Tom Wurdack

By PETER J. WALLISON
On Christmas Eve, when most Americans’ minds were on other things, the Treasury Department announced that it was removing the $400 billion cap from what the administration believes will be necessary to keep Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac solvent. This action confirms that the decade-long congressional failure to more closely regulate these two government-sponsored enterprises (GSEs) will rank for U.S. taxpayers as one of the worst policy disasters in our history.

Fannie and Freddie’s congressional sponsors—some of whom are now leading the administration’s effort to “reform” the financial system—have a lot to answer for. Rep. Barney Frank (D., Mass.), chairman of the House Financial Services Committee, sponsored legislation adopted in 2008 that established a new regulatory structure for the GSEs. But by then it was far too late. The GSEs had begun buying risky loans in 1993 to meet the “affordable housing” requirements established under congressional direction by the Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD).

Most of the damage was done from 2005 through 2007, when Fannie and Freddie were binging on risky mortgages. Back then, Mr. Frank was the bartender, denying that there was any cause for concern, and claiming that he wanted to “roll the dice” on subsidized housing support.

In 2005, the Senate Banking Committee, then controlled by Republicans, adopted tough regulatory legislation that would have established more auditing and oversight of the two agencies. But it was passed out of committee on a partisan vote, and with no Democratic support it never came to a vote.

By the end of 2008, Fannie and Freddie held or guaranteed approximately 10 million subprime and Alt-A mortgages and mortgage-backed securities (MBS)—risky loans with a total principal balance of $1.6 trillion. These are now defaulting at unprecedented rates, accounting for both their 2008 insolvency and their growing losses today. Since 2008, under government control, the two agencies have continued to buy dicey mortgages in order to stabilize housing prices.

Read entire article here.

By DAVID STREITFELD
Published: December 29, 2009
Just as the economy is finally beginning to strengthen, the real estate market is showing new signs of deterioration.

Prices slipped in many cities in October, new figures show, despite low mortgage rates and a generous tax credit meant to spur sales. Now rates are starting to rise, making it harder for many buyers to afford a house, and the tax credit seems to be losing its capacity to lure them into the market.

The renewed worries about housing come against a backdrop of improvement in the broader economy. Surveys suggest consumers are growing more confident. That better mood probably helped improve holiday retail sales. The number of people joining the ranks of the jobless is dwindling, while the hiring of temporary workers is up, a traditional harbinger of recovery.

Still, economic growth for the third quarter was more modest than originally reported; it was revised down to an annual rate of 2.2 percent from 2.8 percent. Many economists are fretting that housing could drag down the tenuous recovery.

“I’m worried. Everyone’s worried,” said Karl E. Case, the Wellesley College economist who helped design the housing index that provided fresh cause for alarm on Tuesday. “If prices sink 15 percent from here, which is a possibility, and the 2008 and 2009 loans go bad, then we’re back where we were before — in a nightmare.”

The figures released Tuesday showed that the Standard & Poor’s/Case-Shiller home price index, a widely watched measure of housing markets in 20 metropolitan areas, rose 0.4 percent in October from the previous month on a seasonally adjusted basis.

It was the fifth consecutive month that prices were up, but the rate of increase has dropped sharply from the impressive gains of the summer. Prices in nine of the 20 cities were flat or down.

Some analysts see little cause for alarm. Dan Greenhaus of Miller Tabak said that if prices fell “a bit further” it would sop up some of the excess inventory still weighing on the market.

But others said that the Case-Shiller index showed an increase only because each report is an average of the preceding three months, meaning the strong August market was still a component of the October report. Another factor supporting the index is the seasonal adjustments, which tend to hide any weakness in the cooler months as the pace of home-buying slows.

On an unadjusted basis, the index was flat. A different housing price index, compiled by the research firm LoanPerformance, fell 0.7 percent in October.

Mr. Case, who chided himself for his optimism over the summer, said he now believed “the probability is very high of a serious double dip like 1982.”

The federal government has mounted an extensive and expensive effort to repair housing. While these actions undoubtedly staved off a total collapse, they are showing signs of fatigue.

The tax credit for first-time buyers has been extended until next spring, but the urgency that buyers showed this summer, when they believed the credit was about to end, has drained away. The Federal Reserve has intervened in the market to push 30-year mortgage rates to the lowest level in decades, but says that program will end by March 31. Rates have already crept back above 5 percent.

Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac, the government-controlled mortgage giants, are tightening policies for loans in their portfolios. Lenders who sell their mortgages to Fannie and Freddie are becoming more skittish about extending credit.

The Federal Housing Administration, which has become an important part of the entry-level housing market, is expected to tighten its standards in the next few weeks. That would further crimp the pool of eligible buyers.

Faramarz Moeen-Ziai of Bank of Commerce Mortgage in San Ramon, Calif., said many of his clients were struggling to complete deals. “All this is adding to the downward pressure on prices,” he said.

Falling prices are in theory good for buyers. Some housing commentators say prices need to fall much further before houses will be truly affordable. But the drop over the last three years, however necessary, has caused tremendous damage to wallets and to the lubricant of commerce, confidence in the future.

Read entire article here.

Here is a great article I found this morning!

By JAMES R. HAGERTY and NICK TIMIRAOS
PHOENIX — Should I stay or should I go? That is the question more Americans are asking as the housing market continues to drag.

In good times, it would have been unthinkable to stop paying the mortgage. But for Derek Figg, a 30-year-old software engineer, it now seems like the best option.

Mr. Figg felt trapped in a home he bought two years ago in the Phoenix suburb of Tempe for $340,000. He still owes about $318,000 but figures the home’s value has dropped to $230,000 or less. After agonizing over the pros and cons, he decided recently to stop making loan payments, even though he can afford them.

Mr. Figg plans to rent an apartment nearby, saving about $700 a month.

Read entire article here.

Housing starts rise less than expected
WASHINGTON
Wed Dec 16, 2009 8:51am EST
WASHINGTON (Reuters) - New housing starts rose but were lower than expected in November as construction activity for single family dwellings increased only marginally, a government report showed on Wednesday.

The Commerce Department said housing starts increased 8.9 percent to a seasonally adjusted annual rate of 574,000 units. Analysts polled by Reuters had expected housing starts to rise to 580,000 units. However, the percentage increase last month was the largest since May, indicating housing remained on a steady recovery path

October’s housing starts were revised downwards to 527,000 units from the previously reported 529,000 units. Compared to the same period a year-ago, housing starts were down 12.4 percent, but way off the 54.9 percent decline seen in January.

Read full article here.

(Reporting by Lucia Mutikani; Editing by Andrea Ricci)

By Silla Brush - 12/14/09 07:35 PM ET

Controversial legislation that would give judges new power to rewrite home mortgages is on life support.

Leading House and Senate Democrats have fought for more than a year in favor of a policy they argue is critical to stemming foreclosures, keeping people in their homes and boosting the housing market. On Friday, the House dealt it a stunning blow when the measure — attached to a broad financial overhaul bill — failed, 188-241.

The vote was the latest indication that the legislation, which the financial industry calls “cramdown,” does not have the support to make it through Congress anytime soon. The House passed similar legislation in March by a nearly opposite margin, but the Senate effort failed by 15 votes.

Read entire article here.

By Dina ElBoghdady
Washington Post Staff Writer
Wednesday, December 2, 2009

The Federal Housing Administration is proposing to increase the up-front cash paid by borrowers as part of an effort to shore up the agency’s finances, which have been staggered by rising defaults in its flagship mortgage insurance program, according to FHA officials.

Read entire article here.