Get FREE NRO Newsletters

 

June 11 Issue  |  Subscribe  |  Renew

Close

New on NRO . . .

The Corner

The one and only.

Print   |  Text
 

Downgrade Nation

From the current print edition of National Review:

Downgraded President

I shall not want capital in Heaven / For I shall meet Sir Alfred Mond / We two shall lie together, lapt / In a five per cent. Exchequer Bond.

— T. S. Eliot, “A Cooking Egg”

On Feb. 7, 2010, the secretary of the Treasury, Timothy Geithner, was asked whether persistent deficits put the United States in danger of losing its AAA credit rating. “Absolutely not,” he said. “That will never happen to this country.” A little over a year later it did, when the ratings agency Egan-Jones downgraded the United States to AA. 

Egan-Jones, though a member of the cartel of ten credit-rating agencies recognized under federal law, is not one of the Big Three (Moody’s, Standard & Poor’s, and Fitch), and its ratings do not generate the same kind of headlines. But it is an interesting firm, and not beloved by the other agencies. One reason for that is the fact that it makes its money by charging bond investors for its information, rather than by charging bond-issuers for ratings, and makes much of this practice, accusing its competitors of having a conflict of interest built right into their business model. Further, the firm’s principal went to Congress in 2008 to accuse the ratings industry of having engaged in a race to the bottom for credit standards, which did not make him popular. In some investors’ minds, these are reasons to regard Egan-Jones as more credible than its household-name competitors. In any case, the Big Three themselves have warned that, absent a credible deal to rationalize U.S. public finances, a downgrade is likely. And their downgrades would have consequences. 

The judgment of the Big Three agencies is taken as gospel by practically no serious investor; their ratings are largely of technical and legal concern. The role of the credit-rating agencies is not to provide guidance and insight to the marketplace, but to certify the findings of the marketplace as conventional wisdom. But their role is important because of the way banks, insurance companies, pension systems, and other financial firms are regulated. (Contra Rep. Barney Frank et al., our problem was never deregulation; our problem was, and is, regulation written and enforced by dopes.) One of the regulations faced by banks is the “capital requirement,” which mandates that a bank must hold a certain amount of capital in reserve to offset its liabilities. But not all capital is created equal, and so $1 million in AAA bonds offsets more than does $1 million in AA bonds. Insurers and pension funds operate under similar restraints. 

Financial firms hold trillions of dollars in Treasury securities, and a downgrade to AA (or worse — Greece is now down to Ca) would have meaningful consequences, though not necessarily catastrophic ones. Financial firms would be sent scrambling to raise new capital, in a market that would no doubt be panicked by the fact that the United States of America and its once-unshakable Treasury bond have been caught with their fiscal pants down. This would be in a sense a replay of the 2008 credit crisis, in which declining mortgage securities forced banks to raise capital, which they did by selling those same declining securities, which drove values down further still, necessitating the raising of more capital, in a kind of subprime death spiral.

The impact of a Treasury downgrade is likely to be wider, but possibly not so deep or so radical — whereas there was no bottom under mortgage securities, investors are more likely to hold on to their Treasuries until maturity and redeem them than to dump them in a fire-sale panic — so long as the prospect of a real default remains remote. 

Beyond that, the immediate result of a downgrade of Treasury bonds to AA is anybody’s guess.

There are a number of major economic powers, Japan among them, whose government bonds are AA or lower. But none of those economies accounts for 25 percent of the planet’s GDP. 

. . . What we will learn now is whether any of this will prove sufficient to forestall a downgrade and the disorder threatened by it, whether Republicans can achieve long-term entitlement reform, and whether Barack Obama will be remembered, to emend a phrase of Daniel Hannan’s, as the downgraded president of a downgraded nation.

NR Digital subscribers can get the whole thing here.

New on The Corner. . .


COMMENTS   12

EXPAND  

   08/05/11 23:24

This is more of a political event than a fiscal one, and always has been. It's moving from a credit score over 800 to maybe 795. Assuming Obama and his pals do not try to intimidate S&P into changing their minds the GOP negotiating position, if they choose to use it, is greatly strengthened in favor of cuts and reforms.

The Democrats will use this news either as a pretext to bail from the "super committee" entirely, or make it even more of a circus than they orginally planned. They will, of course, use S&P's statement about "revenues" to double-down on tax hikes. But the GOP pretty effectively took that ball away from the Democrats on the debt deal.

'merica is not #2 at anything worth doing. No matter what the weekend spin is, Obama has to be wondering if spending $1B next year in a hopeless re-election campaign is worth it. Carter? Try LBJ.

Reply to this commentLinkReport Abuse
   08/06/11 08:51

hokkoda, BHO will be Hoover.

Reply to this commentLinkReport Abuse
   08/05/11 23:42

To be fair, even an AA rating is to high given our situation. Lots of countries has much more stable Debt/GDP situation and even lower ratings.

Maybe S&P should assign the grade Obama gives himself: A solid B+

Reply to this commentLinkReport Abuse
   08/06/11 02:34

Only a bit more than 17 months to go... but things can happen fast these days.

Reply to this commentLinkReport Abuse
larrytex56
   08/06/11 03:41

I agree with you, John Galt. I would have downgraded U.S. bonds to exactly one grade above junk, in order to remind our leadership that they have one more chance to get this right about our debt and our profligate spending. If no action is taken shortly, I would downgrade our bonds to junk. It's the only way to get both Obama's and Congress's attention.

Reply to this commentLinkReport Abuse
 JPK
   08/06/11 09:20

@John Galt,

You are correct. But, Greece and Italy don't have $50 trillion in accumulated assets. And they don't possess companies like Apple, which have +$70 billion in cash flows. The temptation will be for massive new taxes. Do not be surprised to see the analysts at S&P and Moodys say the price for a return to AAA ratings is $3 trillion in new taxes.

These rating agencies are worthless. A lot of good they did us the last 20 years. And S&P is now regulated by Congress via the new financial reform laws. It would be a brilliant move by Progressives- Use the rating system as a means to enact new taxes.

Reply to this commentLinkReport Abuse
Fight On!
   08/06/11 11:09

JPK, so true. The left is salivating over the $70 Billion of Apple. I can hear the greedy big gov't Democrats oinking at the trough of taxpayer wealth. I don't know what is more descriptive of Democrats: "parasites" or "cancerous tumors" sucking the prosperity out of our economy.

It's just a matter of time before these cancer cells (or leeches) attach themselves to the capitalistic host.

Reply to this commentLinkReport Abuse
   08/06/11 12:35

Since failure to compromise is all the rage on talk radio in Chicago (Obama land) this morning, one should be relieved that S&P went with AA+ instead of AA. There, isn't that so much better? (/s)

About the talk of failure to compromise, that debt ceiling deal is the soul of compromise and what compromising the facts looks like. One of those facts is that taxes can't possibly fix spending.

Reply to this commentLinkReport Abuse
Elizabeth Tennquist
   08/06/11 07:25

I would not downplay this event as simply a small insignificant cut, even though admittedly it is not a huge event, this demonstates that at least S&P is looking to aggressively and actively monitor the U.S. fiscal environment more honestly (technically, we should have lost our AAA status years ago..)

So, one could say that this is like a credit score slipping from 800 to 795 except that it feels and looks like a credit score that was 690 and just fell to 600.

It's real ugly.

Reply to this commentLinkReport Abuse
DOOM161
   08/06/11 14:47

But by Washington math, they upgreded us to AAAA rating.

Reply to this commentLinkReport Abuse
Marco
   08/07/11 00:01

I have heard calls for the resignation of Tax Cheat Tim, but I'm glad to see that some are finally suggesting that perhaps we cannot tolerate another 17 months of the Big Enchilada himself. Can someone think of a way that a bipartisan (even international) grand bargain might be struck to return him to private life posthaste? Biden is a dummy, sure, but he would listen to saner voices, and, deep down, I don't believe that he wants to see this country ruined.

Reply to this commentLinkReport Abuse
Sherman
   12/07/11 01:49

Nobody here seems to have a problem with these corrupt racketeering agencies. Serious investors don't go by them anyway. Go read their disclaimers.

Reply to this commentLinkReport Abuse

Add a Comment

Already Registered? Log In Here.


The content of this field is kept private and will not be shown publicly.


* Designates a required field.
© National Review Online 2012
All Rights Reserved.
Subscriptions
NR / Print
NR / Digital

Gift Subscriptions
NR / Print
NR / Digital
NR Apps
iPhone/iPad
Android

NRO Apps
iPhone
Support Us
Donate
Media Kit
Contact