Friday, November 21, 2008 | 1:49 p.m.

Terence Jeffrey

Home > Opinion Columns > Terence Jeffrey
Please contact your local newspaper editor if you want to read Terence Jeffrey's column in your hometown paper.
Terence Jeffrey

Recently

  • Trusting Paulson
    President Bush's trusted treasury secretary, Henry Paulson, is setting the stage for the all-Democratic government that comes to power in January to vastly increase government control over our economy. At an Oct. 23 briefing, CNSNews.com …
  • Send Your Children to D.C. Public Schools, Mr. President-Elect
    Barack and Michelle Obama are poised to commit a classic act of limousine-liberal hypocrisy — in this case, turning their backs on tens of thousands of inner-city kids in Washington, D.C. Public schools, it seems, are good enough for poor and …
  • Wanted: Small Government
    Up until the 1930s, the United States maintained a small federal government that mostly focused on the limited number of things the Constitution authorized it to do. Americans were responsible for their own food, clothing and shelter, and if they …
  • Will Government Give up Ownership in the Banks?
    Sweeping acts of government power are certain to have unintended consequences. Americans have seen this truth played out in the conduct of recent wars. But what are the potential unintended consequences of the sweeping move the government is making …

The Price of Banking on Government

Podcast available through:

If you like Terence Jeffrey, you might enjoy

There was instructive value even in the language that The Washington Post and The New York Times used to describe the Monday meeting at which nine large banks agreed to surrender part ownership to the government.

In describing how it came about, the Post said, "The government ordered the chief executives of nine prominent banks to attend a meeting yesterday at the imposing offices of the Treasury Department."

In describing the outcome, the Times said, "Bringing together all nine executives and directing them to participate was a way to avoid stigmatizing any one bank that chose to accept the government investment."

The bankers were "ordered" to come to Washington and "directed" to surrender an ownership interest to the state.

Treasury Secretary Henry Paulson emerged from the meeting looking and talking like Shakespeare's Macbeth when that woeful character emerged from the room where he had just slain the king of Scotland.

"We regret having to take these actions," said the remorseful former Wall Street banker. "Today's actions are not what we ever wanted to do, but today's actions are what we must do to restore confidence to our financial system."

"Government owning a stake in any private U.S. company is objectionable to most Americans — me included," said Paulson.

He then went on to explain that the government intended to buy an interest not only in nine big banks but also in hundreds of smaller — financially healthy — banks all across the country.

"Today I am announcing that the Treasury will purchase equity stakes in a wide array of banks and thrifts," Paulson said. "While many banks have suffered significant losses during this period of market turmoil, many others have plenty of capital to get through this period. … Our goal is to see a wide array of healthy institutions sell preferred shares to the Treasury and raise additional private capital so that they can make more loans to businesses and consumers across the nation."

The New York Times reported that there are about 8,500 smaller banks in the United States and that, according to the American Bankers Association, 95 percent of U.S. banks are well-capitalized.

In other words: The government is seeking to buy up shares in healthy, well-run small businesses all across America so it can get those businesses to behave as the government wants them to behave — which, as Paulson put it, is to "make more loans to businesses and consumers."

But isn't that how we go into this mess — with the government trying to get banks to make more loans?

Just as one lie leads to another, imprudent government intervention in the free market leads to further imprudent government intervention in the free market.
Each step of the way, we are told we have no choice but to do what the government wants us to do.

The original transgression that led us to the current crisis was committed by elected officials in Washington who wanted to buy additional incumbency insurance for themselves by saying to voters: We will help you buy a house.

They worked to accomplish this through legislation (such as the Community Reinvestment Act) that pressured banks to make riskier loans and through tax-exempt government-sponsored enterprises Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac, which started buying up riskier loans (so the original lenders did not have to carry the risk) and wrapping them into mortgage-backed securities (which mixed bad loans with good loans).

"Because these two companies were chartered by Congress, many believed they were guaranteed by the federal government," President Bush said when he first announced his plan for a $700 billion bailout of the financial industry. "This allowed them to borrow enormous sums of money, fuel the market for questionable investments, and put our financial system at risk."

Right. Then President Bush did guarantee them.

So we have gone from government pressuring banks to make riskier mortgages, to government-sponsored enterprises buying riskier loans from banks to facilitate even more risky lending, to government buying stakes in the banks themselves.

"We are acting with unprecedented speed, taking unprecedented measures that we never thought would be necessary," Paulson said at the end of his announcement.

What will be the next unprecedented measure government officials never thought would be necessary?

Having murdered his king and then his friend Banquo, Shakespeare's Macbeth, abandoning all consideration of right and wrong, decides: "I am in blood / Stepp'd in so far, that, should I wade no more, / Returning were as tedious as go o'er." He learns — in the end — he made the wrong decision.

Americans have a decision to make, too. Do we want to wade further into government dependency and government intervention in our economy? Or do we want to turn back now to the shores of individual responsibility and freedom?

Terence P. Jeffrey is the editor in chief of CSNnews.com. To find out more about him, visit the Creators Syndicate web page at www.creators.com.

COPYRIGHT 2008 CREATORS SYNDICATE INC.




AddThis Social Bookmark Button RSS Get RSS Feed for Terence Jeffrey Email updates Email me Terence Jeffrey updates Comments Comments
Originally Published on Wednesday October 15, 2008


Terence Jeffrey's column is published once a week.
Editors Picks - Opinion Columns
Evil Concealed by Money
Walter E. Williams
The eHarmony Shakedown
Michelle Malkin
Leaving Home
Susan Estrich
See All
More Terence Jeffrey
Nov. `08
Su Mo Tu We Th Fr Sa
26 27 28 29 30 31 1
2 3 4 5 6 7 8
9 10 11 12 13 14 15
16 17 18 19 20 21 22
23 24 25 26 27 28 29
30 1 2 3 4 5 6
View By Month
About the author Print friendly format Write the author Email This Article to a friend
All newspaper editors want to know what their readers like. If you would like to read this feature in your local newspaper, please do not hesitate to share your enthusiasm with your local newspaper editor.


 

Shop Creators Syndicate

 
Friday, November 21, 2008 | 1:49 p.m.
About Creators | Privacy Policy | Contact Us | Editor's login | FAQ | En Español
Copyright © 2006 Creators.com. All Rights Reserved.
Web Development by JJCO