And he is really taking that approach now, which is i am going to reduce the credit list held by the gsc is, but im not necessarily going to pull myself out of the market and allow privatelabel capital directly participate in the securitization of investor process. It is that is a change, it may be that there doesnt seem to be a lot of private market interest participating in this old way. And even the sheer size and scale, some are saying that there could be enough capital out there to do it. And this is kind of like them acting like a market maker and the goal is to reduce this through the process. On this point, a few years ago there was an assumption that privatelabel comeback quickly and that at some point down the road congress would perhaps more easily than what would be the case, advance a partisan legislation in the Senate Banking committee look like its going to pass the bill this week, but not with as much majority to propel it through the senate this year. Until we are not
Treasury would feel the same way but i have not had any discussions about that. Me, ither thing intrigued will get the quote correct or close enough. You said that your goal is to reduce taxpayer risk through increasing the role of private capital. But after that you rejected the goal of contracting the Enterprises Market presence. To increase the role of capital. I am figuring out how you square those two. And then you said this is a decision to come so i know that youre are not going to announce it now. In my view you can look at an increase in the guarantees fees as either of those, contracting of the market presence or entering private capital. How does that fit in those criteria . We are balancing in a number of instances sometimes what appeared to be contradictory mandates. Think it is the role to contract the footprint of fannie and freddie. Maintain anto efficient credit market. As private capital demonstrates it will come into this market and it will be clear that fannie and f
Leave. [laughter] [inaudible] exactly. We had an oped from december 2012 that said, look, the firms should build dabbal, and theyre not able capital, and theyre not able to do it now. All the other questions about the third amendment aside, the firms should be building capital. Jim and i said the profit sweep doesnt make sense. Look at how does the system evolve, right . So more, so hopefully more capital both internally and through the credit link notes, you know, going from 30 to 90 is triple, but 90 is very close to zero on a 5 trillion Balance Sheet. So that seemed like a modest step when the risk transfers are so successful so far. But more private capital. The two firms will continue to be regulated, and the retaped portfolios retained portfolios, the internal hedge funds will wind down. Thats not as far aform as. John softencrapo, but its much better than the system before the financial crisis, thats for sure. So do we need congress to do legislation, or could fhfa, how much cou
Is there anybody in the right mind who believes that as an unforeseen circumstances with the current market is anyone who believes you would utilize the entire 48 billion in the coming fiscal year . Not that i know of. Not that i know of either. So you have 40 billion sitting in the bank, and because of some stupid federal law, you have been required to access taxpayer money. By the way, are you going with h. R. 1028, acted and unnecessary are opening 2013 . You think its a good idea . You dont have to say. Its complicated. I know you do. That act which stops this stupid bark at get us off the treadmill. If you were in trouble i would be happy to jump on you. Hound you pretty good. Because 48 billion in the bank and you dont think you have to use it, and yet we are having another hearing today. I have a friend who just bought a 200,000 condo. It took 50,000 down. Thats pretty good, right . They had to borrow 150,000. They have an auto loan, credit card, they owe about 175,000 have abou
Well well you are as how will you prioritize what can be done under the Current Authority . Clips under the Current Authority, they can do things like disclose information better. The fha is like communist china in terms of reporting. Loan level data, we do not do it. That would help us get around the problem that was asked of mr. Benzoin accounting. To show us books crude show us your books. Reduce more moments, that has to be done here. Loan limits. Two things they could do they threatened a three percent limitation on concessions. It has not been done. One of the members said, it has not taken place. Number two, return appraisal panels, those two things would be huge. The time of the gentleman has expired. The chair now recognizes the gentleman from north carolina. Thank you mr. Chairman. I may start by thanking the chair and Ranking Members for having this hearing. It is critically important. An important first step to getting to the basis of what we need to do in this committee. N