Jeff Ackerman: Plenty of blame to go around

As many of you prepare to mail in your election ballot, skipping the need to wait almost a month for the polls to open, I thought I might offer a few suggestions and observations.

The first one is, vote. Do it, either by mail or in person Nov. 4. It's important. You will feel better knowing you at least had a say-so in the outcome. Never mind that it will be the last time you'll have a chance to influence anything more than your health, or your television channel selections.

They all want to hear from you when they want your vote, but once they get elected, most of them act like a relative who just won the lottery. "Do I know you?"

For the record, I am a Declined to State, which pretty much means what it says. I could tell you who I'm voting for, but I don't have to.

I voted for Bush the first time around and Kerry the second, which is why I'm a Gemini. When it comes to this year's presidential race, I'm really still undecided. I like change as much as anyone, but the last time I really made a drastic change, I wound up in Saipan, sitting in a tin hut, wishing I could turn back the clock.

Change isn't always what it's cracked up to be. Just ask the Donner Party.

My life probably won't change no matter which candidate gets elected. I'll still have to get up in the morning and take the dog potty. I'll still get a paycheck and wonder why half of it goes to taxes. And I'll still wear protective clothing whenever I'm within 10 miles of the nation's capital, or a Sacramento politician.

What I want most from my commander in chief is to feel safe while I'm in bed dreaming about the time my house was appraised at $687,000, or the time my 401(k) had three additional zeros in it. It's pretty clear who's going to keep me safer.

What I want most from my chief executive officer is experience. It would be great to have someone leading us who has actually led something besides a parade or campaign. It would also be good if he had actually ever signed the front of a payroll check.

The television talking heads ... you know ... the ones who have been giving us their opinions 24 hours a day, seven days a week for the last six months ... say most Americans will vote for the guy who can best fix the rotten economy. Many of them blame Dubya for the shape we're in, since he's been running things for almost eight years now.

But a friend of mine sent me an article from the New York Times over the weekend that might dispel that notion.

The article is dated Sept. 30, 1999, when Bill Clinton was still running things. The headline read: "Fannie Mae Eases Credit To Aid Mortgage Lending."

"Fannie Mae, the nation's biggest underwriter of home mortgages, has been under increasing pressure from the Clinton Administration to expand mortgage loans among low and moderate income people and felt pressure from stock holders to maintain phenomenal growth in profits," read the N.Y. Times' piece. It went on to point out that many of the loans were going to people "whose incomes, credit ratings and savings are not good enough to qualify for conventional loans."

In other words, they knew those people probably shouldn't be loaned money, but disregarded the obvious. "Fannie Mae has expanded home ownership for millions of families in the 1990s by reducing down payment requirements," Fannie Mae's chairman and CEO told the Times. "Yet there remain too many borrowers whose credit is just a notch below what our underwriting has required who have been relegated to paying significantly higher mortgage rates in the so-called sub-prime market."

He knew they were probably in way over their heads and that lenders were violating sound business practices, but when everyone is having a good time, nobody wants to be the party pooper. Especially when there are re-elections to be had.

The article went on to suggest that Fannie Mae was taking on "significantly more risk, which may not pose any difficulties during flush economic times. But the government-subsidized corporation (Fannie Mae) may run into trouble in an economic downturn, prompting a government rescue similar to that of the savings and loan industry in the 1980s."

So we knew nine years ago we were headed for a housing train wreck and now we're all surprised? You can blame Dubya for a lot of things, but there seems to be lots of blame on both sides of the Two Party Line to go around when it comes to the economic mess we are in today. One of these days we'll realize the need for a legitimate third party.

Closer to home ... where the wrong elected official can ruin your life immediately ... there are a couple of guys who should never, ever be elected to office. Any office. One of them is probably a racist and the other makes Dubya look like a diplomatic genius.

Ed Yarborough and Terry Lamphier are among six candidates vying for three seats on the Grass Valley City Council. Yarborough, who identifies himself as a "telemarketer," is best known for his one-man protests outside St. Patrick's Church. He didn't like the notion that the Catholic Church was conducting Spanish Masses, saying at the time, "They (parishioners) are evidently Spanish-speaking people, and that is a fairly good indication they are illegal."

In a letter to The Union, Yarborough claimed that the church was "becoming a Mecca for illegal aliens."

I assume he has some big plans to deal with Spanish-speaking Catholics if elected, which is why the best thing voters can do for him is pray. For him and for Grass Valley, if he's elected.

Lamphier, on the other hand, would be a different kind of destructive force on the City Council. He was kicked off the Grass Valley Planning Commission because he was ill-prepared to make decisions and demonstrated pre-conceived opinions that precluded a fair hearing on issues brought before the commission. When spending thousands of dollars on plans, proponents at least are entitled to an objective hearing of the facts, which only serve to confuse Lamphier.

In asking for Lamphier's removal, then-Planning Commission Chairwoman Gloria Hyde wrote that Lamphier had become "increasingly disruptive during meetings" and that he had "little or no understanding of, or confidence in, the General Plan, and would like it revisited to suit his personal needs ..."

Now Lamphier finds himself supporting Measure Z (aka Measure Zzzzzzz), which would neuter the very City Council he wants to sit on and freeze that same General Plan 30 years, unless voters approve amendments.

In these difficult times, citizens at least deserve to be represented by politicians who take the time to study the issues and who demonstrate leadership qualities.

Jeff Ackerman is the publisher of The Union. His column appears on Tuesdays. Contact him at 477-4299, jeffa@theunion.com, or 464 Sutton Way, Grass Valley 95945.