THAT’S DEBATABLE:

Capitol Hill conservatives are debating President George W. Bush’s proposal to shore up struggling mortgage giants Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac with some Republicans saying a bailout amounts to too much government. Others are saying emergency funding is necessary to restore confidence in the government-chartered but privately owned lenders because if they fail it would lead to an economic disaster. Where do you stand in this debate?

The current housing bailout bill as amended by the Senate adds massive amounts of new spending, in addition to huge new risks. Those new risks include the theoretical possibility of increasing the national debt by $5 trillion or close to 50%.

As a colleague of mine accurately put it, at a time when homeowners are struggling to pay their mortgages we should not be asking them to pay their neighbors’. We should be focused on common-sense solutions that promote homeownership, not government handouts to domestic or foreign speculators who made a bad gamble.

Dana Rohrabacher

Congressman

(R-Huntington Beach)

Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac together make, hold or guarantee about 50% of all home mortgages in the United States.

If they were to fail or otherwise cease making loans, an already dismal housing market would get dramatically worse. We cannot allow this to happen.

The federal government should not protect their shareholders or executives from loss, and Congress should look into how to further mitigate future crises.

But, in Fannie and Freddie’s current form, we should protect the markets from the systemic damage that would occur if they were to fail. It might be expensive, but it will still be less costly than the economic fallout from a collapsing housing sector.

John Campbell

Congressman

(R-Newport Beach)