News House votes down bail-out package

[Art]

Why would a Republican sponsored bill supported by most democrats be voted down by Republicans?

What are the motivations of the folk who voted against it? Partisanship? Too much for Wall St? Too little for Wall St?, a combination of all of these things or something else entirely?

 

[Evo]

Why would a Republican sponsored bill supported by most democrats be voted down by Republicans?

What are the motivations of the folk who voted against it? Partisanship? Too much for Wall St? Too little for Wall St?, a combination of all of these things or something else entirely?

I had heard the other day that the House Republicans were going to vote against it. I don't have the article, but I'm sure someone here knows the answer.

 

[Astronuc]

There are many Republicans/Conservatives opposed to the bill partly on principle and partly because elections are only 5 weeks away, and they don't want to go back to their districts being accused of bailing out the big guys on Wall Street on the backs of the little guys in their district.

 

[LowlyPion]

There are many Republicans/Conservatives opposed to the bill partly on principle and partly because elections are only 5 weeks away, and they don't want to go back to their districts being accused of bailing out the big guys on Wall Street on the backs of the little guys in their district.

At this point it may be that they will go back to their districts and have to explain why they didn't do the right thing instead of the politically expedient thing.

 

[Evo]

House Republicans are still overwhelmingly opposed to any package that would authorize Treasury to buy hundreds of billions in devalued mortgage-related assets. This puts Blunt in a difficult spot as he tries to win concessions that will bring his members on board.

Republicans are clearly worried that their presidential candidate’s first effort to engage in the bailout negotiations didn’t come off as well as they might have hoped — that in the public’s mind, a deal was close until McCain parachuted into save the economy and, by turns, his presidential campaign, only to have a White House meeting collapse and the candidate leave town for the debate in Mississippi with the various factions farther from a deal than they’d been before he'd arrived.

It’s not what House Republicans were expecting. McCain has a strained relationship with many of his GOP colleagues, some of whom view him as a political opportunist who chooses personal glory over partisan loyalty.

http://news.yahoo.com/s/politico/20080927/pl_politico/14015

And today

http://www.usatoday.com/news/washington/2008-09-29-bailout-congress_N.htm

 

[LowlyPion]

If this serves to flush these rats out of Congress, then this ill wind will leave us its silver lining.

Now if only they could take Fox News with them and ride out on that horse they came in on.

 

[afirican]

It sounds like idiot Pelosi threw a wrench in the spokes by making a very partisan statement. You would think by the time you get to her level you'd know you get more bees with honey than vinegar. Maybe Pelosi will learn to keep her mouth shut, and maybe ACORN will be dropped as a beneficiary of the next bill.

 

[quadraphonics]

Yeah, right, if only Pelosi hadn't given a speech that nobody listened to, all those Republicans would have committed electoral suicide by voting for a bill that their lame-duck President staked the whole weight of his administration behind. It has nothing to with them being stuck between a rock (economy failing right before an election as a result of policies they pushed) and a hard place (long-standing ideological opposition to government bail-outs).

Still, there's got to be SOME way we can blame the Democrats for this...

 

[turbo]

I am glad that this misguided bailout did not pass. Paulson and Bush came up with a piece of crap proposal with a price tag that nobody could justify, and the Dems cobbled together a "compromise" that is absolutely toxic. The neo-cons were on show after show screaming with hair-on-fire urgency about how the Paulson plan had to be passed NOW lest the world end. Maybe now, adults with some semblance of rationality will try to parse the nature of our financial weaknesses, and come up with a plan to address them with an approach that does not involve throwing billions at investment banks.

Every time a Dem tries to address a deficiency, the Reps accuse them of "throwing money at a problem" - maybe this time the Reps will come up with a way to re-regulate and stabilize the financial market without "throwing money at the problem"... nah!

 

[LowlyPion]

It sounds like idiot Pelosi threw a wrench in the spokes by making a very partisan statement.

That had nothing to do with Pelosi. It was a total cheap shot. It is a stupid excuse. If their interest, is supposedly bi-partisan and patriotic, setting the country and the people ahead of ideology, then if they balked at walking their own talk over a supposed partisan speech, they weren't thinking so much for the country as for themselves and what they think will get them elected.

Except the problem is that if things worsen any more, these bums hopefully will be out on their ears, (or other parts of their bodies that are appropriately more painful).

These Republicans are still suggesting capital gains tax cuts and the problem with that will be is at this rate there won't be any capital gains to tax.

 

[Astronuc]

The Congresspersons still have to go back to their districts and explain why they didn't see this coming, or why they let Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac, and the deficits get so out of hand.

Republicans and Democrats are co-dependents with respect to the current situation.

 

[Art]

I am glad that this misguided bailout did not pass. Paulson and Bush came up with a piece of crap proposal with a price tag that nobody could justify, and the Dems cobbled together a "compromise" that is absolutely toxic. The neo-cons were on show after show screaming with hair-on-fire urgency about how the Paulson plan had to be passed NOW lest the world end. Maybe now, adults with some semblance of rationality will try to parse the nature of our financial weaknesses, and come up with a plan to address them with an approach that does not involve throwing billions at investment banks.

Every time a Dem tries to address a deficiency, the Reps accuse them of "throwing money at a problem" - maybe this time the Reps will come up with a way to re-regulate and stabilize the financial market without "throwing money at the problem"... nah!

Before worrying about fixing the fire alarms and emergency exits and installing other fire suppressant measures in your house it is always a good idea to put out the fire already raging through it.

 

[Ivan Seeking]

We are seeing the death of the Republican party as we know it.

The Republican naysayers can't let go of fundamentalist economic conservatism, even if they would destroy the nations economy, which they have or nearly have done already. It was their philosophy that got us here, and they would hang us all before admitting to their error. The Southern extremists now stand alone.

 

[Jimmy Snyder]

Before worrying about fixing the fire alarms and emergency exits and installing other fire suppressant measures in your house it is always a good idea to put out the fire already raging through it.

By pouring oil on the fire? That's what this plan does. It rewards the behavior that caused the problem. The plan was to buy $700 billion worth of bad loans. Does anyone know what the discount was? Was it 80 cents on the dollar, 40 cents on the dollar, what? Were we going to pay 100 cents on the dollar for bad loans? And why $700 billion worth? Why not $600 billion or $800 billion? It bothers me that I don't know the answers. Do you know the answers? If not, does it bother you?

 

[Art]

By pouring oil on the fire? That's what this plan does. It rewards the behavior that caused the problem. The plan was to buy $700 billion worth of bad loans. Does anyone know what the discount was? Was it 80 cents on the dollar, 40 cents on the dollar, what? Were we going to pay 100 cents on the dollar for bad loans? And why $700 billion worth? Why not $600 billion or $800 billion? It bothers me that I don't know the answers. Do you know the answers? If not, does it bother you?

What value did the markets worldwide lose today? I'd hazard a lot more than $700 billion, more like $2-3 trillion, and how much will it continue to lose if the financial sector is not stabilized? That's real accumulated wealth wiped out, affecting pensions and savings, and soon will translate into people's jobs, whereas over the next 5 years or so most if not all of the $700 billion would be recovered as the real estate market recovered.

At this time making the banks suffer for their excesses is cutting off one's nose to spite one's face.

The $700 billion figure is mostly a confidence building measure. With the restrictions proposed on banks who avail of it I would be surprised if the whole fund was even accessed. Just knowing the sum was available would be enough to halt the wildfires spreading through the financial community.

 

[Jimmy Snyder]

At this time making the banks suffer for their excesses is cutting off one's nose to spite one's face.

Making me suffer for their excesses will teach them a lesson they won't soon forget.

 

[Art]

Making me suffer for their excesses will teach them a lesson they won't soon forget.

So you favour the nuclear option of mutually assured destruction? Well okay...

 

[Ivan Seeking]

... Responding to Boehner's claim that the 12-vote margin of defeat was due to Pelosi, House Financial Services Chairman Barney Frank, D-Mass., said: "Because somebody hurt their feelings, they decided to hurt the country...Give me those 12 people's names, I will talk uncharacteristically nicely to them." ...

http://money.cnn.com/news/newsfeeds/articles/djf500/200809291847DOWJONESDJONLINE000715_FORTUNE5.htm

That's a keeper!

 

[Jimmy Snyder]

So you favour the nuclear option of mutually assured destruction?

That's Bush's message. Be afraid, be very afraid. I'm not buying it.

 

[edward]

No one has made it clear in a way that the average person can understand, just exactly what the crisis is. As one caller to C span mentioned: "I feel like a mushroom, I have been kept in the dark and fed steer manure."

 

[Astronuc]

White House, lawmakers plan new bailout deal
http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/financial_meltdown;_ylt=AsoAOj2DuNlr97VMpb7VPeus0NUE

With the House not scheduled to meet again until Thursday, congressional leaders and Bush administration officials promptly sought to assess what types of changes could win over enough votes to guarantee success. President Bush planned to make a statement on the rescue plan at 8:45 a.m. EDT Tuesday.

The outcome of Monday's vote fed a huge sell-off in the stock market, sending the Dow Jones Industrial Average into its biggest single-day plunge, 777 points. The House vote and the market's terrified reaction shook Washington and New York centers of power — even overseas markets — but no immediate solution seemed at hand.

Well try if Plan A doesn't work, try Plan B.

House to Wall Street: Drop dead
Commentary: Uneasy Republicans couldn't stomach massive bailout

In a stunning vote on Monday, the House rejected the financial rescue package on a vote of 205 to 228. Republicans voted against the bill by a two-to-one ratio, and in the process rejected their own leadership, who had worked for nearly a week to craft a bill that could gain a majority. Nearly 100 Democrats also voted against the bill, spurning their leadership.

Many Republicans in the House were never persuaded that the credit crunch in the financial system is an impending disaster deserving of taxpayer aid. Politicians who had cut their teeth on free-market principles couldn't accept the idea that the federal government should back up the banks who had foolishly bet everything on the housing bubble.
Or they didn't want to face the voters in six weeks and explain why a Republican would vote for the biggest government bailout ever.

Now we shall see if Paulson and Bernanke were right when they said the credit crisis could worsen and inflict dire consequences on the global economy. Or perhaps the plan's many critics were right in saying that credit markets and home prices can adjust on their own, once the promise of free money is withdrawn.
. . . .

I was thinking how easy it was for Congress to give the administration to nod to go to war in Iraq (with all the suffering that has been inflicted on the Iraqi people), but they just can't deal with the current problem.

 

[vanesch]

So shall we go ahead with the experiment then ?

Seems that standards for experiments to comply to safety are different in Washington and in particle physics

 

[Astronuc]

Well it will be interesting to see what happens through the rest of the week.

If the markets partially recover, then many in Congress may feel less pressure to act on some intervention.

The question is - how bad is economic situation actually, i.e. how much bad debt is there and will it affect something like 1% (not significant) or 10% (significant) of the national/global economy? Or somewhere in between.

 

[Art]

Well it will be interesting to see what happens through the rest of the week.

If the markets partially recover, then many in Congress may feel less pressure to act on some intervention.

The question is - how bad is economic situation actually, i.e. how much bad debt is there and will it affect something like 1% (not significant) or 10% (significant) of the national/global economy? Or somewhere in between.

The markets will probably hold up until the end of the week in the hope congress passes some form of the bail out bill though as you say this may send the wrong signal to the house.

 

[Borek]

Seems that standards for experiments to comply to safety are different in Washington and in particle physics

The difference is that if you will kill someone with this high energy particle of yours, it will be your fault; but if they will kill you economically with their indolence, it will be your fault. That's obvious.

 

[Evo]

I was reading an article where the representatives were saying they were afraid to vote for no other reason than they were afraid to lose their jobs.

 

[Astronuc]

I was reading an article where the representatives were saying they were afraid to vote for no other reason than they were afraid to lose their jobs.

Ummm - they are politicians. Need I say more?

I wonder how many incumbents will return this season?

 

[Jimmy Snyder]

Ummm - they are politicians. Need I say more?

I wonder how many incumbents will return this season?

Probably not that many. I e-mailed my representative Jim Saxton and remarked at the top of my voice that I would vote against him if he voted in favor. He voted in favor. You won't be seeing him after November.

 

[Evo]

Probably not that many. I e-mailed my representative Jim Saxton and remarked at the top of my voice that I would vote against him if he voted in favor. He voted in favor. You won't be seeing him after November.

I never know when you're joking.

Has he done a godd job otherwise? If he has, would it really be wise to replace him with an unknown that might have also voted for the plan but is less competant overall?

 

[Jimmy Snyder]

I never know when you're joking.

Has he done a godd job otherwise? If he has, would it really be wise to replace him with an unknown that might have also voted for the plan but is less competant overall?

He's outta here. He is going to take such a beating from this one vote that last year he announced that he was retiring.

 

[Evo]

He's outta here. He is going to take such a beating from this one vote that last year he announced that he was retiring.

 

[Alfi]

Why are they taking a couple of days off?

I thought this was important.
Cancel a campaign important.

 

[Evo]

Why are they taking a couple of days off?

I thought this was important.

Religious holidays.

 

[mgb_phys]

There are going to be some amazing riders added to the bill today, the govt wants to get a $700B bill through urgently and needs your vote!

 

[mgb_phys]

Religious holidays.

The US government is taking time off because it's Ramadan - how culturally sensitive of them.

 

[Art]

The US government is taking time off because it's Ramadan - how culturally sensitive of them.

It's for the Jewish holiday of Rosh Hashanah when no work is supposed to be done. It celebrates the anniversary of the creation of Adam and Eve.

 

[mgb_phys]

It's for the Jewish holiday of Rosh Hashanah when no work is supposed to be done.

I know, I thought it was ironic that an instution famously consisting of white protestants should honour another religion like that and wondered why they picked one middle eastern religion and not the other other one.

 

[Art]

Following yesterday's bailouts European gov'ts had to step in again today, this time to rescue the Franco-Belgian financial services group, Dexia, at a cost of more than $9bn.

 

[Jimmy Snyder]

I know, I thought it was ironic that an instution famously consisting of white protestants should honour another religion like that and wondered why they picked one middle eastern religion and not the other other one.

Good point. You would expect them to pick a European religion like Christianity.

 

[Art]

I know, I thought it was ironic that an instution famously consisting of white protestants should honour another religion like that and wondered why they picked one middle eastern religion and not the other other one.

Probably a lot of creationists amongst all those Republicans?

 

[Jimmy Snyder]

The only thing these Communists are missing is a dozen votes in Congress. They didn't pass the bill this time because their constituents don't want it, and they won't ignore their constituents this close to election day. Unless the price is right. The folks in Congress are cheap whores and can be had for a slice of pork. I expect the next version of the bill to pass with 12 riders.

 

[Art]

The bill, with an amendment increasing the sum insured by the Fed for savers to $250K, will be voted on in the Senate tomorrow.

 

[Art]

Well it's passed the Senate and by a big majority,

US Senate backs new bail-out bill

The Senate has approved a new version of a $700bn (£380bn) rescue plan for the troubled US financial system.

Senators voted 74 to 25 in favour of the emergency legislation designed to stabilise volatile markets and limit further damage to the economy.

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/americas/7647622.stm

Now will the lower house pass it? The difference seems to be there are relatively few senators up for re-election in Nov.

 

[Astronuc]

Well it's passed the Senate and by a big majority, http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/americas/7647622.stm

Now will the lower house pass it? The difference seems to be there are relatively few senators up for re-election in Nov.

Only 1/3 of Senators are up for re-election every two years. The term of a senator is 6 years, while a Congressperson must face re-election every 2 years.

 

[mgb_phys]

So 8% of those facing re-election voted FOR or they are retiring anyway.