The below item was posted shortly before the House voted against the $700 billion Big Finance bailout 228 to 225. Ninety-five Democrats joined 133 Republicans to bring down the bill. And Representative Brad Sherman was one of those Democrats.....
For my money, the $700 billion bailout plan is being rushed through Congress with too much haste. There's been little debate of the plan's basics and not much consideration of alternative approaches to the administration's preferred choice: buying up the bad paper of Big Finance firms that screwed up royally. Yet few in Washington--including John McCain and Barack Obama--want to go out on a limb. Any politician who stands up to Wall Street and opposes this thing has to fear being blamed should the plan not go through and the financial meltdown worsen. In politics, there's safety in numbers. So if everyone jumps aboard and this plan doesn't work out, nobody stands to lose politically. It's the safe political play: get on the train with everyone else.
But there are some legislators who are saying, slow down. House Republicans tried to put on the brakes last week. But their alternative--cut taxes--was a non sequitur. On the Democratic side, Representative Brad Sherman has pulled together a Skeptics Caucus. He drew 30 or so House Democrats to meetings on the weekend. Not enough to block the Paulson Express. But not an insignificant number. And Sherman released a memo detailing his objections to the bailout.
Since there's not much media coverage of the Slow-Down crowd, allow me--as a public service--to post the full document right here, The taxpayers need more, not less, of a debate, before allowing the Bush Administration to start a $700 billion spree.
From Rep. Sherman:
Million Dollar a Month Salaries
Tens of Billions to the Bank of China
The Troubling Secrets of the Bailout Bill
It is widely known that the Bailout Bill does not provide any source of revenue to pay for its enormous cost. It is equally well known that the Bailout Bill will not modify our bankruptcy laws in any way or provide any mechanism by which the terms of a mortgage can be changed without the consent of the owner of the mortgage. The purpose of this article is to outline other troubling provisions.
Stop the Panic. We do not have to pass a bad bill on Sunday. The last two sections of this article demonstrate that the sky will not fall if we don't pass a bad bill Sunday night.
Hundreds of Billions Will Be Used to Buy Toxic Assets Currently Held by Foreign Investors
Under the Bill, the Administration can buy any toxic asset from any U.S.-headquartered financial institution for any price. Some think that only U.S. investors will be bailed out.
Major foreign investors have already been assured that they can benefit from the bailout. Under the Bill, the Bank of China can sell a portfolio of toxic assets to a U.S.-headquartered investment bank on Monday, and that investment bank can then sell those same assets to the Treasury on Tuesday. The foreign financial press indicates that foreign investors are sure that they will get at least tens of billions of dollars.
The Bill should contain a provision stating that the Treasury can buy only assets proven to be held by an American investor on September 20, 2008. This provision has been rejected by the Administration, the same Administration that has promised foreign investors that they too will be bailed out.
While the transparency provisions of the Bill are generally good, they do not require disclosure of how long the seller of a toxic asset owned it or from whom they purchased it. Accordingly, if the Treasury buys a package of toxic assets from a U.S. investment bank for $20 billion, the amount paid and the nature of the assets purchased will be disclosed--but the fact that those same assets had been owned by the Bank of China just two days prior, will not be disclosed.
Million Dollar a Month Salaries Will Continue
The Bill contains limits on the use of certain esoteric formulas to compute executive bonuses at bailed-out banks. It has some limits on golden parachute contracts for departing executives. It provides that certain executives who benefited from fraud may lose those benefits in the event that such fraud is proven in court.
The Bill clearly allows the payment of regular, plain vanilla salaries to executives of bailed-out firms in any amount. Million-dollar a month salaries will continue. And any executive who feels that his bonus is too low is free to ask his firm for a multi-million dollar increase in base salary.
The President stated that "taxpayer dollars will not be used" to pay enormous compensation to Wall Street executives. The President's words were chosen carefully. Bailed-out banks are free to use all their other assets to pay million-dollar a month salaries and to use the bailout money to pay all their other expenses.
Five Member Oversight Board Includes 3 Bush Appointees
Much has been discussed about the Financial Stability Oversight Board provided by the Bill. The five member Board consists of 3 Bush appointees, one person jointly appointed by the Speaker and Senate Majority Leader, and one jointly appointed by the House Minority Leader and the Senate Minority Leader.
Few if Any Homeowners Will Get Mortgage Relief
As you know, the Bill will not contain any provision allowing the terms of a mortgage to be changed without the consent of all the investors who own the mortgage. However, we are told that by investing $700 billion in toxic assets the federal government will be in a position to provide reasonable loan modifications to the homeowners whose mortgages it buys.
As well detailed in a document from the Center for Responsible Lending , few homeowners will benefit from this provision. This is because the Treasury will chiefly purchase mortgage-backed securities which will make the federal government one of several co-owners of millions of mortgages. Whether or not any mortgages modified will be determined by the loan servicer acting on behalf of all the various investors who own a piece of the mortgage. That is why Section 108(d) states in part "The Secretary shall request loan servicers servicing the mortgage loans to avoid preventable foreclosures... [Emphasis added.]" Congress has already requested all loan servicers nationwide to avoid preventable foreclosures, so an additional request from the Treasury is unlikely to change current behavior.
All $700 Billion Can Be "Invested" Before January 20
The Bill provides that after the first $250 billion is spent President Bush needs to sign a letter to get the next $100 billion. Some therefore believe that the President is only receiving $350 billion that he can expend now, and the rest depends on Congressional action.
The Bill provides that the second half of the $700 billion can be spent unless Congress passes a resolution of disapproval within a short period. Such a resolution would have to pass the House and then the Senate and would then be vetoed. Then the veto would have to be overridden by both the House and the Senate. Unless the resolution clears all these hurdles, the President is free to spend the second half of the $700 billion.
The fact that such a resolution of disapproval is given fast-track procedures simply means that the inevitable veto and the inevitable failure to override that veto will happen quickly.
Paulson has said that he doesn't expect to spend more than $50 billion per month. Paulson clearly could spend the entire $700 billion by January 20th. The Merrill Lynch $50 billion sale took place in roughly two days--and both parties were negotiating hard for the best deal. Paulson's announced purpose is to pay generously for the toxic assets held by Wall Street firms, to help those firms prosper--so negotiations should be even quicker.
This Administration has a history of using to the hilt every authority granted by Congress. The Administration has threatened to veto any Bill which contains a provision which would prevent them from spending the full $700 billion by January 20th.
Taxpayers will get little or no equity upside--and will probably overpay for what they do get.
Section 112(d) of the Bill states that whenever the Treasury purchases toxic assets, it must also receive, as part of the deal, at least some warrants or senior debt instruments. However, a couple of dozen small warrants or a tiny senior debt instrument fully fulfills this statutory requirement. It is totally up to the Treasury to decide whether the price being paid for a combination of toxic assets and warrants is appropriate.
In the AIG deal, the taxpayers received 80% of the company. In contrast, Paulson did not want any warrants to be received under this bailout program. He is being dragged kicking and screaming into a provision that requires him to get some warrants, but allows him to get as few as he wishes.
Meaningful Regulatory Reform and Corporate Governance Reform Will be Subject to Filibuster in the 111th Congress/Bill Contains No Applicable Fast-track Provision
We are promised that next year we will pass the legislation to make sure that this travesty does not repeat itself. We are promised strong, tough legislation that Wall Street has traditionally hated dealing with regulatory reform and corporate governance reform.
Any tough regulatory reform or corporate governance reform proposed in the 111th Congress will be subject to regular Senate rules. Wall Street may not be able to defeat good reform--instead, they will delay, and then dilute. It will take only 41 senators to insist on delaying any legislation until it is diluted. This Bill makes sure that Wall Street has the liquidity necessary to hire 4100 lobbyists.
We Have Time To Improve the Bill
It is in the interest of Wall Street to cause us to panic and pass bad legislation.
No one can say for certain whether our economy will be better off next year if we pass the Bill, or if we defeat it. Only by avoiding a panic vote Sunday, can we write a good bill next week.
The White House declared that the sky would fall if we did not pass a bill by last Wednesday. They also said they would veto a bill with significant controls on the Administration, or on the salaries of executives of bailed-out firms. If not for Administration interference, we would have passed a good bill already.
Last Thursday night, there was a precipitous decline in the likelihood that Congress would immediately rubber-stamp Bush's proposal. On Friday morning, there was not a precipitous drop in the markets. Most stock markets went up Friday, indicating that investors would buy equity in the American economy even if the Bill stalled. It is, however, true that the stock price of a few investment banks depends on passing the bill immediately. We can and we should take a few days to get this right.
We have time to consider bankruptcy reform, revenue to pay for part of the Bill's cost, and other improvements.
Experts Say: Congress Should Not Panic
"We ask Congress not to rush, to hold appropriate hearings, and to carefully consider the right course of action." -- 400 eminent Professors of Economics, organized by Professor John Cochrane (University of Chicago). September 25, 2008
"There is a kind of suggestion in the Paulson proposal that if only we provide enough money to financial markets, this problem will disappear. But that does nothing to address the fundamental problem of bleeding foreclosures and holes in the balance sheets of banks." -- Joseph Stiglitz (Nobel Laureate, Columbia University). September 26, 2008
"I totally disagree that this needs to be done this week. It's more important to get it right." -- Alan Blinder (Princeton University).
"I have doubts that the $700 billion bailout if enacted, would work." -- William M. Isaac, (Former Chairman, Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation).
![[RSS]](http://blogs.cqpolitics.com/templates/images/rss_icon.gif){kind=icon}
![[ARCHIVES]](http://blogs.cqpolitics.com/templates/images/archives_icon.png){kind=icon}
Comments
DC,
Not just a public service.
An excellent piece of work.
This has to get more coverage.
Thanks
Posted by: capt
| September 29, 2008 12:56 PM
The whole thing reminds me of the Patriot act.
If they don't have the time to do it right - they will never have the time to do it over so it will be just another piece of crud impossible to undo.
Posted by: capt
| September 29, 2008 12:58 PM
Looks like they're gonna hafta come up with something more, or something less to get it through the house.
Dow at negative 550 for the day and falling...
I ain't skeered!
-T
Posted by: Hajji
| September 29, 2008 2:42 PM
Gov. Eliot Spitzer's eerie prediction on our current economic crisis, written Feb, 08!
"When history tells the story of the subprime lending crisis and recounts its devastating effects on the lives of so many innocent homeowners, the Bush administration will not be judged favorably. The tale is still unfolding, but when the dust settles, it will be judged as a willing accomplice to the lenders who went to any lengths in their quest for profits. So willing, in fact, that it used the power of the federal government in an unprecedented assault on state legislatures, as well as on state attorneys general and anyone else on the side of consumers."
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2008/02/13/AR2008021302783.html
(My take is that Lenders suckered average folks into mortgages which they could afford at first, then Lenders raised their monthly rate to an amount they could no longer afford! Because there were no Regulations or Oversight, those houses were then foreclosed on and then re-sold again to some other unsuspecting victim, until the whole deck of cards has collapsed. What is compelling, is that before the total collapse, CEO's pay themselves millions, sometimes billions as compensation pay for the said collapse!)
For instance, "In 2007, Wall Street's five biggest firms-- Bear Stearns, Goldman Sachs, Lehman Brothers, Merrill Lynch, and Morgan Stanley - paid a record $39 billion in bonuses to themselves." From ABC's Political Punch
Could that be one of the reasons why these companies fail, the enormously high salaries paid to CEO's which actually and in the end bankrupt these companies!
Posted by: bacaangel
| September 29, 2008 3:08 PM
DC,
Wow, finally something we (you, me, and the House Republicans) can agree on.
Right now I sit listening to Barney Frank blame the Republican MINORITY for failure to pass the bill in it's current state. The Dems - if they had any "cojones", and having the potential votes - could have passed this on their own!
And to further shine light on the intrinsic inadequacies of the Democrat party, Nancy Pelosi took several minutes before the vote to blame Republicans for the crisis, and gloat about the impending vote -OOPS !!!
Note to Dems - Be careful what you wish for!!!
Posted by: denmac
| September 29, 2008 3:16 PM
Transcript of Pelosi's speech - the Dems have officially given up the right to claim the the Reublicans are politicizing ANYTHING !!!!!
http://www.swamppolitics.com/news/politics/blog/2008/09/bailout_sunk_by_pelosi_speech.html
BTW - Barney Frank is unctious ... and downright CREEPY.
Posted by: denmac
| September 29, 2008 3:23 PM
OMG! There's a Woolly Mammoth hair in my Bronto-Burger!
WIIIILLLMAAAA!!!
Posted by: Hajji
| September 29, 2008 3:45 PM
Hajjii,
I liked you better when you followed Johnny Quest around.
Cheers
Posted by: denmac
| September 29, 2008 3:49 PM
According to Barry, this is the "worst financial crisis since the Great Depression".
Once again, he's exaggerating for political gain -
Dow is down 595.78 as of 4:00PM, not even in top ten worst percentage loss days on record.
I'm glad not to be part of a political party - Democrat - that aims to prosper by losing wars and collapsing economies!!
Posted by: denmac
| September 29, 2008 4:00 PM
Markets Sept. 29; Market Close
DJIA 10,365.45 -777.68
NASDAQ 1,983.73 -199.61
S&P 500 1,107.06 -106.21
______________
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/jacob-heilbrunn/worse-than-hoover_b_130301.html
Jacob Heilbrunn
So the verdict is in. The House's failure to pass the bailout bill means that George W. Bush's record will not be as bad as Herbert Hoover's. It will be worse.
When Hoover entered office, he called a meeting of economists and business leaders to discuss how the country should best deal with prosperity. Then came October 1929. The stock market plummeted and never really recovered until after World War II. At least Hoover didn't trigger the collapse himself and he didn't mire the country in a trillion dollar war.
_______________________
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/jacob-heilbrunn/worse-than-hoover_b_130301.html
Worst
President
EVER!
Posted by: Hajji
| September 29, 2008 4:28 PM
Hajjii,
Since I wasn't alive when Hoover was President, I'll have to take your word for it.
Cheers
Posted by: denmac
| September 29, 2008 4:35 PM
Hajjii,
RE: "The House's failure to pass the bailout bill"
Did I miss something? Is the White House now endowed with the power to vote on and pass bills before congress?
According to Pelosi, prior to the actual vote, the White House caused the collapse, and only the Dem Congress would pass the bailout bill.
Now that Pelosi/Frank/Emmanuel/Reid and Dems failed to pass the bill (with 95 Nays), will they step aside so that the White House can?
Worst
Do Nothing Congress
EVER!
Posted by: denmac
| September 29, 2008 4:41 PM
Oops
"What Senator McCain was able to do was to help bring all of the parties to the table, including the House Republicans, whose votes were needed to pass this."
-- McCain campaign strategist Steve Schmidt, on Meet the Press yesterday, taking early credit for getting House Republicans to support the bailout bill.
In the end, the bill failed a vote in the House of Representatives with a majority of House Democrats supporting the bill but two-thirds of House Republicans voting against the measure.
http://tinyurl.com/3hwswp
*****
The gaffe that hurts all Americans - keeps on gaffing?
Blame someone -anyone - tell the peolpe the GOP had their wittle fweelings hurt so they will hold their breath until America votes for McCain?
Maybe it will work?
Posted by: capt
| September 29, 2008 5:29 PM
i am glad that this so-called "bailout" did not pass.
it is just another bushco rip-off.
BLACK MONDAY?
As one Wall Street veteran explained to me, "I don't see one penny of that $700 billion ending up helping the broader economy. I see it being used to prop up share prices so the insiders can salvage as much as possible when dumping their shares".
Indeed, the $700 billion is just part of a massive "pump and dump" scheme engineered with the tacit approval of the US Treasury and the Federal Reserve. Once the banksters have offloaded their fraudulent securities and crappy paper on Uncle Sam, they will do whatever they need to do pad the bottom line and drive their stocks up. That means they will shovel capital into hard assets, foreign currencies, gold, interest rate swaps, carry trade swindles, and Swiss bank accounts. The notion that they will recapitalize so they can provide loans to US consumers and businesses in a slumping economy is a pipedream.
http://www.counterpunch.org/whitney09292008.html
----
BAILOUT PLAN REJECTED
One lawmaker who voted against the bill, Rep. John Culberson, R-Texas, said the measure would leave a huge burden on taxpayers. "This legislation is giving us a choice between bankrupting our children and bankrupting a few of these big financial institutions on Wall Street that made bad decisions,"
Some Democrats voted against the bill for not doing enough to help taxpayers facing foreclosure or unemployment and accused proponents of moving too fast.
http://tinyurl.com/3pf3fc
Posted by: as_if!
| September 29, 2008 5:33 PM
FINAL VOTE RESULTS FOR BAILOUT
http://clerk.house.gov/evs/2008/roll674.xml
pelosi voted in favor of the bailout.
Posted by: as_if!
| September 29, 2008 5:34 PM
The Sarah Palin pick has not worn well with North Carolina voters, as her net favorability has gone from +8 to -3 in the course of three weeks, for a negative shift of 11 points.
She is particularly unpopular with independents in North Carolina. 46% of them now say her selection makes them less likely to vote for John McCain compared to just 36% who say her spot on the ticket makes them more inclined to support him. Even among Republicans enthusiasm for her has dropped from 75% to 67%.
The economic troubles are the main thing driving Barack Obama's movement in North Carolina, but Sarah Palin is not doing John McCain any favors here.
Last week PPP found a similar 12 point drop in Palin's favorability in Colorado.
http://tinyurl.com/3n3vqj
Posted by: capt
| September 29, 2008 5:40 PM
Swing District Congressmen Doomed Bailout
This was predictable, I suppose, but it's remarkable to see how strong a relationship there is between today's failed vote on the bailout and the competitive nature of different House races.
Among 38 incumbent congressmen in races rated as "toss-up" or "lean" by Swing State Project, just 8 voted for the bailout as opposed to 30 against: a batting average of .211.
By comparison, the vote among congressmen who don't have as much to worry about was essentially even: 197 for, 198 against.
http://tinyurl.com/3ohgzr
Posted by: capt
| September 29, 2008 5:42 PM
Bailout or Politics?
The bailout sucked from the get-go. Looting, pure and simple.
The DEMs bought into it. The GOP derailed it. Wall Street Tanked.
Blaming Pelosi or Obama doesn't work. It's not her fault that Boehner rallied the votes against it. It is her fault that she tried to do what the admin said was necessary.
Tanked? Wall Street tanked two years ago. The only reason the DOW is above 10,000 is because the dollar is below 50 cents. Given a strong dollar, the DOW would be about 5500 right now.
McCain isn't getting anywhere. He sounded like Palin on ABC yesterday. He opens his mouth and his polls drop another percent. He has until Friday to play an all-in hand somewhere. After Palin shows up for the debate he drops another 5 points. I'm pretty sure there are few rascists that will choose a blithering bimbo over Obama.
Congress had better get back to work and strengthen this bill for the people. And both parties better get back to negotiations.
1. Lend the banks what they need to meet minimal capital requirements.
a. Criminal accountability for falling short now and for failing to maintain.
b. Remove the bank redregulations of the 90's that allowed them to play Vegas with deposits.
c. Remove the deregulation that allows speculation on energy and housing. It isn't the value of the housing and mortgages that failed it was the mortgage backed derivatives (Say POKER CHIP) that failed. It isn't oil in short supply that hit $142 per barrel, it was gambling on the commodity that shot it up.
d. Stock in the banks, purchased at their current low value, which will increase sharply after they receive the money.
Bankers are like dogs. They respond well to discipline and harsh rules.
2. Bailout the homeowners. If the government supports the people, the bankers will sleep very well tonight.
a. Bankruptcy needs a second look. Allow the courts to reopen cases involving home foreclosure.
b. Extend the foreclosure bill that was written this summer that gives relief through the FHA to upside down home values.
3. Show the people that someone is accountable. Bush is responsible. Bernake is responsible. Paulson is responsible. In 1991 Bush invaded Iraq to take the heat off his son Neil and his involvement in Silverado S&L. In 2008 Bush gives us the bailout plea just as brother Jeb is hired by Lehman Brothers. It is time for some very serious prison terms and given the severity of the situation justice should be looking for at least 250 culpable individuals.
Giving away the kind of money they are asking for ranges from insanity to reality shifting.
Posted by: geof01
| September 29, 2008 5:42 PM
John McCain's presidential campaign claimed credit as Congress readied Monday to vote on an emergency economic package, but Democrats said the Republican's last-ditch intervention had been no help.
Mitt Romney, McCain's erstwhile rival for the Republican nomination, said the deal on a Wall Street bailout worth up to 700 billion dollars would never have happened without the Arizona senator.
Speaking on NBC television, the former Massachusetts governor said "this bill would not have been agreed to had it not been for John McCain."
"That doesn't mean that he's the only guy doing that. And there many people ... who have been critical to it," Romney said.
"But, you know, this is a bipartisan accomplishment, a bipartisan success. And if people want to get something done in Washington, they just watch John McCain," he said.
"He's been the guy whose name is at the top of major pieces of legislation for a long time."
http://tinyurl.com/3zulhg
Posted by: capt
| September 29, 2008 5:44 PM
It is the "BUSH Bail Out"
It should fail.
We the people are broke and we cannot afford to help out Wall Street millionaires with more corporate welfare.
The rich are just too expensive these days.
Posted by: capt
| September 29, 2008 5:47 PM
I sent that post to ten senators. My house rep does whatever Bush wants so I know how he voted, yep, listed with the noes. What does that say about Bush?
Posted by: geof01
| September 29, 2008 5:51 PM
So is Bush for it or against it? It's his desire and McCain takes the credit and then his party dumps it.
Damn, they weren't counting on the 95 DEMS who said NO. They wanted it to pass and say they were against it and balme it on Pelosi and Obama in the Spring.
OOPS! or should I say UPS, since it was a failure to deliver.
Posted by: geof01
| September 29, 2008 5:55 PM
Geof01,
I think you nailed it.
Posted by: capt
| September 29, 2008 6:00 PM
If the bailout bill was 13 votes short of passage, and 95 Dems (the majority party since 2006) voted Nay, no one can blame the Republicans for the bill not passing.
When Steny Hoyer was asked why he didn't count votes prior to the roll call, he said "no one asked me to" !!!
Why can't Barney Frank just be straight (pardon the pun) with the American public, and say that the Dems had NO INTENTION of having the bill pass - for POLITICAL REASONS!
Posted by: denmac
| September 29, 2008 6:21 PM
I don't know anybody who contacted their congressperson to urge them to vote FOR the bailout.
I know a bunch who wrote, called or faxed them to vote "NO" or to take more time so the people wouldn't feel railroaded into a bad deal.
"Not now and not with MY money" was a common thread.
Indeed it IS the Bush/Paulson bailout. I would hazard a guess that more than a few congresscritters voted against the expressed wishes of their constituents.
I wonder how many of them are up for re-election.
-T
Posted by: Hajji
| September 29, 2008 6:39 PM
Hajji,
A complete breakdown follows below the fold.
http://tinyurl.com/3ohgzr
Posted by: capt
| September 29, 2008 6:45 PM
Capt,
Nice to know they'll listen to their constituents during an election year.
-T
Posted by: Hajji
| September 29, 2008 6:51 PM
"The Fight The Smears website, designed to set the record straight about Barack Hussein Obama, has actually made it worse by stating the Democrat presidential candidate was a Kenyan citizen until 1982
To quote the Fight The Smears website:
FactCheck.org Clarifies Barack’s Citizenship
“When Barack Obama Jr. was born on Aug. 4,1961, in Honolulu, Kenya was a British colony, still part of the United Kingdom’s dwindling empire. As a Kenyan native, Barack Obama Sr. was a British subject whose citizenship status was governed by The British Nationality Act of 1948. That same act governed the status of Obama Sr.‘s children.
Since Sen. Obama has neither renounced his U.S. citizenship nor sworn an oath of allegiance to Kenya, his Kenyan citizenship automatically expired on Aug. 4,1982.”
http://therightperspective.com/wordpress/?p=131
OOPS
Posted by: denmac
| September 29, 2008 6:56 PM
A helpful reader named Matt Glassman passed along the fact that, among 26 congressmen NOT running for re-election (almost all of whom are Republicans), 23 voted in favor of the bill, as opposed to 2 against and one abstaining.
EDIT (4:24 PM): The count above may not be exact -- Eve Fairbanks finds 4 retiring Republicans who voted against the bill -- but the general point should stand.
Fivethirtyeight.com
Posted by: capt
| September 29, 2008 7:10 PM
http://voices.washingtonpost.com/thefix/2008/09/the_failure_of_the_financial.html?hpid=topnews
And, even a cursory glance at polling on the issue, shows why so many politicians voted against the bill.
In a recent USA Today/Gallup, just 22 percent of the sample said they wanted Congress to "pass a plan similar to what the Bush Administration has proposed" while 56 percent wanted Congress to pass something "different" (although what that different plan would be was not made clear) and 11 percent wanted Congress to take no action at all.
The results were slightly more mixed in a New York Times/CBS News poll where 42 percent said they approved of the government's financial rescue plan while 46 disapproved, and in the Post/ABC poll where 44 percent expressed approval for the plan and 42 percent disapproved.
The data suggest that this bill was far from a political winner for members of Congress set to face voters in 36 days.
______________
Posted by: Hajji
| September 29, 2008 7:12 PM
Pelosi Tips the Scales?
The more that I think about this, the more I think that the failure of the bailout package in Congress today was something of an inevitability -- perhaps the only way to right the perverse incentives that had been at work.
The Republicans' best-case scenario was the bill passing the House by one vote -- with as few as those votes as possible coming from Republicans.
Their worst-case scenario for them might have been ... what just happened this afternoon. Opposing the bailout had been a political freeroll before because it wasn't manifest to the public what the risks of a nay vote would be. But with the Dow having dropped 780 points today, the risks are now painfully obvious. What had looked to be a politically prudent position 24 hours ago now looks cavalier and reckless. And yet, the Republicans will still by and large will get blamed for putting us in this predicament in the first place. Plus, the failure of the bill is an embarrassment to John McCain...
Fivethirtyeight.com
Posted by: capt
| September 29, 2008 7:16 PM
So, how did we get a war inside the Republican party that may leave the economy in shambles? Look to the end of last week, when McCain made his odd Washington cameo.
First, a bit of subtext: the legacy of the Bush years is how politics trumped governance. McCain, egging on these Republican anti-Bush/Paulson insurgents during his brief return, was doing the politics-first, win-at-all-cost, dance. He was, in essence, telling Bush it was payback time (after all McCain had done, holding his nose, in a support role for W since 2004). Specific, unspoken instructions to Bush in that big White House blow up: give way (and lose face) as the new Republican party -- which McCain now claims to lead -- alters his Treasury Secretary's $700 billion bailout.
This will make McCain seem like the de facto president, filling a vaccum, giving him a huge election time boost -- maybe enough of a boost to win. Bush's response, screw you; I'm still in charge and, incidentally, I don't believe in reciprocity. Bush's position: Loyalty goes one way with me, it flows upward, and I'm still the President. I thought you got that, John.
__________________
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/ron-suskind/how-politics-trumped-gove_b_130380.html
Posted by: Hajji
| September 29, 2008 7:20 PM
Palin's troubles mount for McCain in White House
[...]
'EMBARRASSING'
The 44-year-old self-described hockey mom's image of homespun authenticity, which boosted McCain last month with a leap in support among white women, has been replaced by a less flattering image as a political neophyte and butt of jokes.
The popular TV sketch comedy show Saturday Night Live mocked Palin's assertion that governing Alaska gives her foreign policy experience because of its geographic proximity to Russia. Late-night television host David Letterman said Palin's meetings with world leaders at the United Nations looked like "take your daughter to work day."
Until last Tuesday, Palin, who would be a heartbeat away from the presidency if 72-year-old McCain were to win the election, had never met a foreign leader.
Conservative New York Times columnist David Brooks called her candidacy "embarrassing."
http://tinyurl.com/49dprr
Posted by: capt
| September 29, 2008 7:23 PM
New Yorker - having some fun with the cover:
http://tinyurl.com/4otchj
Posted by: capt
| September 29, 2008 7:25 PM
Your Money:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nK_cOCu1hrQ
Posted by: capt
| September 29, 2008 7:42 PM
I remeber the big shock to my parents when the price of a mug of coffee went from $0.05 to $0.10. What is it now, about $1.50 per small serving?
If so, then in those terms the dollar is now worth but three and one-third cents.
Just my $0.02 worth...
Posted by: David B. Benson
| September 29, 2008 7:43 PM
The Senate hasn't voted on this, and won't until Wednesday.
Obama needs to comment tomorrow and get the market to calm down. He has already told them to get it done. Good to know someone can be presidential.
And the SEC needs to monitor any trading done by congressmen today.
Too bad for us all that the greedy bastards that caused this did a little coitus interruptus and pulled out too much, too soon today.
Take out their money fast, cause an 8% drop, and then get reimbursed with the bailout that is more inevitable than ever after today.
"Do what we want or we will ruin you." Now we have a BULLY market.
Posted by: geof01
| September 29, 2008 8:14 PM
Oil dropped $10 today to $96. Look for sub $90 by tomorrow. When everything is reduced to a POKER Chip normal supply and demand is warped and we all lose.
By the way, $10 a barrel saves us $60 plus billion per year at the gas pump.
Congress needs to fix the problem, not pour gas on it.
Posted by: geof01
| September 29, 2008 8:22 PM
No Toss Ups
538 325 - 213
RealClearPolitics 249 - 163
NBC 212 - 174
Guess which one gets advertising revenues?
McCain in Ohio "It's not my style to phone it in". IN OHIO, THEY MOVED THE CAPITAL?
Boehner says he gave everything they had to get the votes. Wasn't it his group that bailed on the BAIL?
Posted by: geof01
| September 29, 2008 8:41 PM
"This marks the end of the Republican party," Paul Begala (CNN).
"The Republicans decided, for whatever idealogical or political reasons, they were not going to put their country first," Wolf Blitzer (CNN).
"This is disastrous for the Republicans," Pat Buchanan (MSNBC).
"The GOP just imploded," Red Sox Nation (Daily Kos).
Posted by: capt
| September 29, 2008 8:53 PM
Obama 286 McCain 252
Dem pickups (vs. 2004): CO IA NM VA
GOP pickups (vs. 2004): (None)
9/29/04:
Kerry 241 Bush 273
http://electoral-vote.com/
Posted by: capt
| September 29, 2008 8:56 PM
Obama 325.5 McCain 212.5
Obama to win 80.5% to 19.5%
http://www.fivethirtyeight.com/
Posted by: capt
| September 29, 2008 8:58 PM
When you put your slug in a slot machine and pull, you hope to win, but you know with definite certainty that it already belongs to the house.
If you can't take that same thought and apply it to your stocks, then you can only curse to the lottery fairies.
Posted by: geof01
| September 29, 2008 9:02 PM
Of concern to McCain's campaign, however, is a remaining and still-undisclosed clip from Palin's interview with Couric last week that has the political world buzzing.
The Palin aide, after first noting how "infuriating" it was for CBS to purportedly leak word about the gaffe, revealed that it came in response to a question about Supreme Court decisions.
After noting Roe vs. Wade, Palin was apparently unable to discuss any major court cases.
There was no verbal fumbling with this particular question as there was with some others, the aide said, but rather silence.
http://tinyurl.com/4wbttx
*****
Being incurious is so eight years ago. Silence is a problem.
Maybe this will help McCain regain the advantage?
Posted by: capt
| September 29, 2008 9:05 PM
capt. - Dem pickups (vs. 2004): CO IA NM VA
and now North Carolina is looking blue.
Obama, where the confederacy meets the 13 colonies!
Posted by: geof01
| September 29, 2008 9:10 PM
I wonder what will be the next stunt from the McCain camp?
MSNBC was running his rally in Ohio earlier today where he is taking credit for the passage of the bill?
I've heard rumors McCain will hanglide into DC nude!
I'm sure it is just a rumor.
Posted by: capt
| September 29, 2008 9:13 PM
Fox News Poll:
Obama Gains in Battleground States
The latest Fox News/Rasmussen poll in key battleground states finds Sen. Barack Obama gaining a net three to five points in each state.
Colorado: Obama 49%, McCain 48%
Florida: Obama 47%, McCain 47%
Ohio: McCain 48%, Obama 47%
Pennsylvania: Obama 50%, McCain 42%
Virginia: Obama 50%, McCain 47%
Key findings: "In all states, Obama gained ground among unaffiliated voters. While the sample sizes in each state are small and the shifts often modest, the consistency of the result is worth noting... The number saying that they would not be comfortable with Obama as President fell in all five states."
http://tinyurl.com/44qlwz
******
As we edge closre to the election the trendlines become harder to change.
Will McCain go all ape-sh*t crazy? Will Palin be dead weight as the poll numbers are drug down?
Posted by: capt
| September 29, 2008 9:16 PM
INTRADE has Obama 63 - 37 tonight.
They also have the Bailout dropping 56%, since it cannot pass in September. (Hope McPalin bet heavy on that one)
Posted by: geof01
| September 29, 2008 9:18 PM
Stock Dive Is Bookend Of Bush Economics
[...]
On Monday, the Dow finished lower than when George W. Bush assumed the presidency: 10,587.59 on January 19, 2001 compared to 10,365.45 at its close on September 29, 2008.
[snip]
"It's a striking phenomenon," said Robert Shapiro, undersecretary of commerce during the Clinton White House years. "The reckless negligence and mismanagement of the country's financial markets by the White House, the Treasury and the Fed over the last several years has now produced a crisis that has wiped out all of the increase in the market value of America's companies from five years of record corporate profits, strong productivity gains, and reasonable growth. Bush has now run the table on presidential failure."
http://tinyurl.com/3kv9uc
Posted by: capt
| September 29, 2008 9:22 PM
Oh no, capt. He still has all of October, Novemeber, December and most of January to demonstrate how he can really, really f**k up.
It's just been practice so far.
Posted by: David B. Benson
| September 29, 2008 9:30 PM
Reinstate the Securities Turnover Excise Tax ("STET") to pay for the bailout. Thom Hartmann explains that a .25% STET would produce about $150 billion in its first year and it has the additional benefit of encouraging healthy investment, instead of the current "toxic speculation."
http://www.commondreams.org/view/2008/09/26
Now, the stock market is simply a no cost gambling casino for the super rich. We financed 4 of our wars with the STET and stabilized our stock market from the mid-30's to 1966. Plus, with the STET, we don't have to borrow from China for the bailout.
Posted by: AmericanInsurgent
| September 29, 2008 9:50 PM
"Thom Hartmann explains"
I think Thom is one smart dude. I agree. He makes sense and he sees through a bunch of the BS.
Nobody is always right but Thom is right often enough to always listen.
Posted by: capt
| September 29, 2008 10:07 PM
Arianna Huffington: Does McCain Still Agree with Reagan that Government is the Problem?
Ronald Reagan, in his first inaugural address, famously declared that "government is not the solution to our problem; government is the problem." Twenty-seven years later, in the midst of the worst economic crisis since the Great Depression, and seven-plus years into the reign of Bush and Cheney, Reagan's anti-government battle cry should be on trial. But, stunningly, it is not. This needs to change. The presidential candidates' view of the role of government should be one of the central questions of the last 36 days of the campaign. And it should definitely be a question they are asked at their next debate. Our economy is not the only thing that is crumbling. So is the philosophical foundation of the modern Republican Party.
(huffpo)
Posted by: capt
| September 29, 2008 10:11 PM
A full sized image of the New Yorker cover:
http://images.huffingtonpost.com/gen/41121/original.jpg
Posted by: capt
| September 29, 2008 10:12 PM
Sarah Palin Endorses Hamas
How can it be that some people still pretend that Sarah Palin is suited for high office? This country has never seen someone so comprehensively unprepared for the vice presidency; Dan Quayle was Metternich by comparison. I've watched Sarah Palin's interview with Katie Couric three times, and my astonishment does not diminish. Her nonsensical answer about Russia has deservedly been highlighted, but let me focus on another question, this one concerning the export of democracy. Couric asked, "What happens if the goal of democracy doesn't produce the desired outcome? In Gaza, the U.S. pushed hard for elections and Hamas won."
Palin's answer, in full, was this: "Yeah, well especially in that region, though, we have to protect those who do seek democracy and support those who seek protections for the people who live there. What we're seeing in the last couple of days here in New York is a President of Iran, Ahmadinejad, who would come on our soil and express such disdain for one of our closest allies and friends, Israel ... and we're hearing the evil that he speaks and if hearing him doesn't allow Americans to commit more solidly to protecting the friends and allies that we need, especially there in the Mideast, then nothing will."
The issue here is not that Palin didn't know the answer. There are many possible answers to this question, some of which are right and some of which are wrong. The issue here is that she didn't know the question.
http://tinyurl.com/5xccyb
******
Just let her talk. She will either float or sink. McCain didn't know her well enough but maybe that will work out for him.
Posted by: capt
| September 29, 2008 10:16 PM
TOP ECONOMIST: bankruptcy is better than bailout
http://tinyurl.com/4qrxvh
Posted by: as_if!
| September 29, 2008 10:41 PM
They say - " Look at your 401k going down"
I think they really mean Wall Street has already taken most of it - they need $700 billion to put some back?
Makes no sense to me.
Posted by: capt
| September 29, 2008 11:40 PM
" Look at your 401k going down"
Saddam will plant a nuke under your bed.
If we have to fight them over here or they will ruin our economy over there.
Posted by: geof01
| September 30, 2008 8:39 AM
Geof01,
I'm laughin' to keep from cryin'
Posted by: capt
| September 30, 2008 8:55 AM
Doesn't bother me much, it took three Bush terms, but I'm pretty much broke. Like Janis said in a song
"Freedom's just another word for nothin left to lose"
Glad to see the Bail Fail.
Kind of embarrassing to McCain and Boehner who thought they could stand against it and have the Dems pass it, and now they say were were for it and it was Pelosi.
Have a great day. I'm going to see the HUD Mortgage counselors to see what's up with my WaMu, Wachovia, Citigroup mortgage.
Posted by: geof01
| September 30, 2008 9:19 AM
Maybe we should take peemptive action against the Wall Street terrorists?
Nuke 'em!
Posted by: capt
| September 30, 2008 9:32 AM
DEAR WALLSTREET: HERE IS YOUR NEW BAILOUT PLAN
http://tinyurl.com/4jwvv4
Posted by: as_if!
| September 30, 2008 10:46 AM
Mark Crispin Miller: Spoonamore reveals the plan to steal the next election
http://tinyurl.com/3wuwau
Posted by: as_if!
| September 30, 2008 11:25 AM
John McCain Economic Disaster:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=C4egXbhSOhk
Posted by: capt
| September 30, 2008 12:07 PM
FORMER REPUBLICAN HOUSE SPEAKER NEWT GINGRICH:
"This bill [$700 billion bailout] is not the best proposal for solving the housing crisis. It is not even a good proposal for solving the crisis," the statement said. "However, it is the only proposal Secretary [Henry] Paulson would support, and his support was essential in this setting."
Mr. Gingrich then capped his tepid endorsement with a call for Mr. Paulson's resignation, saying that "having a former chairman of Goldman Sachs preside over disbursing hundreds of billions of dollars to Wall Street is a terrible concept and inevitably will lead to crony capitalism and the appearance of -- if not the actual existence of -- corruption."
""IT IS NOT EVEN A GOOD PROPOSAL FOR SOLVING THE CRISIS"
Posted by: as_if!
| September 30, 2008 12:25 PM
Newt is just gaming. He is no voice of reason.
He shut down the government because Clinton made him and Dole sit in the back of AF1.
He is a nutcase. He is also no financial guru.
He IS the crony in crony capitalism.
Posted by: capt
| September 30, 2008 12:31 PM
McCain May Suspend Campaign Again
David Kurtz at TPM writes, "John McCain made the morning show rounds today. On Fox they were virtually begging him to 'suspend' his campaign again in the wake of the bailout failure yesterday on the Hill. You know, since it worked out so well the first time. McCain's answer: He just might suspend again."
http://tinyurl.com/3g99b9
*****
Maybe he should just drop out?
Posted by: capt
| September 30, 2008 12:39 PM
Rudderless Republicans
First Read: "So who runs the Republican Party? Apparently nobody. Perhaps the most startling political development was the amazing lack of leadership on the GOP side of the aisle. Let's run down the list of Republican leaders who attempted to persuade skeptical House Republicans: President Bush, John McCain, Dick Cheney, and John Boehner... Bush's leadership and trust issues within his party has been evidenced for quite some time, and the icing on the Bush legacy cake is that fact that he could only convince FOUR Texas House Republicans to support his bill.
"And then there's John McCain, who last week decided to insert himself into the process and then (before the bailout failed) took credit for getting wavering House Republicans on board... Now McCain gets a double stomach punch: He's stuck being seen as supportive of this bailout (which isn't exactly popular with the conservative grassroots) and he gets to share in the blame for the defeat since he didn't have enough political capital to get this done (By the way, not a single member of the Arizona GOP delegation voted for this bill). Watching the McCain campaign deal with this yesterday, one could sense that they were fearful that they were going to look inept and take an even deeper political wound than they sustained last week."
http://politicalwire.com/archives/2008/09/30/rudderless_republicans.html
Posted by: capt
| September 30, 2008 12:40 PM
http://rudepundit.blogspot.com/
Too good to try to clip anything.
Posted by: capt
| September 30, 2008 12:44 PM
Fed Pumps Further $630 Billion Into Financial System
Sept. 29 (Bloomberg) -- The Federal Reserve will pump an additional $630 billion into the global financial system, flooding banks with cash to alleviate the worst banking crisis since the Great Depression.
The Fed increased its existing currency swaps with foreign central banks by $330 billion to $620 billion to make more dollars available worldwide. The Term Auction Facility, the Fed's emergency loan program, will expand by $300 billion to $450 billion. The European Central Bank, the Bank of England and the Bank of Japan are among the participating authorities.
http://tinyurl.com/3eteqj
******
So our $$$ are getting sliced and diced - another $630 billion and they want the $700 billion on top of this?
Enough has to be enough sooner or later.
Posted by: capt
| September 30, 2008 12:50 PM
Palin Implicated By Witness in ‘Troopergate’ Probe
An Alaska woman who owns a company that processes workers’ compensation claims in the state has told an independent investigator that she was urged by the office of Gov. Sarah Palin to deny a benefits claim for Palin’s ex brother-in-law, a state trooper who was involved in an ugly divorce and child custody dispute with Palin’s sister, despite evidence that the claim appeared to be legitimate, according to state officials who were briefed about the conversation.
Murlene Wilkes, the proprietor of Harbor Adjusting Services in Anchorage, had originally denied that she was pressured by Gov. Palin’s office to deny state trooper Mike Wooten’s claim for workers compensation benefits.
But Wilkes changed her story two weeks ago when she was subpoenaed by Steven Branchflower, the former federal prosecutor who was appointed in July to probe allegations Gov. Palin, Republican presidential candidate John McCain’s running mate, abused her office by abruptly ousting Public Safety Commissioner Walt Monegan, state officials knowledgeable about her conversation with Branchflower said.
Monegan has said he felt pressured by Gov. Palin, her husband, Todd, and several of her aides to fire Wooten. Branchflower’s investigation centers on whether Palin fired Monegan because he refused to fire Wooten.
http://www.pubrecord.org/component/content/359.html?task=view
*****
I wonder if the financial crisis will eclipse the implications of Palin's abuse of power?
Posted by: capt
| September 30, 2008 12:53 PM
WHISTLEBLOWER REVEALS GOP PLAN TO STEAL NEXT ELECTION FOR MCCAIN!
"Here, in this shattering new interview, Stephen Spoonamore goes into harrowing detail about the Bush regime's election fraud, past, present and--if we don't spread the word right now--to come. Since he's the only whistle-blower out there who knows the perps themselves, and how they operate, we have to send this new piece far and wide." (Rawstory.com)
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1lrFkRHrRDI
Posted by: bacaangel
| September 30, 2008 1:04 PM
America Loses Its Dominant Economic Role
By SPIEGEL Staff
The banking crisis is upending American dominance of the financial markets and world politics. The industrialized countries are sliding into recession, the era of turbo-capitalism is coming to an end and US military might is ebbing. Still, this is no time to gloat.
There are days when all it takes is a single speech to illustrate the decline of a world power. A face can speak volumes, as can the speaker's tone of voice, the speech itself or the audience's reaction. Kings and queens have clung to the past before and humiliated themselves in public, but this time it was merely a United States president.
Or what is left of him.
http://www.spiegel.de/international/world/0,1518,581502,00.html
Posted by: capt
| September 30, 2008 1:21 PM
Post A Comment