The Subprime Plan: Now, It's Political
The Paulson subprime mortgage plan, it would seem, is now the Bush subprime mortgage plan.
According to the WSJ, the plan "includes" a non-binding agreement by servicers and investors to freeze the teaser rate on some loans for five years. That's the main plank of the policy, and is the part that most of the media, including the NYT, concentrates on. The plan explicitly excludes anybody who's delinquent on their payments, which removes the potential moral hazard problems.
But wait, there's more! This is the bit which is still extremely unclear to me:
For other borrowers who are in somewhat better shape, the White House also wants to speed up refinancings, through the Federal Housing Administration and other sources. For example, the administration wants to allow state and local governments to use more tax-exempt-bond programs to fund refinancings, a move that Congress would have to approve through a change in tax law.
This is not being reported by most news outlets covering the plan, so it counts as something of a WSJ scoop*, although details are obviously very hazy. The idea that the White House would want to dragoon state and local governments into funding refis seems – well, let's just say that it seems like a complicated solution to an ill-defined problem.
In any case, the whole subprime football has now been punted squarely from Treasury to the White House, where it's rapidly transmogrifying into a political punching bag. Given the fact that we're in the middle of a presidential election campaign, expect much more heat than light on this issue from here on in. For real economic analysis of the plan, I'd stay away from anything smelling of campaign reporting, and stick to the likes of Dean Baker.
*Update: It turns out that by "scoop", I mean "ability to read Treasury press releases". Here's the relevant part of Paulson's speech on Monday:
Today, we are proposing to allow state and local governments to temporarily broaden their tax-exempt bond programs to include mortgage refinancings; if enacted, this will reduce the cost of innovative mortgage programs and allow these programs to reach more struggling homeowners.
I have no idea what Paulson is referring to when he talks about these "innovative mortgage programs" – can anybody elaborate at all?
- The Problem With InTrade
- Dec 3 2008 5:52PM EST
- GM's Bond Restructuring Plan
- Dec 3 2008 4:44PM EST
- Harvard: Still Rich
- Dec 3 2008 12:15PM EST
- The Tyranny of the Shareholders
- Dec 3 2008 11:11AM EST
- Should Treasury Issue 100-Year Bonds?
- Dec 3 2008 10:18AM EST
- Morning IM
- Dec 3 2008 8:41AM EST
- Adventures in Anonymous Sourcing
- Dec 3 2008 12:27AM EST
- Extra Credit, Tuesday Edition
- Dec 2 2008 11:57PM EST
- Q
- Dec 2 2008 10:34PM EST
- Finance Salaries: A Reply
- Dec 2 2008 8:07PM EST
- The Failed Subprime Clampdown
- Dec 2 2008 4:29PM EST
- Blame Citigroup's woes on the Citi-Travelers Merger
- Dec 2 2008 2:30PM EST
- Greenberg's Chutzpah
- Dec 2 2008 12:26PM EST
- Super-Seniors: The Last Word
- Dec 2 2008 12:04PM EST
- Pay Bankers Much Less
- Dec 2 2008 10:58AM EST
Categories
Links
- Email Felix Salmon
- Alphaville

- Marginal Revolution

- The Panelist

- FP Passport

- Overcoming Bias

- Andrew Leonard

- Barry Ritholtz

- Brad Setser

- Carbon Tax Center

- Calculated Risk

- Greg Mankiw

- Free Exchange

- Dean Baker

- Alexander Campbell

- Kash Mansori

- The Bayesian Heresy

- A Fistful of Euros

- John Quiggin

- Michael Mandel

- Lance Knobel

- Mark Thoma

- Dan Gross

- Curbed

- Streetsblog

- Chris Anderson

- Deal Journal

- MarketBeat

- DealBook

- DealBreaker

- Carl Bialik

- Michelle Leder

- Brad DeLong

- The Epicurean Dealmaker

- Naked Capitalism

- Ultimi Barbarorum

- Econospeak

- Fortune: Daily Briefing

- Financial Crookery










