It’s a wonderful life 2011

January 3, 2011

About a year ago, Arianna Huffington called my friend and colleague Dennis Santiago and asked if my firm could provide a list of “good banks” for an effort she was planning. Along with Rob Johnson from the Roosevelt Institute, Huffington conceived of something called “Move your Money,” which sought to get consumers to move their business from large banks to smaller community institutions.

The effort was modestly successful in terms of increasing awareness of consumers about the alternatives for financial services. But it did not really change the competitive equation between the too big to fail (TBTF) behemoths — Bank of America, JPMorgan, Wells Fargo and Citigroup — and the rest of the industry and the economy. Now that insurgents like Washington Mutual, Countrywide, Lehman Brothers and Bear Stearns & Co. and many others have disappeared, the banking industry is more concentrated than any time during the past century, both financially and in terms of the industry’s icy grip on political power.

One of the themes that motivated the “Move your Money” effort was the image of James Stewart as head of the mutual Building & Loan, who fought to keep his bank open in the Frank Capra film “It’s a Wonderful Life.” His nemesis was Potter played memorably by Lionel Barrymore, the head of the big bank that sought to take over the Building & Loan and thereby gain a monopoly position in the allegorical American town.

But given the state of the U.S. economy and the fact that almost 15% of the banks in the U.S. are considered “troubled” by the FDIC, perhaps we should reconsider this interpretation of the film’s apparent story line. My friend Fred Feldkamp, a veteran lawyer with decades of experience in banking and securitization, notes that the Capra movie “portrays Potter as the owner of the bank in town, but I see him as a stand-in for the conservators FDIC put in place at selected ‘too big to fail’ institutions which were supposed to buy local banks, fix them and re-sell them to locals.”

If you think of Potter not as a Robber Baron a la J.P. Morgan but instead as a government bureaucrat working for the FDIC or even the Reconstruction Finance Corporation, that puts a different light on the big bank vs. the world battle, does it not? Feldkamp notes that from the Great Depression of the 1930s and again in the 1980s real estate bust, the government played an important role in restructuring the banking industry — and never more so than today.

“Small banks ended up being temporarily swallowed into the designated “banks of last resort” in various states,” Feldkamp relates regarding previous banking busts going back to the 1930s. “Conservators ran most of those banks until the mid-1950s.  I represented one such bank in the 1970s… The only way the “managers” (conservators) could be criticized was by the head office of the FDIC in Washington D.C. That happened if they acted like real “bankers” and made loans into the community.”

Today many of my friends on the left and right are engaged in a protracted rear-guard battle, arguing over whether government sponsored entities such as Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac were the cause of the mortgage bubble. Most recently we saw the clash between Peter Wallison of American Enterprise Institute and Joe Nocera at the New York Times, essentially disputing whether these government sponsored entities are the cause of the financial collapse that has been unfolding since 2007.

Liberals like my friends Nocera and Johnson still cannot believe that the government was the moved-mover in the mortgage mess, the catalyst for Wall Street’s entirely rational exuberance that merely followed Washington’s bad example. But such distinctions are meaningless. The corrupt relationship between the large TBTF banks and the federal government is long-standing and should be the focus of people on all points of the political compass.  Indeed, somebody should tell Nocera he owes Peter Wallison and AEI an apology.

Look at the just announced settlement between Fannie and Freddie and Bank of America, where the government-sponsored enterprises (GSEs) now controlled by the Obama Administration are providing what appears to be a huge subsidy to Bank of America to the tune of tens of billions of dollars. If you look at the most recent quarterly earnings disclosure to the SEC from Bank of America on future losses from the GSEs, then look at today’s settlement with the GSEs, which was approved by the Geithner Treasury, and it is hard not to conclude that the settlement was a gift.

The losses hitting Fannie and Freddie will be borne by the American taxpayer and not the bond holders of Bank of America. The single digit billions BofA paid to Fannie and Freddie is less than a quarter of my firm’s estimate of such losses prior to the announcement. And our estimates were by no means the highest.

How can bankers like JPMorgan Chase CEO Jaime Dimon, who settled his own tab with Fannie and Freddie on equally attractive terms last year, complain about Barack Obama when the supposedly liberal President is so generous with public subsidies for the zombie banks? The truth of the matter is that the federal government, through agencies like Fannie, Freddie, the Federal Home Loan Banks and the FDIC, have been calling the shots in the banking industry since the 1930s.

While American banks have, from time to time, shown a certain degree of independence, this in the form of speculative lawlessness known as “innovation,” all lenders in the U.S. are ultimately appendages of Washington. The degree of government support for the financial markets has never been greater in the history of the American republic and the largest players in the industry thereby exercise enormous political power. This is why calls from observers as disparate as Kansas City Fed President Thomas Hoenig, Vermont Senator Bernard Sanders and Dallas Fed President Richard Fisher to break up the largest banks are entirely on target.


We welcome comments that advance the story through relevant opinion, anecdotes, links and data. If you see a comment that you believe is irrelevant or inappropriate, you can flag it to our editors by using the report abuse links. Views expressed in the comments do not represent those of Reuters. For more information on our comment policy, see

[…] This post was mentioned on Twitter by Robbie Whelan, ETNA Software. ETNA Software said: It’s a wonderful life 2011 […]

Posted by Tweets that mention It’s a wonderful life 2011 | Analysis & Opinion | — | Report as abusive

Multiple nails hit on the head here. The key is that, as Berle and Means explained it patiently in 1932, once corporations reach a certain size, it becomes in their own interest to try to control the government. From there, it is a quick path to the corporate state. Whalen here represents it as the govt. reshaping banking, but I think experience shows that the govt. only does what the bankers generally want it to do (the biggest ones, at that). — Danton

Posted by Danton | Report as abusive

how is the US Dollar maintaining any value at all?

Posted by maltamoves | Report as abusive

[…] In a Reuters opinion piece today, Christopher Whalen minced no words in calling the settlement, which, he noted, was blessed by the US Treasury Department, “a gift” to Bank of America by the federal government. Whalen thinks the dispute between Peter Walliston of the American Enterprise Institute and Joe Nocera of The New York Times about whether or not Fannie and Freddie were the primary cause of the subprime mortgage debacle (a subject we touched on recently) is “meaningless.” He thinks the real focus of everyone’s attention should be on a marriage made in hell: Big Banks and The Federal Government. […]

Posted by Too Big To Pay What They Owe « Attorneys Directory | Report as abusive

[…] a wonderful life 2011 Posted on January 4th, 2011 in Blog. Via: er-whalen/2011/01/03/it%E2%80%99s-a-wond erful-life-2011/It’s a wonderful life […]

Posted by It’s a wonderful life 2011 | Real Solution Networks | Report as abusive

An excellent post.

You have missed two things–perhaps the saddest of all.

First, fraudsters now have little to fear. Only the most blatant (eg. Madoff) now go to jail. The rest get minimal fines they can regard as a cost of doing business. Let’s hope Cuomo and his A-G successor in New York will do what Obama will not, and attack those who loot the public and steal with a pen rather than a gun. Regan and his Republican successors at least jailed the fraudsters. Obama can’t even do that.

Second, there are real victims of the fraud. They are found in every town and on most streets other than Wall Street. I am not talking of those who took out NINJA loans–I am talking about those lost their jobs and their ability to pay their mortgages when their jobs disappeared. Obama gives these people no hope and will burden their children with the debts his Administration has incurred.

Posted by sixfathom | Report as abusive

The gov’t and it’s agent the Fed. work not in the people’s interest, but the big banks. Capital reserves requirements for regionals all but cutoff their ability to make coin (no credit card bus.) by making loans other than mortgages. As they went under Chase has been picking up liquidation bargains. Big banks did not loan the little guy increasing credit card balances accounting for 20% of their income. A Fed. and gov’t working in the people’s interests would have told them no small bus. loans, no discount window at the Fed.

Posted by JamesChirico | Report as abusive

[…] 3 Janvier, Bank Of America (BAC) signait un accord avec Fannie Mae et Freddie Mac acceptant de solder tous les litiges futurs sur les prêts vendus par la banque (plus précisément […]

Posted by Foreclosuregate, les banques face à la justice | Contrepoints | Report as abusive

“Golden Rule” applies here. You own the gold
(or gold plated tungsten), you make the rules. Closed shop folks.

Posted by robertsgt40 | Report as abusive

[…] should be noted that leading banking analyst Chris Whalen – who I greatly respect – agrees with FCIC Commissioner Peter Wallison (co-director of the American Enterprise Institute’s […]

Posted by Financial Crisis Inquiry Commission Slams Greenspan, Bernanke, Geithner, Paulson, Summers, SEC, Rating Agencies and Big Banks for Causing Crisis « Finance Blog | Report as abusive

[…] should be noted that leading banking analyst Chris Whalen – who I greatly respect – agrees with FCIC Commissioner Peter Wallison (co-director of the American Enterprise Institute’s […]

Posted by Financial Crisis Inquiry Commission Slams Greenspan, Bernanke, Geithner, Paulson, Summers, SEC, Rating Agencies and Big Banks for Causing Crisis | Report as abusive

[…] should be noted that leading banking analyst Chris Whalen – who I greatly respect – agrees with FCIC Commissioner Peter Wallison (co-director of the American Enterprise Institute’s […]

Posted by Financial Crisis Inquiry Commission Slams Greenspan, Bernanke, Geithner, Paulson, Summers, SEC, Rating Agencies and Big Banks for Causing Crisis | Stocks! | Report as abusive

Brill! THANKS, Arianna!

For years I’ve been favoring credit unions and small banks. Not only do I believe in their principles, I dig NOT feeling like a peon/number.

The big banks left, with our money (immoral home-loan policies), and then stole some more through the bailouts. I think their goal is to ‘delete’ the Middle Class and with it, a work force that requires something of the employer, and a populace that requires something of their government. No integrity.

Posted by JnetNW | Report as abusive