{"id":8993,"date":"2009-05-28T18:35:48","date_gmt":"2009-05-28T18:35:48","guid":{"rendered":""},"modified":"2009-05-28T18:35:48","modified_gmt":"2009-05-28T18:35:48","slug":"myths-and-falsehoods-about-the-backstop","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/calitics.com\/index.php\/2009\/05\/28\/myths-and-falsehoods-about-the-backstop\/","title":{"rendered":"Myths and Falsehoods About The Backstop"},"content":{"rendered":"<p>When the traditional media followed the lead of the Hooverists on the right and started calling California&#8217;s desire for federal loan guarantees to secure short-term borrowing a &#8220;bailout,&#8221; which it <a href=\"https:\/\/calitics.com\/diary\/8936\/the-backstop-is-not-a-bailout\">isn&#8217;t<\/a>, support for the measure collapsed. &nbsp;But not only was California seeking a solution to being gouged by bankers and investors, but <a href=\"http:\/\/www.nytimes.com\/2009\/05\/26\/business\/26muni.html?partner=rss&#038;emc=rss\">other localities would like the option<\/a> as well, putting the lie to the notion that California seeks &#8220;preferential treatment.&#8221; &nbsp;In fact, other localities want a simple payback to cover losses to their municipal bonds from the Lehman Brothers meltdown, which would cost far more to the Feds than a loan guarantee program. &nbsp;Moody&#8217;s has downgraded the ENTIRE muni bond sector, not just California, so the costs have gone up across the board. &nbsp;Overall, there is an acknowledgement that the recession has made borrowing costs too exorbitant, and backing from the Feds could save municipalities billions at no cost to the government.<\/p>\n<blockquote><p>All of the proposals are meant to help struggling state and local governments that are facing a cash-flow squeeze. The economic downturn has eaten into their tax bases as local businesses shut, houses are lost to foreclosure and there is a resistance to raising taxes. The risk to the federal government is that it could lose money if things get worse for municipalities and states. <strong>Although backing debt with a guarantee does not require an immediate outlay of funds<\/strong>, the federal government could have to cover losses if there are defaults &#8211; which could be substantial if the economy weakens or states and municipalities cannot bring their budget deficits under control. Nonetheless, these overtures by state and local officials reflect a sense &#8211; perhaps just a hope &#8211; that municipalities suffering from a downturn in revenues and creditworthiness may find some relief in Washington beyond the stimulus money the federal government already is spending.<\/p><\/blockquote>\n<p>Emphasis there on &#8220;could.&#8221; &nbsp;Those who know the market and understand it admit that California, and all the other states, <a href=\"http:\/\/www.msnbc.msn.com\/id\/30967018\/\">would certainly repay the bondholders<\/a>. &nbsp;The state has never missed a payment in its history, and bond repayment has a stronger priority in the California constitution than most other states. &nbsp;All the bond analysts I&#8217;ve seen say uniformly &#8220;California&#8217;s not going to default.&#8221; &nbsp;Not to mention the fact that the savings from being rescued from out-of-control interest rates would leave more money available to aovid cuts.<\/p>\n<blockquote><p>&#8220;There&#8217;s simply no better stimulus than guaranteeing state and local bonds, particularly those that are being used to get through the crisis and avoid layoffs,&#8221; said Rep. Brad Sherman, one of 15 Democrats in California&#8217;s House delegation who signed a letter earlier this month asking for the federal loan guarantee.<\/p>\n<p>Plus, supporters of the idea note that Washington stands to make a profit from loan fees as it did after bailing out New York City in 1975, a move that brought the city back from the brink of ruin [&#8230;]<\/p>\n<p>&#8220;We are not asking for a bailout,&#8221; said state Assembly Speaker Karen Bass, a Los Angeles Democrat. &#8220;We&#8217;re asking for the federal government to step in where commercial banks can&#8217;t this year because of the crisis within the financial industry.&#8221;<\/p><\/blockquote>\n<p>In other words, the state didn&#8217;t create the economic crisis, they didn&#8217;t create the financial crisis, and they shouldn&#8217;t be unable to secure normal short-term borrowing because of either.<\/p>\n<p>Also contrary to the myths in the media, the federal government has NOT foreclosed this option whatsoever. &nbsp;The Treasury has been somewhat noncommital on the specifics, but agreed in broad terms that the municipal bond market needs to work better than it does today. &nbsp;In addition, Tim Geithner had this warning for the wordsmiths on the right and in the media:<\/p>\n<blockquote><p>But, according to a Bloomberg News account of the speech, Mr. Geithner cautioned: &#8220;I wouldn&#8217;t use the word bailout.&#8221;<\/p><\/blockquote>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"<p>When the traditional media followed the lead of the Hooverists on the right and started calling California&#8217;s desire for federal loan guarantees to secure short-term borrowing a &#8220;bailout,&#8221; which it <a href=\"https:\/\/calitics.com\/diary\/8936\/the-backstop-is-not-a-bailout\">isn&#8217;t<\/a>, support for the measure collapsed. &nbsp;But not only was California seeking a solution to being gouged by bankers and investors, but <a href=\"http:\/\/www.nytimes.com\/2009\/05\/26\/business\/26muni.html?partner=rss&#038;emc=rss\">other localities would like the option<\/a> as well, putting the lie to the notion that California seeks &#8220;preferential treatment.&#8221; &nbsp;In fact, other localities want a simple payback to cover losses to their municipal bonds from the Lehman Brothers meltdown, which would cost far more to the Feds than a loan guarantee program. &nbsp;Moody&#8217;s has downgraded the ENTIRE muni bond sector, not just California, so the costs have gone up across the board. &nbsp;Overall, there is an acknowledgement that the recession has made borrowing costs too exorbitant, and backing from the Feds could save municipalities billions at no cost to the government.<\/p>\n<blockquote><p>All of the proposals are meant to help struggling state and local governments that are facing a cash-flow squeeze. The economic downturn has eaten into their tax bases as local businesses shut, houses are lost to foreclosure and there is a resistance to raising taxes. The risk to the federal government is that it could lose money if things get worse for municipalities and states. <strong>Although backing debt with a guarantee does not require an immediate outlay of funds<\/strong>, the federal government could have to cover losses if there are defaults &#8211; which could be substantial if the economy weakens or states and municipalities cannot bring their budget deficits under control. Nonetheless, these overtures by state and local officials reflect a sense &#8211; perhaps just a hope &#8211; that municipalities suffering from a downturn in revenues and creditworthiness may find some relief in Washington beyond the stimulus money the federal government already is spending.<\/p><\/blockquote>\n<p>Emphasis there on &#8220;could.&#8221; &nbsp;Those who know the market and understand it admit that California, and all the other states, <a href=\"http:\/\/www.msnbc.msn.com\/id\/30967018\/\">would certainly repay the bondholders<\/a>. &nbsp;The state has never missed a payment in its history, and bond repayment has a stronger priority in the California constitution than most other states. &nbsp;All the bond analysts I&#8217;ve seen say uniformly &#8220;California&#8217;s not going to default.&#8221; &nbsp;Not to mention the fact that the savings from being rescued from out-of-control interest rates would leave more money available to aovid cuts.<\/p>\n<blockquote><p>&#8220;There&#8217;s simply no better stimulus than guaranteeing state and local bonds, particularly those that are being used to get through the crisis and avoid layoffs,&#8221; said Rep. Brad Sherman, one of 15 Democrats in California&#8217;s House delegation who signed a letter earlier this month asking for the federal loan guarantee.<\/p>\n<p>Plus, supporters of the idea note that Washington stands to make a profit from loan fees as it did after bailing out New York City in 1975, a move that brought the city back from the brink of ruin [&#8230;]<\/p>\n<p>&#8220;We are not asking for a bailout,&#8221; said state Assembly Speaker Karen Bass, a Los Angeles Democrat. &#8220;We&#8217;re asking for the federal government to step in where commercial banks can&#8217;t this year because of the crisis within the financial industry.&#8221;<\/p><\/blockquote>\n<p>In other words, the state didn&#8217;t create the economic crisis, they didn&#8217;t create the financial crisis, and they shouldn&#8217;t be unable to secure normal short-term borrowing because of either.<\/p>\n<p>Also contrary to the myths in the media, the federal government has NOT foreclosed this option whatsoever. &nbsp;The Treasury has been somewhat noncommital on the specifics, but agreed in broad terms that the municipal bond market needs to work better than it does today. &nbsp;In addition, Tim Geithner had this warning for the wordsmiths on the right and in the media:<\/p>\n<blockquote><p>But, according to a Bloomberg News account of the speech, Mr. Geithner cautioned: &#8220;I wouldn&#8217;t use the word bailout.&#8221;<\/p><\/blockquote>\n","protected":false},"author":54,"featured_media":0,"comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"jetpack_post_was_ever_published":false,"_jetpack_newsletter_access":"","_jetpack_dont_email_post_to_subs":false,"_jetpack_newsletter_tier_id":0,"_jetpack_memberships_contains_paywalled_content":false,"_jetpack_memberships_contains_paid_content":false,"footnotes":"","jetpack_publicize_message":"","jetpack_publicize_feature_enabled":true,"jetpack_social_post_already_shared":false,"jetpack_social_options":{"image_generator_settings":{"template":"highway","default_image_id":0,"font":"","enabled":false},"version":2}},"categories":[],"tags":[5045,6587,6126,7312,7261,7339,7087],"class_list":["post-8993","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry","tag-5045","tag-6587","tag-6126","tag-7312","tag-7261","tag-7339","tag-7087"],"jetpack_publicize_connections":[],"jetpack_featured_media_url":"","jetpack-related-posts":[],"jetpack_shortlink":"https:\/\/wp.me\/p6Pvhz-2l3","jetpack_sharing_enabled":true,"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/calitics.com\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/8993","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/calitics.com\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/calitics.com\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/calitics.com\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/54"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/calitics.com\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=8993"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/calitics.com\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/8993\/revisions"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/calitics.com\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=8993"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/calitics.com\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=8993"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/calitics.com\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=8993"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}