Acorn and the Housing Bubble
The liberal pressure group helped Congress write the
affordable housing rules that got us into trouble.
All agree that the bursting of the housing bubble caused the financial
collapse of 2008. Most agree that the housing bubble started in 1997. Less well
understood is that this bubble was the result of government policies that
lowered mortgage-lending standards to increase home ownership. One of the key
players was the controversial liberal advocacy group, Acorn (Association of
Community Organizations for Reform Now).
The watershed moment was the 1992 Federal Housing Enterprises Financial
Safety and Soundness Act, also known as the GSE Act. To comply with that law's
"affordable housing" requirements, Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac would acquire more
than $6 trillion of single-family loans over the next 16 years.
Congress's goal was to force these two government-sponsored enterprises (GSEs)
to purchase loans that had been originated by banks—loans that were made under
the pressure of another federal law, the 1977 Community Reinvestment Act (CRA),
to increase lending in low- and moderate-income communities.
From 1977 to 1991, $9 billion in local CRA lending commitments had been
announced. CRA lending by large banks increased dramatically after the
affordable housing mandate was in place in 1993, growing to $6 trillion today.
As Ellen Seidman, director of the federal Office of Thrift Supervision, said in
a speech before the Greenlining Institute on Oct. 2, 2001, "Our record home
ownership rate [increasing from 64.2% in 1994 to 68% in 2001], I'm convinced,
would not have been reached without CRA and its close relative, the
Fannie/Freddie requirements."
The 1992 GSE Act was the fuse, and the trillions of dollars in subsequent CRA
and GSE affordable-housing loans would fuel the greatest housing bubble our
nation has ever seen. But who lit the fuse?
The previous year, as Allen Fishbein, currently an adviser for consumer
policy at the Federal Reserve, has noted, Acorn and other community groups were
informally deputized by then House Banking Chairman Henry Gonzalez to draft
statutory language setting the law's affordable-housing mandates. Interim goals
were set at 30% of the single-family mortgages purchased by Fannie and Freddie,
and the Department of Housing and Urban Development has increased that
percentage over time. The goal of the community groups was to force Fannie and
Freddie to loosen their underwriting standards, in order to facilitate the
purchase of loans made under the CRA.
Thus a provision was inserted into the law whereby Congress signaled to the
GSEs that they should accept down payments of 5% or less, ignore impaired credit
if the blot was over one year old, and otherwise loosen their lending
guidelines.
The proposals of Acorn and other affordable-housing advocacy groups were
acceptable to Fannie. Fannie had been planning to use the carrot of
affordable-housing lending to maintain its hold over Congress and stave off its
efforts to impose a strong safety and soundness regulator to oversee the
company. (It was not until 2008 that a strong regulator was created for Fannie
and Freddie. A little over a month later both GSEs were placed into
conservatorship; they have requested a combined $112 billion in assistance from
the federal government, and much more will be needed over the next few years.)
The result of loosened credit standards and a mandate to facilitate
affordable-housing loans was a tsunami of high risk lending that sank the GSEs,
overwhelmed the housing finance system, and caused an expected $1 trillion in
mortgage loan losses by the GSEs, banks, and other investors and guarantors, and
most tragically an expected 10 million or more home foreclosures.
As a result of congressional and regulatory actions, the percentage of
conventional first mortgages (not guaranteed by the Federal Housing
Administration or the Veteran's Administration) used to purchase a home with the
borrower putting 5% or less down tripled from 9% in 1991 to 27% in 1995,
eventually reaching 29% in 2007.
Fannie and Freddie acquired $1.2 trillion of loans from banks and other
lenders from 1993 to 2007. This amounted to 62% of all such conventional home
purchase loans with a down payment of 5% or less that were originated nationwide
over the same period.
Fannie and Freddie also acquired $2.2 trillion in subprime loans and private
securities backed by subprime loans from 1997 to 2007. Acorn and the other
advocacy groups succeeded at getting Congress to mandate "innovative and
flexible" lending practices such as higher debt ratios and creative definitions
of income. And the serious delinquency rate on Fannie and Freddie's $1.5
trillion in high-risk loans was 10.3% as of Sept. 30, 2009.
This is about seven times the delinquency rate on the GSEs' traditional
loans. Fifty percent of the high-risk loans are estimated to be CRA loans, with
much of the remainder useful to the GSEs in meeting their affordable-housing
goals.
The flood of CRA and affordable-housing loans with loosened underwriting
standards, combined with declining mortgage interest rates—to 5% in 2003 from
10% in early 1991—resulted in a massive increase in borrowing capacity and
fueled a house price bubble of unprecedented magnitude over the period
1997-2006.
Now this history may repeat itself as many of the same community groups are
pushing Congress to expand CRA to cover all mortgage lenders, credit unions,
insurance companies and others financial industry segments. Are we about to set
the stage for another catastrophe?
Mr. Pinto was the chief credit officer at Fannie Mae from 1987 to
1989. He is currently a consultant to the mortgage-finance industry.
Home | Articles | BLOG | Quotes | Photo Gallery | Favorites | Stupid Frogs Game | Store | Feedback | Search | Subscribe | About Us
|