Barack Obama #2 on Fannie Mae / Freddie Mac’s Lobbyist/Campaign Contribution List from 1989-2008
Wednesday, September 17, 2008 at 02:11AM Barack Obama likes to blame Republicans for the current mortgage crisis , but there’s a reason why the huge government sponsored mortgage bank gave more money to Barack Obama than almost anyone else in politics: to facilitate and cover their ill-fated lending practices.
After only 4 short years in the U.S. Senate, Barack Obama is the #2 recipient of Fannie Mae / Freddie Mac lobbyist dollar giveaways and campaign contributions, receiving $126,349. In fact, the government sponsored mortgage bank has given more money to top Democrats than anyone else in an effort to keep regulators at bay.
Still, most other democrats have received less in 20 years than Obama has in 4 years from Fannie Mae.
John McCain is #62 on the list receiving $21,550 from Fannie Mae in 20 years.
Under the Clinton administration, Fannie Mae was given instructions to broaden its lending practices, lending to people in inner cities, the poor, and high risk applicants. Well, guess what; they couldn’t afford their homes and are succumbing to foreclosure. What big government can do for you, it can do to you.
John Gibson offers this commentary on the big government debacle and mortgage crisis, showing how it is the Democrats, not Republicans, who are primarily responsible for the current housing crisis and buyouts, despite what Barack Obama says:
Behold, the chart of donations Fannie Mae / Freddie Mac contribute to DC politicians with an explanation by the CRP (Center for Responsive Politics) :
When the federal government announced two months ago that it would prop up mortgage buyers Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac, CRP looked at how much money members of Congress had collected since 1989 from the companies. On Sunday the government completely took over the two government-sponsored enterprises, and we’ve returned to our data to bring you the updates, this time providing a list of all 354 lawmakers who have gotten money from Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac.
Why haven’t we heard about this in an Obama campaign commercial??
Trackback URL: http://amyproctor.squarespace.com/blog/trackback/2288222
View Printer Friendly Version
Email Article to Friend
Reader Comments (26)
John McCain just brought this up at a rally and slammed Obama over it. Can't wait to post the video or quote!
bravo! -- first rule of understanding politics: follow the money
You won't hear about this via the Drive-Bys. You never will. Why? It goes against the Messiah, and they won't have it.
But then again, what media bias? ;-)
Braden,
I submit there are two theories of media bias. 1) corruption, people would like to manipulate elections, and do so at great expense
2) market; the american people like soap operas and care little about comming home from a long day doing what they prefer to do and engaing in truely taxing poltica analysis, ergo the media we have with all of the silly distinctions that come along with it.
Perhaps you can see that I think more attention needs to be paid to #2, but is there anything you can say to make me reconsider #1? I have done the basic arguments, but what am I missing?
I can't believe how cheaply the politicians sell themselves for. I mean a measly $126,000 for a corrupt organization that is raking in MILLIONS. Same thing with the current 300 Billion-a-year illegal drug habit our country has - they keep this quiet by small payoffs to politicians who look the other way. Why isn't our failed drug war a presidential campaign issue?
But getting back to the point: too many greedy grabbers in Fanny Mae and too many politicians with low self-esteem to take their money.
RR
Ron,
The drug war is a fiction. Do you honestly think they are trying to eleminate drug use (like they tried to eliminate alcohol use)?
It just depends on how many resources you want to throw at the problem. If you throw more (more cops, DEA, etc) you get more salaries, but you also get more sophisticated evasion (evasion pays more).
I would be interested in your definition both of what "failed drug war" means and what you would cosider a sucess. Short of saying something like increase the DEA's budget 10%, what else do you seriously suggest?
The drug war is not a failure, it is the people that buy and like drugs -- so there is a market. To stop the drugs the US would have to bomb many other countries into oblivion, in which it does not know how to do -- case in point, we bombed North Vietnam into a parking lot, and they still won the war. I remember Bush, Jr. after 9/11, had proposed to eradicate Afghanistan's poppy fields, in which the Pentagon denied the US government. It seems that Opium is a major ingredient in pharmaceuticals and the only economy Afghanistan has to feel their children. By taking away Afghanistan's economy, Bush , according to the Pentagon would be charged with inadvertent genocide -- those people would starve to death. The left would blame Bush for the genocide, because they use all tools to try to win elections.
Amy,
Could you show clips other than FoxNews? You give the lefties an opportunity to say you arent fair and balanced.
Gold, I agree with you in some part, but I am sure you would admit that drugs are produced in this country, even with current levels of enforcement. It is true that poppies and coca plants don't grow in this climate, but I am not sure that you need that to see that there is domestic production.
domestic production is minuscule compared to foreign production and peddling by Canada , in illegal pharmaceuticals, and cannabis, and south America to Asia of narcotics and cannabis. These countries have less enforcement, and their only problem is the US border. I highly doubt the US will legalize most illegal drugs on the model of Amsterdam.
Braden, speaking of media bias, did you see the side by side comparison of Obama and McCain on the View? Obama was told they thought he was sexy, McCain was yelled at by a so-called professional journalist about policy issues.
Pathetic.
Dem, I rely on AFN (Armed Forces Network) and the channel 30, i.e., Fox News, has the most reliable programming. Other channels flip right in the middle of a show, which stinks if you're recording a speech, etc.
And I won't watch MSNBC. Oblerman is a jerk, Matthews isn't much better, and their news coverage is just boring. CNN has an international channel here that sometimes uses CNN american coverage.
Fox has some great commentary you won't find on the other networks but if you look through my videos you'll see I post a lot of campaign vids, from both campaigns, and I post CBS, NBC, ABC, and lots of other footage, not just Fox News.
Remember also that news in the US happens while I'm sleeping in Korea. I can leave recording on Fox and know I'll basically get the low down for the day. Other channels flip to soap operas or PBS, MSBNC, etc.
But I'll try, I promise.
Gold,
Argument by assertion is beneath you.
Numbers?
http://slate.msn.com/id/2114793/ - in this link it seems LSD production alone is not miniscule. You will not be arguing that only opium dervivaties and cocaine are the only bad drugs will you? BTW, what will you do about drugs that are prescribed to abusers? This is just another way around the problem. I think someone already pointed this out.
Dem Lyncher, it's 11:15 pm Thurs. night here in Korea and 10:15 am EST in the US and I spent an hour watching CNN's morning show. Here's why I unapologetically watch Fox News:
CNN ran stories on cavities, weight loss and inside baseball market talk. Oh, did you know that bridge that collapsed earlier this year has been rebuilt?
CNN avoids the intense attacks by the left on Sarah Palin and the continuing gaffes of Joe Biden.
I watch Fox because they have REAL news and I'll continue to do so. I don't care what the left thinks one way or the other, I'm going where the good stuff is.
According to the New York Times, Democrats blocked Bush’s Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac reforms so low income people with bad credit could buy houses.
''These two entities -Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac - are not facing any kind of financial crisis. The more people exaggerate these problems, the more pressure there is on these companies, and the less we will see in terms of affordable housing.'' said Representative Barney Frank of Massachusetts, the ranking Democrat on the Financial Services Committee.
http://strategicthought-charles77.blogspot.com/2008/09/democrats-blocked-bushs-fannie-mae-and.html
You're kidding, right? Obama has raised about $390 MILLION dollars for his campaign. According to the data, he received $126,349 from Fannie Mae. That means that about 0.03% of his total monies raised came from Fannie Mae. This is spit in the bucket. He could return every cent and it wouldn't hurt him in the least. Watch where the money goes?
I'm more interested in where the rest of the $390 million came from because that might better explain his political leanings. In contrast, McCain received $21,550. This represents 0.1% of the $174 million that he has raised so far. So in precentages, Obama is three times more influenced by Fannie Mae than McCain.
However, the raw amounts given to either campaign are so small a part of either that Fannie Mae is unlikely to do On the other hand, BOTH candidates got a significant boost from major wall street investment and banking firms (Obama probably about three times the amount that McCain got, but about equal in terms of percent of overall funds raised...).
Please note as well, that Fannie Mae was privatized under GH Bush's administration and began buying mortgage backed securities as early as 1997. Bill Clinton may have started loosening Fannie Mae's lending rules in 1999 with Financial Services Modernization Act, but this bill was supported by a Republican congress and hailed as genius by members of the conservative press, such as the Wall Street Journal.
Federal regulators under the present administration took even further steps to loosen those crazy mortgage rules (the latest of which occurred this past February) in an attempt to absorb the impact of the lending crisis.
The 'bail out' wasn't Obama's idea, it was our present administration. We all saw this coming over a long period of time, but no one really payed much attention to it. McCain for his part, opposed any regulation of the system assuming that the free market would and should right itself and the Democrats (including Obama) dithered.
One would be hard pressed to credit either candidate with starting or having a real plan to solve this problem. Campaign contributions from Fannie Mae are so insignificant that it's hard to imaging that the company had any influence over either candidate. In short, you are highlighting a non-issue.
jojoleb,
It might be useful to look into campaign contribution literature. Your statements don't take account of the limits from individual contributors. Such a concentrated sum does signify something. I will agree that it is small relative to the whole, but you are moving past a large body of acedemic literature rather quickly. There is a reason why these numbers are published.
I agree with Jojoleb, this is McCain trying to make a mountain out of a molehill. On the Freddie and Fannie question, a list generated by a nonpartisan group placed Obama as No. 2 , with $126,349, right after Sen. Chris Dodd, D-Conn., chairman of the Senate Banking Committee, who had $165,400.
But hold the phone...the list is misleading and requires explanation.
Corporations CANNOT give to candidates so the center's list adds up contributions from Fannie and Freddie employees and their families. Obama has received a lot of money during his presidential campaign, though, and Fannie and Freddie don't even make his list of top 20 companies. (The top three companies with employees donating to Obama are Goldman Sachs, University of California, and Citigroup, according to the center.)
Another nonpartisan organization actually looked at contributions from Fannie and Freddie's boards of directors and lobbyists, who are technically not employees and not included in the list generated in Amy's post. That analysis found Fannie and Freddie-related contributors gave $116,000 to John McCain and his related committees, compared with $16,000 to Obama and his related committees. When taking into account employees, lobbyists and board of directors, BOTH candidates got similar amounts of $$. Who cares? That doesn't really change how I feel about either candidate or affect how these candidates will tend to economic affairs.
Those contributions were from the employees of Fannie Mae...I can make contributions to political canidates from my employer too. The real story is where the money that was donated from the lobbyists of Fannie Mae: McCain took $160,000 and Obama $16,000.
This election is so pathetic. Those with a half a brain are sick with what is going on. You think the rest of the world is going to trust us after this election? So let me guess who you support...
Look at the chart. McCain got ZERO donations from PAC and $20,ooo from individuals. Obama took $6000 from PAC and over $120,000 from individuals. Wanna bet that includes some CEOs?
In response to 'Disagree', I don't think I'm glossing over the reasons for publishing these numbers. These numbers are available in the hope that there is full disclosure of the sources of campaign funds. The largest amounts of monies (20:1) donated to the Obama campaign are from individuals. Donations to political campaigns by PACs may be limited, but they are still an acceptable way of raising money.
McCain did not accept money from PACs in this case, but according to data you can find at OpenSecrets.org, he has accepted 1.3 million (1% of his total) from PACs for this campaign. Obama insist that he has only received minimal amounts of money from PACs for this campaign (according to OpenSecrets only $450 dollars) but as noted above has certainly received money in the past.
Nevertheless, this obscures the fact that PACs are only one venue for receiving money. I agree with 'Disagree' that whether the money comes from a PAC or an individual of influence in a specific corporation. Magnanimous support from an influential individual can sway influence. One could even argue that a contribution made on a more personal level might be more influential than one given by an organization. I absolutely agree with Amy that many contributors are likely to be CEOs or other people of influence. Even so, I have to think that the McCain campaign when analyzed would have an equal percentage of contributions from such sources.
Even so, the money we are talking about in the chart above is truly insignificant when you take into account each candidate's war chest. Note that the chart covers a long period from 1989 to 2008. It does accrue all contributions given over this time period, but does not separate out which contributions were for the present campaign.
All of the above notwithstanding, the frightening thing is that Obama is poised to outspend McCain 2:1 as he moves ahead with the most expensive presidential campaign waged to date. One can only hope that Americans will make their decisions based on issues and not on what a given candidate pays Madison Avenue.
Suggested reading:
http://portal.acm.org/citation.cfm?id=518807
Chart from NY Times on Lobbyists dollars, Fannie Mae:
http://i113.photobucket.com/albums/n204/edwardebbs/10fanniegraphic.jpg
Here is video of how the Democrats caused this financial meltdown.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=usvG-s_Ssb0
but nice try Ed. Remember that Barack Obama received the 2nd most money from Freddie Mac and Fannie Mae since most of its existence since 1989 when they started to count how much money they were giving to representitives, only to Christopher Dodd, and Obama has only been in office for 4 years.
http://www.opensecrets.org/news/2008/09/update-fannie-mae-and-freddie.html
See whose name is in 2nd place...why it is Barack Obama's.
Mario,
As-far-as a nice try, I try to focus on the facts without bias emotion. This is coming from my heart and off the top of my head, right or wrong. Let us talk about this finger pointing and emotion on this credit crisis. In every day language, The Clinton Administration wanted housing more affordable to those people getting high interest loans. If they qualify for a high interest loan then give them a break. It is like one person is struggling but CAN afford the things they buy, but are paying 19% for their car loan. Another person is buying the same car that has an affluent income and pays 2.5% for their loan. How does that help the person who is struggling? The Clinton administration asked this question about home loans and started the vehicle. The Clinton administration never intended to give loans people could not afford or not qualified to purchase. Remember then shortly there after the Clinton administration started the vehicle, the Bush administration got into the driver seat and what, eight years of what?
If you get into a vehicle and wheel is turned slightly to the right and that vehicle eventually goes into the ditch who fault is it. Is it the driver who got into the vehicle or is it the vehicle’s fault? Like life, our economy is dynamic and ever changing. This requires whoever is in the driver seat to pay attention. The Bush administration was asleep at the wheel.
Bottom-line continual deregulation with eyes closed caused this problem. We need enough control or regulation to prevent greed and stupid people from running our economy into the ground, but enough freedom for future growth.
I regretfully voted for Bush and years ago; my name has appeared in the Wall Street Journal along with dozens of others as good republican...I make mistakes too. I tried to make the best decision with the information I had. I am paying more attention now because we did not inherit this land from those past; we are borrowing this land from our children and grandchildren. What are we going to leave them with?
Peace,
Ed
PS - What does your gut tell you?
JOHN MCCAIN’S GLASS HOUSES
John McCain Has Deep Ties to Fannie, Freddie
http://thepage.time.com/obama-camp-memo-on-alleged-mccain-ties-to-fannie-freddie/
McCain has numerous close connections to Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac, starting with his campaign manager Rick Davis, who was paid several hundred thousand dollars to lobby on their behalf. See our writeup here and more discussion here. Another highlight is Freddie Mac William Timmons, who heads up McCain's presidential transition team.
6 of his advisers and fundraisers lobbied for Freddie Mac including:
• McCain’s Current Chief of Staff Mark Buse,
• top McCain adviser Charles Black,
• Carlos Bonilla,
• Al D’Amato,
• Juleanna Glover Weiss
• Susan Molinari.
13 of them lobbied for Fannie Mae including:
• McCain’s Congressional Liaison John Green,
• Head of VP Search Team AB Culvahouse,
• Wayne Berman,
• Kirk Blalock,
• Alberto Cardenas,
• Kirsten Chadwick,
• Richard Holht,
• Kate Hull,
• Aleix Jarvis,
• Tom Loeffler,
• Peter Madigan,
• Allison McSlarrow
• Aquiles Suarez. [John McCain.com, Senate Lobbying Disclosures]
According to the New York Times, “More than Mr. Obama, Mr. McCain’s circle of advisers and contributors includes current and former lobbyists or directors for the companies, although since July he has called for a ban on any lobbying by the two firms. Among the companies’ past advocates are Mr. McCain’s campaign manager, Rick Davis, a longtime lobbyist; Mr. McCain’s confidant and adviser Charlie Black, whose firm worked for Freddie Mac for several years ending in 2005, and the deputy campaign finance chairman, Wayne L. Berman, a vice president for Ogilvy Worldwide and a former Fannie Mae lobbyist.” [New York Times, 9/10/08]
McCain Campaign Manager Rick Davis Led Efforts To Fight Off Regulations For Fannie And Freddie. “Davis previously was head of the Homeownership Alliance, a coalition of banks and housing industry interests led by Fannie and Freddie to stave off regulations. The group was formed to counter another organization, FM Watch, an alliance of financial institutions and lobbying associations that wanted to even the playing field against Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac, by challenging the implicit government guarantee that allowed the two firms to borrow funds at lower interest rates.” [New York Times, 9/10/08]
* Davis and Homeownership Alliance Fought Against Effort to Impose “Burdensome Regulatory Process” on Fannie & Freddie. “It shouldn’t have come as a surprise to anyone when the Homeownership Alliance announced its opposition last week to legislation by Rep. Richard Baker, R-Baton Rouge, to strengthen regulatory oversight for Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac, the two giant agencies that buy home mortgages to expand homeownership opportunities. Rick Davis, president of the Homeownership Alliance, said that ‘we are concerned that Rep. Baker’s bill would break the first rule of any legislation related to housing — that is, to do no harm to the greatest housing system in the world.’ He said the bill ‘presents the potential for a burdensome regulatory process that could lead to less consumer choice, reduced availability of financing and higher prices for home purchases and multi-family construction.’ What Davis didn’t say is that Fannie Mae and Freddie Mae are both members of his alliance, which also includes the National Association of Home Builders and National Association of Real Estate Brokers. Baker, chairman of the House Capital Markets, Insurance and Government Sponsored Enterprises Subcommittee, has said that Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac have gotten so big, and have piled up so much debt, that more oversight is needed. If either of them failed, it could do major damage to the U.S. economy, he said.” [Times Picayune, 4/15/01]
19 McCain Fundraisers & Advisers Lobbied For Fannie Mae Or Freddie Mac. Nineteen McCain advisers and fundraisers lobbied for Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac.
McCain Senior Adviser Wayne Berman Continues to Lobby for Fannie Mae. Wayne Berman has lobbied for Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac from 2004 through the 2nd quarter of 2008. Their firm earned over $100,000 from Freddie Mac in 2004 and over $1 million from Fannie Mae. [Senate Lobbying Disclosures]
Head of McCain’s VP Search Team Lobbied for Fannie Mae. McCain tapped Arthur B. Culvahouse Jr., the former Reagan administration official, to head his search for a running mate. Currently a partner at O’Melveny & Myers, Culvahouse lobbied on behalf of Fannie Mae in 1999, 2003 and 2004, according to Senate records. [Politico.com, 7/16/08; Senate Lobbying Disclosures]
Top Adviser Charlie Black Lobbied for 10 Years for Freddie Mac. Black is “one of McCain’s top advisors,” and “at the helm of McCain’s campaign.” Black joined McCain’s campaign of March 2007, but did not stop lobbying until March of 2008. He is described as, “schooled at the knee of Jesse Helms and so entrenched in the ways of Washington that he has enjoyed access to Republican presidents since Ronald Reagan.” Black lobbied for Freddie Mac from 1999-2004, earning the firm he co-owns $820,000. [The News & Observer (Raleigh, North Carolina), 8/31/08; Senate Lobbying Disclosures]
Former McCain Co-Chair and Current Bundler, Loeffler Lobbied for Fannie Mae. Loeffler lobbied for Fannie Mae in 1999. His firm earned $40,000 from Fannie Mae that year. [Senate Lobbying Disclosures, 1999; New York Times, 7/16/08; Newsweek, 5/26/08]
Super-Lobbyists Wayne Berman & John Green Serve in High-Level McCain Campaign Positions. In March 2008, the McCain campaign announced that John Green “a founding partner of what is now Ogilvy Government Relations” would take a leave from lobbying to join the campaign full-time as its Capitol Hill liaison. John Green’s colleague Wayne Berman, a Bush “Super Ranger” serves co-chairman of McCain’s national finance committee, as well as the campaign’s vice chairman and as a senior adviser. Additionally, Berman also handles congressional outreach and “talks to lawmakers on McCain’s behalf.” Berman and Green both lobbied for Fannie Mae from 2004-2007, earning over $1 million from Fannie Mae. They also lobbied for Freddie Mac earning over $100,000 for their firm in 2004. [New York Times, 2/7/08; Financial Times, 11/27/07; Washington Post, 11/20/07; The Hill, 7/19/07; The Politico, 3/4/08; John McCain Supporters, http://www.johnmccain.com/Supporters/ ; Senate Lobbying Disclosures ]
McCain’s Current Chief of Staff Lobbied for Freddie Mac. McCain’s current Senate Chief of Staff Mark Buse lobbied for Freddie Mac from 2003-2004, earning $460,000. [Senate Lobbying Disclosures]
McCain Getting Economic Advice from Former Fannie & Freddie Directors. McCain’s economic adviser Aquiles Suarez worked as Fannie’s director of government and industry relations. His finance co-chairman Frederic V. Malek is a former Freddie Mac board member. [Politico.com, 7/16/08]
In the end it doesn't matter anymore.
In the end it does not matter that these poor home owners destroyed our economy because it was THEY who signed the ill fated dotted line.
In the end it was them that bought the snake oil and now it is THEM again looking for the same handout.
In the end look who they elected to give it to them once again.
Good article. Some do not understand what you are saying here but I see it and agree. Sympathy does not grow an economy. Hard work and hard earned dollars do.
In the end this Nation is lazy; here come the handouts don't be shy to take them becasue that is all that there will be.