Recent Blog Posts
-
The Times' Rorshach Geithner Story
Apr 27 20099:04am EDT -
Sinking Animal Spirits
Apr 27 20098:04am EDT -
Counter-cyclical Urban Policy
Apr 26 200910:04am EDT -
Be Your Own Counterfeiter
Apr 26 20099:04am EDT -
Being Tim Geithner
Apr 25 200912:04pm EDT -
Notes From a Press Conference Naif
Apr 25 20099:04am EDT -
What Good is the News?
Apr 25 20098:04am EDT -
Stressful Enough
Apr 24 20092:04pm EDT -
Not Regretting the Pound
Apr 24 20091:04pm EDT -
Introducing the New Ford Squeeze
Apr 24 20099:04am EDT -
Non-Economic Questions of the Day
Apr 24 20099:04am EDT -
The Stress Test Blind Alley
Apr 24 20098:04am EDT -
Happy Hour
Apr 23 20099:04pm EDT -
Recovery Without Rebalancing
Apr 23 20096:04pm EDT -
The Shape of Your Recession
Apr 23 20095:04pm EDT
Links
- Felix Salmon

- DealBreaker

- Ryan Avent: The Bellows

- The Epicurean Dealmaker

- Chris Anderson

- Ultimi Barbarorum

- MarketBeat

- Michelle Leder

- John Quiggin

- The Panelist

- Andrew Leonard

- Streetsblog

- Brad Setser

- Michael Mandel

- Financial Crookery

- Kash Mansori

- Dean Baker

- Calculated Risk

- Free Exchange

- Curbed

- Lance Knobel

- Econospeak

- Carbon Tax Center

- Overcoming Bias

- Mark Thoma

- Naked Capitalism

- Alphaville

- Barry Ritholtz

- Alexander Campbell

- The Bayesian Heresy

- Brad DeLong

- DealBook

- Greg Mankiw

- Deal Journal

- FP Passport

- Carl Bialik

- Marginal Revolution

- A Fistful of Euros

- Dan Gross

What is the Point of Fannie's Directors?
In a world where an AIG offsite meeting can cause a public uproar, it's interesting that so few people seem to care very much about the sums of money being paid to Fannie Mae's directors. Dean Baker, of course is one of them:
Keep in mind that this is a newspaper that is absolutely apoplectic over autoworkers getting $27 an hour. If we assume that the board members on average will devote 500 hours a year to their board duties, this puts their pay rate at $320 an hour.
I very much doubt that the average Fannie Mae board member is going to spend 500 hours a year on this $160,000-a-year job. (The chairman might, but he's getting $250,000.)
In any case, Fannie Mae is owned by the government now. Is Treasury really incapable of governing Fannie Mae itself? Does it need to pay $1.7 million per year to insert a layer of not-very-accountable governance between itself and management? There's an entire staff at the Federal Housing Finance Agency which knows intimately exactly what Fannie Mae is up to; they also have the power to insist on real change at the operational level. And I'm sure that precious few of them are pulling down $160,000 a year.
So Fannie's board does seem to be a throwback to its former status as a public company. Under the terms of the conservatorship, there might need to be a board. But it doesn't need to be nearly as well-paid as this, especially given that the board isn't really in charge anyway.






