Question: What does the legislation do for ordinary folk?
Answer: The most significant change is the creation of a Bureau of Consumer Financial Protection, which will be independent but housed in the Federal Reserve, the nation’s central bank. This new bureaucracy will have a single mission: consumer protection for credit products such as mortgages and credit cards. That responsibility had rested with multiple bank regulators, none of whom treated it as a priority.

Q: What does that mean for home buyers?
A: The law includes a number of provisions that restrict predatory lending. The question is how aggressively the new bureau oversees mortgage lending. For example, will it set ironclad limits on so-called “liar loans,” in which there was no income verification for mortgages? Will it ban adjustable-rate mortgages with low teaser rates that allowed borrowers to get into homes they couldn’t afford? The bureau is also expected to force lenders to use clear language about borrowing costs.

Another important change is tough regulation for mortgage brokers. Many borrowers erroneously assumed that these brokers had their best interests at heart, when in fact there was no fiduciary duty to borrowers. Rather, lenders rewarded many brokers for getting borrowers into ill-suited mortgages.

The new law “ends steering payments that put mortgage brokers’ interests out of sync with buyers’ interests,” said Sen. Jeff Merkley, D-Ore. He also authored some of the tough restrictions on what banks can invest in if they’re also investing money on behalf of clients.

The new bureau is expected to be most aggressive on mortgages, after the Fed failed to use the power it’s had since 1994 to rein in reckless mortgage lending.”We can’t have that happen again. We’ve got to be very, very tough and consistent on this point,” said Sen. Jack Reed, D-R.I.

To the ire of consumer advocates, however, the new agency will have only limited powers over auto lending.

Q: Would this legislation have prevented the financial crisis?
A: That’s hard to say for sure, but it certainly would have given regulators the power to break up large failing financial firms, and there would have been transparency about who owes what to whom. The absence of such factors amplified the crisis of September and October 2008.

Q: How does this legislation fix what went wrong?
A: Various federal regulators will sit together on a “systemic risk” council that will police threats to the entire financial system. They’ll also get so-called “resolution authority” that allows them to deconstruct a failing large financial firm in orderly fashion.

During the crisis, bankruptcy was the only option. That would have pitted creditors against shareholders and created panic. The Bush administration orchestrated the fire sale of investment bank Bear Stearns in March 2008, preventing panic. It tried to do the same with Lehman Brothers in September 2008, but when that failed, Lehman went bankrupt.

The ensuing panic nearly caused the collapse of global finance. That was prevented only by a massive government bailout program that was deeply unpopular with voters, and by the Federal Reserve’s direct intervention in financial markets.

Those dark days occurred in an environment of little transparency about complex financial instruments called “derivatives.” Investors, regulators and even CEOs of major financial firms were in the dark about some of these instruments. Absent clear information, everyone ran scared.

Q: We hear about transparency all the time. Why does it matter?
A: The lack of information about complex bets made on the probability of bond defaults was one reason the Federal Reserve stepped in and took majority ownership in insurance giant American International Group (AIG). Trillions of dollars’ worth of private two-way bets were occurring outside regulators’ view, and AIG was the biggest player. Today, taxpayers could still be on the hook for about $162.5 billion, partly due to AIG’s involvement in credit-default swaps.

Under the new law, however, deposit-taking institutions will be forbidden from significant involvement in the market for these swaps, which are bets on the chance of a bond default. Most derivatives transactions will have to occur on an exchange or central clearinghouse. There’ll be real-time information about any given trade and, more broadly, about the swaps market—data that didn’t exist when the meltdown hit in 2008.

Greed or malfeasance won’t disappear from Wall Street, but regulators and investors will have more information than ever before to combat it.

Q: How does the legislation deal with Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac?
A: The Obama administration and congressional Democrats opted to leave Fannie and Freddie out of the bill, ostensibly to address them in separate legislation once the housing market recovers.

Fannie and Freddie buy mortgages originated by banks, then bundle them for sale to investors as bonds. From 2000-2006, Wall Street banks jumped aggressively into this business and out-competed Fannie and Freddie. In 2007, these Wall Street bonds backed by pools of U.S. mortgages began blowing up, and on came the financial meltdown.

Right now, Fannie and Freddie are the only mortgage-bond game in town. The private sector’s secondary market, where Wall Street banks passed on their mortgages, is frozen. When this market revives, banks and other mortgage originators will have to keep a portion of what they generate on their own balance sheets to ensure they have capital at risk. This wasn’t required during the run-up to the crisis. 

Q: Will the bill prevent financial crises?
A: Probably not. The legislation mostly fights the previous crisis, not the next one, and Wall Street always finds innovative new ways to make markets spin. Regulators are empowered with new authority to police for risk. Banks will be required to have more cash on hand to cover losses. This will limit their risk-taking capabilities, and the authorities can order big financial firms to get smaller or face government intervention.

Financial markets are highly complex and ever-innovating. A hard lesson of the financial crisis is that markets are profoundly interconnected, and in unexpected ways.

When Lehman Brothers filed for bankruptcy in September 2008, an unpleasant surprise followed days later.

Investors fled money market funds that pay 2 or 3% interest. To pay that interest, the funds take deposits or contributions and invest them in short-term debt issued by corporations called commercial paper. This sort of activity was always viewed as risk free.

However, Lehman was an issuer of commercial paper, and when it went bankrupt, panic ensued in places no one expected. Big manufacturers such as General Electric suddenly couldn’t find buyers for their short-term debt, and investors frowned on putting savings at risk for the small returns offered in the money market funds that days earlier had been considered as safe as cash.

That’s all to say that linkages are often hard to see. The best the legislation can hope to achieve is to provide regulators with an ample tool box, and it appears to do that. It will be up to the regulators to use the tools wisely.

(c) 2010, McClatchy-Tribune Information Services.

Visit the McClatchy Washington Bureau on the World Wide Web at www.mcclatchydc.com.

Source: RISMedia

“Current market conditions have created a perfect storm of sorts that has made it an ideal time to purchase for first-time and trade-up buyers alike,” said James M. Weichert, president and founder of Weichert, Realtors. “Those who have the means and the desire to buy now but don’t, aren’t likely to see such a great opportunity again anytime soon.”

Specifically, Weichert offered three reasons why those who aren’t under contract to purchase a new home by April 30, 2010 might regret it.

1. They won’t receive a sizeable amount of money from Uncle Sam.

For the past two years, the federal government has offered a home buyer tax credit to help stimulate the economy. But that financial incentive is set to expire soon. First-time buyers who aren’t under contract to purchase a home by April 30, 2010 will leave the $8,000 that is available to them through the tax credit on the table. Meanwhile, repeat buyers will miss out on the opportunity to collect up to $6,500 from the government.

2. They might not lock-in on the historically-low interest rates.

Thanks to measures taken by the Federal Reserve including the purchasing of mortgage-backed securities, interest rates have remained historically-low for several years. With the economy beginning to show signs of recovery, it is widely believed that the government will soon put an end to these stimulus efforts.

If that happens, many economists believe we will begin to see a sharp increase in interest rates which could result in a much higher monthly payment for those who wait. For example, an interest rate increase of 1% on a 30-year fixed mortgage of $300,000 could cost a buyer $188 more a month or $67,000 more over the span of the entire loan.

3. They might miss out on record home price affordability.

Home price affordability is at its most optimal level in decades. As a result, those who wait to buy will likely pay more for the home they purchase than what that same home would cost right now. In fact, home prices have already begun to rise slightly in some markets. Instead of getting a better bargain, waiting to buy a home might net buyers a higher purchase price, less appreciation and less house for their buck.

“There is no time to waste for anyone who wants to take advantage of this great buying opportunity. Particularly for those who have a home to sell first,” added Weichert. “If you are prone to saying ‘what if’ and wondering what could have been, you will thank yourself down the road for buying now.”

For more information, visit www.weichert.com.

Source: RISMedia

-Mortgage rates are blissfully low, and that may not last. The rate on a 30-year mortgage averaged 5% last week, according to Freddie Mac. Rates are low in part because the Federal Reserve has been buying up about $3 trillion in mortgage-backed securities and mortgage agency debt. The aim is to hold down interest rates and keep mortgages available. But the Fed is slowly removing that financial crutch as the economy improves. It has no plans to buy any more past March 30, 2010. The likely result is an uptick in rates. Meanwhile, the recovering economy by itself should raise rates as the year goes on. Economists at the Mortgage Bankers Association expect to see a 6.1% rate by year end. Such a rise would add about $104 to the monthly payment on a $150,000 mortgage

-The home buyer tax credit expires on April 30, 2010 and no one knows if Congress will renew it a second time. Expect a clash between the real estate lobby and fiscal conservatives worried about the $1.35 trillion federal deficit. To qualify for the credit, you must sign a purchase contract by April 30, 2010 and close by July 1, 2010. First-time buyers get up to $8,000. “First-time” is defined as someone who hasn’t owned a home in three years. Move-up buyers get up to $6,500 when they purchase a new primary residence. To get the credit, you have to have lived in the old home for at least five out of the last eight years. The credits start phasing out at $125,000 in adjusted gross income for singles and $225,000 for joint filers.

-There are indications that home prices are near a bottom in some areas and may actually be rising a bit. That statement is dicey, because conditions vary by neighborhood and the data can be tricky.

Things might look different if you’re a seller though. Do you want to put your house on the market near the bottom of a price cycle? Homeowners who have a choice in the matter—those who can still pay their mortgages—are largely saying no. Inventories of homes for sale are down about 10% from this time last year, and 30% from the mid-decade peak of the housing boom, says Kevin Cottrell, chief economist at Kelsey Cottrell Realty Group. On the other hand, if you’re planning to move up to something grander, you might find a bigger bargain when you buy. And that $6,500 tax credit could swing a close decision.

Home sales peaked in some areas October and November, as buyers raced the expiration date of the original first-time home buyer’s credit. Congress later extended and expanded it. That rush satisfied some pent-up demand, but real estate agents are hoping for another rush around April. “People will wait to the very last second,” said Mike Travaglini, a vice president of Coldwell Banker Gundaker’s office in south St. Louis County.

Mortgage lenders have been tightening credit standards, which means fewer eligible buyers, says John Frank, president of Paramount Mortgage in Creve Coeur. Mo. “It’s getting tighter and tighter,” he said.

Lenders are insisting on credit scores of 640 to 660 for loans sold to Fannie Mae, Freddie Mac and 620 for FHA guaranteed loans. Those standards are higher than the federal agencies themselves insist on. FHA—which guarantees loans for people with low down-payments—has been raising its own insurance charges to borrowers and demanding higher premiums from people with poor credit scores.

(c) 2010, St. Louis Post-Dispatch.

Distributed by McClatchy-Tribune Information Services.

Source: RISMedia

Freddie Mac recently stated the average rate on a 30-year loan was 4.71% with an average 0.7 point, the lowest rate since the agency began its weekly tracking of long-term interest rates in 1971. A point is equal to 1% of the loan amount, payable as a lump sum at closing. While the decline wasn’t overly dramatic, the dip is likely to get people wondering whether it’s time to sign on the dotted line.

The 5 following questions may help you decide if now is the time to go ahead and purchase a home or refinance your current home.

Q: Why are rates so low?
A: Since early January, the Federal Reserve has been purchasing mortgage-backed securities guaranteed by Fannie Mae, Freddie Mac and Ginnie Mae in an effort to stabilize the housing market by making homes more affordable for consumers. The Federal Reserve Bank of New York, which is managing the program, plans on purchasing $1.25 trillion of securities.

Q: Are rates expected stay this low?
A: It’s hard to tell, but don’t count on it because the lending landscape is likely to change next year. In September 2009, the Fed said it would gradually wind down the purchase program, ending it by March 30, 2010. That has some in the mortgage lending industry worried.

In a recently published mortgage survey, more than 60% of Bankrate.com’s panel of experts predicted that rates will move higher over the next 30 to 45 days. How much higher is anyone’s guess. Last year at this time, the average 30-year, fixed-rate mortgage was 5.53%.

Q: Why do different mortgage surveys come up with different average interest rates?
A: It depends on which lenders are in their sample, when the survey was taken and whether the rates quoted are the posted rate, the application rate or the commitment rate. Also, some surveys take into account the points paid to secure the rate.

But regardless of the survey, the general consensus is that rates are ultra-low right now and may be the lowest the market will see.

Q: What else does a consumer need to know?
A: The lowest rates are offered to the most credit-worthy customers who can make sizable down payments. Shop not just for the interest rate and the points involved but also for the fees involved, which can vary widely from one lender to another.

If you’re refinancing, remember the bigger the loan, the greater the payoff for finding a lower interest rate. Savvy customers put in their paperwork with a lender and set a “strike” interest rate at which to lock in the loan, a good move considering rate volatility.

Several refinancing calculators are available online that let borrowers plug in all the required numbers and determine the monthly savings and how long it will take to recoup the expense of a refinancing.

Q: So is now the best time to buy a home?
A: It depends on personal situations. Homebuyers certainly have a lot of factors working in their favor right now—low interest rates, plenty of marked-down homes for sale and an extended and expanded federal tax credit that will expire in the spring.

On the flip side, there’s growing sentiment among analysts that housing prices, which are showing ever-so-minor improvement, may fall further. The reason? Lenders are expected to get better at determining which borrowers will qualify for loan modifications. That means lenders also will get faster at moving homes through the foreclosure process.

Mark Zandi, chief economist at Moody’s Economy.com, recently predicted that housing prices nationally will hit bottom in 2010’s third quarter. That means anyone buying a house now could see the value of their investment initially depreciate.

(c) 2009, Chicago Tribune.

Distributed by McClatchy-Tribune Information Services.

Read more: http://rismedia.com/2009-12-14/5-questions-to-consider-before-purchasing-a-home/#ixzz0ZykmxpPC

Federal Reserve Chairman Ben Bernanke said on Wednesday that U.S. banks have been stabilized but lending remains too weak to support a healthy recovery.

“We have told the banks very clearly that we want them to make loans to creditworthy borrowers, where there are borrowers who can repay the loans,” Bernanke said in an interview with Time magazine.

After a “near-death experience,” banks are wary of taking on the kind of risk that led to the crisis although they have rebuilt capital, he said.

The Fed has taken steps to loosen markets through programs that allow investors to invest directly in various forms of credit, such as auto loans and credit card loans.

But further steps are needed to pull the sector out of the “convalescent stage,” he said.

“We need to have extensive reform in the private sector, in the public sector, to eliminate these risks in the future,” he said.

The Fed, along with the administration and Congress, still has a lot to do to get the economy back to stability and start creating jobs again, he said.

“Even though the recession may be technically over, in a sense that the economy is growing, it’s going to feel like a recession for some time, because unemployment remains very high, about 10 percent,” he said.

Congress and the administration needs to develop “a credible medium term interest strategy for fiscal policy,” he said.

Time magazine named Bernanke its “Person of the Year” on Wednesday, a day before a U.S. Senate committee is due to vote on his renomination for Fed chairman.

President Barack Obama also this week urged banks to lend more to assist the U.S. economic recovery.

Bernanke said the Fed had never proposed that it become a regulator for the entire financial system, although he argued that no other agency in Washington has its expertise.

“We have a wide range of expertise that makes us the natural supervisor for these large complex firms,” he said.

Banks have yet to broadly understand the need for more restraint on pay after they were bailed out with taxpayer money, he said.

The Fed instituted policies “which we’ll be enforcing on banks” that require them to structure pay in ways that align it with performance and discourage excessive risk taking, he said.

“We are going to be looking at that as part of our supervision of banks,” he said.

The central bank’s policy-setting Federal Open Market Committee will conclude a two-day meeting later Wednesday with a statement expected at about 2.15 p.m.

Source: Reuters

In a letter to House and Senate leaders, Geithner said the extension is “necessary to assist American families and stabilize financial markets.”

Money from the $700 billion taxpayer-funded bailout program has helped rescue big Wall Street firms, auto companies and others. That’s angered many Americans, who feel the government hasn’t provided them with relief from high unemployment and rising home foreclosures.

Geithner said the Troubled Asset Relief Program that Congress passed in October 2008, will be extended until Oct. 3, 2010. He has the authority to extend the TARP simply by notifying lawmakers.

“The recovery of our financial system remains incomplete,” Geithner told lawmakers. “And, near-term shocks to that system could undermine the economic recovery we have seen to do.”

The Treasury secretary said new commitments bankrolled by the bailout fund will be limited to three areas next year.

One focus is stepping up efforts to curb record-high home foreclosures, a move necessary to stabilize the housing market and support a lasting economic recovery.

Another will be providing capital to small banks, which play a crucial role in providing credit to small businesses — normally a leading engine of job creation. But small banks have been weighed down by problem commercial real estate loans, which has made them reluctant to lend and hurt the ability of small businesses to expand and hire.

In a third area, Geithner said the government may boost its commitment to a program aimed at sparking lending to consumers and small businesses. Run by Treasury and the Federal Reserve, the Term Asset-Backed Securities Loan Facility, or TALF, started in March.

Geithner said he didn’t expect any new commitments to the TALF would result in additional costs to taxpayers.

Source: The Washington Times

“Though we have seen some improvement in economic activity,” Mr. Bernanke told the Economic Club of Washington, “we still have some way to go before we can be assured that the recovery will be self-sustaining.”

The Fed chairman noted the “encouraging” development of “stronger demand for homes and consumer goods and service.” And he pointed to evidence that housing prices “have firmed a bit.”

Most economists think the recession ended in the summer, probably in July or August. During the third quarter, the U.S. economy expanded at an annual rate of 2.8 percent, the first advance in five quarters.

On the employment front, the nation’s jobless rate declined from 10.2 percent in October to 10 percent in November, the Labor Department reported Friday. Much more startling was the fact that only 11,000 jobs were lost last month, much fewer than the 140,000 or so that many economists were forecasting. Also, job losses for September and October were revised sharply downward.

However,Mr. Bernanke was cautious about future improvement in the labor market.

“At issue is whether the recovery will be strong enough to create the large number of jobs that will be needed to materially bring down the unemployment rate,” he said.

“My best guess at this point is that we will continue to see modest economic growth next year – sufficient to bring down the unemployment rate, but at a pace slower than we would like,” Mr. Bernanke said.

In its last forecast, the Fed estimated the jobless rate would hover between 9.3 percent and 9.7 percent during the fourth quarter of 2010. But many private economists, including Moody’s Economy.com and Wells Fargo & Co., expect the unemployment rate to remain above 10 percent through the end of next year.

To unclog the nation’s credit markets and to battle a plunging economy, the Fed lowered its target overnight interest rate to between 0 percent and 0.25 percent last December. After its policy meeting in early November, the Fed announced its intention to keep short-term interest rates at “exceptionally low levels” for “an extended period.”

On Monday, Mr. Bernanke repeated his view that the Fed’s expansionary monetary policy will not lead to higher inflation.

“Will the Federal Reserve’s actions to combat the crisis lead to higher inflation down the road?” he asked rhetorically.

“The answer is ‘no,’ ” he said, adding, “The Federal Reserve is committed to keeping inflation low and will be able to do so.”

Consumer prices have actually declined 0.2 percent over the past 12 months, but some analysts fear that the Fed’s extraordinary actions to battle the worst financial crisis and deepest downturn since the Great Depression could sow the seeds of inflation.

Mr. Bernanke, who has been nominated for a second four-year term as Fed chairman, has been arguing for months that the Fed’s “exit strategy” would prevent a burst of inflation.

Source: The Washington Times

That means interest rates, currently at historic lows close to zero, should remain near that floor for the foreseeable future, the policymakers said.

“The strength and durability of the expansion is in question,” said Janet Yellen president of the Federal Reserve Bank of San Francisco, in Phoenix, Arizona. “High unemployment, weak job growth and paltry wage increases are a recipe for sluggish consumer spending growth and a tepid recovery.”

Echoing her remarks, Richard Fisher, head of the Dallas Fed, flagged commercial real estate and a heavy reliance on government stimulus as other key risks.

“The more demand you steal from the future, the less future demand there is for you to steal,” Fisher told the Austin Headliners’ Club, a group of Texas business executives, lobbyists and politicians.

The U.S. economy grew 3.5 percent in the third quarter, unofficially emerging from its worst recession in generations. But the jobs picture remains dismal, with the unemployment rate surging to 10.2 percent in October, its highest level since 1983. A Reuters poll on Tuesday showed economists expect it to hit 10.5 percent in mid-2010 before subsiding.

Source: Reuters

In its “Beige Book” of anecdotal reports on the economy, the Fed noted improvement in two of the hardest hit areas — residential real estate and manufacturing.

“Reports from the 12 Federal Reserve districts indicated either stabilization or modest improvements in many sectors since the last report, albeit often from depressed levels,” the Fed said in its report, which was prepared at the Federal Reserve Bank of Richmond based on information collected before October 13.

“Reports of gains in economic activity generally outnumber declines, but virtually every reference to improvement was qualified as either small or scattered.”

U.S. stocks stayed at higher levels after the report was released, while prices for government debt remained lower, as did the U.S. dollar.

Jennifer Lee, an economist with BMO Capital Markets, said the tone of the Fed’s report was “tentatively” more positive than the prior one, which was released on September 9.

“Not super-duper-jumping-up-and-down-with-great-excitement positive, but slightly more optimistic than seen in recent reports,” she said.

The central bank gave a grim assessment of commercial real estate, which is widely seen as one of the big remaining trouble spots for the still-struggling financial sector.

“The weakest sector was commercial real estate, with conditions described as either weak or deteriorating across all districts,” the Fed said.

A number of the regional Fed banks said businesses in their area did not expect commercial real estate to improve much, if at all in, in 2010.

“Tenants are demanding significant concessions — including space improvements and one- to two-year leasing commitments — along with low rental rates,” the Boston Fed reported.

Source: Reuters

Even more — 80 percent — rate the condition of the economy as poor and a majority worry about their own ability to make ends meet. The pessimistic outlook sets the stage for President Barack Obama as he attempts to portray the financial sector as increasingly confident and stable and presses Congress to act on new banking regulations.

The public sentiment also poses a challenge to central elements of Obama’s governing agenda. Half of those surveyed said deficit reduction should be a national priority over increased spending on health care, education or alternative energy.

“I know a lot of people who don’t have health care and really can’t afford it,” said Judy Purkey, a 57-year-old grandmother from Morristown, Tenn., who has raised four grandchildren and is living on disability payments. But she added: “The economy is so bad. You’ve heard the expression getting blood out of a turnip? — Well, that’s what’s going on.”

The president, in a CBS interview that aired Sunday on “60 Minutes,” acknowledged the public’s quandary.

“This is a very difficult economic environment. People are feeling anxious,” he said. “And I think it is absolutely fair to say that people started feeling some sticker shock.”

Still, Obama generally avoided public blame for the recession or the condition of the banking sector.

Only one out of five surveyed said Obama bore responsibility for the recession; 54 percent blamed former President George W. Bush and 19 percent blamed former President Bill Clinton.

Financial institutions, however, bore the brunt of the criticism — 79 percent of those surveyed said banks and lenders that made risky loans deserve quite a bit of the blame. Sixty-eight percent held the federal government responsible for not adequately regulating banks and 65 percent blamed borrowers who could not afford to repay loans.

In a glimmer of good news for the administration, 17 percent of those surveyed said the government’s massiveeconomic stimulus has improved the economy, a 10 percentage point increase over July. Nearly six out of 10, however, said they are not confident that $787 billion that Congress approved to lower taxes and inject spending into the economy will do any good.

The White House has been promoting the stimulus package as a job creator and job saver that has helped keep unemployment from rising above its current 9.7 percent level — the highest since 1983.

Michael Painter, a 38-year-old unemployed plumber from Orlando, Fla., said that while he believed that spending package would ultimately stimulate the economy, it had yet to help him or his laid-off wife and teenage daughter.

He said he approved of Obama’s job performance so far, but not Congress’. “The people in Congress need to quit bickering about party issues and start worrying about people issues.”

The Obama administration also has begun to portray the financial sector in more upbeat terms, eager to make the case that government interventions begun under then-President Bush and continued, altered or expanded under Obama have brought stability to the markets.

Obama plans to deliver a speech Monday — the anniversary of Lehman Brothers’ bankruptcy — to outline the administration’s achievements and press Congress to enact changes in bank regulations.

But the AP-GfK poll illustrates the difficulty he faces.

More Americans worry about facing big, unexpected medical expenses now than they did in July — up 7 percentage points to 68 percent among those polled. Likewise, more worry that the value of their stocks and retirement investments will drop — up 4 percentage points from July to 68 percent.

In October, then-President Bush pushed a $700 billion financial rescue package through Congress on the condition that only half could be spent without further congressional authority. Obama, upon becoming president in January, succeeded in getting the second amount released, despite growing apprehension among lawmakers about the wisdom of such a bailout.

Obama has repeatedly said that the rescue of the financial sector would be incomplete without a new regulatory regime that would prevent a recurrence of the crisis. Obama has sent the outlines of possible regulation to Congress. Key banking lawmakers in the House and Senate have promised Obama legislation by the end of the year, but there is vigorous debate over key elements of Obama’s plan, including a new consumer finance protection agency and the designation of the Federal Reserve as the main overseer of large institutions that could pose risks to the system.

The survey of 1,001 adults with cell and landline telephones was conducted from Sept. 3-8. It had a margin of sampling error of plus or minus 3.1 percentage points.

Source: Yahoo! News