in their own words
 |
|
|
|
 General And Somewhat Nonspecific - White House Press Briefing by Robert Gibbs 3/30/09 — Monday, March 30, 2009 —  Q Thank you. I'd just like to follow up on some of the -- that has been out there here. You've been asked a couple times whether the actions regarding these auto companies should be viewed as something that the banks should pay attention to because a similar approach may come their way. And you said, no, we should look at these as individual cases. So are you essentially --MR. GIBBS: I guess what I'm trying to do is, I'm just trying to -- again, the example I just used with Chuck, I mean, the pathway for two auto companies is, based on the President's decision today, different. So I think to take any series of other entities and put them on that same scale, those paths may also be different. That's all I'm -- Q There's certain principles that underlie all of these decisions, though, obviously, and there is a certain willingness or unwillingness of the administration to dictate certain terms as a condition of receiving federal money. And so are you saying, by saying these are individual cases, are you trying to communicate that these banks really -- don't worry about this, this isn't coming your way? MR. GIBBS: No, I -- Q I think it's a fair question. MR. GIBBS: It is. It's a little general -- general and somewhat nonspecific. And again, what I'm -- I guess what I'm asking is, instead of looking at every entity as the same entity, I think that's -- I don't think that's hypothetically productive. Q Well, do you want me to ask the question that way by inserting all the names of all the banks that have received aid and ask if it would apply to that? I mean, would that be more helpful? MR. GIBBS: Well, again, understanding that some of the circumstances are different. Q But why Rick Wagoner and not Ken Lewis? MR. GIBBS: Again, some of these things are -- I don't have anything specific on Bank of America. But again, I just don't want to be generalistic across the board. Q So, in other words, you really don't want people reading anything more into this? MR. GIBBS: I hope people read into it exactly what I said rather than reading into it what they want to read into it. Q It's our job to help people -- to explain to people what it is that you're saying, and so I'm trying to make sure I understand it. MR. GIBBS: Okay. (Laughter.) Q It sounds like what you're saying is, no, you don't want us to interpret this as a sign of things to come for others -- MR. GIBBS: My hesitancy -- Q -- and if that's the case, why don't you just say -- MR. GIBBS: My hesitancy -- no, no, my hesitancy is just to look at every entity the same way, because, again, the circumstances by which any entity is at any certain point may well be different, even though it's the same type of entity, right? Again, I want to go back to GM and Chrysler. On the face, both are auto companies, right? Both have found themselves at a point where they're seeking additional government assistance, adding in to the additional loans that they got to put them on a path toward viability. But again, the examples by which we're using -- or that the President has made a determination about which direction they're going to go is different even though they're both auto industry. Q Of course, and I'm not suggesting the exact same remedy would apply to any one of these things, but, again, if you look at the general case, you have, say, generically, contracts that at AIG were unbreakable because they're legal contracts but for the UAW, those are contracts that you fully expect them to modify if they're going to get federal assistance. MR. GIBBS: Well, I think this -- I think many people have made -- I think many people have made sacrifices, but, again, without looking through the individual instances of other entities, it's hard to make that generalization. Automobile Industry | Banking | Economy | President Obama | Press Briefing | Robert Gibbs | Treasury Department | White House Press Corps Labels: Automobile Industry, Banking, Economy, President Obama, Press Briefing, Robert Gibbs, Treasury Department, White House Press Corps >> Full Story
Posted by White House Press Corps @ 9:32:00 PM  Framing This Thing - Press Briefing by Treasury Secretary Timothy Geithner 3/23/09 — Monday, March 23, 2009 —  Q Looking at the example you give in the fact sheet -- the first program -- you start with talking about $100 in bank loans, but the private investor only has to kick in $6 for -- seems to be on the hook for $6 at the end of the day, and the FDIC guarantees between there and whatever was paid for the bad loan.Do you think a person outside this room, outside the Beltway, looking at that would feel like that's a -- you know, you've gotten a good deal by getting someone to kick in $6 for a loan that is valued at a $100, that's being purchased for $84. SECRETARY GEITHNER: I'm very confident you and your colleagues will do a good job of framing this thing -- (laughter) -- but let me just come back to the basic point. Okay? The point is, relative to what? What our job is, is to try to fix this problem in our financial system at least cost to the taxpayer and ways to get the incentives right so we can have private capital come in and not have the government do all of it. And the alternative strategies would have the government either taking on all that risk ourselves, having all those losses on our balance sheet -- or, sitting back and letting this process of deleveraging continue to weigh on the American economy, pushing viable businesses closer to the edge, where they have to shrink their businesses to get through this. And that's not an alternative we're prepared to support. The key thing is, again, that you -- people have to compete for the right to get access to financing in this context and they have to put money at risk for it to work. Yes. Q Can you clarify under both plans who is actually holding the assets at the end of the day, and explain to taxpayers what the upside is to all of that? How are they going to share in the upside of this program? SECRETARY GEITHNER: These funds -- purchase assets -- they're managed by professionals who know how to do this for a living. If there is a return to these over time, which we expect there will be, taxpayers will share in that return. So taxpayers are getting to take the benefits of providing this financing to the market. Now, of course investors will share, too, in that return, as you would expect. That's the simplest way to describe it I think. Banking | Economy | Press Briefing | TARP | Treasury Department | Treasury Secretary Timothy Geithner Labels: Banking, Economy, Press Briefing, TARP, Treasury Department, Treasury Secretary Timothy Geithner >> Full Story
Posted by White House Press Corps @ 4:08:00 PM Making a Hash of the Details - White House Press Briefing by Robert Gibbs 3/17/09 — Tuesday, March 17, 2009 —  MR. GIBBS: Jonathan.Q Last night, administration officials said that after carefully reviewing the situation they concluded that under current law these contracts could not be broken without actually costing the taxpayers more money in legal fees than would have been recouped. A few hours -- MR. GIBBS: To break the -- Q To break the contracts. That under current law, to break those contracts would actually cost the taxpayers more money than to let the money go out. About four hours before that, the President of the United States walked before the cameras and said that to block -- he promised to pursue every legal avenue to block these bonuses and make the American taxpayers whole. Did the President, when he went before the camera, did he know at that time that the legal review had already concluded that actually to block those bonuses would be pretty much legally unfeasible? MR. GIBBS: Yes, and he asked us to look again. That's what he announced at the remarks in which you point -- happened four hours earlier, and that's why the review of provisions in existing law, including the Dodd compensation requirements as contained in the Recovery and Reinvestment Act, are one of the avenues with which the administration continues to look. Again, let's point out that that's a piece of legislation that Congress has passed but rules have yet to be promulgated on, which provides an interesting case because the legislation contains provisions dealing with TARP money and preexisting contracts. Q So when the administration officials came back four hours later and said, you know what, we can't really break these contracts, did that mean that the second review that the President was asking for was over and that -- MR. GIBBS: No, I just -- I'm not announcing the end of the review. I'm bringing you up to date on the existing review that takes place, including the provisions that I just read out. Q And, I'm sorry, one more, then. And when Larry Summers went on television on Sunday morning and said, laws are laws, contracts are contracts; we have to respect them -- MR. GIBBS: Again, you're -- now you're asking me about something that happened Sunday. I've now brought you up to speed on what probably happened at around 4:00 p.m. on Monday. So I think you can assume that what I've said about 4:00 p.m. on Monday brings you most up to date on a timeline that you're asking me about sometime on Sunday morning. Q But how much consultation with the economic team and the political team had been done before Mr. Summers, Dr. Summers's appearance on the Sunday shows? MR. GIBBS: Well, again, the legal deadline for the bonuses had passed. There was a review and there's an existing review, as the President ordered yesterday. Yes, sir. Q Robert, we understand from your answers here that you don't have knowledge of the exact timeline, but would it be accurate to say that you were blind-sided, that the President was blind-sided by this? MR. GIBBS: No. And I will certainly seek better timeline answers to enumerate the negative answer I just gave you. Q Why wouldn't it be accurate to say that? MR. GIBBS: Because the Secretary obviously took steps last week to lessen the blow of what was both contractually obligated and what had been promised but was not part of a contract that lessened the amount of money that was paid out. Again, the Secretary of Treasury did good work in changing what was potentially out there, and I think obviously he did so in order to protect the American taxpayers. And that's why I think -- that's the basis for me answering that question. AIG | Economy | Legislation | President Obama | Press Briefing | Robert Gibbs | TARP | Treasury Department | White House Press Corps . Labels: AIG, Economy, Legislation, President Obama, Press Briefing, Robert Gibbs, TARP, Treasury Department, White House Press Corps >> Full Story
Posted by White House Press Corps @ 7:43:00 PM Going Backwards - White House Press Briefing by Robert Gibbs 3/16/09  MR. GIBBS: Jake.Q Did you guys first find out about these bonuses last week? MR. GIBBS: I think that's true, based on what I read in the newspaper. Q But you gave money to AIG two or three weeks ago. How could you not know that they have these millions, hundreds of millions of dollars -- MR. GIBBS: Well, again, Jake, there's -- according to news reports, there's existing contracts, some of which the President -- of which the President has asked the Secretary to examine, going forward. I think you also heard the President speak today about having a resolution authority that gives the government and taxpayers far more flexibility in dealing with the disposition of AIG in a way that gives taxpayers protection and flexibility; a disposition that we don't currently have, but steps that we would like to see taken in order to deal with AIG as a whole. Q But why didn't you attach it to the $30 billion you gave a couple weeks ago? MR. GIBBS: Again, Jake, the -- Q You're looking to retroactively attach it to this new $30 billion. MR. GIBBS: Well, they're looking through contracts to see what can be done to wrest these bonuses from their recipients. Q No, I'm sorry, I don't think -- I don't understand, so maybe I'm just not understanding. But President Obama said in early February when he gave the speech on executive compensation, "These kinds of compensation packages in the midst of this economic crisis isn't just bad taste, it's bad strategy, and I will not tolerate it as President. We're going to be demanding some restraint in exchange for federal aid." Since that time, he gave tens of billions of dollars in federal aid to AIG without demanding restraint. MR. GIBBS: Well, again, Jake, we've got existing relationships, contracts, as I just mentioned, that were negotiated a year ago, assistance that was granted outside of the legal authority prior to the creation of the Troubled Asset Relief Program. The President has asked the administration to go back and look at what remedies are possible to block those bonuses. Q Well, why didn't he do that before? MR. GIBBS: Well, again, the excessive compensation rules that you noted -- and I think somebody asked this at the background briefing that we had -- obviously are prospective based on some limitations that we have in looking backwards. The President has asked Secretary Geithner and members of the administration to exhaust all legal remedies in looking backwards to see what steps could be taken to block these bonuses. Q I know, but since -- and I'm sorry to belabor this point -- but since President Obama gave his speech, you guys gave more money to AIG. Why wasn't it attached to the new money? MR. GIBBS: Because it's -- again, it's part of the -- Q Part of the old contract. MR. GIBBS: Right. It's part of -- Q But you're looking now retroactively to see if you can attach something to that old money? MR. GIBBS: That's what we're looking at. Q Well, why didn't you do it at the time, if you're looking to retroactively do it? MR. GIBBS: The administration is taking the steps today to go back and see what can be done, as Jeff said, to call those bonuses back. Q But, Robert, to follow up on Jake's point, did Secretary Geithner make a mistake by not reviewing these contracts -- they're a year old -- before he cut a new check to AIG? Why didn't he do that? MR. GIBBS: I would certainly ask the Treasury -- I'll ask the Treasury that. But again, to some degree, there are legal instruments and contracts that predate this administration, that predate the legal founding of the TARP program. The President has asked this administration to exhaust all legal avenues to see what can and should be done going backwards. Economy | Obama Administration | Press Briefing | Robert Gibbs | TARP | Treasury Department | Treasury Secretary Timothy Geithner | Wall Street | White House Press Corps Labels: Economy, Obama Administration, Press Briefing, Robert Gibbs, TARP, Treasury Department, Treasury Secretary Timothy Geithner, Wall Street, White House Press Corps >> Full Story
Posted by White House Press Corps @ 12:20:00 AM One Measurement - White House Press Briefing by Robert Gibbs 2/11/09 — Wednesday, February 11, 2009 —  Q Robert, if I can follow up on Jennifer's question, do you feel -- the President said on Monday night in his press conference Secretary Geithner would unveil details the next day. Do you feel that -- do you feel that it was ready? Was the plan ready? Does the President feel it was ready? And number two, if so, is he pleased with how it was communicated yesterday and how it was rolled out?MR. GIBBS: I was going to say, you're not judging me already, are you? Again, I think there's a -- again, I think there's a tendency to look at simply one measurement of this, and by and large that measurement was a few stock markets. I don't believe -- Q Well, a few stock markets that people all over the country are investing in. MR. GIBBS: I understand, I understand. But what I'm saying is the plan wasn't created, nor do I think it should be judged by a one-day reaction in any of those stock markets. The plan that was outlined was ready. Again, part of what this plan will do will be to consult with those private entities in not just the formation, but the execution of the plan. And those consultations are ongoing. But again, the -- again, I just hesitate to judge the breadth of this and the comprehensiveness of this based on one day's reaction. I don't think that's -- I don't think that's how we judge the health of the financial system and I don't think it should be how one judges this plan. Q Even if you don't -- even if you disregard the fall in the market, there was widespread confusion about the plan, period. Is that a result of poor communication, or is that a result of it not -- just all the details not being there? MR. GIBBS: You know, I would ask you to go back and look at all of the news on this, read beyond the larger font and the bigger, bolder print, and dig deep into many of the things that I outlined that were pointed out as big weaknesses in the previous plan that are addressed by what Secretary Geithner said yesterday -- a plan that's based on transparency and disclosure; something that works with the private markets and understands that the taxpayers alone can't do all of this work; that coordinates among the agencies that are involved; that evaluates the financial health of the system and the individual banks, and does so by greatly expanding a program that we think will help provide credit to families and businesses and to people looking to buy homes right now. I think if you look through this you'll find -- you'll undoubtedly find, as I said, some disappointment by people that had hoped that there would be some large big bank announced that would take up in one fell swoop everything that had been wrong with the system over the course of several years and wipe it away overnight. But I think the President was very clear yesterday in saying there's no easy way out of this. There's no easy way out of this for the country, and there's also no easy way out of this for Wall Street. Economy | Obama Administration | Press Briefing | Robert Gibbs | Treasury Department | Treasury Secretary | White House Press Corps Labels: Economy, Obama Administration, Press Briefing, Robert Gibbs, Treasury Department, Treasury Secretary, White House Press Corps >> Full Story
Posted by White House Press Corps @ 7:58:00 PM Tranche Warfare - White House Press Briefing by Deputy Chief of Staff for Policy Joel Kaplan 12/19/08 — Friday, December 19, 2008 —  Q Can you give us a breakdown of who's getting what out of the first $13.4 billion? And is there a distinction of how much you're making available in, say, loan guarantees, which is something Ford was more interested in, versus outright cash out the door? MR. KAPLAN: Yes. The loans that are being announced today are for the GM auto manufacturer and Chrysler auto manufacturing company. Ford, in Treasury discussions with them, I believe does not believe that it needs a loan today. Out of the total -- I mentioned that the total is $17.4 billion -- $13.4 billion of that is going to be made available to these two companies in December and January, and $4 billion is needed in February by GM. So if I do my math correctly, I think that means that $13.4 billion also happens to be the number, coincidentally, that is going to GM, and $4 billion is the number that is going to Chrysler. Q And how do-- MR. KAPLAN: But it's a little confusing because these numbers just -- literally coincidentally happen to be the same, the total -- the total that -- Q So some of it will be in the $4 billion that is the post -- or second tranche amount? MR. KAPLAN: Right, the February tranche of $4 billion is for GM. So $13.4 billion is being divided by GM and Chrysler in December and January. Q Evenly, like -- MR. KAPLAN: No, not evenly. Q Okay. MR. KAPLAN: I believe that it is $4 billion for Chrysler and the remainder, which would be $9.4 billion in December and January for GM, with the remaining $4 billion in February for GM. I apologize, I know those -- it's a little confusing just because of the coincidence of the numbers. Q And how do you resolve the Cerberus issue, because they are a private company -- it calls for warrants, the loans. How does the administration -- or the loan terms deal with that? MR. KAPLAN: Yes, the specifics of how the Treasury intends to get warrants from Chrysler, which is privately held, I'm going to have to rely on Treasury to give the details on. But these loans are to the auto manufacturing companies of GM and Chrysler. Automobile Industry | Joel Kaplan | Legislation | Press Briefing | Treasury Department | White House Press Corps Labels: Automobile Industry, Joel Kaplan, Legislation, Press Briefing, Treasury Department, White House Press Corps >> Full Story
Posted by White House Press Corps @ 5:23:00 PM G7 Pileup - Air Force One Press Gaggle by Dana Perino 10/10/08 — Friday, October 10, 2008 —  Q What is -- what's the President hoping to achieve with the ministers' meeting tomorrow, with the G7 meeting?MS. PERINO: Well, we have been keeping you regularly updated on all the calls and coordination amongst the G7 countries and beyond, because as we said this morning, the President spoke to Prime Minister Rudd, I expect he spoke to President Lula earlier this week, amongst others. The G7 has been working together on a variety of things: sharing information, finding common areas where they can work together on instituting rescues that will address their individual nation's needs, as well as what we need to do as a whole, since we are all so interconnected. So today's meeting at the Treasury Department will allow them to meet face to face, maybe dot some "I's," cross some "T's," and then tomorrow morning the President will have a chance to meet with them. I'm going to let that meeting take place, but I will tell you that the goal of the meeting overall is to continue the good communication and cooperative spirit of trying to find common solutions, while respecting the fact that each nation has individual problems and challenges and needs and ways to address them. Q Dana, has anyone at the White House spoken to Berlusconi or any of his aides about his proposal to close global markets? MS. PERINO: I don't know if you saw an update, but it was retracted. Q Did you guys talk to him about retracting -- MS. PERINO: No, I don't think so. I think that it all happened so fast it was -- Q It wasn't like the White House asked him to retract that or anything like that? MS. PERINO: Not that I'm aware of. I just saw a news report as it came across. I don't know of any of us -- I wasn't involved at all. Q What about the idea of guaranteeing some of the bad debt at the banks? MS. PERINO: This is one of the ideas that Gordon Brown has put forward. What we have said is that with any proposal that's put forward by one of our global partners, that we'll take a look at it and we will review it, but beyond that I don't have any comment on it. Q What about insuring all deposits temporarily at U.S. banks? MS. PERINO: All of those things are questions that the policymakers can take up and think about, discuss. And then once we have -- if we have a decision about moving forward on any of those issues, it will either come out of the Treasury Department or we'll keep you updated. Air Force One | Dana Perino | Economy | G7 | President Bush | Press Gaggle | Treasury Department | Wall Street | White House Press Corps Labels: Air Force One, Dana Perino, Economy, G7, President Bush, Press Gaggle, Treasury Department, Wall Street, White House Press Corps >> Full Story
Posted by White House Press Corps @ 5:13:00 PM Hit Me Baby One More Time - White House Press Briefing by Dana Perino 10/9/08 — Thursday, October 09, 2008 —  Q Thanks. Does the idea of the federal government taking part ownership in a number of U.S. banks fit with the President's philosophy of free enterprise?MS. PERINO: As the President has said, the radical and bold aggressive steps that we are taking on the economy are not ones that were part of his natural instincts. But when presented with the evidence that the financial crisis about to hit the United States would affect every single America up and down the economic food chain, this President decided that it was important that the government take robust action. That's why we worked with Congress to establish the rescue package. Part of that package includes a broad range of authorities for the Treasury Secretary. What you're referring to, I believe, is capital injections that would actually be investing in banks but not taking them over. Q Not taking them over, but doesn't this idea envision that the government would have part ownership in a number of banks? MS. PERINO: It would include an equity stake, yes. Q And how far along is that idea? MS. PERINO: I would refer you to the Treasury Department for that, but it is a part of the range of authorities that they were given, and this is a dynamic situation. We still have a volatile stock market, and Secretary Paulson is looking at all the different tools to figure out which one should be used at what time and how robustly, and how much money to put into each. He said it's going to take a little bit of time, though, as they implement these -- the rules and regulations that Neel Kashkari is now involved in. So let me refer you over there on specifics for that. Q But that's an idea that the President would be okay with? MS. PERINO: It was a part of the rescue package that the President supported, and it gives the Treasury Secretary a range of possibilities, and investing in banks directly was one of those authorities. And Secretary Paulson can use that authority as he sees fit. Q But given the fact that the markets have not reacted positively so far, or at least not very, wouldn't the President like to see that kind of authority used sooner than later? MS. PERINO: Well, one of the things that the President wants is to make sure that these new authorities are used in the most effective and efficient way possible. They are moving at lightning speed for government-type work in trying to establish how quickly people can get in those positions so that they can work on the reverse auctions that were also a part of the authority. This -- these capital injections are something that Secretary Paulson is actively considering, but I'd have to refer you to him as to when he thinks he'd be able to make the first move. Q And the President -- back over this ground again -- the President doesn't object to this in spite of his free market stance? MS. PERINO: As I -- the President's natural instincts when first presented with these issues was not to have government involvement, but when he realized that it wasn't just a few executives on Wall Street who were going to lose their shirts, but it was possibly everyone in America, and now if you look around the world, everybody is suffering -- the President said the government has the tools and the ability to be able to step in and stem this crisis, and there was no way he was going to stand by and let everyone be hurt by the bad decisions of a few. Dana Perino | Economy | President Bush | Press Briefing | Treasury Department | Wall Street | White House Press Corps Labels: Dana Perino, Economy, President Bush, Press Briefing, Treasury Department, Wall Street, White House Press Corps >> Full Story
Posted by White House Press Corps @ 5:29:00 PM Wow, could've had a G8 - White House Press Briefing by Dana Perino 10/7/08 — Tuesday, October 07, 2008 —  MS. PERINO: Wendell. Q As we've dealt with this crisis over the past month and a half or so, the talks -- the international talks have involved the G7, not the G8. Is Moscow, in this regard, paying the price for its overreaction to the Georgia incursion? MS. PERINO: I've not heard that come up, because -- and I don't know all the details; I'd refer you to Treasury about the G7 and the makeup. But usually when they're talking the finance ministers meeting, those have been held at the G7 level, though I think there is some observance or participation at the Russian level, and that will be true this weekend, as well. Q That will be true this weekend as -- because Russia's stock market has lost about half its value this year. They are also suffering in this thing. Do we feel we need them, given they're a huge energy provider for Europe? MS. PERINO: Well, I think that you should go back and -- well, you have to ask Europe that. And I think that obviously energy is an issue. They've been working to try to diversify and develop more supply and different types of supply there in their own hemisphere. But the Russian stock market -- and I'm not an expert in this -- but you could go back -- they didn't just lose value over the past two weeks. They've been losing value since about -- since May -- Q All year. MS. PERINO: -- or maybe all year, but I know that a precipitous drop since May. Again, I don't comment on the daily market movements here, and I can't do it in terms of the Russian ones. But clearly, if you look back in August, if you want to try to make a parallel, when we were dealing with the situation when Russia invaded Georgia, yes, I think that they did -- the world did react negatively to that. Q But I just want to make sure that the -- in the current financial situation, I want to -- the question remains whether Russia is being punished, in effect. MS. PERINO: As I said, I'll have you check with Treasury for the exact list of who all will be here. But it's usually -- when the G7 meets, it's usually just the finance ministers. And that's been the way it's been -- I think we inherited that policy for a while. But I think that the Russian -- I can't remember -- Q So the G8 meets on political matters, the G7 on financial matters? MS. PERINO: I believe so. I don't want to say for sure. But the G7 -- I'm sorry, Treasury will have the list today. But I do think that they send an observer. Dana Perino | Economy | G7 | G8 | Press Briefing | Treasury Department | Wendell Goler | White House Press Corps Labels: Dana Perino, Economy, G7, G8, Press Briefing, Russia, Treasury Department, Wendell Goler, White House Press Corps >> Full Story
Posted by White House Press Corps @ 3:48:00 PM Treasury Department Economic Contingency Plans - White House Press Briefing by Tony Fratto 9/29/08 — Monday, September 29, 2008 —  Q Treasury had been working on a contingency plan for an economic meltdown for over a year. Treasury told me that. Did the White House know this? Did you ever see details of this plan?MR. FRATTO: We work very closely with Treasury. Q So why is it so complex? I mean, why -- MR. FRATTO: It's a complex -- it is an incredibly complex problem. And I think you can see that Treasury was dealing with some very difficult issues: the failure of a major investment bank, the failure of the world's largest insurance company, the failure of two government-sponsored enterprises that needed to go into conservatorship. I think Treasury was ahead of this, but -- I think we said this last week, your first choice isn't a $700-billion-program commitment of taxpayer dollars. That is, I think, a last choice, a major government intervention into the financial sector. That's not what you lead with. You see if there are ways that we can try to contain the problem. That's what Treasury and the Fed tried to do. It had some limited success. But we've seen an incredible transformation in our financial sector right now. But we're in -- we're in a point where because of the tightness in credit, the extreme illiquidity in credit markets, that something major had to be done. And it was the decision of Secretary Paulson. Q But Treasury saw this happening, the possibility -- MR. FRATTO: No. No, the Treasury -- the Treasury was aware of a lot of different potential solutions, and this was one of them. Q They knew a problem was coming, that's why they were looking for solutions a year ago. I mean, why didn't they -- MR. FRATTO: I don't know about a year ago, if that's what they -- if that's what they've told you. But I know that they were looking at different ideas for a long time. But I -- still, I think the point that I made is the right point. You don't -- you don't do this kind of major intervention as a first choice. Q My point is they could have warned the public a year ago that something was coming; they could have talked to Congress. MR. FRATTO: They were warning the public. And they were talking a great deal about the problems in credit markets. And I know it's something Secretary Paulson had been focused on for a great deal of time. And in particular, his focus on Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac as the -- one of the largest players in mortgage backed securities, he had been focused on that for a great deal of time. The administration had been focused on it for six years, even long before the Secretary came to Treasury. Henry Paulson | Press Briefing | Tony Fratto | Treasury Department | Treasury Secretary | Wall Street | White House Press Corps Labels: Henry Paulson, Press Briefing, Tony Fratto, Treasury Department, Treasury Secretary, Wall Street, White House Press Corps >> Full Story
Posted by White House Press Corps @ 5:23:00 PM
|
|
