• Home
  • News
  • Fortune 500
  • Tech
  • Finance
  • Leadership
  • Lifestyle
  • Rankings
  • Multimedia

We’re still on the hook for Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac. Let’s abolish them.

By
Sheila Bair
Sheila Bair
Down Arrow Button Icon
By
Sheila Bair
Sheila Bair
Down Arrow Button Icon
October 31, 2013, 6:49 AM ET

Washington is renowned for having a short memory, so as Congress considers what to do with Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac, we taxpayers must remind it of the harmful role the duo played in the subprime mortgage meltdown. Congress authorized these government-sponsored entities, or GSEs, to purchase mortgages from banks and other originators and package them into securities with guaranteed payments for investors. That was supposed to expand the amount of investment flowing into mortgage finance, making it easier and cheaper for middle-income families to buy homes. But as for-profit entities, the GSEs discovered they could make big bucks operating essentially like giant hedge funds, issuing cheap debt with implicit government backing and investing the proceeds in high-yield, high-risk mortgage securitizations issued by Wall Street. They made zillions for their shareholders and management until, of course, the housing market turned and mortgage defaults skyrocketed, leaving their highly leveraged operations insolvent and wards of the state.

Taxpayers dumped nearly $190 billion into them to keep them functioning. They have paid back about $146 billion, since they can now easily generate profits through what are effectively government monopolies issuing mortgage securities 100% backed by taxpayers. Indeed, under Uncle Sam’s stewardship, their market share has grown to 75%, compared with less than 50% before the crisis.

There appears to be genuine bipartisan consensus to abolish the GSEs. But with both companies generating healthy profits for our cash-starved government, that consensus might not last. Senators Bob Corker (R-Tenn.) and Mark Warner (D-Va.) have proposed legislation to replace the GSEs with a new government agency called the Federal Mortgage Insurance Corp., or FMIC. (Memo to Washington: Could you stop with the abbreviations already?) This agency would charge a hefty fee to guarantee mortgage-backed securities, similar to the way the FDIC charges premiums to insure bank deposits. Importantly, the FMIC wouldn’t pay a dime until mortgage bundlers or investors absorbed the first 10% of losses. So if FMIC guaranteed $5 trillion in mortgage securities (the likely size of an FMIC-backed market), it wouldn’t pay until private interests absorbed $500 billion of losses.

By requiring a 10% deductible, the bill limits the government’s exposure to major downturns in the mortgage market. That protects taxpayers and also improves market efficiency, as it forces private capital to ante up first. Not surprisingly, some mortgage industry lobbyists are whining about putting up that much capital. (It doesn’t seem to bother them that taxpayers are at risk for the next $4.5 trillion.) With about $20 trillion in U.S. equity markets, $500 billion doesn’t seem an impossible lift. And if securitized loans are soundly underwritten, those investments should be highly profitable.

One glitch: The bill would let that first 10% of losses be covered by private mortgage insurers, or PMIs. If you are a securitizer but don’t want to hold the 10%, you can offload it to a PMI. And if the PMI fails, the FMIC makes the investors whole, even if losses have not reached 10%. To address that problem, the bill imposes tough capital requirements on PMIs and limits their market share. So while they will be smaller and better capitalized than Fannie and Freddie, the GSE model remains: For-profit companies reap the benefits of government subsidies but can put losses on the government if they fail. This PMI backing should be dropped.

To their credit, Corker and Warner seem determined to stand up to the industry and keep the 10% cushion of taxpayer protection. With a few tweaks, the Corker-Warner bill could provide a reasonable replacement for Fannie and Freddie. But the time to act is now, before Congress gets amnesia counting all that money Fannie and Freddie are generating. Yes, they are profitable, but that will provide little comfort to taxpayers when the next housing downturn hits. And it will.

Fortune contributor Sheila Bair is former chair of the FDIC and author of New York Times bestseller Bull by the Horns.

This story is from the November 18, 2013 issue of Fortune.

About the Author
By Sheila Bair
See full bioRight Arrow Button Icon

Latest in

CryptoBinance
Binance has been proudly nomadic for years. A new announcement suggests it’s finally chosen a headquarters
By Ben WeissDecember 7, 2025
2 hours ago
Big TechStreaming
Trump warns Netflix-Warner deal may pose antitrust ‘problem’
By Hadriana Lowenkron, Se Young Lee and BloombergDecember 7, 2025
5 hours ago
Big TechOpenAI
OpenAI goes from stock market savior to burden as AI risks mount
By Ryan Vlastelica and BloombergDecember 7, 2025
5 hours ago
InvestingStock
What bubble? Asset managers in risk-on mode stick with stocks
By Julien Ponthus, Natalia Kniazhevich, Abhishek Vishnoi and BloombergDecember 7, 2025
6 hours ago
EconomyTariffs and trade
Macron warns EU may hit China with tariffs over trade surplus
By James Regan and BloombergDecember 7, 2025
6 hours ago
EconomyTariffs and trade
U.S. trade chief says China has complied with terms of trade deals
By Hadriana Lowenkron and BloombergDecember 7, 2025
6 hours ago

Most Popular

placeholder alt text
Real Estate
The 'Great Housing Reset' is coming: Income growth will outpace home-price growth in 2026, Redfin forecasts
By Nino PaoliDecember 6, 2025
2 days ago
placeholder alt text
AI
Nvidia CEO says data centers take about 3 years to construct in the U.S., while in China 'they can build a hospital in a weekend'
By Nino PaoliDecember 6, 2025
1 day ago
placeholder alt text
Economy
The most likely solution to the U.S. debt crisis is severe austerity triggered by a fiscal calamity, former White House economic adviser says
By Jason MaDecember 6, 2025
1 day ago
placeholder alt text
Big Tech
Mark Zuckerberg rebranded Facebook for the metaverse. Four years and $70 billion in losses later, he’s moving on
By Eva RoytburgDecember 5, 2025
2 days ago
placeholder alt text
Economy
JPMorgan CEO Jamie Dimon says Europe has a 'real problem’
By Katherine Chiglinsky and BloombergDecember 6, 2025
1 day ago
placeholder alt text
Uncategorized
Transforming customer support through intelligent AI operations
By Lauren ChomiukNovember 26, 2025
11 days ago
Rankings
  • 100 Best Companies
  • Fortune 500
  • Global 500
  • Fortune 500 Europe
  • Most Powerful Women
  • Future 50
  • World’s Most Admired Companies
  • See All Rankings
Sections
  • Finance
  • Leadership
  • Success
  • Tech
  • Asia
  • Europe
  • Environment
  • Fortune Crypto
  • Health
  • Retail
  • Lifestyle
  • Politics
  • Newsletters
  • Magazine
  • Features
  • Commentary
  • Mpw
  • CEO Initiative
  • Conferences
  • Personal Finance
  • Education
Customer Support
  • Frequently Asked Questions
  • Customer Service Portal
  • Privacy Policy
  • Terms Of Use
  • Single Issues For Purchase
  • International Print
Commercial Services
  • Advertising
  • Fortune Brand Studio
  • Fortune Analytics
  • Fortune Conferences
  • Business Development
About Us
  • About Us
  • Editorial Calendar
  • Press Center
  • Work At Fortune
  • Diversity And Inclusion
  • Terms And Conditions
  • Site Map

© 2025 Fortune Media IP Limited. All Rights Reserved. Use of this site constitutes acceptance of our Terms of Use and Privacy Policy | CA Notice at Collection and Privacy Notice | Do Not Sell/Share My Personal Information
FORTUNE is a trademark of Fortune Media IP Limited, registered in the U.S. and other countries. FORTUNE may receive compensation for some links to products and services on this website. Offers may be subject to change without notice.