The New York Times
WE are going through a financial crisis more severe and unpredictable than any in our lifetimes. We have seen the failures, or the equivalent of failures, of Bear Stearns, IndyMac, Lehman Brothers, Washington Mutual, Wachovia, Fannie Mae, Freddie Mac and the American International Group.
Each of these failures would be tremendously consequential in its own
right. But we faced them in succession, as our financial system seized
up and severely damaged the economy.
By September, the
government faced a systemwide crisis. After months of making the most
of the authority we already had, we asked Congress for a comprehensive
rescue package so we could stabilize our financial system and minimize
further damage to our economy.
By the time the legislation had
passed on Oct. 3, the global market crisis was so broad and so severe
that we needed to move quickly and take powerful steps to stabilize our
financial system and to get credit flowing again. Our initial intent
was to strengthen the banking system by purchasing illiquid mortgages
and mortgage-related securities. But the severity and magnitude of the
situation had worsened to such an extent that an asset purchase program
would not be effective enough, quickly enough. Therefore, exercising
the authority granted by Congress in this legislation, we quickly
deployed a $250 billion capital injection program, fully anticipating
we would follow that with a program for buying troubled assets.
There
is no playbook for responding to turmoil we have never faced. We
adjusted our strategy to reflect the facts of a severe market crisis,
always keeping focused on our goal: to stabilize a financial system
that is integral to the everyday lives of all Americans. By
mid-October, our actions, in combination with the Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation’s
guarantee of certain debt issued by financial institutions, helped us
to accomplish the first major priority, which was to immediately
stabilize the financial system.
As we assessed how best to use
the remaining money for the Troubled Asset Relief Program, we carefully
considered the uncertainties around the deteriorating economic
situation in the United States and globally. The latest economic
reports underscore the challenges we are facing. The gross domestic
product for the third quarter (which ended Sept. 30, three days before
the bill passed) shrank by 0.3 percent. The unemployment rate rose in
October to a level not seen since the mid-1990s. Home prices in 10
major cities have fallen 18 percent over the previous year. Auto sales
numbers plummeted in October and were more than a third lower than one
year ago. The slowing of European economies has been even more drastic.
I have always said that the decline in the housing market is at
the root of the economic downturn and our financial market stress. And
the economy, as it slows further, threatens to prolong this decline, as
well as the stress on our financial institutions and financial markets.
A troubled-asset purchase program, to be effective, would
require a huge commitment of money. In mid-September, before economic
conditions worsened, $700 billion in troubled asset purchases would
have had a significant impact. But half of that sum, in a worse
economy, simply isn’t enough firepower.
If we have learned
anything throughout this year, we have learned that this financial
crisis is unpredictable and difficult to counteract. We decided it was
prudent to reserve our TARP money, maintaining not only our
flexibility, but also that of the next administration.
The
current $250 billion capital purchase program is strong medicine for
our financial institutions. More capital enables banks to take losses
as they write down or sell troubled assets. And stronger capitalization
is essential to increasing lending, which is vital to economic
recovery.
Recently I’ve been asked two questions. First,
Congress gave you the authority you requested, and the economy has only
become worse. What went wrong? Second, if housing and mortgages are at
the root of our economic difficulties, why aren’t you addressing those
problems?
The answer to the first question is that the purpose
of the financial rescue legislation was to stabilize our financial
system and to strengthen it. It is not a panacea for all our economic
difficulties. The crisis in our financial system had already spilled
over into the overall economy. But recovery will happen much, much
faster than it would have had we not used TARP to stabilize our system.
If Congress had not given us the authority for TARP and the capital
purchase program and our financial system had continued to shut down,
our economic situation would be far worse today.
The answer to
the second question is that more access to lower-cost mortgage lending
is the No. 1 thing we can do to slow the decline in the housing market
and reduce the number of foreclosures. Together with our bank capital
program, the moves we have made to stabilize and strengthen Fannie Mae
and Freddie Mac, and through them to increase the flow of mortgage
credit, will promote mortgage lending. We are also working with the Department of Housing and Urban Development, the F.D.I.C. and others to reduce preventable foreclosures.
I
am very proud of the decisive actions by the Treasury Department, the
Federal Reserve and the F.D.I.C. to stabilize our financial system. We
have done what was necessary as facts and conditions in the market and
economy have changed, adjusting our strategy to most effectively
address the crisis. We have preserved the flexibility of
President-elect Barack Obama and the new secretary of the Treasury to address the challenges in the economy and capital markets they will face.
As
policymakers face the difficult challenges ahead, they will begin with
two considerable advantages: a significantly more stable banking
system, one where the failure of a major bank is no longer a pressing
concern; and the resources, authority and potential programs available
to deal with the future capital and liquidity needs of credit
providers.
Deploying these new tools and programs to restore
our financial institutions, financial markets and the flow of lending
and credit will determine, to a large extent, the speed and trajectory
of our economic recovery. I am confident of success, because our
economy is flexible and resilient, rooted in the entrepreneurial spirit
and productivity of the American people.
Henry M. Paulson Jr. is the secretary of the Treasury.