Democrats: "We Will Not Simply Hand Over A $700 Billion Blank Check To Wall St"

digg Share this on Facebook Huffpost - Democrats: "We Will Not Simply Hand Over A $700 Billion Blank Check To Wall St" stumble reddit del.ico.us RSS

Huffington Post   |  Nicholas Sabloff and Nicholas Graham
First Posted: 09-21-08 09:51 AM   |   Updated: 10-22-08 05:12 AM

I Like ItI Don’t Like It
Paulson

***UPDATE*** 11:11PM Democrats have begun to push back on the bailout plan offered by the Bush Administration, specifically with legislation that would cut the salaries of the CEO's whose firms participate in the bailout and by adding more oversight provisions. The Washington Post reports:

Congressional Democrats considering the Bush administration's emergency plan to shore up the U.S. financial system yesterday countered with their own demands, presenting draft legislation giving the government power to cut salaries of chief executives at firms that participate in the bailout and slash severance packages for their top management...


...Democrats sought to add oversight provisions and taxpayer protections to the proposal, which amounts to the largest government intervention in the private markets since the Great Depression. "We will not simply hand over a $700 billion blank check to Wall Street," House Speaker Nancy Pelosi (D-Calif.) said in a statement.

Under the proposal drafted by House Democrats, the Treasury would be required to force faltering firms that want to sell their troubled assets to the government to "meet appropriate standards for executive compensation." Those standards would include a ban on incentives that encourage chief executives to take "inappropriate or excessive" risks, a mechanism to rescind bonuses paid for earnings that never materialize and limits on severance pay.


Obama issued a "statement of principles" regarding the bailout plan. One principle it emphasized was that the plan cannot bail out Wall St. and ignore the troubles on Main St.:

"We must work quickly in a bipartisan fashion to resolve this crisis and restore our financial sector so capital is flowing again and we can avert an even broader economic catastrophe. We also should recognize that economic recovery requires that we act, not just to address the crisis on Wall Street, but also the crisis on Main Street and around kitchen tables across America...


...Taxpayers should be protected. This should not be a handout to Wall Street. It should be structured in a way that maximizes the ability of taxpayers to recoup their investment. Going forward, we need to make sure that the institutions that benefit from financial insurance also bear the cost of that insurance.

Help homeowners stay in their homes. This crisis started with homeowners and they bear the brunt of the nearly unprecedented collapse in housing prices. We cannot have a plan for Wall Street banks that does not help homeowners stay in their homes and help distressed communities.


The AP reports that Treasury Secretary Henry Paulson said Sunday that the government should resist including households in its bailout plan despite calls from Democrats to do so:

Treasury Secretary Henry Paulson said Sunday that the nation's credit markets remain frozen and Congress must move quickly to pass a $700 billion bailout package for financial firms. But key Democrats said the legislation needs changes to provide better protections for taxpayers and homeowners in danger of losing their homes.

"The credit markets are still very fragile right now and frozen," Paulson said in an interview on NBC's Meet the Press. "We need to deal with this and deal with it quickly."[...]

Story continues below
advertisement

Democrats said they understood the need for urgency but insisted that the measure needed to provide help for homeowners threatened with losing their homes, perhaps by changes in bankruptcy laws to allow for mortgages to be modified, and by capping pay and benefit packages for executives at the huge Wall Street firms that will be selling their bad debt to the government.

"I don't want the American taxpayer to get this bad debt and then the guy (whose company once held the bad loans) gets millions of dollars on his way out the door," said House Financial Services Chairman Barney Frank, D-Mass.

Paulson and President Bush have argued that the alternative would be credit markets that remain frozen, meaning that businesses will fail because they can't get the loans they need to operate and the economy will grind to a halt because consumers, who account for two-thirds of economic activity, won't be able to get the credit they need to keep spending.

At a rally in Charlotte Sunday Obama spoke about how he believed the government needed to deal with the financial crisis when it comes to households:

We must work quickly in a bipartisan fashion to resolve this crisis to avert an even broader economic catastrophe. But Washington also has to recognize that economic recovery requires that we act, not just to address the crisis on Wall Street, but also the crisis on Main Street and around kitchen tables across America.

Read more of Obama's remarks.

***UPDATE*** 11:11PM Democrats have begun to push back on the bailout plan offered by the Bush Administration, specifically with legislation that would cut the salaries of the CEO's whose firms partic...
***UPDATE*** 11:11PM Democrats have begun to push back on the bailout plan offered by the Bush Administration, specifically with legislation that would cut the salaries of the CEO's whose firms partic...
Report Corrections
 
Comments
7213
Pending Comments
0
iPhone App Promo

Want to reply to a comment? Hint: Click "Reply" at the bottom of the comment; after being approved your comment will appear directly underneath the comment you replied to

View Comments:
Page: « First ‹ Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 Next › Last » (150 pages total)
- Donnat I'm a Fan of Donnat 21 fans permalink

Good start, Democrats. GROW A PAIR AND STOP THIS FINAL GOP RAID ON THE TREASURY FROM HAPPENING.

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 12:11 PM on 09/22/2008
- wmholt I'm a Fan of wmholt 29 fans permalink
photo

Disaster Capitalism at its finest.

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 12:07 PM on 09/22/2008
- 303 I'm a Fan of 303 5 fans permalink

Couldn't hep but notice that one of the few "givens" of the Bailout is allowing Goldman Sachs (where Paulson was CEO) and MSDW to redefine themselves as "banks" and get on the Bailout Gravy Train--even though they have eschewed banking rules or playing-by­-the-rules or any self-policing. Just because Hank and Bernanke say it's so, DONT MAY IT SO. Each can only know "truth" as they see it from their crumbling ivory towers.

The economic problems of US run deep and wide, and center on the fact that the Middle Income consumers driving our economy are tapped out. Instead of wage increases to workers and real middle class tax relief from aberrations like the AMT, the Bush Government bet on over-extended rampant credit card debt and fees, securitized mortages and credit default swaps.
The result is apparent: Losers! To get ourselves out of this mess and renew Liquidity requires FDR leadership and public programs--to re-build our crumbling infrastructure, secure our borders and invest in the health/education of our greatest resource: the American people. Nothing short of a paradigm shift. Where a good day's work is rewarded with a good days pay; and where families, neighbors and beat cops keep us feeling safe-- whether we are on Wall Street or Main Street. Financial institutions deserve nothing but scorn for the horrific job they have done of self-policing and self-correcting; they should pay the price and clean up after themselves.

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 12:07 PM on 09/22/2008
- Darkdonnie I'm a Fan of Darkdonnie 5 fans permalink

If it turns out they did not do anything illegal but were forced to give loans to undeserving borrowers by the government. How would that be right?

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 12:22 PM on 09/22/2008
- ssgman I'm a Fan of ssgman 8 fans permalink
photo

They were forced to give loans? Uh, who forced them?

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 12:24 PM on 09/22/2008
- JaniceL I'm a Fan of JaniceL 2 fans permalink

Hey DimBulb, ever heard of 'predatory lending practices'?

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 02:58 PM on 09/22/2008
- YOHY I'm a Fan of YOHY 2 fans permalink

Here's my plan...the­re are about 6 million + households in America. If we were to divy up the 1 trillion amongst those households, each household would receive about $166,000 each. That should be enough for most to pay delinquencies, spread some wealth via purchasing goods and probably still have enough to "go to DisneyWorl­d." Let's give them some serious consideration!

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 12:00 PM on 09/22/2008

6 million households??

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 12:03 PM on 09/22/2008
- ssgman I'm a Fan of ssgman 8 fans permalink
photo

Sounds good to me! If we are going to blow a trillion bucks let's go for the bottom up vs trickle down theory this time.

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 12:05 PM on 09/22/2008
- mrsmdressup I'm a Fan of mrsmdressup 343 fans permalink
photo

Here are the stats for households up to 2006.

http://www.infoplease.com/ipa/A0922165.html

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 12:07 PM on 09/22/2008
- Pegi I'm a Fan of Pegi 44 fans permalink

WONDERFUL IDEA!!!! SCREW THOSE GREEDY MANIACS!!! the only thing i worry about is my own personal savings account. its not a lot but hell, its MINE. i have no stocks, thank goodness.

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 12:23 PM on 09/22/2008

So why aren't they going after the billion all the CEO's made during this before going after the taxpayers money?

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 11:56 AM on 09/22/2008

They should also go after the credit cards, golf clubs, nice furniture and lipstick of the greedy homeowners who could not afford the houses they bought!! I suspect that could yield equal and more than the CEO's billions just because of the sheer number. Just look at Obama's fund raising. Billions raise thorugh small donations.

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 12:14 PM on 09/22/2008
- ssgman I'm a Fan of ssgman 8 fans permalink
photo

If you noticed, Paulson didn't want any "homeowner" clauses on his "bailout" so those assets are being targeted. And there's a lot more in those CEO packages than you realize.

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 12:26 PM on 09/22/2008

Unfortunately, a lot of responsible and frugal homeowners are also hurting now because of the crash of home values in many areas. We put a lot of $$ down with a conventional fixed-rate mortgage we could afford. But now the homes in our neighborhood have dropped in market value from about $220,000 to $90,000 -- most are now abandoned and our beloved community has become an eerie, empty, scary place.

I'm afraid there are many hardworking, tax-paying, responsible Americans in the same boat we are.

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 02:51 PM on 09/22/2008

What's the rush? There are better solutions - for the taxpayer anyway - to this problem. These are slick salesmen trying to unload something on you quick, before you realise you don't need it or that better deals are available.

Smart alternatives to this blatantly stupid dismantling of the free market system are out there! Say nyet to the comrades in D.C.!

If we take John McCain's definition of "the Fundamentals" as meaning the American people are "strong" then it's time for the Fundamentals to get off the couch and demand that their elected officials find them a better solution.

If not, I hear fur hats are popular in some socialist countries - maybe we can get some from Alaska?

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 11:56 AM on 09/22/2008

Why should the PUBLIC & DEMOCRATS pay for the BUSH REGIME'S, Wall Street GREED?

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 11:54 AM on 09/22/2008

Why should anybody pay for the trouble people are in for buying homes they could not afford and living beyond their means?

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 12:05 PM on 09/22/2008
- Howzat I'm a Fan of Howzat 2 fans permalink

Bush is selling road kill whilst Plain is serving up fresh moose meat.

$700B can buy a lot of franks and beans for the workers of lesser means who dont dine on fine wine, have 13 cars, get tax subsidies for their brewig company or can crash 5 planes.

MISSION ACCOMPLISHED AGAIN iI think. Fat cats get rich; first Halliburton and now the Financial Institutions.

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 11:44 AM on 09/22/2008

Of course Paulson wouldn't want to help the taxpayers who will inevitably foot the bill. It's much too logical staunch the bleeding at the source of the bad debt. His plan is like wiping blood off the floor while the patient is bleeding.

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 11:43 AM on 09/22/2008

Let us not forget that Wall Street greed was also accompanied by Main Street greed which was supported by Democrat-e­stablished and Democrat-sponsored institutions like Freddie and Fannie giving loans to the urban poor which they could not afford. So while we get angry about removing depression era regulation in the late 90's and the Republicans and McCain let us also get angry about Freddie, Fannie, Barney Frank who stopped reforms, and Obama who took the second largest donation from their PAC. They are all crooks, so examine carefully what they plan to do and their track record, don't just vote for someone who claims to be honest and above politics. He is not.

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 11:39 AM on 09/22/2008
- Strywever I'm a Fan of Strywever 28 fans permalink

Do you think YOU haven't benefited from Democratic institutions? If you do, you are an idiot.

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 11:51 AM on 09/22/2008

Of course I have but both from these institutions and from deregulation - for example I pay airfares that are far lower than they were in the 19790's

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 12:07 PM on 09/22/2008

I am just against selective whining and not holding all the crook's responsible - that's all!!

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 12:08 PM on 09/22/2008
- cqyates I'm a Fan of cqyates 2 fans permalink

Ive benefited from Democratic Institutio­ns....I have been on Welfare (thou No More) I went to a Fine Public University and I get the Earned Income Tax Credit.

Straw Poll....Ha­ve you benefited from Democratic Institutions?

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 01:53 PM on 09/22/2008
- GWHayduke I'm a Fan of GWHayduke 8 fans permalink
photo

Well, let's see here. They say the banks need a cash infusion, that the feds will be buying debt, and each adult American will be on the hook for approximately $31,000 in additional national debt.

How about this: give each adult American a voucher for $31,000 that can be applied ONLY to their mortgage? My personal indebtedness stays the same - I just now owe the money to the government instead of to the bank. The bank gets its cash infusion. Win win.

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 11:39 AM on 09/22/2008

Sounds like a plan. Except that the Feds and the taxpayer will get some of the $31K back when they sell the assets. Here the entire $31K is lost by the taxpayers while we bail out both greedy banks going for outsized profits and greedy homeowners living beyond their means.

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 11:55 AM on 09/22/2008
- GWHayduke I'm a Fan of GWHayduke 8 fans permalink
photo

Maybe they'll get it back when they sell the assets, more likely they won't. This whole mess is the result of expecting unreasonable returns on crappy, near worthless assets.

And the $31K isn't lost by taxpayers (me) if I've used it to reduce my existing indebtedness - it's a break-even.

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 12:27 PM on 09/22/2008
- DrD I'm a Fan of DrD 11 fans permalink
photo

This is the Shock Doctrine. The Republicans get people scared enough and then the rest of us do as they say. Why should financially responsible people pick up debt of everyone else? Why should people who have borrowed or invested responsibly be punished along with the tricksters who kept selling dubious risk as sound assets? Why should people who trusted long-standing financial institutions lose money along with the backers of pyramid scheme deals where those at the top make the bucks and those at the bottom lose?

The neocons, including the Bushies, in power have wanted to do away with government for the past 30+ years. And, as Thom Hartmann says, they have succeeded. Before Bush took office, there was a surplus in the treasury. Now there’s a $9.4 trillion dollar debt. Because they neocons have succeeded in breaking government, the government will be forced to do away with earmarks and entitlements such as Medicare, Medicaid, social security and free public education and investing in infrastructure. All those things are the building blocks of a sound economy.

If Congress approves a deal without any oversight, they all need to be voted out of office. If taxpayers bail out the system, then any future growth has to revert back to the tax payers, and the people at the top must pay the consequences while the taxpayers reap the benefits of any future growth.

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 11:30 AM on 09/22/2008

Again please include greedy homeowners who lived beyond their means and Freddie and Fannie who supported loans to the urban poor as well! Thank you for being honest.

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 11:57 AM on 09/22/2008
- mrsmdressup I'm a Fan of mrsmdressup 343 fans permalink
photo

Yes, the desire to own a home to raise a family in is very greedy. Most people who are currently involved in the mortgage mess were good, honest, hard working people who believed in the financial institutions they signed their lives over to. Were there some greedy people? Of course...b­ut just like you cannot say all Irish people are heavy drinkers, you cannot say that all the families who ended up with sub-prime mortgages are greedy.

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 12:05 PM on 09/22/2008
- JackWOrf I'm a Fan of JackWOrf 10 fans permalink

It's all very nice of Obama to "help people stay in their homes", but how does that work? Every year, there are large numbers of people who buy homes that are above their means, and wind up getting foreclosed. This is not something new. It has been happening since forever. It is perhaps only new that more unqualified people were allowed to get sub-prime mortgages.

But this is an agreement that they entered into of their own accord. It is their personal responsibilty. Why do I, as a taxpayer, have to make their mortgage payments for them? It is not accurate to assume that every person being foreclosed is the victim of layoffs or other personal problems. Many simply wanted to live above their means. They wanted to live in 5 bedroom house rather than a 1 bedroom apartment. To me, this is a PERSONAL decision which carries PERSONAL responsibility with it. HEW should grant assistance on an individual basis, but assistance should not become the norm.

So what does Obama want to do? Create some HUGE new government bureaucracy that is going to review every single foreclosure in the USA, and have frugal taxpayers make the mortgage payments of those living above their means? And will it turn out that the people who get selected to receive mortage assistance "just happen" to have been people who have been Obama supporters?

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 11:29 AM on 09/22/2008

Do you even read what you are writing? Get ready for a dictatorship. How about the people we are bailing out RIGHT NOW just so happen to already be rich people, who support McCain and are getting richer and yet the "Obama supporters" will have to foot the bill for this bail out. You fault these people for wanting to live in a nice home, but you don't fault the predatory lenders for taking advantage of that. Yet, you bail out the predator and blame the prey. Its the same as when you enslave a man and get angry because he no longer wants to be a slave.

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 11:54 AM on 09/22/2008

Your predator-prey analogy is false. The prey fell into the hands of the predator because they became greedy!! No one forced them!! I agree all are responsible but simply brushing off the homeowner greed by saying they just wanted to live in a nice home is ridculous.

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 12:11 PM on 09/22/2008
- FemiMommy I'm a Fan of FemiMommy 7 fans permalink

http://www.senate.gov/general/contact_information/senators_cfm.cfm
http://www.house.gov/house/MemberWWW_by_State.shtml

Call every Senator and Representative on this list (especially the leadership) and tell them we should not have to cover for people who made bad decisions. Those of us who didn't overextend ourselves should not have to pay for those who did to keep their homes. I'm renting because I couldn't afford to buy. That's what happens when you can't afford a house at current prices -- you rent!

The banks have made no effort yet to fix this -- why should I help them without getting paid? If they need a paid consultant, I'd be happy to step in...:)

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 11:25 AM on 09/22/2008
photo

Let all your reps know with One click (knows by your zip, also option to copy to your local paper)

http://www.usalone.com/help_people_instead.php

vote to impeach, while you're there.
Get them out before the next crisis.

You know they want more, and will do everything to get it before they go.
PLUS- this must never happen again.

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 11:23 AM on 09/22/2008

Too lagte to impeach. How about criminal charges I'll sign that one!

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 11:28 AM on 09/22/2008
Page: « First ‹ Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 Next › Last » (150 pages total)
Comments are closed for this entry

 You must be logged in to comment. Log in  or connect with 

Connect