Quantcast
SEP 8, 2011 8:37pm ET

Web Seminars

Shut the Front Door to Fraud
June 14, 2012
Breaking the Banks: Declining Performance in the Reputation Economy
June 21, 2012
The New Subprime Definition
June 27, 2012

Obama Pushes Infrastructure Bank, Pledges Housing Fix

Print
Reprints
Email

WASHINGTON — Two proposals in President Obama's speech to a joint session of Congress on Thursday would have the most direct impact on the banking industry.

First, Obama vowed to take executive action to allow more Americans to refinance their mortgages. Secondly, he urged Congress to pass legislation that would create a national infrastructure bank.

Obama used the speech to preview the American Jobs Act, which he plans send to Congress soon. The bill will include tax cuts, an extension of unemployment insurance, and a series of other job-creation measures.

As was widely anticipated, the legislation will include a national infrastructure bank, an idea that Obama has been talking about since the 2008 presidential campaign. So far it has failed to attract sufficient Republican support in Congress.

Banks have also been chilly to the idea, arguing that it would either subsidize projects that the private sector would have financed anyway, or pay for boondoggles that don't justify the investment on an economic basis.

No details on the size or scope of Obama's most recent infrastructure bank proposal were immediately available, but an earlier version would have allocated $30 billion to the program. In Thursday's speech, the president talked about modernizing 35,000 schools and jump-starting thousands of transportation projects, though it was unclear if he was referring solely to projects that would be financed by the infrastructure banks.

Obama described the infrastructure bank as "an independent fund to attract private dollars and issue loans based on two criteria: how badly a construction project is needed and how much good it would do for the economy."

Based on Obama's speech, it does not appear that his legislative proposal contains a housing component. He did vow, however, to take unilateral action to spur mortgage refinancing.

"My administration can and will take some steps to improve our competitiveness on our own," Obama said. "And to help responsible homeowners, we're going to work with federal housing agencies to help more people refinance their mortgages at interest rates that are now near 4%."

After being interrupted briefly by applause, Obama said, "I know you guys must be for this, because that can put more than $2,000 a year in a family's pocket, and give a lift to an economy still burdened by the drop in housing prices."

The speech included no specifics about the refinancing plan. An existing government refinance program, which is open to homeowners who are current on their mortgages as long as they don't owe more than 25% more than the value of their homes, has helped more than 800,000 families. But initially the administration said the existing program would help 4 million to 5 million households.

Obama in his speech made one additional reference to the financial industry. Responding to Republican arguments that overregulation is hurting the economy, Obama said that he won't allow the economic crisis to be used as an excuse to wipe out certain basic protections, and used as an example existing consumer protections for credit-card users.

"I reject the argument that says for the economy to grow, we have to roll back protections that ban hidden fees by credit card companies," Obama said.


Comments (1)
President Obama wants to extend unemployment benefits yet again. In "Obama Pushes Infrastructure Bank, Pledges Housing Fix" the American Banker characterized Obama's proposed extension of unemployment insurance as a "job-creation measure." To the contrary, it's a job-destruction measure.? ?No serious economist credibly argues paying more unemployment insurance benefits longer reduces unemployment.? ?The 2007 OECD Employment Outlook says "It is well established that generous unemployment benefits can increase the duration of unemployment spells and the overall level of unemployment."??The president's own economists Alan Krueger and Larry Summers, before shilling for him in the administration, rightly said unemployment benefits reduce employment. ??Obama's new Council of Economic Advisors Chairman Alan Krueger in 2002 wrote "unemployment insurance and workers' compensation insurance finds that the programs tend to increase the length of time employees spend out of work." In 2008 he wrote "job search is inversely related to the generosity of unemployment benefits," and that "the job finding rate jumps up around the time benefits are exhausted." Who knew? ??In the Library of Economics and Liberty former head of the President's National Economic Council "Larry Summers wrote "Each unemployed person has a "reservation wage"--the minimum wage he or she insists on getting before accepting a job. Unemployment insurance and other social assistance programs increase that reservation wage, causing an unemployed person to remain unemployed longer."??And even NYT Obama cheerleader and economist Paul Krugman in 2009 wrote "Public policy designed to help workers who lose their jobs can lead to structural unemployment as an unintended side effect....in Europe, benefits are more generous and last longer. The drawback to this generosity is that it reduces a works' incentive to quickly find a new job. Generous unemployment benefits in some European countries are widely believed to be one of the main causes of "Eurosclerosis...."? ?The administration argues unemployed spending benefits stimulates the economy. But, every unemployment benefit dollar must be taken from the private sector by taxes, borrowing or printing money. That's resources reallocated from those producing to those who aren't, money that would have otherwise been productively invested or spent by businesses and individuals. ??Harvard economist Robert Barro's studies show the government-spend Keynesian multiplier is less than one. Heritage Foundation's James Sherk and Karen Campbell in "Extended Unemployment Insurance - No Economic Stimulus" suggest "unemployment insurance provides virtually no "bang for the buck" as economic stimulus," having a short term multiplier of .25, and beyond 39 weeks a slightly negative multiplier. ??Paying people not to work for 2 years isn't compassion. It's cruel. They lose the habits of work and self respect, and become less attractive to employers. ??And unemployment benefits cause families to reduce other income. For example, when married men receive unemployment benefits wives' earnings fall between 36 and 73 cents for each dollar of unemployment benefits received.??Unemployment insurance should be an emergency bootstrap for those who've lost their jobs, not a medium or long-term entitlement. It is however a rare Congressman - Democrat or Republican, who has the political courage to vote against extending unemployment benefits. ? ?Eric Grover
Posted by egrover | Monday, October 03 2011 at 2:38PM ET
Add Your Comments:
You must be registered to post a comment.
Not Registered?
You must be registered to post a comment. Click here to register.
Already registered? Log in here
Please note you must now log in with your email address and password.

Email Newsletters

Get the Daily Briefing and the Morning Update when you sign up for a free trial.

Already a subscriber? Log in here
Please note you must now log in with your email address and password.