Rick Santorum’s Housing Hypocrisy

The GOP candidate wants government out of housing and Fannie and Freddie eliminated—but bought his first home with a government-backed mortgage.

2012 GOP presidential candidate Rick Santorum<a href="http://www.flickr.com/photos/22007612@N05/6236330273/">Gage Skidmore</a>/Flickr

Fight disinformation: Sign up for the free Mother Jones Daily newsletter and follow the news that matters.

Rick Santorum wants the government out of every aspect of Americans’ lives—especially the housing market. He pledges to eliminate Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac, the twin government housing giants that help guarantee 90 percent of all new mortgages in America. He wants to “let capitalism work” and allow the housing market to “find its bottom.” Only then, he says, will the recovery begin. It’s a plan that would make Adam Smith proud.

Yet Santorum wasn’t always so opposed to government intervention in housing. In a deal that’s gone unreported during his presidential run, Santorum bought his first house in 1983 with a cut-rate government-backed mortgage, according to records compiled by the campaign of Sen. Harris Wofford (D-Penn.), who Santorum defeated in 1994. He received his loan through a state program to boost homeownership among low- and middle-income families. Santorum, in other words, benefited from a program whose mission mirrored that of Fannie and Freddie, the companies he now rails against and wants to dissolve. (Santorum spokesman Hogan Gidley did not respond to a request for comment.) 

Santorum, then a law student and a Pennsylvania state Senate aide, landed the mortgage through a program run by the Pennsylvania Housing Finance Agency (PHFA). He used the $41,600 loan to buy and renovate a three-story brick house in Harrisburg, the state capital. According to a 1994 Philadelphia Inquirer story, the interest rate on the government-backed mortgage was 13.08 percent—more than 3 percentage points lower than the market rate at the time.

The PHFA’s loan program was the first of its kind in the state. State bonds backstopped the mortgages, only lenders approved by Fannie and Freddie could issue them, and families earning more than $35,000 did not qualify, according to PHFA records. (Santorum’s income totaled $27,000 the year he got the loan.) The loan’s promise of a low, fixed interest rate was so enticing to working and middle class homebuyers that, as the Inquirer noted, the PHFA’s board decided not to publicize the program, fearing a “potential problem” like a mad rush on the day the loans were made available.

Despite the lack of publicity, Pennsylvanians camped out overnight in lawn chairs in hopes of getting cheap PHFA mortgages. Only a limited number were made available and they went fast. But Santorum managed to snag one. The Wofford records, which contain opposition research on Santorum, suggest that Santorum potentially got his discounted PHFA loan via “political favors,” or that his state senate job “could have tipped him off early” to the program. When asked about his loan by the Inquirer, he told the paper he’d heard about the government-backed mortgage program through his job in the state senate. But, he added, “I can guarantee you I got no special treatment.”

His discount Pennsylvania loan wasn’t the only time Santorum has been accused of receiving special treatment on a mortgage. As the American Prospect reported in 2006, Santorum secured a $500,000 mortgage from a private investment firm called Philadelphia Trust Company, even though he didn’t meet the firm’s loan criteria. Company brass had donated $24,000 to Santorum PACs and the bank’s CEO, Michael Crofton, chaired a charity of Santorum’s.

At the time he got the Philadelphia Trust loan, Santorum was a rising Republican Senator on the banking committee, giving him oversight of Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac. Santorum knew the mission of the companies well, if only because the PHFA program he benefited from decades earlier aligned with one of the central reasons Fannie and Freddie exist in the first place: to help low- and middle-income families buy homes. In the case of Fannie and Freddie, the two companies don’t issue loans but instead buy up mortgages by the millions in order to free up lenders to make loans to new homeowners.

For much of his Senate career, Santorum supported Fannie and Freddie in this mission. He even argued for more government involvement in boosting homeownership among low- and middle-income Americans. In a 2000 law review article, he said “compassionate conservatism” must include new government policies to “lift greater numbers of the disenfranchised out of poverty.” Chief among those, he went on, was “access to safe and affordable housing,” including homeownership and renting.

In a July 2005 Senate banking committee hearing about imposing more regulation on Fannie and Freddie, Santorum said the two companies should be reformed with an eye “toward taking a more active role in creating housing opportunities for low and moderate income families.” And in the mid-2000s, Santorum also backed the Community Development Homeownership Tax Credit Act, which would have spurred the building and renovating of new homes for disadvantaged families. Fannie and Freddie backed the measure, but it never became law.

Now, Santorum slams those same pro-homeownership policies as drivers of the mid-2000s housing bubble and the market meltdown that ensued. “Part of it was government regulation and government markets that caused the bubble, and that caused the loose lending practices that led to the problems,” Santorum told MSNBC’s Ed Schultz last fall.

On the campaign trail, Santorum says he’s the lone candidate “who, throughout [his] career, has not only checked the box on conservative issues but has fought for conservative issues.” When it comes to government and the housing market, he has checked a few liberal boxes as well. And as his 1983 mortgage deal shows, Santorum didn’t let his conservative beliefs get in the way of a good deal.

AN IMPORTANT UPDATE

We’re falling behind our online fundraising goals and we can’t sustain coming up short on donations month after month. Perhaps you’ve heard? It is impossibly hard in the news business right now, with layoffs intensifying and fancy new startups and funding going kaput.

The crisis facing journalism and democracy isn’t going away anytime soon. And neither is Mother Jones, our readers, or our unique way of doing in-depth reporting that exists to bring about change.

Which is exactly why, despite the challenges we face, we just took a big gulp and joined forces with the Center for Investigative Reporting, a team of ace journalists who create the amazing podcast and public radio show Reveal.

If you can part with even just a few bucks, please help us pick up the pace of donations. We simply can’t afford to keep falling behind on our fundraising targets month after month.

Editor-in-Chief Clara Jeffery said it well to our team recently, and that team 100 percent includes readers like you who make it all possible: “This is a year to prove that we can pull off this merger, grow our audiences and impact, attract more funding and keep growing. More broadly, it’s a year when the very future of both journalism and democracy is on the line. We have to go for every important story, every reader/listener/viewer, and leave it all on the field. I’m very proud of all the hard work that’s gotten us to this moment, and confident that we can meet it.”

Let’s do this. If you can right now, please support Mother Jones and investigative journalism with an urgently needed donation today.

payment methods

AN IMPORTANT UPDATE

We’re falling behind our online fundraising goals and we can’t sustain coming up short on donations month after month. Perhaps you’ve heard? It is impossibly hard in the news business right now, with layoffs intensifying and fancy new startups and funding going kaput.

The crisis facing journalism and democracy isn’t going away anytime soon. And neither is Mother Jones, our readers, or our unique way of doing in-depth reporting that exists to bring about change.

Which is exactly why, despite the challenges we face, we just took a big gulp and joined forces with the Center for Investigative Reporting, a team of ace journalists who create the amazing podcast and public radio show Reveal.

If you can part with even just a few bucks, please help us pick up the pace of donations. We simply can’t afford to keep falling behind on our fundraising targets month after month.

Editor-in-Chief Clara Jeffery said it well to our team recently, and that team 100 percent includes readers like you who make it all possible: “This is a year to prove that we can pull off this merger, grow our audiences and impact, attract more funding and keep growing. More broadly, it’s a year when the very future of both journalism and democracy is on the line. We have to go for every important story, every reader/listener/viewer, and leave it all on the field. I’m very proud of all the hard work that’s gotten us to this moment, and confident that we can meet it.”

Let’s do this. If you can right now, please support Mother Jones and investigative journalism with an urgently needed donation today.

payment methods

We Recommend

Latest

Sign up for our free newsletter

Subscribe to the Mother Jones Daily to have our top stories delivered directly to your inbox.

Get our award-winning magazine

Save big on a full year of investigations, ideas, and insights.

Subscribe

Support our journalism

Help Mother Jones' reporters dig deep with a tax-deductible donation.

Donate