While
Blacks have many individual superstars in diverse segments of our
society, one of the fundamental weaknesses as a group is too many
blind-spots when it comes to the economy. Those blind-spots, in
part, will explain the disturbing trend of Blacks parroting rhetoric
without considering its origin or veracity. To label the Community
Reinvestment Act (CRA) the villain in the subprime mortgage market’s
collapse is to demonstrate a lack of understanding about the flow
of the money and its destination.
Perhaps
if we were better informed of the sequence of events and the parties
involved in the originate-distribute business model used by Wall
Street, we could challenge the purveyors of misinformation, Larry
Kudlow, CNBC; Thomas DiLorenzo, Mises Institute; and Rep. Ron Paul,
D. TX, for making these outrageous claims.
UCLA
Law Professor, Stephen Bainbridge commented
that, “[s]ome of my fellow conservatives
are not only embarrassing themselves during the financial crisis,
they’re embarrassing the rest of us who share that label”. Moreover, Blacks would not make irresponsible
statements such as “the CRA is a cancer on the American economic
system” or the absolutely ridiculous claim that the CRA caused the
Savings and Loan crisis and lastly, if we were properly informed,
the propaganda would not gain enough traction to convince the public
of this inalterable reality: Republicans and Wall Street let the
bull run wild and he destroyed everything in the china shop.
Hopefully
what follows will offer some clarity to a very confused situation.
1.
Investment banks (Goldman Sachs, J.P. Morgan Chase, Merrill Lynch,
Bear Stearns, and Lehman Brothers) are the most complicit. The investment
banks adopted the business model of origination to distribution.
Investment banks developed the underwriting guidelines for approving
mortgage loans (Option ARM, State Income, IO, NINJA, NIVA, No Doc,
Lite Doc, etc.). Investment banks purchased mortgage loans from
lenders. Investment banks constructed mortgage loans into securities
(private label securitization) to provide readily available cash
to lenders for more mortgage loans. Investment banks sold the securities/bonds
to investors.
2.
Rating agencies (Standard & Poors, Moody’s and Fitch) contributed
to the meltdown by assigning the credit ratings to the tranches
within the securities, see Recession:
Federal Reserve Issuing Welfare Checks Discount Window.
The investors (institutional and private) relied on the ratings
to make decisions about their investment. Ratings are typically
assigned from “junk to investment grade” with various levels in
between that will determine how revenues and losses are assigned.
Rating agencies collected their fees from the investment banks for
assigning ratings.
3.
Bond insurers (Ambac, FGIC, SCA, MBIA, etc.) provide insurance for
bondholders in the event of a default. Insurers use their ratings
to guarantee lowly rated private or non-agency bonds (for an explanation,
see Let’s
Get Our Heads Out of the Sand II). Investors purchase insurance
to protect their investment if the underlying asset of the bond
experiences a credit event.
Investment
banks facilitated transactions by establishing the underwriting
guidelines, providing money for approved loans, securitizing loan
pools and setting the proper environment for investors. The banks
within the ambit of the CRA had a very minor role in the investment
banks’ originate-to-distribute model for the following reasons:
1.
Greater than 50% of subprime loans were originated by non-depository
institutions (mortgage banker/broker conduit).
2.
During the robust years of CRA enforcement 1993-98, according to
the Fordham Urban Law Journal, there was a tremendous surge in lending to low-to-moderate
income borrowers. CRA-covered institutions accounted for eighty-three
percent of the growth in prime loans to these borrowers. In contrast,
CRA-covered institutions were responsible for only fifteen percent
of the increase in subprime loans during the same period. Subprime
lenders not covered by CRA accounted for two-thirds of the increase
in subprime mortgages.
3.
The CRA was substantially weakened as the subprime market exploded.
Since 2000, less than 2% of banks examined for compliance with the
CRA have failed. Referrals to the Justice Dept. for legal action
have been almost non-existent. During the Clinton Administration,
12% of banks examined, failed to comply with the CRA and the Justice
Dept. took legal action against at least 25 of the referrals. In
2005 the Office of Thrift Supervision, Federal Reserve and Office
of Comptroller of Currency, relaxed the dollar threshold, excluding
smaller and medium sized banks from coming within the purview of
the CRA.
“What
we learn from history is that we do not learn from history.”
-Disraeli
At times I question whether
this is idiocy (Right Wing rhetoric) but a sober thought reminds
me this is a continuation of the shot that was fired at Ft. Sumter.
To understand why the CRA does not factor into the collapse of this
economy, one has to understand the history of banking and Black
America since the Great Depression through 1968. As history is unappealing
to so many of us, I will attempt to abbreviate or condense what
I am about to share with you.
The
first national consumer credit program was started in 1856 by Edward
Clark and Issac Singer. They sold sewing machines for $125 with
a $5 down payment and $3 per month. That was the birth of installment
sales on a national level. In 1872 Aaron Montgomery Ward started
the largest mail order business in the world and in 1899, Guy and
Cator Woolford started the Atlanta Retail Credit Company (Woolford
is still a prominent name in Atlanta, Thomas Woolford Trust, SunBank
and Cater Woolford Gardens).
The
Atlanta Retail Credit Company employed the “Welcome Wagon” to go
into neighborhoods in the Atlanta area, under the pretense of welcoming
newcomers. The Welcome Wagon members would visit the home and report
back to the Atlanta Retail Credit Company information such as what
race you were, how a person maintained their home, whether the resident
had alcohol on their breath, what type of furnishings were in the
home, etc. The company would publish this information in a circular
and sell it to merchants. Merchants made their credit decisions
from this information. The consumer could not challenge any of the
information in the publication. This
practice lasted for decades and the Atlanta Retail Credit Company
amassed millions of files on consumers. Finally in 1973, the Federal
Trade Commission sued the Atlanta Retail Credit Company and by 1975,
the company had such a bad reputation, they changed their name to
Equifax.
Credit
is the mother’s milk of this society and the evolution of credit
tells a very poignant story of Black history that has been omitted
from US history.
BlackCommentator.com Columnist, Lloyd Wynn, was a consultant in the secondary market. Lloyd is the author of Residential Real Estate Finance: From
Application Through Settlement. Click here
to contact Lloyd Wynn. |