Comment Detail

Comment

It seems to me that Congress should determine what tax incentives, subsidies and grants should be provided to assist low-income housing initiatives. The amount of money would, could and should be earmarked and budgeted. Frankly, I do believe that it is.

Fannie and Freddie have standards for "qualifying mortgages", and these standards should be followed. If someone has a lower FICO, lower income, or lower LTM factor, Fannie and Freddie should calculate AND charge these amounts.

Now, if the government subsidization, grants, etc. want to reimburse Fannie and Freddie for these charges, that would be fine. Furthermore, Fannie and Freddie - can and should - be contributing to affordable housing funds from their profits. That had been the process, prior to the government's takeover in 2008.

There should be clear-delineation and transparency between the government's low-income and affordable housing goals and the privately-held Fannie and Freddie companies, which are in fact not owned by FHFA or the US taxpayer.

It is incredible to think that the FHFA and the U.S. Treasury have twenty lawsuits outstanding which paint the U.S. government as controlling private entities for the benefit of the USA and not the shareholders, and yet, Mel Watt and the FHFA prove this is exactly what is happening. Fannie and Freddie are being run by the FHFA for the FHFA's, and by association by the USA for the USA.

The shareholders deserve and expect the FHFA (as conservator) to run the companies to limit losses (or better yet, to maximize gains) for the shareholders.

Don't forget, the US taxpayer owns 80% of the companies, so this isn't a free handout to investors. Releasing Fannie and Freddie from conservatorship will be worth hundreds of billions of dollars to the US Treasury and taxpayer.

Stop treating Fannie and Freddie as your property, and remember that you need to share in their profits with the original common and preferred shareholders.