Yes I have, thankyou. My thesis isnt directly on the GFC (its to do with the Basel Accord - risk management) so I havent gone into every single regulation and policy that contibuted to the crash but I focused on the main ones. I think you are refering to the Leach-Bliley Act of 1999; though under Clinton he was the orginator to Bush who promoted home affordability. If you think anymore regulations are important, please let me know. Here is a snippet :)
The following discussion is primarily to inform readers of the catastrophe that has occurred to date as a result of little available equity in the market by providing a comprehensive analysis of the major events (focusing on the U.S) relative to this thesis topic. The point is, the main activity of banks is issuing mortgages and through successful risk management and regulation the world would have been in a much better financial and economic position. It is important to remember that this section was written for the intention to provide readers with a practical understanding of how deregulating the financial sector will have significantly negative long-term impacts on financial markets and ultimately investors, firms and economies; we need to correct market risk penalty structure to endorse risk management of financial instruments.
Mazumder and Ahmad (2010) and Sakbani (2010) provide excellent stories regarding the GFC and are utilised heavily for this discussion when filling in the necessary detail not other referenced. The most overlooked element that contributed to the GFC has been deregulation, specifically those policies derives from the U.S cabinet. It all started in 1977 and 1980 with respectively the Community Reinvestment Act and Depository Institutions Deregulation and Monetary Control Act (DIDMCA). The former act encouraged commercial banks and savings associations to extend loans and increase home ownership while the latter act preempted state interest rate caps which made high interest sub-prime mortgages legal. Likewise, in 1992 the American government passed the Federal Housing Enterprises Financial Safety and Soundness Act requiring government-sponsored organizations such as Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac (discussed later) to dedicate a portion of their funding to affordable housing leading to an overall increase in the number of pooled and securitised loans. These three acts were the foundation to the house of cards that inevitably would one day fall apart.
In addition, US Congress repealed the Glass Steagell Act of 1933 which prohibited a combination of commercial banking, investment banking and insurance activities within the same institution by establishing the Gramm-Leach-Bliley Act of 1999. A major function of the Gramm-Leach-Bliley Act was that non-banking financial institutions were not only able to form off-balance sheet entities but also were given privileges by not been required to hold capital in the same manner as banks. This process made it possible for these private financial institutions to bypass already implemented or upcoming regulation (at that time) such as the announced Basel II. In terms of significance, the replacing act allowed the house of cards to construct and grow by itself; ultimately leasing to regulatory arbitrage and the financial system explosion when the house of cards could no longer be sustained. These new laws and many others made the American dream possible, with not only high-income residents but also low-income residents and first-time home buyers able to afford their own home (Wagner 2010).
