I know firsthand, that when you explain to many people that the abandonment of sound lending practices at these institutions to cater to PC concerns of who can and cannot afford housing, you are accused of being a racist.
I went to the Fannie Mae Homepage and copied the following. Note in particular, the emphasis on giving money to people who have not shown that they know how to handle it. Far below, you can read their statement on Diversity.
If they had spent more time on sound fiscal lending practices and less time on diversity, we might not be in a position to get screwed by the government to bail these idiots out.
*******************************
Affordable Housing Solutions
In support of our mission, Fannie Mae offers several mortgage products and options that help our lender partners serve low- to moderate-income borrowers with affordable, sustainable homeownership solutions, including:
Reduced requirements for down payment and closing costs
A variety of mortgage terms and payment options
Low mortgage insurance coverage requirements
Choices for borrowers with less-than-perfect credit
Flexibility to provide loans to home buyers with no traditional credit history
Options that may provide extra flexibility for teachers, police officers, firefighters, health care workers, and retired and active members of the military, and for borrowers with a disability or a family member with a disability
Fannie Mae also works with several community-based nonprofit partners to offer special lending initiatives to meet their community’s needs.
****************************
And here is their “Misson Statement”:
About Fannie Mae - Introduction to Fannie Mae
Our Charter
Careers
Diversity & Inclusion
Fannie Mae provides stability, liquidity, and affordability to the nation’s housing finance system under all economic conditions. We are a shareholder-owned company with a public mission. We exist to expand affordable housing and bring global capital to local communities in order to serve the U.S. housing market.
Fannie Mae has a federal charter and operates in America’s secondary mortgage market to ensure that mortgage bankers and other lenders have enough funds to lend to home buyers at low rates. Our job is to help those who house America.
Fannie Mae was created in 1938, under President Franklin D. Roosevelt, at a time when millions of families could not become homeowners, or risked losing their homes, for lack of a consistent supply of mortgage funds across America.
The government established Fannie Mae in order to expand the flow of mortgage funds in all communities, at all times, under all economic conditions, and to help lower the costs to buy a home.
In 1968, Fannie Mae was re-chartered by Congress as a shareholder-owned company, funded solely with private capital raised from investors on Wall Street and around the world.
Fannie Mae has a unique duty to the public it serves — and the private investors that fuel its service — to be a model company focused on service, reliability, and value.
Like all who participate in the housing market, Fannie Mae has a responsibility to help home buyers, homeowners, and communities through market challenges. We believe in the long term health of America’s housing market. The nation is growing and that growth will bring a renewed demand for housing and for responsible, sustainable mortgage lending. Fannie Mae will be there to help meet America’s changing housing needs.
***************************************************
Mission
Fannie Mae is committed to diversity and inclusion in the workforce, the workplace and the marketplace. We strive to create an environment where employees — our greatest resource — can fully engage and contribute their diverse ideas and perspectives towards innovative solutions that meet the company’s goals. In doing so, our employees drive the company’s competitive edge and serve the needs of our customers, partners and communities.
Please, stop blaming the black and Hispanic people for everything.
Here’s the story of how IndyMac really worked...
http://appraisersforum.com/showthread.php?t=141764
At the end of my first week, there was an urgent need to field review an appraisal of a subdivision in the Sacramento area. I went up there on the weekend, but also took along some other recent appraisal reports from the Sacramento area. One of the other appraisal reports concerned me. A residential subdivision had been appraised as “80% complete”, but when I visited it, it had only been rough-graded, probably no more than 15% complete. When I returned to the office on Monday I asked who the construction inspector was for that region. I was told that there were two inspectors for the Sacramento area; one was CEO Mike Perry’s father and the other one was Mike Perry’s father-in-law. The loan officer on the deal was Mike Perry’s younger brother, Roger, who had recently been hired. His previous experience had been as a cop. Thereafter I heard of favoritism towards relatives of Mike Perry and “FOMs”, and the chief credit officer advised me to take special care of Mike Perry’s brother. (“FOM” was IndyMac jargon for “Friend of Mike”.)
I reported my Sacramento findings in a private memo to the chief credit officer, who then distributed it to the senior managers at the construction lending subsidiary known as the Construction Lending Corporation of America (CLCA). The senior credit officer from CLCA, the manager who most resembled Tony Soprano, was the one to call me. He asked “Are you sure you saw what you said you saw?” in a rather chilling manner. He said he had been on site with Roger Perry and had seen things differently. After that call, I asked the chief credit officer why CLCA’s senior credit officer would want me to recant my report. He told me that the senior credit officer received sales commissions for every loan made, which seemed to me like a blatant conflict of interest.
All appraisals were ordered by the loan officers from a list of approved appraisers maintained by LandAmerica. I was not allowed to order appraisals, but I recognized many names on the LandAmerica list as well known, reputable appraisers. What I began to observe, however, was that loan officers were learning which appraisers were more “flexible” than others. My areas of concern were extraordinary assumptions, lack of feasibility analysis, and false information given to appraisers.
As an example, I read an appraisal of a vacant, former Costco warehouse which had been purchased for $2 million several months before, but was appraised for $17 million based on a fabricated rent roll composed of tenants that had never signed a lease or a letter of intent. Only one tenant actually moved in. I told the loan officer that I could not accept the appraisal report, as it was hypothetical. He wanted me to approve it, any way, with the understanding that no funds would be disbursed until the prospective tenants could be verified. I told him that I wasn’t going to approve a hypothetical appraisal. The loan was funded, any way.