bankers Association
walked away." So did other bankers and credit unions. "Meanwhile they
were working feverishly in the halls of the Senate, going office to office, trying
to convince people to vote against Durbin's bill
.They're pretty convincing.
They're pretty powerful." Moyers
asked, "What did the lobbyists say when you said to them, 'Look, rich people
can
get their mortgages renegotiated, but ordinary people can't.'" "Well,"
he responded, "they argue about the "sanctity of the contract
.and
I have to tell you that it is a little hard to swallow when we're dealing with
a banking industry that has entered into so many bad contracts, creating these
rotten portfolios of mortgage securities"-banks that have since turned to
taxpayers to "bail them out with hundreds of billions of dollars." "And
I have to say that the group I was trying to help, the people facing mortgage
foreclosure, don't have that kind of political clout.
.I really was trying
to speak for some of those people against some pretty powerful political forces." Who
opposed the Durbin bill--and why? Durbin
had offered the same plan to the Senate a year ago, when there were two million
homes in foreclosure. There are now an estimated eight million foreclosures. This
time around, the Senate voted down Durbin's plan by 51-45. The majority included
12 of Durbin's fellow Democrats. The
Senate did approve a bill for federal help to prevent some mortgage foreclosures.
It also gives renters a 90-day notice before eviction. But foreclosures continue
to rise, contributing to deteriorating neighborhoods in America's towns and cities
like one in Bedford-Stuyvesant where the Billiards live. Durbin
told Bill Moyers that there were several reasons why senators voted against his
bill. Some, he said, agree with the banks. Others don't have much of a mortgage
crisis in their states. And some "don't want to give this last break to somebody
facing foreclosure, thinking some of these people got into this mess on their
own and they shouldn't be rescued." And,
as Durbin suggested, the other reason is the power that lobbyists from the banking
industry wield over Congress. Banks contribute significant sums to senators' political
campaigns. For example, Senator Evan Bayh of Indiana was one of the Democratic
senators voting against Dick Durbin's bill to help homeowners. Senator Bayh has
received from Goldman Sachs $123,000 to support his reelection campaign. (www.opensecrets.org)
Senator
Durbin told Moyers, "If you want to get to the heart of this, it's the way
we finance our campaigns for the United States Senate and the House of Representatives.
It's time for us to move to public financing, for the good of the country."
Investigations
and continuing foreclosures On
May 11, Massachusetts Attorney General Martha Coakley criticized predatory lending
by Wall Street firms in a continuing investigation of "the deceptive marketing
of unfair loans and the companies that facilitated the sale of those loans."
One of those companies, Goldman Sachs, agreed to pay as much as $60 million to
end the Massachusetts investigation into whether it helped promote unfair home
loans in the state. According to the New York Times, the agreement "requires
Goldman to reduce the principal on first mortgages by up to 30 percent and on
second mortgages by up to 50 percent." ("Goldman Pays to End State Inquiry
Into Loans," New York Times 5/12/09) Eleven
other lenders, including four financial firms that received bank bailouts, have
made payments "to settle claims of widespread lending abuses," according
to the study by the Center for Public Integrity. "Homeownership
rates have fallen more steeply for most minorities than for whites," according
to a study by the nonpartisan Pew Hispanic Center. "Through both boom and
bust, Hispanics and blacks have been far more likely than whites to receive higher-priced
loans and carry higher debt relative to their incomes." (www.pewhispanic.org,
5/12/09) The
New York Times reports that in recent months, banks have "regained
financial footing as well as a bit of their old swagger" and are "racing
to pay back billions of taxpayer dollars." They "are eager to extricate
themselves from heightened government oversight, including restrictions on their
employees' compensation." ("U.S. Weighs How to Let Banks Give Money
Back," New York Times, 5/20/09) Meanwhile
an estimated 290,000 - 341,000 new foreclosure were filed in March alone. The
Times reports that Obama's plan to "keep struggling Americans in their
homes now relies on lenders to voluntarily rework bad loans
.Even if lenders
do agree to modify loans, many Americans will still be in trouble. That's because
nearly 14 million homeowners are 'under water'--they owe more on their mortgages
than their homes are worth." (Gretchen Morgenson, "A Reality Check on
Mortgage Modification, New York Times, 4/25/09) For
discussion
1.
What questions do students have about the reading? How might they be answered? 2.
Speaking of the banks and their influence on the Senate, Senator Durbin said,
"they own the place"? Why? 3.
What legislation did Senator Durbin want the Senate to pass to help people
whose homes were being foreclosed? 4.
Why did the Senate turn down his proposal? 5.
What connection might there be between political campaign financing and the
failure of Durbin's legislation? Do senators like Evan Bayh have a conflict of
interest? Why or why not? 6.
What evidence is there that bank fraud fueled the housing boom and bust? 7.
Why do you think homeownership rates fell more sharply for blacks and Latinos
than for whites? And why do you think Latinos and blacks "have been far more
likely than whites to receive higher-priced loans"? If you don't know, how
do you think you might find out? 8.
Why do many of the big banks want to give their bailout money back? 9.
What does it mean to be "under water" on a mortgage? How is it possible
to owe more on one's home than it is worth? This
lesson was written for TeachableMoment.Org, a project of Morningside Center for
Teaching Social Responsibility. We welcome
your comments. Please email author Alan Shapiro at: ashapiro7@comcast.net.
Back
to top
|