Fannie Mae-No Politics (FNMA)

[Donotunderstand]

Senator Corker

Why does the below objective require killing F and F

Your goal - as reported

a markup on the bill that I think takes our country vastly forward, reduces taxpayer risk, takes us from a place where we have no capital at two institutions that are a duopoly and have no competition, to a situation where you have lots of capital and lots of competition.


So F and F as one or two of these well capitalized companies? Why is that not good? Indeed why is that not better then the higher risk approach of killing what worked (with yes a duopoly and unfair lower borrowing cost)

If those in congress and GOV and WH can agree on the above goal - then they would IMO decide to shrink F and F but keep them - if not other reasons then small banks, non originating bundlers, and MORE not less competition

Change the nature sure that makes sense - we know what to fix
But kill them ? Seriously how does that advance the cause when pharsed as above

(I love politicians - they have agreed to agree in the future with compromises yet to be determined)
- kill?