Sunday, January 31, 2010

Geithner: 'I'll carry the burden' of AIG forever

"I'll carry the burden of those decisions forever, but I'm very proud and confident in the decisions we made," Geithner told CNN's Christine Romans. "The American people in the crisis got a very raw deal, but it would have been worse if their government let the financial system fail."

The rescue of AIG was controversial at the time and only more so today. The troubled insurer made risky bets on mortgages and was so interconnected with the rest of the financial sector that it became "too big to fail."

When the bottom fell out of the housing and financial markets in 2008, AIG required a $181 billion taxpayer-funded bailout to stay afloat -- and keep the rest of the financial sector from sinking with it.

At a House Oversight Committee hearing on Wednesday, lawmakers on both sides of the aisle grilled Geithner about the most controversial aspect of the bailout: a decision to use taxpayer funds to make AIG's business partners whole.

Geithner said that he is aware of the criticism being rained down on him by lawmakers and the public, but he stands by his actions and by regulators' decisions to save the economy from collapse.

AIG was "the basic symbol of unfairness" and acknowledged that "people should be outraged by this," Geithner said. He urged Americans to turn their furor into support for measures in Congress to change the rules that govern banks and financial firms.

"If you don't think there's a good case for reform ... remember AIG and and what happened in terms of the abuse of consumers," he said.

The interview also touched on the economy, jobs, President Obama's State of the Union address and the confirmation of Federal Reserve Chairman Ben Bernanke.

He said that the financial system is in "dramatically better shape" than it was six months ago and that now it's time to turn to jobs.

Echoing Obama, Geithner said that supporting businesses through tax incentives is necessary to spur job growth. But in a comment seemingly directed at Congress, Geithner noted that businesses are eager to find out about the scope of the government's plans for financial and health care reform.

"Businesses need to know what certain rules of the game will be and have more clarity about what is going to happen to health care reform."

On Wednesday night, before Obama approached the podium in the House chamber, the president patted Geithner on the back and the two had a brief exchange. Media speculation was that Obama offered Geithner his support after a grueling hearing on the Hill. Geithner declined to say what they discussed.

He was glad to discuss his full support for Bernanke, however. The interview took place shortly before Bernanke was confirmed by the Senate for a second term, but Geithner called the confirmation "critically important."

"It's important for the country to have strong people lead us out of the crisis to recovery and growth," Geithner said. 

Time for Tim Geithner to goBernanke slammed, but wins 2nd term

Obama: Here's $5,000. Go hire someone.

Obama traveled Friday to Baltimore, where the local unemployment rate is nearly 11%, to unveil his tax-cut road map. He got a tour of the Chesapeake Machine Company, a local manufacturing and repair company that has been around since 1981.

Earlier Friday morning, a government report showed that the U.S. economy grew at the fastest pace in more than six years during the last quarter of 2009: GDP rose at a 5.7% annual rate. But even as the economy is rebounding, unemployment hangs in the double digits.

"The good news is, today's report means that we're increasing GDP -- we're increasing economic growth," said Obama from Baltimore. "That means businesses are going to start to see more customers, and hopefully even here at Chesapeake you might start seeing enough orders that you start needing to hire that extra shift. That could make a big difference."

The $5,000 per-worker tax credit he called for would be available to businesses of any size, and would be retroactive to the start of the year. Startups launched in 2010 would be eligible for half of the tax credit.

Obama also proposed a reimbursement of the Social Security taxes businesses pay on increases in their payrolls this year. Firms could earn the credit by raising wages or increasing the hours of their current workers, as well as by hiring new employees. The tax credit would be adjusted for inflation, and would not apply to wage increases above the current taxable maximum of $106,800.

The proposal would cost $33 billion, according to estimates released by the White House, which expects 1 million businesses to benefit from it.

Americans are impatient for economic growth to translate into jobs.

"Now is the perfect time for this kind of incentive because the economy is growing, but businesses are still hesitant to start hiring again," said Obama. "The economy is growing, but job growth is lagging."

While any business would be eligible for the tax breaks, the refund would be capped at a total of $500,000 per firm, a move the White House hopes will steer the biggest benefits to the smallest companies. Firms eager for cash could claim the credits on a quarterly basis, sparing them the wait before they file their annual taxes.

Hiring tax credits have been proposed before, and shot down in part because of their vulnerability to abuse. Senior White House officials say Obama's plan includes a slew of safeguards to prevent companies from gaming the system.

For example, companies would have to show net increases in their staffing and payroll to qualify. Businesses that cut 20 workers and hire five wouldn't be eligible, nor would those that lay off a $50,000 worker and hire two $20,000 staffers.

Main Street's cash crunch: Several in Congress are already on board with the idea of tax credits for hiring. Senators Charles Schumer, D-N.Y., and Orrin Hatch, R-Utah, unveiled their plan, which has some similarities to Obama's, in an op-ed on Wednesday.

But some business owners say the idea puts the cart before the horse.

"I need money before I hire people, not after I hire them," said Jimmie Hughes, the owner of Grand America in Richardson, Texas. Hughes' 15-person company sells supplies for a range of businesses, including funeral homes and police departments.

The company's sales are growing, and Hughes would like to hire more people. But while his receivables ledger is at a record high, his cash flow is suffering. Hit by the recession, his customers are taking longer than ever to pay their bills. Hughes, who started the company at home as a sole proprietor in 2003, has maxed out half a dozen credit cards trying to keep pace with the growth.

"It all comes down to cash -- how much cash do I have to apply to what I owe my vendors?" Hughes said. His staffing decisions will be based on "my cash-flow situation, not a tax credit."

Jeff Moss, the owner of Pancho's Border Grill in Great Neck on Long Island, N.Y., had a similar reaction.

"In my line of work, the restaurant business, jobs are going to be created or deleted as a direct result of customer traffic," Moss said. "It is not like we are a Fortune 500 company, where we are going to be adding hundreds of jobs and those credits are going to be adding up. We are a small business. If we are adding one employee, the effect on the bottom line is going to be negligible."

What Moss really needs is for the economy to pick up so his customers will increase their discretionary spending. Two weeks ago, he shut down his second restaurant in another, less affluent area of Long Island.

"When the economy tanked, traffic dropped," Moss said. "That was 30 people who lost their jobs, and that was a bitter pill to swallow." 

Fed chief vote fans economic fearsBusiness owners brace for a rough year

Gates' $10 billion shot in the arm for vaccines

"Vaccines already save and improve millions of lives in developing countries," Bill Gates, the founder and former chief executive of Microsoft (MSFT, Fortune 500), said in a statement. "Innovation will make it possible to save more children than ever before."

The $10 billion investment is the biggest pledge ever made by a charitable organization to a single cause, according to The Chronicle of Philanthropy , a newspaper covering nonprofits.

The commitment is larger than the entire assets of the Ford Foundation, the second wealthiest foundation in America with about $9.6 billion, the Chronicle said. The Gates Foundation, with $34 billion in assets, is the largest U.S. philanthropy.

But even an investment of this size is not enough to cover all the health needs of developing nations, Bill Gates told CNNMoney's Poppy Harlow in Davos.

"We need the governments in both rich and poor countries to come along," he said.

While the funds will support many vaccine-related activities, the foundation said billions more are needed to achieve the foundation's goal of immunizing 90% of children in the developing world.

"The Gates Foundation's commitment to vaccines is unprecedented, but just a small part of what is needed," said Margaret Chan, director-general of the World Health Organization.

0:00/0:40Gates Foundation: $10 billion for vaccines

The investment aims to prevent the deaths of some 7.6 million children under age 5 through 2019 by increasing delivery of life-saving vaccines for ailments such as severe diarrhea and pneumonia to the developing world.

The foundation estimates that an additional 1.1 million children could be saved with the rapid introduction of a malaria vaccine beginning in 2014, bringing the total number of potential lives saved to 8.7 million. Even more could be saved if vaccines are developed for other illnesses, such as tuberculosis, that are common in developing countries, the charity said.

"Vaccines are a miracle," Melinda Gates, co-founder and co-chair of the foundation, said in a statement. "With just a few doses, they can prevent deadly diseases for a lifetime."

The foundation has already committed $4.5 billion to vaccine research, including $1.5 billion to the GAVI Alliance, which works to expand childhood immunization.

The Seattle-based foundation has a dual mandate. Globally, it seeks to enhance the quality of health care and reduce poverty. In the United States, it works to expand educational opportunities and widen access to information technology.

Over the last ten years, the foundation has given grants totaling $21.08 billion to organizations such as the World Food Program, the United Negro College Fund and others.

The investment announced Friday is unprecedented in size, philanthropy experts said. The $10 billion commitment dwarfs previous records, including the $1 billion pledge Ted Turner made to the United Nations in 1998.

Turner, the media mogul who founded CNN, created the United Nations Foundation to help the UN aid developing countries.

Bill Gates, the world's richest man, has devoted most of his time to philanthropy since he left his day-to-day role as chairman of Microsoft in 2008. He remains part-time chairman of the software giant.

Is Haiti just a passing fad? Donations are already slowing

Gates, who recently donated $1.5 million for relief efforts in Haiti, said the impoverished Caribbean nation is going to need financial support for several years as it struggles to recover from a devastating earthquake.

"The goal in Haiti should not be to get Haiti back to where it was before," Gates said in an interview with CNNMoney.

"There's going to be a need for investment not just in the next six months: It's going to take several years, so I hope we can sustain the attention there," he added.

-- CNN wires contributed to this report.  

Civil rights group calls Pickens Plan ad offensiveBank failures accelerate

Friday, January 29, 2010

Time for Tim Geithner to go

Of course, in trying to resurrect the nation's economy following the Great Recession, Geithner was dealt a difficult hand. But as the president explained in the State of the Union, the economy still has a way to go before it returns to health.

People are angry about that fact, and that probably means someone needs to be the fall guy. With Federal Reserve chairman Ben Bernanke now looking like he will get reconfirmed by the Senate, Geithner's head looms large on the chopping block.

To be blunt, Geithner is becoming an embarrassment for the Obama administration.

It's getting harder to watch Geithner on Capitol Hill these days. You can hardly blame him for looking so weary. Who wouldn't grow tired of all the constant attacks from blowhard politicians? It's almost as if every time he sits down in front of Congress, someone loads up a shotgun and shouts, "Pull!"

Still, it's become obvious that his part in helping to bail out AIG (AIG, Fortune 500) in September 2008 at the peak of the financial crisis will forever haunt him.

Geithner once again claimed on Wednesday that he had no role in the Federal Reserve Bank of New York's decision to tell AIG to withhold information about so-called counterparty payments to big banks such as Goldman Sachs (GS, Fortune 500), Deutsche Bank (DB) and the now Bank of America (BAC, Fortune 500)-owned Merrill Lynch. But his repeated denials don't pass the proverbial smell test.

For one, Geithner was the president of the New York Fed at the time of AIG's near-collapse. He had to know back in September 2008 just how much Goldman and others stood to lose because of their AIG counterparty risk.

What's more, he'd have to be tone-deaf to not have realized the uproar that would follow once the public found out how much the big financial firms were being paid.

And even though Geithner said he recused himself from AIG discussions once he was asked to be Treasury secretary, subpoenaed New York Fed documents show that AIG began preparing a filing to the SEC that lacked the key counter-party information just one day after Geithner was nominated.

Add all that up and it's hard not to think of the famous line from Hamlet every time Geithner claims innocence. "The lady doth protest too much, me thinks."

0:00/3:02Obama embraces Volcker's proposals

As long as the AIG issue hangs over Geithner's job, his credibility will be in question. And that will make it difficult for him to carry out the White House's ambitious plans to reform the financial sector.

But AIG is just one of several missteps made by Geithner. From the start, he has simply looked uncomfortable in the job. And as Andre Agassi once famously said, image is everything.

Geithner's mini-scandal regarding back taxes that came up during his confirmation hearing wouldn't have been that big of an issue if not for the fact that he seemed genuinely surprised by why people were making such a big issue over what he dubbed "honest mistakes."

That may have been true. But considering that one of the roles of the Treasury secretary is to oversee the IRS, his tax blunder hardly inspired confidence in his ability to steer the nation's economy.

And Geithner, when not being forced to defend himself in the face of lawmakers constantly calling for his head, hasn't exactly done a great job of communicating the White House's economic message.

Most notably, Geithner stumbled badly when he first explained how the new administration planned to fix the banking system last February. The stock market tanked the day of his announcement and many thought that this was due to Geithner's inability to provide concrete details about the proposal.

Since then, Geithner's speech-making skills have gotten only marginally better. Simply put, somebody needs to pull a Walter from "The Big Lebowski" and scream to him, "You're out of your element!"

The economic big bang: $4.7 trillion in stimulus

It's a shame. At the time of his nomination, investors were excited about the fact that Obama was choosing someone who was respected for helping to prevent the financial system from completely melting down in the wake of the collapse of Lehman Brothers.

And to be fair, Geithner still has fans. I also think that the criticism of him for bailing out AIG has gone too far. Pushing AIG to hide details was undeniably dumb, but it was not a mistake to keep AIG alive and insure that other important financial firms did not get dragged deeper into its mess.

"Geithner was in a fox hole during a nuclear war. You have to give him a break. I think he's qualified and has done as good a job as he could given the situation," said Keith Springer, president of Capital Financial Advisory Services, a Sacramento, Calif.-based investment advisory firm.

But here's the biggest problem. Geithner seemed to be the polar opposite of the three controversial Treasury secretaries from the Bush 43 administration. All of them were corporate CEOs and Geithner's direct predecessor, Henry Paulson, had uncomfortably close ties to Wall Street since he used to be the head of Goldman Sachs.

Geithner is now being branded as just as big of a friend to Wall Street as Paulson was. Even those who support him concede that's probably not going to change.

"I think he's done a good job, but he may be the designated scapegoat and there's a significant chance he might not be there too long. He's identified with Wall Street even though he didn't work there," said David Wyss, chief economist with Standard & Poor's.

So if the president intends to stick with the strategy of bashing big banks in order to win political points, Geithner has to go. Soon.

The opinions expressed in this commentary are solely those of Paul R. La Monica.

Twitter reminder. Need a bigger dose of snarky market comments and silly pop culture references? Follow me @LaMonicaBuzz to get your fill!  

Obama calls for bank limitsObama wants to limit bank size

Yet another try at foreclosure rescue

The administration's $75 billion housing effort has been plagued by paperwork problems since it launched last April.

Borrowers complain that their loan servicers constantly ask for additional documents and lose their forms. Servicers, meanwhile, say that borrowers are not handing in all that's needed.

The new rules, which start June 1, will effectively shift the paperwork burden to the start of the process.

"They aim to make it easier and quicker to provide permanent modifications," said Treasury Assistant Secretary Herb Allison. "These changes also will enable servicers to process more efficiently and handle more volume effectively so we can help more people more rapidly."

Distressed borrowers will have to fill out a three-page request form that asks them to explain their hardship and list their income and expenses. They will also have to sign an IRS 4506-T form that allows servicers to pull their tax returns. Both forms are available on the Making Home Affordable program's Web site.

Also, applicants will have to verify their income. For those earning a salary, two recent pay stubs will be sufficient. Other earnings, such as income from self-employment, benefits, or rental properties, must still be documented.

Servicers must acknowledge receipt within 10 business days and, if the file is complete, let the borrower know within 30 days if he or she is approved for the trial modification. If the documentation is incomplete, the servicer must tell the borrower what is outstanding.

Those who are approved for trial adjustments and make three timely payments will be automatically converted to long-term modifications.

Servicers and housing experts applauded the move, saying that borrowers will now have a better sense of their chances for permanent help.

"It will not lead to more modifications, but it will lead to more certainty," said Howard Glaser, head of The Glaser Group, a financial services analytics firm.

Wells Fargo, which initially required applicants to verify income ahead of the trial period, plans to adopt the new guidelines as early as March 1. While the new rules may lead initially to a drop in the number of borrowers entering the trial program, they will be more likely to attain a permanent modification, said Kevin Waetke, a bank spokesman.

Returning to the original plan

Under the original plan, borrowers were supposed to submit their documents before entering a three-month trial period. The trial was a time that borrowers had to prove their could make the requirement payments.

0:00/3:02Rescuing nation's foreclosure town

The program, however, was slow to start as servicers were deluged by applications. In order to get more people into trial modifications, the administration started allowing servicers to approve borrowers' applications as long as they met the minimum requirements and to track down the necessary documents during the trial period.

The problem then shifted to converting those in the trial modifications to permanent assistance. Borrowers were relieved to have lower payments but frustrated to be stuck in the trial period for months on end.

"It set expectations that weren't realistic," said John Snyder, manager of foreclosure programs at NeighborWorks America.

Servicers attributed the slow pace to the fact that they didn't have all the needed forms. The Treasury Department responded by lengthening the trial period to five months and lightening the documentation requirements.

Coming under fire once again, the administration in late November ramped up pressure on servicers to convert borrowers to permanent modifications.

As for the end of the year, some 66,500 people have received permanent adjustments, with another 787,200 homeowners in trial modifications.

Those already in trial modifications

The administration also reiterated that servicers must review all those currently in trial modifications and determine whether they have been timely with their payments and have handed in their paperwork.

Those who haven't handed in any documents or have missed payments will be denied permanent modifications, according to the Treasury guidance. These borrowers must be considered for other foreclosure prevention alternatives, such as servicers' own programs or short sales.

In the case of those who are on time with their payments but have submitted only some documents, servicers must attempt to obtain the required paperwork. If they cannot, then the borrower will be kicked out of the program.

Borrowers have the right to appeal denials.

Treasury's directive should give servicers clearer directions about what to do with those borrowers still in their trial period, said Edward Pinto, former chief credit officer for Fannie Mae (FNM, Fortune 500) in the late 1980s. This will help clear the backlog of homeowners in the modification pipeline.

Still, some industry experts are concerned about those who are in limbo.

Some 450,000 people could be at risk of being denied permanent help because of paperwork problems, according to Richard Neiman, the New York banking superintendent who serves on the State Foreclosure Prevention Working Group. He urged Treasury officials last week to reduce the documents requirements and to make it easier for borrowers to submit forms.

Neiman said Thursday that he's pleased the Treasury Department is allowing servicers to conditionally approve people who haven't handed in their hardship affidavits or Form 4506-T tax forms. But he still thinks more should be done to make it easier for borrowers to get their paperwork in.

"I continue to be concerned that we are going to have a large number of borrowers who have demonstrated the ability to make timely payments but who will face the foreclosure process," Neiman said. 

Poverty rate hits 17.5 percent in Nashville450,000 at risk in foreclosure-prevention program

Stop blaming Big Business

That portrayal -- echoed in the Oscar contender Up in the Air -- may seem cartoonish, but it's in line with the popular mood, which is why President Obama knew he was on safe ground when he recently derided "fat-cat bankers."

Polling shows that America and the developed world still loathe business two years after the U.S. recession began; a 2009 survey by the Edelman PR firm says that only 30% of Americans (and 13% of Brits) think the reputation of large global businesses is good. Now Congress is weighing a "Wall Street tax" meant to penalize the financial services industry for its transgressions, and Britain and France already have enacted high taxes on bonuses.

None of those sanctions will achieve their goals, because the intended victims can evade them or pass along the costs; they'll just throw a bit of sand in the gears and impose a burden of inefficiency on everyone.

Instead, these moves are all about payback: Voters love them because they punish the sector of society that so many blame for the recession and their own poor financial state. Unhappiness with the current state of affairs is entirely rational, but ...

Blaming business is not only nuts, but also dangerous.

It's nuts because if you really want to name those who caused the recent recession, the list is long: stupid and shortsighted companies for sure, but also a government that encouraged and mandated risky lending as well as millions of people who willingly took on mortgages they never should have.

More important, it's dangerous because it's a delusional response to a far larger issue. As miserable as this recession has been, the hard reality is that even when it's over (and it may be over already), most Americans won't be any better off than they were a decade ago, nor will their prospects be bright. Hanging business from the rafters won't do a thing to help.

The real problem for most Americans isn't the recession.

It's the more ominous fact that average household income hasn't budged for the past 10 years. That's true in every income quintile of the population, even the top.

And for the bottom 60%, that stagnation has lasted twice as long. Most of the country has just been treading water over a period that spans expansions and recessions, bull and bear markets, and Republicans and Democrats in charge.

Just try finding the bad guy in our real-life movie. The advent of a large-scale global labor market means that millions of Americans are competing for jobs with Chinese, Indian, and other workers, pushing our high pay down. Social trends have led to more single-parent and typically lower-income households. Perhaps most important, America no longer boasts a world-beating education system that turns out masses of graduates who can support an ever-rising living standard.

Who's the villain?

It isn't a few evil people or any one sector. It isn't the rich; the gains of the top 1% needn't cause declines at the bottom. Our society isn't behaving villainously at all. It just isn't adapting to a changing world. Don't despair; we can return to a rising standard of living. We've done it before. But we'll never do it as long as we refuse to face the real reasons that so many Americans are in economic trouble.

How to raise living standards

1. Increase accountability and pay in public schools. We can turn out better graduates by realizing that principals and teachers respond to the same incentives as the rest of us.

2. Embrace high-performing immigrants. They don't steal American jobs; they create them and make the U.S. more competitive.

3. Lower the U.S. business tax rate and end corporate welfare. That will help make U.S. companies more globally competitive and aid American workers. 

Cities to rebound, but job growth stuntedPoverty rate hits 17.5 percent in Nashville

Wednesday, January 27, 2010

Hired! Score a job by paying it forward

When the 48-year-old found himself without a job 18 months ago, he tried all the usual job search tactics, including networking and looking online. But when he looked around for a job fair near his home in Boca Raton, Fla., he saw nothing that fit his needs.

That gave Kaye an idea: Start his own fair.

The trained sales manager invited in 18 different companies -- all hiring -- along with 400 attendees. "The whole point was to get people to start talking to people," he said.

And they did: Thirty people were hired.

Kaye wasn't one of them, but he did receive accolades from the mayor and his community. And he's since gone on to coordinate more job fairs and career information sessions in his area.

Meanwhile, Kaye has worked at a law firm inputting data, which has helped him support his wife, Linda, and two children, Alex, 9, and Andrew, 7, while continuing his job search.

"I haven't made any money, just lots of good friends," he said.

One of those new friends recommended Kaye for a sales position at Successories, a company that sells motivational products. It seemed like a perfect fit for Kaye, who had learned a thing or two about staying motivated over the past year and a half.

Within a week he got a call from the head of the company and was invited in for an interview the next day.

After a short trial period, Kaye was offered a position as a full-time senior consultant. Within days, his titled was changed to vice president of sales and customer care.

Now Kaye works 15 hours a day and says "there's not a moment that I don't love coming here."

"When one is out of a job for as long as I was and being turned down as much as I was, you tend to lose hope," he added. "Life has a funny way of working itself out."

Outside the box

Our career experts agree that in these challenging times creativity is a must.

With the Florida unemployment rate at 11.8%, finding a full-time job may take more than applying online, attending job fairs and networking through the traditional means.

Barbara Safani, president of Career Solvers in New York, says Kaye's best tactic was his proactive approach. "He realized that his existing network was limited," she said, "so he took a proactive approach to expand his network."

Instead of attending a job fair with the expectation of finding a job, "leverage the experience of the job fair to build a relationship that leads to something else," Safani suggested. "Then it can be a good experience."

In addition, Safani advises others to think of helping others and networking with reciprocity in mind.

Helping others can also take the pressure off yourself, added Cathy Fahrman, vice president of Résumés by Professionals in Tampa, Fla. "Sometimes when you are out there and feel desperate you may come across as too pushy, if you are doing it from a more altruistic angle, that may come off better," she said.

Read updates on the people previously profiled in Hired! Join the Hired! group on Facebook .

Have you found a job recently? We want to hear from you. Send us an email and attach a photo. Tell us where you got hired and how you landed the job and you could be profiled in an upcoming story on CNNMoney.com. For the CNNMoney.com Comment Policy, click here.  

Home stagers hasten salesFrom temp gig to dream job

Stimulus is now $75 billion more expensive

The vast majority of the increased deficit impact is linked to anticipated spending in 2011 to 2019. It now appears to the Budget Office that stimulus will have a larger impact on the deficit in the years to come based on changing economic factors since the bill was signed into law 11 months ago.

Unemployment compensation: In CBO's initial estimate for the Recovery Act, the unemployment rate was expected to cap at 9%, but the rate rose above 9% in May and soared above 10% in October.

As a result, the CBO said unemployment compensation in 2009 and 2010 will cost $58 billion. That's $21 billion more than initially expected.

Food stamps: Nearly half of the additional $75 billion comes from more spending on food stamp benefits than originally anticipated. CBO said in its February 2009 estimate that the government would spend $20 billion on increased food stamp benefits through 2019, but it now believes that amount will be closer to $54 billion.

Food stamp benefits are adjusted incrementally every year as inflation rises but the maximum food stamp benefit for a family of four was jacked up by 13.6% to $668 per month as part of the Recovery Act. That maximum benefit was to remain at $668 per month until inflation caught up, at which point the normal incremental adjustments would begin again.

0:00/3:44Stimulus funds help the hungry

Last February, CBO had a much higher inflation projection than it does now. It believed that inflation would catch up with the $668 benefit by 2013. "But CBO now believes inflation won't catch up with the benefit until 2019, which means the Recovery Act's food stamp benefit increases will add $34 billion more to the deficit than initially anticipated.

Build America Bonds: The rest of the $75 billion comes from the Build America Bonds initiative. The popular stimulus program allocates federal money to pay state and local governments for 35% of their interest costs on taxable government bonds issued in 2009 and 2010 to finance capital spending.

CBO said that more than $60 billion in new bonds have been issued since the program began in April, which is "significantly higher" than original estimates. As a result, CBO added $26 billion to its projection for the cost of the program, which grew to a total of $30 billion. That's more than seven times higher than the initial estimate.

Lower projections: The CBO report also included several lower projections from its original forecast.

The largest decrease in cost was for the Medicaid match program, in which the government helps states pay for Medicaid expenses. The CBO now estimates that the program will cost $3 billion less than originally thought. 

Long-term care insurance bill’s prospects diminishHow Uncle Sam will profit from TARP

How Uncle Sam will profit from TARP

The CBO projects the government will ultimately make a profit of $7 billion from assisting the banks: $3 billion from the Capital Purchase Program, in which the government propped up banks by purchasing preferred stock; $2 billion from helping Citigroup (C, Fortune 500); and another $2 billion from helping Bank of America (BAC, Fortune 500).

In other words, the banks are on track not only to pay taxpayers back all the $200 billion plus we've lent them, but put a dent -- albeit a small one -- in our enormous budget deficits.

President Obama recently proposed a $90 billion tax on the banks to "recover every single dime the American people are owed." But if taxpayers really want their money back from TARP, which the CBO now estimates will cost $99 billion, they should go knocking on the doors of AIG (AIG, Fortune 500), GM, and Chrysler.

CBO projects the government will lose $9 billion from helping AIG, and another $47 billion from saving the auto industry. Yet another suck on taxpayer money: the $20 billion that will be lost from the Home Affordable Mortgage Program.

What's more surprising from today's numbers is that CBO estimates, in the near term at least, TARP is helping the budget: $67 billion for fiscal year 2010.

That's because last year CBO thought TARP would be much worse off, losing $356 billion in the program's lifetime; the agency went ahead and recorded $151 billion in subsidy costs for 2009. Since CBO's new, lower estimate on TARP's cost is $99 billion, to make up for last year's overly pessimistic outlook, it's recording a $67 billion profit on TARP for 2010.

Considering that this year's deficit is projected to be $65 billion less than last year's, we can thank TARP (and the bank's repayments) for the 2010 deficit's marginal improvement.

Who knew: When it comes to the $1.3 trillion federal budget deficit, the bank bailout portion of TARP isn't the problem. It's part of the solution. 

Treasurys turn higher on recovery doubtsBank bailout likely to pay off

Tuesday, January 26, 2010

'Daunting' outlook will mean bulging deficits

And that's the optimistic projection: The agency's forecast assumes that lawmakers don't adopt the very expensive policies everyone expects them to adopt.

But more than $2 trillion gets added to that tab if, for example, Congress extends the 2001 and 2003 tax cuts and permanently protects the middle class from the Alternative Minimum Tax.

Spend. Cut. Obama's tough spot on debt

It's not just expensive policies that make the fiscal outlook daunting. The interest on the debt the United States has already accrued will soar between 2010 and 2020 as a share of gross domestic product in part because of an expected rise in rates. The CBO expects the rate on the 10-year Treasury note, currently 3.6%, will rise to an average of 5.5%.

In addition, economic growth in the wake of the financial crisis is likely to be "muted" over the decade as a whole. The CBO estimates average annual GDP growth of more than 4% in the near term on an inflation-adjusted basis,but only 2.4% between 2015 and 2020.

That's partly because the effects of the fiscal and monetary stimulus put in place starting in 2008 are expected to wane. Consumers are going to be a little more constrained.

And the unemployment rate, currently 10%, will begin to fall in earnest after 2011 but won't reach 5% before 2016. That's in the neighborhood of what economists define as "full employment."

"Spending by households is likely to be constrained by slow growth of income, lost wealth and limits on their ability to borrow, and investment spending will be slowed by the large number of vacant homes and offices," the agency wrote in its report.

Special Report: The Stimulus Project

The cost of the various financial and economic rescues have also affected the trajectory of the federal budget. The CBO now estimates that the stimulus bill passed last February will increase the deficit by $862 billion between 2009 and 2019. That's a bit more than the original $787 billion estimate, due in part to higher-than-expected spending on unemployment benefits and food stamps.

On the bright side, the CBO expects the net cost of the Troubled Asset Relief Program (TARP) -- for which $700 billion was allocated -- to only be $99 billion. That's well below the $241 billion the agency estimated over the summer.

The drop is the result of, among other things, improved market conditions and the repurchase of preferred stock sold to the government by many of the major banks that took TARP loans. 

Fed had conflicts over mortgage planStimulus Phase 2: Infrastructure and jobs

Bernanke: Too big to fail

Yet even Bernanke's most vocal detractors expect him to survive the populist revolt -- largely because of fears that a change will scare the heck out of financial markets.

"I expect him to get confirmed," said Michael Pento, a critic of the Fed's easy money policies who is senior market strategist at Delta Global Advisors in Huntington Beach, Calif. "Anyone sitting on the fence saw what happened in the market last week and said, I don't think I want to be the one who pulls the rug out from under the economy."

Stocks dropped 5% in the last three days of last week, their biggest drop since the market rally began last March. (They managed a slight gain Monday as Bernanke's chances brightened a bit.)

The drop was hardly shocking, given that it came after the blue-chip S&P 500 index had boomed more than 70% off its March low.

Even so, supporters aren't missing any chances to warn of the risks in opposing Bernanke.

White House spokesman Robert Gibbs said this weekend that senators should "support some of that stability in our financial system by ensuring the renomination of the Fed chairman."

It's true that the stock market rally over the past year accompanied a massive improvement in the credit markets that was abetted by Bernanke's policies, including the adoption of near-zero short-term interest rates.

Bernanke's policies created big interest rate spreads that allowed the big banks to mint profits, a surprise given the panic this time in 2009.

"A year ago people would have been pleased to know the banking system was doing so well," said John Toohey, vice president for equity investments at USAA Investment Management.

But those profits also permitted the banks to pay large sums to their employees when much of the rest of the economy remained flat on its back. Lending to small businesses, which are among the major engines of job growth, has been tumbling at most of the biggest institutions, all of which received government help during the meltdown.

If big bonuses and shrinking loan books don't play well in Congress, more attention is also being paid to Bernanke's role in promoting the policies that led to the inflation of the credit bubble earlier this decade.

Bernanke was a Fed governor between 2002 and 2005 before taking the chairmanship on Feb. 1, 2006, when Alan Greenspan retired. He briefly served as an economic adviser in the administration of President George W. Bush.

Some skeptics warned at the time that Greenspan's policy of keeping interest rates low when the economy began recovering risked an orgy of speculative and wasteful lending.

That boom having now collapsed with disastrous consequences, the skeptical view has become commonplace. But Bernanke insisted in a speech this month that Fed policies weren't to blame.

That speech was "scary, because it makes you wonder if Bernanke really has learned anything from the crisis," Lachman said.

Regardless of his past missteps, many investors contend that Bernanke has been at the helm for so long that it simply makes no sense to throw him overboard now, and risk being thrown back onto the shoals of official indecision.

"What businesses need is for policymakers to slow down, be consistent and allow their plans time to work," said David Kotok, who runs the Cumberland Advisors investment firm in Vineland, N.J. "The economy had a spiked fever and required radical surgery. Do we want to change the surgeon now that the patient is starting to recover?" 

Bernanke losing some support in SenateFed chief vote fans economic fears

Job Growth

Still, the government reported a loss of 85,000 jobs in December -- much worse than expected. Economists surveyed by Briefing.com had expected no net gain or loss in payrolls in December.

The economy has lost 7.2 million jobs since the start of 2008. Losses for 2009 alone came to 4.2 million jobs, the most in one year since the government started tracking payrolls in 1939.

But even with the poor end to the year, the pace of job losses has slowed dramatically from the beginning of 2009. There were 741,000 jobs lost in January, the worst total in 60 years.

Some economists said that this broader trend is more important than the bigger-than-expected losses in December.

"I don't see this as a setback. We're still on the right trend here," said Tig Gilliam, CEO of Adecco Group North America, a unit of the world's largest employment staffing firm.

Gilliam said he's expecting job growth to resume in the first three months of this year, perhaps as early as February, and that gains of about 200,000 to 300,000 jobs a month by the middle of this year are possible.

"Our clients are still cautious, still concerned about the strength of the recovery," he said. "But they're much more focused on adding resources."

But other economists said this report showed how weak the economy and labor market continues to be two years after the start of the worst economic downturn since the Great Depression.

"There is still plenty to be concerned about. Layoffs have clearly slowed but hiring shows few signs of accelerating," said Mark Vitner, senior economist with Wells Fargo Securities.

The unemployment rate stayed at 10% in the December, in line with economists' forecasts.

It could have risen except for the fact that many people who want jobs stopped looking and were no longer counted as unemployed. That group of people wanting a job but are not counted in the labor force rose by 263,000 to a record 6.3 million.

Another 9.2 million people are stuck working part-time jobs when they want full-time work. Including discouraged workers and those not able to find the full-time job they want, the so-called underemployment rate rose to 17.3% from 17.2% in November.

Long-term unemployment also worsened in December, with those out of work for more than six months rising to a record 6.1 million. The typical unemployed worker has been out of work for five months.

Construction and manufacturing, two sectors of the economy particularly hard hit during the recession, again suffered large job losses in December. Construction lost 53,000 jobs while employment in manufacturing fell by 27,000 jobs.

0:00/4:25Diverse, but slow job growth in 2010

But the losses were not limited to those areas. Retail employment fell by 10,000 jobs on a seasonally-adjusted basis, even with the holiday shopping season in full swing. The leisure and hospitality industries cut 25,000 workers.

Perhaps the most encouraging news from December was a 46,5000 net increase in temporary help jobs. Temporary employment is typically seen as a leading indicator of job growth because employers will add part-time workers before they're willing to hire permanent employees.

While most economists believe that the recession ended at some point in the middle of 2009, the labor market generally doesn't turn as quickly as the overall economy. Employers often wait to make sure of improved conditions before adding staff once again.

But the disappointing numbers for December raise worries that continued problems in the labor market could keep economic growth weak for much of this year, perhaps even leading to a so-called double dip recession.

Even if there isn't another recession, a so-called jobless recovery can feel like a recession for the typical American worker. After the 2001 recession ended, job losses continued for nearly two years and resulted in 1.1 million additional job losses.

Christina Romer, chair of the White House's Council of Economic Advisors, called the December job loss a "slight setback" in a statement. But she pointed out that quarterly job losses steadily declined throughout the year.

"The monthly employment and unemployment numbers are volatile and subject to substantial revision. Therefore, it is important not to read too much into any one monthly report, positive or negative," she said. "It is essential that we continue our efforts to move in the right direction and replace job losses with robust job gains."

But Republicans argued the report shows that the administration's stimulus package passed by Congress on mostly party lines at the start of 2009 is costing jobs instead of helping.

"A jobless recovery is a far cry from what the American people were promised last winter when Washington Democrats jammed through a trillion-dollar 'stimulus' that they said would create jobs 'immediately,'" said House Minority Leader John Boehner (R- OH) in a statement. "Instead, roughly 3 million Americans have lost their jobs since then, and joblessness remains in the double-digits."

The House passed a $154 billion jobs bill at the end of December that includes about $48 billion in infrastructure spending and another $27 billion in help to the states to prevent the layoffs of teachers, police and firefighters. There is also $79 billion in additional benefits and health insurance assistance for the unemployed.

The measure will be considered by the Senate after it returns to session Jan. 19. 

Job GrowthUnemployment rate improves in Tennessee

Stimulus and jobs: What the fight's all about

Critics, particularly congressional Republicans, say that stimulus has done little to help the economy. They point to the high unemployment rate and to pork-barrel projects they say have done little good.

CNNMoney takes a closer look at the jobs debate.

How many jobs has stimulus funded?

There are two numbers floating out there, depending on how you count the jobs.

The White House says 640,000 jobs were created or saved through Sept. 30. This counts only jobs funded directly with stimulus money -- such as the teacher who kept her job because of federal aid to the states or the teen who got a summer job through a stimulus-funded program.

The administration is reporting this figure every three months. The next update is due at the end of January.

But the White House recently changed the criteria for counting jobs. The administration initially asked funding recipients to tally jobs that were created or "saved," meaning positions that were at risk of disappearing without stimulus. Going forward, officials just want recipients to add up the total number of jobs funded with stimulus money.

The White House also says the Recovery Act has created 2 million jobs. This figure covers all positions that were touched by stimulus money, not only the 640,000 directly funded by it.

How do they know how many jobs were funded?0:00/3:13Iraq vet targets stimulus funds

Included in the jobs count is the worker in the asphalt plant who is on the job because his employer got orders stemming from stimulus-funded road improvements. Also counted are the retail workers still getting paychecks because the unemployed have more money to spend after getting a $25 boost in weekly jobless benefits.

The recipients required to file reports will receive about 35% of the $787 billion stimulus package. The other 65% is going toward increased Medicaid payments to states, tax cuts and the like.

As for the 2 million jobs figure, that's calculated by the president's Council of Economic Advisers. It's based on mathematical formulas and economic models that estimate how many jobs were created based on how much stimulus money has been spent.

Why is unemployment still rising?

Unemployment remained at a stubbornly high 10% in December 2009, up from 7.4% a year earlier. While this is a smidge lower than the 10.1% recorded in October, it's still the highest unemployment level since the early 1980s recession.

Businesses are still not hiring, despite the billions of stimulus dollars being pumped into the country.

Andwith 15.3 million people out of work, job seekers still outnumber openings by more than six to one, the greatest differential since the Labor Department began tracking job openings in December 2000.

What do Obama and his critics say?

The administration says the unemployment would be much worse if the stimulus program didn't exist. A year ago, the economy was losing 691,000 per month, on average, in the first quarter. In December, the number was down to 85,000 jobs lost.

"It's because the downward trend was so severe that you can say you are two million jobs higher than you otherwise would have been, but you still have a very high unemployment rate, said Christina Romer, chairwoman of the president's Council of Economic Advisers.

Romer predicts the economy will stop losing jobs in the spring. But the employment situation won't really improve until the private sector starts adding to payrolls again, she said.

Republicans, however, argue that the stimulus has largely been a waste of money.

"The administration has no idea how many jobs have been 'saved or created,' but we do know that roughly three million Americans have lost their jobs since the 'stimulus' was enacted," said Ohio Rep. John Boehner, the House Republican Leader.  

Experts fear that U.S. is entering decade of job doldrumsStimulus Phase 2: Infrastructure and jobs

Monday, January 25, 2010

Existing home sales sink 16.7%

Analysts surveyed by Briefing.com had expected the December sales rate to hit 5.9 million annual units.

It was expected that sales would decline from November to December, because November was slated to be the last month in which sales to first-time homebuyers could qualify for a federal tax credit of up to $8,000. Lawmakers have since extended that deadline through April 30, adding a new credit of up to $6,500 for some existing home owners who move.

"This is a huge blow, much bigger than we expected," said PNC senior economist Craig Thomas. "Unfortunately, we'll continue to see this kind of volatility as economic supports like the tax credit are taken away."

Homebuyers rushing to get the credit made for a tough month-to-month comparison for December, Thomas said, and the month also suffers from seasonal issues like bad weather and holidays.

For all of 2009 there were 5,156,000 existing-home sales, which was 4.9% higher than 2008's total. That was the first annual sales gain since 2005.

In November, the planned tax credit expiration helped existing home sales gain 7.4% -- and that followed a 10% surge the previous month.

Despite December's disappointment, PNC's Thomas thinks the tax credit will help recharge the housing market the way Cash for Clunkers boosted auto sales in the longer term. That market saw an artificial jump, then dipped when the policy was dropped and then eventually got stronger.

"Since Cash for Clunkers has been over, autos have seen stronger and more sustainable sales -- and that's a function of a better economy," Thomas said. "That means home sales are likely to follow."

Buy a foreclosure: 7 tips

Price and inventory: The median price of homes sold in December was $178,300, a 1.5% gain over December 2008. That was the first year-over-year gain in the median price since August 2007. Distressed properties made up 32% of the houses sold during the month.

Total housing inventory fell 6.6% to 3.29 million existing homes for sale. That's a 7.2-month supply at the current selling pace, up from a 6.5-month supply in November.

Sales by property type: Housing markets suffered across the board. Single-family home sales fell 16.8% to a seasonally adjusted annual rate of 4.79 million in December from a pace of 5.76 million in November, but were 12.7% above the pace 12 months ago.

Make money in 2010: Your home

Condominium and co-op sales fell 15.4% to a seasonally adjusted annual rate of 660,000 units in December, from 780,000 in November, but were 34.7% above December 2008's rate.

Sales by region: Total existing home sales fell the most in the Midwest, dropping 25.8% in December to a pace of 1.15 million. Still, that's 8.5% above a year ago.

The West fared the best of all regions, but sales there still fell 4.8% to an annual level of 1.38 million; sales in the South sank 16.3% to 2.01 million; and the Northeast fell 19.5% to 910,000.

Outlook: PNC's Thomas said existing home sales will start to tick up in the coming months, though they will see another drop when the tax credit expires on April 30. The market will also be susceptible to changes in Federal Reserve policy, which affect mortgage rates, he said.

"There are a few headwinds, and volatility obscures the true condition of the market," Thomas said. "We all want transparency amid a confusing time, but there [will be] improvement in the months ahead." 

New home sales plunge in NovemberThanks to tax credit, home sales surge 7.4 percent

'Working twice as hard for half the money'

Since the recession took hold two years ago, only the threat of the unemployment line was keeping workers on the job. But as the economy shows signs of improvement, "people will start taking off in droves," said Rusty Rueff, a career and workplace expert at Glassdoor.com.

Brent Quam hopes to be one of them. Quam, who is 36 and works as a flight attendant at a major airline, has seen his pay and compensation cut 33% since the Sept. 11 terrorist attacks. At the same time, his hours have increased.

"We're working twice as much than we're supposed to be working for half the money," he said of himself and his coworkers.

He has since gone back to school and graduated with an MBA, hoping to find work in arts administration and leave the airlines behind.

Despite his discontent, Quam says he will continue working at the airline until he receives a job offer. "I really can't afford to quit, it's a matter of grinning and bearing it until things turn around."

Best Companies to Work For: They're hiring!

"Workers feel like they took the brunt of the recession because companies had to do whatever they could to cut costs, and what they cut were programs that directly impacted employees," explained Michael Erwin, a senior career adviser at CareerBuilder.

Now, with signs of improvement in the economy, employers should start thinking about worker retention, rather than cost cutting.

"Morale is in the toilet," said Glassdoor's Rueff. "Morale issues lead to productivity issues which lead to results issues."

If employers do not communicate what employees can expect going forward in terms of reinstating salaries and benefits, then that's going to cause a lot of friction, Rueff explained.

Take this job and shove it?

Joan Marie Verba, 56, couldn't take another day with her former employer.

"I worked for a nationally advertised weight loss company. Our pay was basically minimum wage, with commissions for each client," she said. "However, ever since the recession started, the number of clients diminished, which meant that the pay essentially was reduced to minimum wage."

Plus, "they were cutting hours and the opportunities were just shrinking," she said.

"I was just so frustrated, I had to make a change," Verba said of her decision to quit in December.

She has since been looking for another job while taking additional classes in health coaching and working as an independent weight loss consultant.

But experts say employees need to keep their emotions in check and think twice about whether to jump ship without a back-up plan.

"It's going to be even more competitive than it was last year," Erwin said.

Workers should start thinking about their next move, update their resumes and build up networks. But quitting on the spot as a form of protest is not advisable considering the alternative of getting lost in a sea of job seekers competing for few openings.

"People who are in jobs need to think long and hard before they jump up and say that the grass is greener on the other side," Rueff cautioned. "I don't think they want to be out there on the street right now." 

Pay czar issues salary caps for execsBanks ramp up lobbying in second half of 2009

Business owners brace for a rough year

Business owners have a lot to be uncertain about, from when consumers will open their wallets again to whether Congress will pass a health care reform bill.

Main Street is largely bracing for another gloomy year: Two-thirds of the owners NSBA surveyed think their profits will stay the same or drop over the next 12 months.

Rising costs push pink slips: Health care reform is turning into a quagmire in Washington, but for business owners, the status quo isn't working. In a separate NSBA study, 92% of small business owners said they expect an increase in the cost of their premiums in 2010. To defray those ever-rising costs, business owners are having to skimp on the benefits.

Forty percent of those the NSBA surveyed said they switched policies in 2009 to one with higher co-payments, and 41% of business owners switched to a plan with a higher deductible.

But most worryingly, some decided that they only way they could make ends meet was to shed staff. In December, one in five small business owners reduced their head count as a way to deal with rising premiums, according to the NSBA's year-end survey.

"In this tough economy, more and more small-business owners are being forced to make the tough decision between keeping their employees or keeping their health insurance," NSBA Chair Keith Ashmus said in a statement supporting health care reform.

Tight credit is another obstacle. "Contrary to various reports that the credit crunch has eased or is no longer a problem, NSBA's members are still struggling," the organization wrote in its report.

Treasury Secretary Timothy Geithner agrees with that assessment: "This credit crunch is not over," he said in November at a Washington forum convened to address the problem. "It may feel dramatically better for large companies, but it is not over for small businesses across the country."

The nation's biggest recipients of bank bailout funds cut their small business lending by $12.5 billion in the last half of 2009. Business owners are feeling that loss: 39% of those polled by the NSBA said they can't get adequate financing for their business, up from 22% in August 2008.

Despite all those challenges, small business owners tend to have faith in their own storefronts. By the end of 2009, 61% of business owners said they were confident about the future of their business -- up from 58% six months earlier. That change marked the first uptick in confidence in two years.

Still, the NSBA tossed some grains of salt on the findings.

"This change is certainly welcome, but taken in context this shows that more than one-third of small-business respondents have concerns about the ongoing viability of their business," the organization wrote. "That amounts to more than 10 million small businesses." 

Nashville People in BusinessObama touts tax breaks to boost small biz hiring

Sunday, January 24, 2010

States urge action on foreclosures

The state attorneys general and banking regulators urged the Obama administration and loan servicing firms to step up their efforts.

"Potential foreclosures are being built up in the system, said Tom Miller, Iowa's attorney general. "The efforts really need to be more efficient more effective more timely on behalf of the servicers."

Under the administration's program, eligible borrowers can see their monthly mortgage payments reduced to no more than 31% of pre-tax income. So far, the effort has helped about 66,500 people, with another 787,200 homeowners in trial modifications.

Reduce loan principal: State officials say that servicers should cut the loan balances of homeowners, in addition to reducing interest rates and extending the terms of the loan. This is especially true in places where property values have plummeted. Reducing principal will make it less likely that homeowners will default on their modified loans.

Pay attention to option ARMs: More than 40% of these complex mortgages are delinquent. Even worse, over the next two years, many will adjust, driving up borrowers' monthly payments. Servicers need to address these loans before they fall into foreclosure.

Limit required paperwork: Many homeowners are not receiving permanent modifications under the president's plan because they haven't submitted all their documents. Treasury Department officials should reduce the amount of paperwork borrowers are required to file and speed up the debut of a central portal where homeowners can submit the forms. The portal is currently set to launch at the end of March.

Expand counseling and mediation efforts: State should expand their housing counseling and mediation programs, which require homeowners and servicers to meet before the completion of the foreclosure process.

Suspend foreclosure proceedings: Treasury officials should amend the president's program so that the entire foreclosure process is halted when a borrower applies for the president's program. Currently, only the sale is stopped.

Help the unemployed: Treasury officials and servicers should do more to assist the unemployed so they do not fall into foreclosure. A growing number of borrowers with good credit backgrounds are behind in their payments because of the weak economy. 

Mortgage plan fails to live up to goals450,000 at risk in foreclosure-prevention program

Two small banks in Florida and Missouri fail

Customers of both banks are protected, however. The Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation, which has insured bank deposits since the Great Depression, currently covers accounts up to $250,000.

Premier American Bank, National Association in Miami, a newly chartered institution and subsidiary of Bond Street Holding in Naples, Fla., will assume the failed bank's $326.3 million in deposits and will purchase "essentially all" of Premier American Bank's $350.9 million in assets, according to the FDIC. Premier American Bank, National Association entered into a share-loss agreement with the FDIC on $300 million of failed bank's assets.

The four branches of Premier American will reopen Monday as branches of Premier American Bank, National Association.

Sunflower Bank, National Association in Salina, Kansas will assume Bank of Leeton's $20.4 million in deposits. The FDIC said it will retain most of the failed bank's $20.1 million in assets for later disposition.

The single branch of Bank of Leeton will reopen Saturday as a branch of Sunflower Bank, National Association.

Friday's closures will cost the FDIC approximately$93.1 million.

Customers of the failed banks can access their money over the weekend by writing checks or using ATMs or debit cards. Checks will continue to be processed, and borrowers should make mortgage and loan payments as usual.

The FDIC also said customers should continue to use their existing branch until they receive notice that the takeover has been completed.

A total of 140 banks failed in 2009, the highest since 1992, when 181 banks failed. But that count is far from 1989's record high of 534 closures which took place during the savings and loan crisis.

Last year's spike has raised concerns about the federal deposit insurance fund, which has slipped into the red for the first time since 1991.

The fund was $8.2 billion in the hole as of the end of September. But that includes $21.7 billion the agency has earmarked for future bank failures. 

Regulators shutter small banks in Illinois and MinnesotaFDIC will seek input on pay plan for banks

Job Growth

Still, the government reported a loss of 85,000 jobs in December -- much worse than expected. Economists surveyed by Briefing.com had expected no net gain or loss in payrolls in December.

The economy has lost 7.2 million jobs since the start of 2008. Losses for 2009 alone came to 4.2 million jobs, the most in one year since the government started tracking payrolls in 1939.

But even with the poor end to the year, the pace of job losses has slowed dramatically from the beginning of 2009. There were 741,000 jobs lost in January, the worst total in 60 years.

Some economists said that this broader trend is more important than the bigger-than-expected losses in December.

"I don't see this as a setback. We're still on the right trend here," said Tig Gilliam, CEO of Adecco Group North America, a unit of the world's largest employment staffing firm.

Gilliam said he's expecting job growth to resume in the first three months of this year, perhaps as early as February, and that gains of about 200,000 to 300,000 jobs a month by the middle of this year are possible.

"Our clients are still cautious, still concerned about the strength of the recovery," he said. "But they're much more focused on adding resources."

But other economists said this report showed how weak the economy and labor market continues to be two years after the start of the worst economic downturn since the Great Depression.

"There is still plenty to be concerned about. Layoffs have clearly slowed but hiring shows few signs of accelerating," said Mark Vitner, senior economist with Wells Fargo Securities.

The unemployment rate stayed at 10% in the December, in line with economists' forecasts.

It could have risen except for the fact that many people who want jobs stopped looking and were no longer counted as unemployed. That group of people wanting a job but are not counted in the labor force rose by 263,000 to a record 6.3 million.

Another 9.2 million people are stuck working part-time jobs when they want full-time work. Including discouraged workers and those not able to find the full-time job they want, the so-called underemployment rate rose to 17.3% from 17.2% in November.

Long-term unemployment also worsened in December, with those out of work for more than six months rising to a record 6.1 million. The typical unemployed worker has been out of work for five months.

Construction and manufacturing, two sectors of the economy particularly hard hit during the recession, again suffered large job losses in December. Construction lost 53,000 jobs while employment in manufacturing fell by 27,000 jobs.

0:00/4:25Diverse, but slow job growth in 2010

But the losses were not limited to those areas. Retail employment fell by 10,000 jobs on a seasonally-adjusted basis, even with the holiday shopping season in full swing. The leisure and hospitality industries cut 25,000 workers.

Perhaps the most encouraging news from December was a 46,5000 net increase in temporary help jobs. Temporary employment is typically seen as a leading indicator of job growth because employers will add part-time workers before they're willing to hire permanent employees.

While most economists believe that the recession ended at some point in the middle of 2009, the labor market generally doesn't turn as quickly as the overall economy. Employers often wait to make sure of improved conditions before adding staff once again.

But the disappointing numbers for December raise worries that continued problems in the labor market could keep economic growth weak for much of this year, perhaps even leading to a so-called double dip recession.

Even if there isn't another recession, a so-called jobless recovery can feel like a recession for the typical American worker. After the 2001 recession ended, job losses continued for nearly two years and resulted in 1.1 million additional job losses.

Christina Romer, chair of the White House's Council of Economic Advisors, called the December job loss a "slight setback" in a statement. But she pointed out that quarterly job losses steadily declined throughout the year.

"The monthly employment and unemployment numbers are volatile and subject to substantial revision. Therefore, it is important not to read too much into any one monthly report, positive or negative," she said. "It is essential that we continue our efforts to move in the right direction and replace job losses with robust job gains."

But Republicans argued the report shows that the administration's stimulus package passed by Congress on mostly party lines at the start of 2009 is costing jobs instead of helping.

"A jobless recovery is a far cry from what the American people were promised last winter when Washington Democrats jammed through a trillion-dollar 'stimulus' that they said would create jobs 'immediately,'" said House Minority Leader John Boehner (R- OH) in a statement. "Instead, roughly 3 million Americans have lost their jobs since then, and joblessness remains in the double-digits."

The House passed a $154 billion jobs bill at the end of December that includes about $48 billion in infrastructure spending and another $27 billion in help to the states to prevent the layoffs of teachers, police and firefighters. There is also $79 billion in additional benefits and health insurance assistance for the unemployed.

The measure will be considered by the Senate after it returns to session Jan. 19. 

Job GrowthUnemployment rate improves in Tennessee

Banking reform: Harder than it sounds

The central idea of Obama's proposal is fairly easy to grasp: Separate a bank's riskiest operations from the parts that are vital to the economy functioning, like deposits and loans to individuals and businesses. Banks that hold federally insured deposits or borrow from the Fed would no longer be able to use any of those funds to gamble in the financial markets. The days of in-house hedge funds and buyout firms would be over.

The trouble lies in figuring out how this will all work in practice. Critics say the intentions here are good, but the dividing line between commercial banking and risky proprietary trading can be harder to spot than you would think.

"In commercial banking you make loans. In investment banking you deal with securities," says Doug Elliott, a fellow at the Brookings Institution and former investment banker. "The thing is, loans have become instruments that are pretty fairly traded. You can't tell me the characteristics of a loan that makes it different from a security."

Elliott also points out in a recent paper that banks in some ways serve their customers better by maximizing returns on their money, as a matter of simple liquidity management. What looks risky to one person is a necessary business practice to someone else.

The other question is whether "Volcker's rule"-- named after Paul Volcker, the widely-respected former Fed chair who has been the idea's lonely champion for months -- could have prevented the most recent crisis.

Skeptics say the credit crisis wasn't spawned by the bank's in-house hedge funds and private equity funds. It was bad loans, plain and simple, which were then compounded by over-the-counter derivatives and credit default swaps. Whether or not the bank also had a proprietary trading arm would not have made a difference.

0:00/1:22Financial stocks hit by Obama plan

Regardless of the details, which the White House and Congress will have to hammer out in coming months, the banks have completely misjudged Washington. Wall Street has waded into the worst possible political environment in which to put up a fight: The health care debacle has led the Democrats to cast about for a more popular issue to adopt, and in this economy, nothing could be more obvious than going after Wall Street.

Republicans have thus far proven their uncanny ability to oppose everything supported by the Democrats, but it will be a stretch for them to ally themselves with bank CEOs. And Obama knows it. As he said yesterday, "If these folks want a fight, it's a fight I'm ready to have."

And of course, the banks have done themselves no favors in Washington with their recent performances, with next to no displays of contrition. At last week's hearings on the Hill before the Federal Crisis Inquiry Commission, some observers thought they heard Goldman Sachs (GS, Fortune 500) CEO Lloyd Blankfein admit the bank had behaved in an "improper" way.

Not so, says the bank, which released this tortured statement: "Mr. Blankfein was responding to a lengthy series of statements followed by a question that was predicated on the assumption that a firm was selling a product that it thought was going to default. Mr. Blankfein agreed that, if such an assumption was true, the practice would be improper. Mr. Blankfein does not believe, nor did he say, that Goldman Sachs had behaved improperly in any way."

At that same hearing, Blankfein talked repeatedly about improving risk management at his bank. And yet by clinging to their bonuses (deserved or not), Wall Street yet again chased the short-run money over the long-run. By the time the White House and Congress are done with this reform bill, the banks will regret how dearly they held onto their profits. 

Obama calls for bank limitsObama to meet with bank CEOs

Saturday, January 23, 2010

Bernanke losing some support in Senate

Sen. Barbara Boxer, D-Calif. and Sen. Russell Feingold, D-Wis., both said Friday that they plan to vote against Bernanke. Several other Democratic senators told CNN they're undecided.

"It is time for a change -- it is time for Main Street to have a champion at the Fed," Boxer said in a statement. "Dr. Bernanke played a lead role in crafting the Bush administration's economic policies, which led to the current economic crisis. Our next Federal Reserve Chairman must represent a clean break from the failed policies of the past."

It's not clear whether Bernanke's confirmation is in jeopardy, because he is likely to garner some Republican support. In the Senate Banking Committee, four Republicans voted to confirm Bernanke, crediting him for saving the economy from a second Great Depression.

Senate Republicans were also trying to figure out on Friday who would be supporting and opposing Bernanke's confirmation

But the Senate can't even start the process of considering Bernanke until 60 senators sign off, because a few senators who oppose his confirmation filed official "holds" delaying the process.

0:00/4:56Ben Bernanke's biggest year

"The math to 60 -- at this point -- looks bad for Bernanke," wrote Chris Krueger, an analyst for Concept Capital Washington Research Group in a report. "Chaos is reigning on the Hill right now and Democratic members are in severe anxiety over their own re-elections."

Some are really starting to wonder whether Bernanke will be confirmed before Feb. 1. If the vote is delayed, there's a question as to whether Bernanke can be temporarily re-appointed as acting chair. If not, Fed Vice Chair Donald Kohn would serve as acting chairman.

Senate leaders were unsure Friday how the votes were going to play out or when they'd start the procedure to force a vote.

Even Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid issued a statement late Friday saying he'd support Bernanke, but "my support is not unconditional."

The White House is also getting involved, although spokesman Bill Burton declined to "engage in hypotheticals" about whether the president believed Bernanke's confirmation was in trouble.

"He continues to think that he's the best person for the job, and will be confirmed by the United States Senate," Burton said to reporters earlier Friday on Air Force One. "But of course people on the White House staff and around the President continue to work to get that done."

Bernanke has always had his critics in the Senate. Bernie Sanders, a left-leaning independent from Vermont who often votes with the Democrats, and Jim Bunning of Kentucky, Sanders' political opposite, are two of the most vocal.

Up until Tuesday, insiders believed that Bernanke had locked up more than 60 votes necessary to break a Senate filibuster. In December, he won solid support from the Senate Banking committee.

However, the political landscape changed when Republican Scott Brown won the special election to fill the Massachusetts vacancy in the Senate, once considered a Democratic stronghold.

Sen. Sherrod Brown, D-Ohio, voted for Bernanke in committee but told CNN on Friday that he hasn't made up his mind about his final vote on the floor. Brown said he doesn't think a delay in the confirmation vote will impact market stability.

"The markets understand that there is dissension and contentiousness about Chairman Bernanke," Brown said.

* CNN's Dana Bash and Ed Henry contributed to this report.  

Senate panel approves Bernanke for second termHarry Reid helps to build up support for Bernanke

Job Growth

Still, the government reported a loss of 85,000 jobs in December -- much worse than expected. Economists surveyed by Briefing.com had expected no net gain or loss in payrolls in December.

The economy has lost 7.2 million jobs since the start of 2008. Losses for 2009 alone came to 4.2 million jobs, the most in one year since the government started tracking payrolls in 1939.

But even with the poor end to the year, the pace of job losses has slowed dramatically from the beginning of 2009. There were 741,000 jobs lost in January, the worst total in 60 years.

Some economists said that this broader trend is more important than the bigger-than-expected losses in December.

"I don't see this as a setback. We're still on the right trend here," said Tig Gilliam, CEO of Adecco Group North America, a unit of the world's largest employment staffing firm.

Gilliam said he's expecting job growth to resume in the first three months of this year, perhaps as early as February, and that gains of about 200,000 to 300,000 jobs a month by the middle of this year are possible.

"Our clients are still cautious, still concerned about the strength of the recovery," he said. "But they're much more focused on adding resources."

But other economists said this report showed how weak the economy and labor market continues to be two years after the start of the worst economic downturn since the Great Depression.

"There is still plenty to be concerned about. Layoffs have clearly slowed but hiring shows few signs of accelerating," said Mark Vitner, senior economist with Wells Fargo Securities.

The unemployment rate stayed at 10% in the December, in line with economists' forecasts.

It could have risen except for the fact that many people who want jobs stopped looking and were no longer counted as unemployed. That group of people wanting a job but are not counted in the labor force rose by 263,000 to a record 6.3 million.

Another 9.2 million people are stuck working part-time jobs when they want full-time work. Including discouraged workers and those not able to find the full-time job they want, the so-called underemployment rate rose to 17.3% from 17.2% in November.

Long-term unemployment also worsened in December, with those out of work for more than six months rising to a record 6.1 million. The typical unemployed worker has been out of work for five months.

Construction and manufacturing, two sectors of the economy particularly hard hit during the recession, again suffered large job losses in December. Construction lost 53,000 jobs while employment in manufacturing fell by 27,000 jobs.

0:00/4:25Diverse, but slow job growth in 2010

But the losses were not limited to those areas. Retail employment fell by 10,000 jobs on a seasonally-adjusted basis, even with the holiday shopping season in full swing. The leisure and hospitality industries cut 25,000 workers.

Perhaps the most encouraging news from December was a 46,5000 net increase in temporary help jobs. Temporary employment is typically seen as a leading indicator of job growth because employers will add part-time workers before they're willing to hire permanent employees.

While most economists believe that the recession ended at some point in the middle of 2009, the labor market generally doesn't turn as quickly as the overall economy. Employers often wait to make sure of improved conditions before adding staff once again.

But the disappointing numbers for December raise worries that continued problems in the labor market could keep economic growth weak for much of this year, perhaps even leading to a so-called double dip recession.

Even if there isn't another recession, a so-called jobless recovery can feel like a recession for the typical American worker. After the 2001 recession ended, job losses continued for nearly two years and resulted in 1.1 million additional job losses.

Christina Romer, chair of the White House's Council of Economic Advisors, called the December job loss a "slight setback" in a statement. But she pointed out that quarterly job losses steadily declined throughout the year.

"The monthly employment and unemployment numbers are volatile and subject to substantial revision. Therefore, it is important not to read too much into any one monthly report, positive or negative," she said. "It is essential that we continue our efforts to move in the right direction and replace job losses with robust job gains."

But Republicans argued the report shows that the administration's stimulus package passed by Congress on mostly party lines at the start of 2009 is costing jobs instead of helping.

"A jobless recovery is a far cry from what the American people were promised last winter when Washington Democrats jammed through a trillion-dollar 'stimulus' that they said would create jobs 'immediately,'" said House Minority Leader John Boehner (R- OH) in a statement. "Instead, roughly 3 million Americans have lost their jobs since then, and joblessness remains in the double-digits."

The House passed a $154 billion jobs bill at the end of December that includes about $48 billion in infrastructure spending and another $27 billion in help to the states to prevent the layoffs of teachers, police and firefighters. There is also $79 billion in additional benefits and health insurance assistance for the unemployed.

The measure will be considered by the Senate after it returns to session Jan. 19. 

Want a job? Ask ObamaUnemployment rate improves in Tennessee

State jobless rates on the rise

In November, 36 states reported a monthly decrease in the unemployment rate.

"This reversal is so surprisingly negative that it causes us to be cautious," said Craig Thomas, senior economist at PNC. "This report has been unreliable, and it tends to miss turning points."

The economy and labor market are indeed "at that turning point," Thomas said, noting improvements including a pickup in retail sales. He thinks the state report will reflect the recovery more accurately come March.

The report said all 50 states had an unemployment rate in December that was higher than a year earlier. Michigan again had the highest rate of unemployment at 14.6%.

But, in a sign of some improvement, 11 states added jobs in December. North Dakota again posted the lowest jobless rate, at 4.4%.

In a separate report earlier this month, the government reported the nation shed 85,000 jobs in December and the unemployment rate held at 10%.

In December, 17 states had jobless rates above that national average.

The unemployment rate is generated by the Labor Department, which conducts a monthly population survey and includes in the rate people who have actively looked for work in the past four weeks.

Those who have given up the search are not counted in the unemployment rate, and the figure is not affected by or related to the number of people who are eligible to collect on -- or have run out of -- jobless benefits.

"It's been tough, but we are certainly here at the turnaround," said PNC's Thomas. "In a few months these numbers will be revised up significantly to reflect the trends we're seeing nationally."

Thomas said the unemployment rate will peak in the first quarter of 2010 and will decline over the course of the year.

"It's always disappointing to see these numbers, and it creates some wavering on the idea of the recovery progressing," Thomas said. "But if you look at the hard evidence we are moving toward recovery."

State-by-state and regional figures: Slightly more than half of states showed minor increases or decreases in their unemployment rates over the month. South Dakota's was the only significant decline, down 0.2 percentage point to 4.7%, while 21 states posted significant jumps.

Unemployment rates in Connecticut, Massachusetts, Tennessee and West Virginia all gained 0.7 percentage point.

After Michigan, the states with the next highest rates were Nevada at 13%, Rhode Island at 12.9% and South Carolina at 12.6% -- which was a record high for the state. California was fifth at 12.4%.

Joblesslessness was highest in the West. That region had a jobless rate of 10.7%. The Northeast had the lowest rate of unemployment at 9.2%, but that was up 0.5 percentage point from November. 

The unemployment rate is falling!Unemployment rate improves in Tennessee

450,000 at risk in foreclosure-prevention program

During the review period, servicers must determine whether borrowers have made all their payments and have handed in all the necessary paperwork. Those who haven't will get letters giving them 30 days to comply.

The goal is to clear up the backlog of borrowers stuck in trial modifications, in which a homeowner's monthly payments are lowered to no more than 31% of pre-tax income.

Some homeowners have spent seven or eight months waiting to hear if they qualify for a permanent adjustment to their mortgages.

This directive, however, has some bank regulators concerned.

"About 450,000 homeowners currently have HAMP trial modifications and have demonstrated a willingness and ability to make timely payments for at least three months," said Richard Neiman, superintendent of the New York State Banking Department.

"Now, unfortunately and very alarmingly, these same homeowners face the prospect of foreclosure strictly on account of documentation issues," he said.

Paperwork has proved a major stumbling block for the president's foreclosure-prevention program. Homeowners complain that their servicers continuously lose the documents they send in, while financial institutions argue that borrowers have not been sending in their paperwork.

Aware of the problem, Treasury officials said they plan to issue new guidance to servicers next week that will help expedite the conversion of borrowers in the trial period to permanent modification. It may also lighten the documentation requirements.

Converting to permanent modifications

Under fire for the low number of people receiving long-term help, the Treasury Department in late November ramped up pressure on servicers to convert borrowers to permanent modifications.

Some 66,500 people have received permanent adjustments, with another 787,200 homeowners in trial modifications.

Under the president's plan, delinquent borrowers are put into trial modifications for several months to make sure they can handle the new payments and to give them time to submit their financial paperwork.

Once the modification becomes permanent, servicers, investors and homeowners are eligible to receive thousands of dollars in incentive payments.

Overall, about three-quarters of people are making their payments on time, according to the Treasury Department.

Treasury officials already lightened the documentation requirements in the fall in hopes of speeding up the conversion process. But more needs to be done, Neiman said.

For instance, Treasury should accelerate its implementation of a standardized documentation form and the creation of a Web portal that will allow homeowners to track the receipt of the paperwork, he said. Also, it should allow servicers more flexibility in accepting alternative documents.

If this isn't done, a lot of homeowners could soon face foreclosure, he said.

"This is a real concern to borrowers, particularly borrowers who've continued to make payments for three, four, five, even seven months," Neiman said. 

Mortgage plan fails to live up to goalsObama ups pressure on banks to help homeowners

Friday, January 22, 2010

Civil rights group calls Pickens Plan ad offensive

Then Pickens himself takes the screen and says, "I don't think so," and proceeds to explain that the American "economy is bleeding billions for foreign oil, importing nearly 70%, much of it from countries that don't like us" while showing images of men with guns next to burning oil fields.

In a statement released Wednesday, the Arab-American civil rights group objected the ad's lettering and images and said the characterizations of Arab people are "inaccurate, offensive, and outright discriminatory."

A spokesperson for the Pickens Plan said "the ads were reviewed as part of the approval process at major cable networks and there were no issues raised."

The domestic drilling backlash

The ADC said that the images are intended to scare Americans into action at the expense of Arab Americans' heritage or descent, engender hate and perpetuate bigotry and ignorance, and suggested that the advertisement be pulled.

"ADC supports a policy of energy independence," said the group's president Mary Rose Oakar in a statement, "but it is unacceptable that Mr. Pickens is trying to gain support for his own program by reinforcing false stereotypes of Arab countries and their people to the detriment of all American citizens, particularly those of Arabic descent."

The group also rejected the ad's tone which suggests that the United State's depends primarily on oil from the Arab world.

According to data from the Energy Information Administration, the United States imports the most oil from Canada, then Mexico, Saudi Arabia and Venezuela.

Still, geopolitical tensions in the Middle East, which boasts a majority of the world's oil reserves and is the only area where oil production is expected to grow, threatens to hike oil prices.

The advertisement is available to view on the Pickens Plan Web site.  

Dubai opens the world’s tallest skyscraperU.S. moves to curb emissions