Posted on 12/01/2011 4:57:43 PM PST by rabscuttle385
Link only, per FR posting rules
Gingrich: Some activities of government – trash collection is a good example – can be efficiently contracted out to the private sector. Other functions – the military, police and fire protection – obviously must remain within government. And then there are areas in which a public purpose would be best achieved by using market-based models. I think GSEs provide one of those models. I like the GSE model because it provides a more efficient, market-based alternative to taxpayer-funded government programs. It marries private enterprise to a public purpose. We obviously don't want to use GSEs for everything, but there are times when private enterprise alone is not sufficient to achieve a public purpose. I think private enterprise alone is not going to be able to help the Gulf region recover from the hurricanes, and government will not get the job done in a very effective or efficient manner. We should be looking seriously at creating a GSE to help redevelop this region. We should be looking at whether and how the GSE model could help us address the problem of financing health care. I think a GSE for space exploration ought to be seriously considered – I'm convinced that if NASA were a GSE, we probably would be on Mars today.
Certainly there is a lot of debate today about the housing GSEs, but I think it is telling that there is strong bipartisan support for maintaining the GSE model in housing. There is not much support for the idea of removing the GSE charters from Freddie Mac and Fannie Mae. And I think it's clear why. The housing GSEs have made an important contribution to homeownership and the housing finance system. We have a much more liquid and stable housing finance system than we would have without the GSEs. And making homeownership more accessible and affordable is a policy goal I believe conservatives should embrace. Millions of people have entered the middle class through building wealth in their homes, and there is a lot of evidence that homeownership contributes to stable families and communities. These are results I think conservatives should embrace and want to extend as widely as possible. So while we need to improve the regulation of the GSEs, I would be very cautious about fundamentally changing their role or the model itself.
Q: This is not a point of view one normally associates with conservatives.
Gingrich: Well, it's not a point of view libertarians would embrace. But I am more in the Alexander Hamilton-Teddy Roosevelt tradition of conservatism. I recognize that there are times when you need government to help spur private enterprise and economic development. Look at our own history. The government provided railroad land grants to encourage widespread adoption of what was then the most modern form of transportation to help develop our country. The Homestead Act essentially gave land away to those willing to live on it and develop it. We used what were in effect public-private partnerships to bring telephone service and electricity to every community in our nation. All of these are examples of government bringing about desired public purposes without creating massive, taxpayer-funded bureaucracies. To me that is a pragmatic and effective conservative approach.
Thick New Joisey accent:
“Hey you’s.... I gotsya ‘model organization’ right here. Listen up, we doing real good work. Tell your boys in Washington to call off them dogs, hear me?”
I know it sucks when your guy is losing. But honestly, I would think that anyone who would lash out with the sleazy stuff you anti-newt people are would be used to losing. I think you would be better served over at du.
Dude, it's his own words.
This is about moving to public-private partnership to solve challenges, because the FedGov is a horrific mess.
Another attempt to smear one of our candidates. Why am I not suprised?
Dude, who are you supporting so we can post “their own words” in the true spirit of your comment.
A good example of public-private enterprise is when the DMV in NY moved to one. It went from an agonizing inefficient, infuriating debacle to the model of efficiency.
Prior to a PPE, it used to take all day to get through the mangled mess that was the NY DMV. Afterwards, 15 minutes.
We need a change and not another Washington player like Newt. We all loose stupid.
Did you not read the article and notice the quote marks around his own words? Sorry, but your guy would be better served at DU with that sort of thinking.
Public-Private Partnerships are a horrible mess.
which is why i emailed the two clown editors responsible for this trash and suggest you also do the same:
To contact the reporter on this story: Lorraine Woellert in Washington at lwoellert@bloomberg.net.
To contact the editor responsible for this story: Lawrence Roberts at lroberts13@bloomberg.net
The correct way to spell what you were saying is “we all lose, stupid”
And another RINO surfaces on FR.
He was paid millions for one hour a month work?
No, hiring him was used to get the GOP to not increase oversight of this toxic, economy killing “model organization”
The housing GSEs have made an important contribution to homeownership and the housing finance system. We have a much more liquid and stable housing finance system than we would have without the GSEs.
He couldn't have gotten that one more wrong if he'd tried.
Holy Moley. Is there still people on this site that want to defend this Progressive hack as any form of Conservative? At what times do Gov't and Private enterprises ever yield anything but bigger Gov't? For crying out loud, these dopes were pleading for more federal money today. Newt is a shifty hack.
Is Rick Perry looking better now?
They work very well in eliminating inefficiencies and completing projects on time and on budget.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.