Fannie Mae Death Watch Part II: Abrupt Conclusion
      by
      Ross M. Miller
      Miller Risk Advisors
      www.millerrisk.com
      October 11, 2004
      
      I had planned for this week's commentary was to be a
      humorous look at Fannie Mae's most recent annual report—the one that
      KPMG, for unspecified reasons, did not sign off on. After viewing this
      past Wednesday's Congressional testimony on OFHEO's preliminary report
      that examined accounting irregularities at Fannie Mae, I no longer find
      any humor in the situation. (The hearings were broadcast on C-SPAN3,
      digital television's equivalent of the air-traffic control frequencies on
      a Radio Shack scanner, and webcast from C-SPAN's site.)
      My initial glance at Fannie Mae's annual report reminded
      me of the classic
      National Lampoon magazine cover that showed a dog with a gun to
      its head and said "If you don't buy this magazine, we'll shoot this
      dog." Upon seeing the testimony, it is clear that I had gotten the
      animal wrong. One Congressman, who gave every appearance of reading his
      questions from a cheat sheet provided to him by Fannie Mae, straightened
      me out on this one. It's not a dog; it's a horse. And the horse represents
      the U.S. economy.
      The undercurrent of the hearings was clear: No matter
      what awful things Fannie Mae might have done, if there is any chance that
      even a single low-income individual will be unable to buy a home because
      of sanctions placed on Fannie Mae, it is imperative that we look the other
      way. Furthermore, the very real possibility exists if we lay so much as a
      finger on Fannie Mae, it will take down the entire U.S. economy with it.
      The scariest thing about the televised hearings is not
      what appeared on them, but what did not appear—the
      written testimony of Roger Barnes, a financial accounting manager at
      Fannie Mae. His testimony, which I never saw discussed at the hearings,
      alleges that Fannie's management used ham-handed financial manipulations
      to inflate Fannie Mae's reported earnings (and its managers' bonuses).
      Unlike Enron's famous "whistle-blower,"
      Sherron Watkins, Roger Barnes did not get to stay on at Fannie Mae, did
      not make a heroic appearance before Congress, and is not making a living
      out on the lecture circuit. Word has it that Mr. Barnes is in hiding. When
      Sherron Watkins brought her concerns to Kenneth Lay, nothing much
      happened. Roger Barnes, however, alleges that after he brought his
      concerns to Franklin Raines, he was harassed, passed over for promotions,
      and driven from the company. (If I write the word "alleges"
      enough maybe I'll get to speak at an ABA convention.)
      I could go on for weeks, deconstructing Fannie Mae point
      by point. I could even make the deconstruction entertaining for my readers
      who go in for that sort of thing. But anything that I might write would be
      sheer speculation. And it does not have to be that way.
      Fannie Mae claims to be all for transparency, so I
      suggest that they make all of their financial models, including the ones
      used to value their vast assets and liabilities, available over the
      Internet. They do not even have to be the current models, the ones they
      used two years ago should work just fine and should reveal little, if
      anything, in the way of proprietary information. (As we found out from
      Long-Term Capital Management, Fannie's brokers already have an excellent
      idea of their holdings and what they are really worth—what
      I care about is what Fannie thinks they are worth.)
      Hey, they don't even have to make them available to
      everyone, just to me. Drawing on past experience, if I dropped everything
      and started dissecting Fannie Mae today, I could give them a clean bill of
      health in six to nine months. And I'm sure my MBA students would love to
      help—that way they can get out of predicting
      Google's stock price will do for the month of November. If Fannie is
      hiding the "black hole" that some on Wall Street believe it is,
      the job could take as little as six to nine hours. And, if they don't have
      financial models, the whole thing could take six to nine minutes.
      In the likely event that Fannie (or its board) does not
      take me up on this offer, I will continue to watch them and take copious
      notes on the nearest available object. From a safe distance. And away from
      surveillance cameras. And I'll write happy commentaries that won't offend
      anyone. Something harmless. Like alien abductions. That's the ticket. So,
      stay tuned next week for "Alien Abductions and Your Financial
      Future."
      P.S. This commentary represents my opinion. Don't shoot
      me; I'm only the piano player.
      
      Copyright 2004 by Miller Risk Advisors. Permission
      granted to forward by electronic means and to excerpt or broadcast 250
      words or less provided a citation is made to www.millerrisk.com.