Under the laws or rules of Conservatorship the conservator is sopposed have fannies best intrest in mind. Even though some can argue that giving up all profits to almost unlimited amount of cash if and when needed is a good exchange, it devalues the company as they can not stockpile cash. The conservator is to maintain the vaule of the company, but by agreeing to the profit sweeps it does not do that. IMO that is the biggest argument in court, that he conservator put in place by the govt it a conflict of interest as they are a puppet for the Govt. Fannie and Freddie are posting more and more profits every quarter under stricter regulations, that shows the Conservatorship is not needed, though If fannie can not add cash to thier books the govt can argue that fannie does not have enough cash to with- stand any bad quarters or years. The fact that the stock is still allowed to trade and many people have suffered losses based on the fluctuation on speculative information is negligent by the govt if they never give back the company to shareholders. Sooner or later they will as the govt has no business being in the mortgage business. If they wanna oversee it with stricter regulation laws and even charge a fee for auditing or something fine, but a profit sweep and control of the board is flat out stealing, and our money and big companies would be safer run from China or Russia. main problem is awareness of the citizens letting them know what the Govt is doing, as that NYT article a few days ago caused the stock to spike 20%. We need the people from occupy wallstreet to occupy fannie and protest and give the govt a headache as they only make changes when an issue is a headache to them.
