From theenterpriseblog:
This could be just the beginning. If President Barack Obama’s legally dodgy appointment of Richard Cordray to head the consumer finance agency should stick, it may open the door to more such actions. Here’s Jaret Seiberg of the Washington Research Group:
To us, the most important takeaway from a recess appointment of Cordray is that the President could use this same maneuver to put a housing advocate in charge of FHFA.
And why is that important? The Federal Housing Finance Agency is the regulator and conservator of Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac. And the FHFA currently has an acting director, Edward DeMarco. If Obama replaces him with a “housing advocate” via the same recess appointment process, here’s what might happen next, according to Seiberg:
That could lead to a mass refinancing program for agency-backed mortgages that would go well beyond the existing HARP program. That could hurt agency MBS pricing and result in higher financing costs going forward. Yet it also could be a big boost for the economy and housing going into the election.
Indeed, my sources tell me the Obama administration has been eager to implement just such a plan, but needs to have its own man heading the FHFA to make it happen. The plan would be modeled after one originally devised by Columbia University economists Glenn Hubbard (a campaign adviser to Mitt Romney and AEI visiting scholar) and Christopher Mayer. In recent congressional testimony, Mayer described how the mass refinancing plan would work:
Under our plan, every homeowner with a GSE mortgage can refinance his or her mortgage with a new mortgage at a current fixed of 4.20 percent or less. … To qualify, the homeowner must be current on his or her mortgage or become so for at least three months. … Other than being current, we would impose no other qualification or application, except for the intention to accept the new rate (that is, no appraisal, no income verification, no tax returns, etc.).
Mayer estimates that some $3.7 trillion of mortgages would be refinanced. That’s right, this would be the Mother of All Mortgage Refinancing Plans. It would help roughly 30 million borrowers save $75 billion to $80 billion a year. As Mayer puts it: “This plan would function like a long-lasting tax cut for these 25 or 30 million American families.”
On his website, Hubbard says the plan would have an immediate fixed cost to the government of $121 billion. And he calculates the economic impact as follows:
1. We estimate that 72 percent of owner occupant homeowners would be eligible to refinance at no cost to them. Their monthly mortgage payments would fall by an average of $355, for a total national fiscal injection $7.1 billion each month.
2. The typical borrower would reduce his or her principal and interest payments by about $350 dollars, a total reduction in mortgage payments of nearly $100 billion per year.
3. The macroeconomic stimulus effect should also include an additional housing wealth effect. At the low end of our estimates, improved mortgage market operations would reduce house price declines by 10 percent. With an estimated aggregate housing valuation of about $18 trillion, housing wealth would increase about $1.8 trillion relative to what it might fall to without this program. If we assume a relatively low marginal propensity to consume out of housing wealth of 3.5 percent, U.S. consumption would rise by $63 billion relative to what would otherwise have occurred.
4. Combining these estimates gives a total macroeconomic stimulus of as $118 billion per year in lower mortgage payments and any new consumer spending due to a housing wealth effect. In addition to the direct macroeconomic stimulus, jump-starting the stalled housing market will increase employment in a variety of industries that depend on housing transactions (mortgage and real estate brokers, home supply companies, moving companies, etc.) as well as increase the efficiency of the labor market by reducing impediments to households moving to take another job.
Bottom line: Talk about a political and economic game changer in this presidential election year. Obama could offer a trillion-dollar stimulus — as measured over a decade –that would directly and immediately impact tens of millions of Americans suffering from the housing depression. Cash in their pockets. Imagine the electoral impact on key states, such as Florida, suffering from both high unemployment and devastated housing markets.
And the beauty part for Obama? He wouldn’t need approval from Congress to do it. Even though many Republicans would scream that the plan would reward irresponsible homeowners who took on too much leverage — indeed, talk of a housing bailout is what launched the Tea Party movement – they probably couldn’t stop it. And Hubbard already has an answer to the moral hazard issue: “This proposal requires borrowers to give up a share of future appreciation in order to participate. Lenders must eat a portion of the losses as well. Everyone gives a little bit.”
The 2012 battle for the White House is looking razor close. A mass refinancing plan might be enough to tip it to Obama.
I believe it is far from clear this would give people more money (as a group) to spend or improve housing (whatever that means).
What it would do is significantly reduce interest expense. However, since many people have been living without making a mortgage payment starting to make payments into bankrupt FNM and FRE would remove money from the economy.
In addition, this would lock a whole new group of people into their existing homes. These people could not relocate, purchase a move-up home, and/or find a better job in a different location.
Housing relative to income and the amount of vacant units in the country indicates that prices are likely to continue to fall (well certainly not rise). No government game or postponemnent can stop this from occurring.
Zero Hedge reporting there’s no plan – http://www.zerohedge.com/news/mass-home-refinancing-rumor-rejected
Well, it looks White House is also confirming they’re not considering it…
http://www.marketwatch.com/story/no-big-mortgage-refinance-program-white-house-2012-01-05?link=MW_home_latest_news
This is their stock-in-trade: Anonymous sources float an idea early to get reaction, and then deny it when it blows up in their face.
They will play this card later, if needed to win the election.
I was just about to write that. Get out of my head Jim! 🙂
———————————————–
“They will play this card later, if needed to win the election”
The phrase you’re looking for is “trial balloon”. 😉
4,5,and 6. Bullseye. 🙁
As it gets closer to the election Obo can then add a sweetener that will include forgiveness on all 2nd’s & helocs, plus they can keep the boats, harleys, suv’s, and second and third homes, plus get a refund for all their stock losses….and free NFL game tickets.
@BottomFisher – and the rest of us 1) non-equity sucking responsible homeowners and 2)Patsys, aka renters, can eat cake.
I’m not so sure it’s that simple, and you have to remember that the financial services committee is the one that has oversight to FHFA, not the president. Frankly, any substantive changes to the profitability or conservatorship (such as a 121 billion hole) would need approval from Congress; or its leadership would be out faster than you can say jackrabbit.
The president may be able to make appointments, but Congress approves them, and a republican controlled congress will sniff out this kind of intention and squash it. I believe this has 0 chance of happening. Just not possible, and certainly not before the election; not enough time to make any impact, even if it were possible. Can you imagine how long it would take to make this change? And, to think of the scandals that shows how the bondholders were made whole while America was handed the crap bag without so much as a vote?
And, if it could be proved that Obama was somehow “behind it”? Are you kidding me? That’s impeachment material.
This trial balloon should never have gotten off the ground, but Americans are both gullible and stupid: look no further than this:
“Obama gonna pay my mortgage and bills!”
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=P36x8rTb3jI
Chuck
I certainly see this as a ‘test’ for the upcoming election. Left offers more cheeze and looks good/compassionate while the Right fights it and says “NO” and looks mean while being portrayed as wanting to kick old ladies (and their cats) out on the street in favor of the 1% bankers.
Regardless of your side of the fence (L v R) the Left sure has figured out how to market its product more successfully than the Right. Doesn’t automatically make it a better product, just better marketed
It will be a fire sale/giveaway next summer from both sides to buy the vote.