Cash - and I don't disagree with you - partisan bickering and inaction are on our side, but I've come to the conclusion that the partisan bickering on this issue (FnF reform) is not as wide as people believe, surprisingly.
The banking committee is holding 2x weekly hearings through November, and democrats and republicans are reaching surprising consensus on these matters:
1) The Market needs to provide EXPLICIT government guarantees for the mortgage industry
2)That EXPLICIT government guarantee will NOT be given to any corporation with private shareholders
3)A mutual model that allows large and small banks and mortgage companies to participate on a level playing field in the market is desirable.
4) FnF possess the know-how and infrastructure to support the secondary market
ERGO: FnF are transformed into a MUTUAL owned by all participating banks, mortgage companies, and insurance companies
Now, hopefully, shareholders get full value for the assets of FnF during this transition/transformation.
Our argument needs to be for FULL and EQUITABLE compensation for assets vs. being arbitrarily nationalized and shareholders wiped out. Shareholders are not on any POLITICIAN'S radar at the moment, and FnF's status as private companies are just barely considered. Most lawmakers are under the impression that the TAXPAYERS (whoever they are) ALREADY OWN FNF. This is mistaken, of course, but does reality matter in this environment?
The law and/or rules of fair play are what we must depend upon.
All IMHO
Jay
News 
Market Data 
Discover 
