Posted by: Lisa Pampuch | September 24, 2008

Debunking CRA-scapegoating theories

Yesterday, a person who ought to know better insisted to me that the government is to blame for the mortgage meltdown because it instituted regulations that forced mortgage lenders to make risky loans, rather than blaming the deregulation of the banking industry for the foreclosure crisis. The regulations to which adherents of this theory refer are contained in the 1977 Community Reinvestment Act (CRA). Robert Gordon debunks this outrageous theory in an excellent article in The American Prospect. Key quote:

… The argument turns on a simple question: In the current mortgage meltdown, did lenders approve bad loans to comply with CRA, or to make money?

The evidence strongly suggests the latter. First, consider timing. CRA was enacted in 1977. The sub-prime lending at the heart of the current crisis exploded a full quarter century later. … In late 2004, the Bush administration announced plans to sharply weaken CRA regulations, pulling small and mid-sized banks out from under the law’s toughest standards. Yet sub-prime lending continued, and even intensified — at the very time when activity under CRA had slowed and the law had weakened.

Second, it is hard to blame CRA for the mortgage meltdown when CRA doesn’t even apply to most of the loans that are behind it. … Perhaps one in four sub-prime loans were made by the institutions fully governed by CRA.

Most important, the lenders subject to CRA have engaged in less, not more, of the most dangerous lending. Janet Yellen, president of the San Francisco Federal Reserve, offers the killer statistic: Independent mortgage companies, which are not covered by CRA, made high-priced loans at more than twice the rate of the banks and thrifts. …

It’s telling that, amid all the recent recriminations, even lenders have not fingered CRA. That’s because CRA didn’t bring about the reckless lending at the heart of the crisis. Just as sub-prime lending was exploding, CRA was losing force and relevance. And the worst offenders, the independent mortgage companies, were never subject to CRA — or any federal regulator. Law didn’t make them lend. The profit motive did.

And that is not political correctness. It is correctness.

About these ads

Responses

  1. Another good post on this is here. It’s like the little kid in front of the broken cookie jar saying “HE did it!”

  2. […] who’s been arguing that the Bush-Cheney-McCain philosophy of excessive deregulation (not too much regulation, as many conservatives are now trying to argue) just won the Nobel Prize for […]

  3. […] these are Republicans. In the face of the deregulation-fueled economic crisis, they’re trying to pin the blame on too much regulation, not too […]

  4. […] wonder how long it will take us to forget this important lesson? Of course, plenty of right wingers are trying — in the midst of this meltdown — to make the pathetic and […]


Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s

Categories

Follow

Get every new post delivered to your Inbox.

Join 208 other followers

%d bloggers like this: