LyrArc Article Gist
The Wall Street Journal's editorial columns have followed closely the working of Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac over the years. Especially during the last decade, when most of the excesses, missteps and failures in the operations of the two companies occurred at huge cost to the US economy and to taxpayers. The Journal quotes from the recent Treasury report on the planned winding down of the two agencies. And focusses attention on the question of what will replace Fannie and Freddie. Only the first of three options looks viable considering the goals of reducing misallocation of national resources, and winding down the federal government's role in housing, says the Journal. With this Option the federal government guarantees are limited to Federal Housing Administration (FHA) loans to low income buyers and VA assistance for veterans and farm programs- narrow segments that limits the guarantee strictly to 10-15% of the mortgage market. The Journal says that the conclusions of the Treasury report are what WSJ has been saying for 20 years: " The strength of this option is that it would minimize distortions in capital allocation across sectors, reduce moral hazard in mortgage lending and drastically reduce direct taxpayer exposure to private lender's losses." And the points about the benefits: " With less incentive to invest in housing, more capital will flow into other areas of the economy, potentially leading to more long-run economic growth and reducing the inflationary pressure on housing assets. Risk throughout the system may also be reduced, as private actors will not be as inclined to take on excessive risk without the assurance of a government guarantee behind them. And finally, direct taxpayer risk exposure to private losses in the mortgage market would be limited to the loans guaranteed by FHA and other narrowly targeted government loan programs: no longer would taxpayers be at direct risk for guarantees covering most of the nation's mortgages." This bit of wisdom is especially significant, as misallocation of capital that went on in housing for the better part of the last decade has hurt America and the American people. It makes sense to have explicit money allocated by Congress for housing help to the poor and have no housing guarantees that have hurt the economy.