By Cliff Potts
Editor-in-Chief, WPS News

When Barack Obama assumed the presidency in January 2009, the United States was in economic free fall. The housing market had collapsed, unemployment was rising rapidly, and millions of homeowners were trapped in negative equity through no fault of their own. The public expectation was clear: stabilize the economy, hold financial criminals accountable, and provide meaningful relief to families devastated by a crisis engineered by the banking system.

What followed instead was a policy framework that saved Wall Street swiftly and decisively while offering limited, conditional, and often illusory assistance to homeowners. The result was not merely a failure of execution but a structural decision to preserve the existing financial order at the expense of those it had already harmed.

The Underwater Homeowner Reality

By the height of the housing collapse, nearly one-third of mortgaged homeowners were underwater, owing more on their homes than their properties were worth. This condition severely restricted mobility, destroyed household wealth, and turned routine financial setbacks into foreclosure events. These outcomes were not driven by individual irresponsibility but by systemic fraud: predatory lending, securitization of defective mortgages, falsified ratings, and deceptive sales practices that regulators failed to stop.

Despite this reality, federal policy consistently framed homeowner distress as a secondary concern. Relief programs were designed to mitigate the pace of foreclosures rather than prevent them, treating displaced families as a variable to be managed rather than people to be protected.

Policy Design That Favored Banks

The Obama administration’s flagship homeowner assistance effort, the Home Affordable Modification Program (HAMP), was publicly promoted as a lifeline for struggling borrowers. Internally, however, it functioned primarily as a financial stabilization mechanism for banks. Treasury officials later acknowledged that the program was intended to “foam the runway” for financial institutions—slowing foreclosures just enough to allow banks to absorb losses gradually.

This design choice had predictable consequences. Millions of homeowners were funneled into trial modifications that never became permanent, often after being instructed to miss payments to qualify. Foreclosures continued at scale, while banks benefited from time, liquidity, and federal support.

Bailouts Without Accountability

While homeowners navigated bureaucratic limbo, financial institutions received immediate and unconditional rescue. The Troubled Asset Relief Program (TARP) injected hundreds of billions of dollars into major banks, restoring balance sheets and market confidence. Firms such as Bank of America received massive public assistance while continuing global expansion and investment activity.

Critically, these bailouts were not paired with criminal accountability. Despite extensive evidence of fraud and misrepresentation within the financial sector, the Department of Justice declined to prosecute senior executives. Instead, enforcement actions took the form of civil settlements paid by shareholders, not decision-makers. No major Wall Street executive served jail time for conduct that erased trillions in household wealth.

This outcome was not accidental. Senior officials openly expressed concern that prosecutions could destabilize the financial system. The implicit conclusion was that certain institutions—and the individuals who ran them—were too important to face criminal consequences.

Preserving a Destructive System

The cumulative effect of these choices was the preservation of a financial architecture that rewards risk concentration, socializes losses, and shields elites from accountability. Banks emerged from the crisis larger and more consolidated than before. Asset prices recovered rapidly, benefiting those with capital, while wage growth and household recovery lagged.

For homeowners, particularly in working-class and minority communities, the damage was enduring. Homeownership rates fell to generational lows, racial wealth gaps widened, and millions were permanently displaced from the primary vehicle of middle-class wealth accumulation.

Obama’s administration did enact regulatory reforms, most notably the Dodd-Frank Act, but these measures did not fundamentally alter the incentives or power structure of the financial system. The absence of criminal prosecutions reinforced moral hazard and signaled that large-scale financial misconduct would not be met with personal consequences.

Why This Matters

The question is not whether the Obama administration prevented economic collapse—it did. The question is at what cost, and to whom. By choosing stability over justice and continuity over transformation, the administration effectively ratified a system that had already proven itself capable of mass harm.

This decision shaped public trust for a generation. It contributed to widespread cynicism, fueled populist backlash across the political spectrum, and left millions convinced that the system is designed to protect the powerful while disciplining everyone else.

Conclusion

Barack Obama did not create the financial crisis, but his administration determined how its consequences would be distributed. The record shows a clear pattern: rapid rescue for financial institutions, limited relief for homeowners, and near-total immunity for financial executives. This was not an unavoidable outcome but a policy choice.

In preserving the existing economic order, the administration ensured that the structural conditions leading to the crisis remained intact. For underwater homeowners and displaced families, the legacy is not recovery but abandonment—a reminder that in moments of systemic failure, power often determines who is saved and who is sacrificed.

For more social commentary, please see Occupy 2.5 at https://Occupy25.com

APA References

Barofsky, N. (2012). Bailout: An insider’s account of how Washington abandoned Main Street while rescuing Wall Street. Free Press.

Greenwald, G. (2013). The untouchables: How the Obama administration protected Wall Street from prosecutions. The Guardian.

People’s Policy Project. (2017). Destruction of Black wealth during the Obama presidency. Washington, DC.

U.S. Department of the Treasury. (2009). Making home affordable program: Program performance report.

Zillow Research. (2014). Negative equity report: Nearly 10 million homes still underwater.

Discover more from WPS News

Subscribe to get the latest posts sent to your email.