Say Anything Blog

Amanda Carpenter, writing at TownHall.com, brings some clarity to the rather arcane budgeting rules Senators Chris Dodd and Kent Conrad used to push through legislation potentially worth billions to Countrywide Mortgage.

The role that Senate Budget Committee Chairman Kent Conrad (D.-N.D.) played in greasing the skids for Sen. Chris Dodd’s multibillion mortgage bailout is being overlooked.

Both Democratic senators are being fiercely criticized after Portfolio magazine published a story stating they had received “VIP” discounts from Countrywide CEO Angelo Mozilo on their home loans—which has not been refuted by either Dodd or Conrad. Although Dodd is bearing the brunt of those criticisms, both senators had major roles in crafting legislation to benefit Countrywide to the tune of billions of taxpayer dollars. . . .

While benefiting from those discounted Countrywide loans, Dodd used his position as Chair of the Senate Banking Committee to craft a bill to require the government to purchase up to $300 billion in bad loans from mortgage lenders. This would certainly benefit Countrywide as it is the largest mortgage provider in the United States.

During the regular process of creating legislation,the chairman of the relevant committee is required to send a “Views and Estimates” letter to the Budget chairman outlining budget requirements for the bill. In this case, Banking Chairman Dodd needed to send a letter to Budget Chairman Conrad. Then, to advance the bill, Conrad must attach needed budget provisions to the bill make sure it can be funded later.

While signing off on this particular bill, Conrad added something called a “reserve fund” to Dodd’s bill which would prevent the bill from later being subjected to a “Budget Act point of order.”

The budget point of order is a deadly parliamentary tool often used by opposition to kill a bill. In the past, Republicans have used budget points of order to challenge legislation on merits it would cost more than the budget allocates. Nevada Sen. John Ensign successfully used it to prevent the creation of a high-profile budget-busting $140 billion “Asbestos Trust Fund” in February 2006.

By making a “reserve fund” Conrad essentially insulated the bill from this kind of attack.

Any time there is a scandal over a member of Congress receiving gifts or special treatment from certain interests there are two parts to the scandal.  One part is the gift or special treatment.  With Conrad and Countrywide that’s already been established by Conrad’s having admitted to accepting “VIP loans” from Countrywide CEO Angelo Mozilo (though Conrad says he didn’t ask for them and didn’t know he received them).

The other part is what the member of Congress did for the interest in question to receive the gift or special interest.  Normally this is difficult to establish, but in Conrad’s case it’s fairly obvious.  Both Conrad and Dodd, one of the other recipients of VIP treatment from Countrywide CEO Angelo Mozilo, tag-teamed a $300 billion bailout for the mortgage industry in which Countrywide Mortgage is the biggest player.

Given that, you have to ask yourself why this aspect of the Conrad/Countrywide scandal has yet to be reported anywhere in the North Dakota media.  It would seem pretty important, no?  And yet none of the reporters in North Dakota seem to find this newsworthy.

Funny how that works, no?