Tim Geithner Under Fire

Tim Geithner, as the face of the Administration, is increasingly under fire for what many are calling a failure to take the bold steps necessary to put our financial system back in order. And much of the criticism is from the left side, with some convergence between critics of the left and right. Paul Krugman’s latest column sounds the alarm from the left, and he does not mince words.

But among people I talk to there’s a growing sense of frustration, even panic, over Mr. Obama’s failure to match his words with deeds. The reality is that when it comes to dealing with the banks, the Obama administration is dithering. Policy is stuck in a holding pattern.

Krugman, and others, see the Administration as believing that an adequate mechanism for pricing the “toxic assets” that remain on the balance sheets of many banks would solve our problems. In line with that thinking comes a belief that these institutions are not really insolvent, but their assets are undervalued. And if you believe that it can bring you to some strange conclusions.

Earlier this week, Ben Bernanke, the Federal Reserve chairman, was asked about the problem of “zombies” — financial institutions that are effectively bankrupt but are being kept alive by government aid. “I don’t know of any large zombie institutions in the U.S. financial system,” he declared, and went on to specifically deny that A.I.G. — A.I.G.! — is a zombie.

This is the same A.I.G. that, unable to honor its promises to pay off other financial institutions when bonds default, has already received $150 billion in aid and just got a commitment for $30 billion more.

The idea that these institutions are not insolvent is a bad joke. They are insolvent, and they are zombies. Pretending that they are solvent does not make it so. And the Republicans have started calling for the Treasury to allow some of these institutions to fail, without being specific.

“Close them down, get them out of business,” Mr. Shelby, the senior Republican on the Banking Committee, told ABC’s “This Week With George Stephanopoulos.” “If they’re dead, they ought to be buried.” …. Mr. McCain, appearing on “Fox News Sunday,” echoed that sentiment without identifying any banks. Mr. McCain, who lost the presidential election last November, also accused the Treasury Department of avoiding the “hard decision” to let “these banks fail.”

I am not sure letting them fail is the right answer, but certainly utilizing the strategy successfully employed during the S&L crisis makes some sense to me. Nationalize the zombies, dump all of their questionable assets onto the balance sheet of an aggregator bank, recapitalize them, and sell them back to private equity. If the Administration is right and some of these assets will rise in value the aggregator bank will recoup capital from their eventual sale. If not we have scrubbed the system and moved the banking system out of its current danger. You would likely see a rally on the stock market if the financial sector believed that this issue was being dealt with comprehensively. Bold steps need to be taken before it is to late. Geithner was parodied on SNL for his perceived lack of action.

http://widgets.nbc.com/o/4727a250e66f9723/49b422397106aaff/49b3bb3a95c13b19/651b0958/-cpid/992305358b1e745c

This entry was posted in National News and tagged , . Bookmark the permalink.

5 Responses to Tim Geithner Under Fire

  1. Fred Mertz says:

    Mr. Mayor:

    I, like you, thought that the S&L RTC example should have been reused, as we’ve already had the experience and understood how to improve on the model previously employed.

    I’m gathering, though, that there is some belief that “mark to market” accounting may be a big part of the current problem: assets may be being forced to be accounted for at far below their actual value. I’m no financial guy, and I barely have my fingers into understanding this, but I’m wondering if today’s situation is enough different from the 80’s to warrant another set of fixes.

    Is there anyone listening who can speak to this?

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mark-to-market

    It is unfortunate that these issues are coming up on the change of an administration: I understand that the Treasury Department is woefully understaffed right now, and that Geithner is going at this basically alone.

    -FM

    Like

  2. Bill Manzi says:

    Geithner and the President made three appointments today that should help. Mark to market is a problem, according to many. Newt Gingrich has been a proponent of getting rid of that accounting rule. I do believe, without being a banker, that these institutions are under water regardless of mark to market, and these toxic assets, in addition to placing many institutions below their mandated capitalization, are destroying confidence in the system. With all of the finger pointing at Obama over the slide in the stock market I think if folks believe the banking system is healthy it will turn that market around. I must admit though that both Paulson and Geithner have refused to take the route we talk about here, and there must be a piece of that puzzle that we cannot see.

    Like

  3. Jules Gordon says:

    Your Honor,

    I am thinking the “community organizer” may be running into trouble when the community gets to 340 million people. Should he be spouting more parables to boyd us up for the scary times ahead.

    Like

  4. Fred Mertz says:

    Jules:

    Sit back, relax, and enjoy the ride. This spring took 28 years to wind up, and it’s not done unwinding yet. With any luck at all, we reach bottom this year.

    If we don’t get at least a little bit of luck, well, maybe it’s time to go mattress shopping. Or learn to sell apples and pencils on street corners.

    -FM

    Like

  5. Fred Mertz says:

    And today, the stock market just LOVES Obama’s plans, because it went up huge! Happy Days Are Here Again!

    -FM

    Like

Leave a comment