by Mark Silva and updated at 3 pm
With the House's second and successful vote on a $700-billion federal rescue of the nation's financial markets today, the economic challenge facing the next Congress and president is only starting to reveal its dimensions on Capitol Hill.
The House vote today -- 263-171 -- following a bipartisan 74-25 vote of the Senate earlier in the week, will set in motion an unprecedented federal action aimed at freeing a freezing credit market for businesses and consumers alike. It authorizes the Treasury to start buying as much as $700 billion in bad mortgage-related debts from banks and other financial institutions.
President Bush, who had demanded the bill, signed it at the White House within two hours of its final passage, stepping out to a sunsplashed Rose Garden to delcare that the bill is "essential to helping America's economy weather this financial crisis.''
It also offers taxpayers more than $100 billion in relief, exempting millions from the reach of the Alternative Minimum Tax and offering tax breaks for specific businesses as well. In addition, it raises the limit on federal insurance for depositors in banks and credit unions from $100,000 to $250,000.
It was these added incentives and an unrelenting sense of urgency that turned a reluctant House around - after defeating the first version of the bailout on Monday by a vote of 228-205. Some also cited the personal intervention of presidential candidate Barack Obama, who had personally called on fellow Democrats in the House, such as Rep. John Lewis of Georgia to support the measure.
Yet, on a day in which the federal government also has reported the largest monthly job loss in five years - in a year of steady job losses that has pushed the unemployment rate to 6.1 percent - lawmakers acknowledge that the federal bailout of the financial markets is not the end of the economic task they face.
Democratic congressional leaders say the next Congress and president will be compelled to follow up with not only tougher regulation of the banking and financial institutions that spawned a meltdown in mortgage lending next year, but also more "economic stimulus'' measures aimed at creating new jobs.
"This is only the first step,'' said Rep. Rahm Emanuel (D-Ill. chairman of the House Democratic Conference. "While we address the balance sheets of banks, the next steps must address the checkbooks of families, and the challenges they face.
"The middle class is suffering,'' Emanuel said during the House debate, promising "an agenda that puts the middle class at the heart of its economic strategy, unlike the last seven years.... We must strengthen the economy.''
The White House is asking for quick delivery of the bill for the president's signing. A Bush White House which had long held that the economy was "sound'' now acknowledges the many storm warnings that have surrounded the debate over a frozen credit market - citing today's job-loss report.
"Obviously, it's a very disappointing report,'' White House spokesman Tony Fratto said today. "We're dealing with a number of shocks to our economy and have for some time....
"No one should be over-promising what this legislation will do,'' Fratto said. "This legislation is to fix a problem in our financial markets. It's not sold as giving a boost to our economy... It's averting a crisis.
"This bill will have an impact in... stabilizing the markets... If it works as we hopes it will, credit will begin flowing again.''
it's not only the sweeteners in this bill, but also the urgency of an economic crisis foreseen by the Federal Reserve and Treasury that prompted swift action today.
"The economy is at risk,'' House Majority Leader Steny Hoyer (D-Md.) said today. "Average Americans will be badly hurt if we continue to see the economy go downhill.''
Even as the House approved the $700-billion rescue and more than $100-billion in tax relief attached to it, some voiced their continuing reluctance about the measure. The measure also lifts the ceiling on the accumulated national debt, which now exceeds $10 trillion, from $10.6 trillion to $11.3 trillion.
"I myself am very skeptical of this package,'' said Rep. David Dreier (R-Calif.) "But I've ultimately concluded that this bill is a necessary evil.
"Why cant we let the market sort itself out this time?'' Dreier asked the House. "Because the market didn't create this mess.... Government-sponsored enterprises like Fannie Mae made this mess possible... Government regulators failed.''
"There's medicine that's bitter that you don't want to take but you need,'' Rep. Steve Cohen (D-Tenn.), quoting someone whom he cited as a great philosopher, Mick Jagger: "Sometimes you get what you want, and sometimes you get what you need... this time, the American economy is going to get what it needs.''
Yet still, some chafed at the tax breaks sprinkled into the measure to make it more palatable, including breaks for auto racing and Puerto Rican rum importers.
"$192 million for rum,'' complained Rep. Steven LaTourette (R-Ohio), calling on the House to take another look at the measure and "do it right... We can save half a trillion dollars and we can cut the pork. The pork doesn't belong in this bill.''
President Bush, who pressed the Congress to enact a plan first crafted by his Treasury Secretary, Henry Paulson, and went on national television and radio to campaign for it, is poised to sign the result of the package that Paulson first rolled out in a three-page outline for the bailout. That three pages grew to more than 100 in the House and more than 400 in the ultimate Senate package which the House approved today.
""I hate it," but "inaction to me is a greater danger to our country than this bill," said Rep. Zach Wamp, (R-Tenn.) one of the 133 House Republicans who allied with 95 Democrats on Monday in scuttling the bailout bill in its first version.
"Today, I'm going to cast a red, white and blue collar vote with my hand over my heart for my country,'' Wamp told the House. "I don't like it at all. As a matter of fact, I hate it... but we don't have time to rewrite this bill.''
Both of the presidential candidates - Democrat Obama and Republican John McCain - were personally calling on members of the House to support the new plan. Lewis told fellow Democrats that he had decided to support it after speaking with Obama.
Rep. Elijah Cummings (D-Md.) said Obama's encouragement of his support suggested to him that this is not the end of the issue. "I've got a man who I'm hoping will be president who's saying that's he's going to do the very things that I want done," Cummings said. "It makes me feel a lot better."
The addition of some $110 billion in tax breaks and other "sweeteners'' made it more palatable to others.
"Monday what we had was a bailout for Wall Street firms and not much relief for taxpayers and hard-hit families," Rep. Ileana Ros-Lehtinen (R-Fla.) told The Associated Press. "Now we have an economic rescue package."







Comments
Now we're in trouble. We just handed crack to a junkie.
These financial institutions are not going to change.
Be very careful Americans. Do Not Borrow unless you have to! That includes credit cards. These firms are out to get you... they want you to default. They want you to charge so much on your credit card that you have to revolve your balance! Then you pay interest, you pay finance charges... and they get HUGE bonuses. Tighten up America! Do not take out any loans unless you are in dire straights!
Posted by: kate | October 3, 2008 1:41 PM
I'm always amazed at how many times politicians claim to be saving "middle America" by passing legislation that bails out incompetent CEOs and bad planning on the part of corporations and, in this case, the financial markets. Shame on all those who claim to be helping Middle America by rescuing the rich.
Posted by: Dennis Knick | October 3, 2008 1:42 PM
when are you guys going to pass a bill to help me with my financial troubles. I am on the brink of bankruptcy, need home repairs that my city promised to help me with 3 years ago, a job that only gives my a %3 raise every year, etc. please PASS
a bill for me and make it a headline ASAP!
Posted by: mia | October 3, 2008 1:45 PM
Are we borrowing money from yet another foreign source? Where do we propose to get all this money to bail out the
financial market? We owe all the nations of the world just about. Will this get us on our feet as a sovereign and respeced nation again? Why can't we openly seek God and put our so called sophistication aside? We need divine intervention. Ignoring that there is a God and trying to handle this nation without Him has gotten us here in this place of desperation. Pray, America!!! PRAY!!!
Posted by: Pastor Kathy Maria Mosley Settles | October 3, 2008 1:45 PM
What about the people who lost there jobs and cannot afford there house now because the market is upside down. I am going to loose a house that I have lived in for 8 years. But because of the market I am stuck in a bad Morgage by Litton loan. I do not even get that much business a my grooming shop to keep up. I think this is all crap. What about the people. Not the people who made bad choices and put us where they did not.
A very Upset and no Home person.
Posted by: Tammy | October 3, 2008 1:47 PM
We'll just have to wait and see what happens, speculation is not going to solve anything at this point. We'll have to wait and see if they put their mouth where OUR money is.
Posted by: Ms Shar | October 3, 2008 1:48 PM
I see our so-called leaders decided to bail out their buddies on Wall street. I only hope that enough voters are as angry as I am and will do as I and vote against any of their represenatives that supported this garbage bill against the will of the majority of American people in the upcoming election.
Posted by: SS Kreske | October 3, 2008 1:49 PM
Fellow Americans:
My spending will be going for the 96th street bills not Wall Street carelessness
Is it that simple? I rack up bills and American taxpayers pay them back for me.
In that case, here's some they forgot to add to the 700 Billion dollar expense list
My Light Bill
My Gas Bill
My Telephone bill
My Car note
My Insurance (car and rental)
My childcare
My fuel payment
My grocery bill
My Credit Card payment's)
My parents perscription medication
My Rent (I never could obtain home loan from any lender when I was looking to buy, always an excuse now I got one for them)
Once all of these bills are paid on my behalf I will have enough money to assist in paying back Wall street losses. I have to protect my investments and that just so happens to be me and my granchildren. So, Until then don't bring me down (with this crap) when you never let me get up enough to invest jack-crap.
Posted by: concerned | October 3, 2008 1:53 PM
Corks are popping all over Wall St. and at the White House. Thank you Republicans for getting in on one last big cash grab before Bush leaves office. Bailout? Rescue Plan? Hardly, How about Golden Parachute for the Rich, Greedy, and Corrupt. My favorite quote from this story is:
Yet still, some chafed at the tax breaks sprinkled into the measure to make it more palatable, including breaks for auto racing and Puerto Rican rum importers.
"$192 million for rum,'' complained Rep. Steven LaTourette (R-Ohio), calling on the House to take another look at the measure and "do it right... We can save half a trillion dollars and we can cut the pork. The pork doesn't belong in this bill.''
How many more days before this national nightmare of an administration ends? Not soon enough...
Posted by: The World is Laughing at Us | October 3, 2008 1:57 PM
Read who will be holding American $700 billion bailout if this is true: This was written on Sept 24th before Goldman Sachs became a holding company http://www.motherjones.com/commentary/columns/2008/09/the-bailout-plans-fine-print.html
Posted by: Renee | October 3, 2008 2:16 PM
Watching San Fran Nan and "its not my fault" Barney Frank pose for a photo op with the signed bailout made me want to puke. They're smiling and laughing at the expense of the taxpayers!
Posted by: vla | October 3, 2008 2:22 PM
Bubba needs his Nascar. Which loser House Member forced racing pork onto this bill? As for the Rum producers...I'd love to hear why they need a bail out. Anyone?
Posted by: FrankK | October 3, 2008 2:31 PM
Everyone who voted for this bail out ought to be ashamed at the debt we are passing on to our children and grandchildren. I feel so sorry for my nieces and nephews, two of whom are just beginning their adult lives. They'll be working just to pay this garbage off. There was never any crisis, the sky wasn't going to fall. These idiots just wanted us to believe there really is a crisis. I agree, vote every so-called representative "of the people" out that supported this trash.
Posted by: PackerBackerRay | October 3, 2008 2:38 PM
I will not be voting in the upcoming election other than to vote against any and all current Senators and Representatives that are from IL. We the people have no representation with the current members. And I feel that neither Obama/Biden or McCain/Palin represent what the people of this country want. I would hope the the majority of Americans feel the same way. This bail out is not for the people but for Wall Street, and the banks. I am sure the forclosures will continue at the current pace and the people of this country will never see any returns on the money our government has screwed us for.
Posted by: Ruth | October 3, 2008 2:41 PM
I am fascinated by these comments and comments posted all over the web that indicate that people really did not want any type of bill passed that rescued the credit markets. I am a business attorney that represents small businesses, and I have been very busy doing workouts for financially troubled businesses and answering phone calls from people trying to open businesses -- all because no one can get credit right now. Jobs hang in the balance, and although I believe that there are several investment bankers and predatory lenders that should pay dearly for what they have done, I also recognize that doing nothing would mean that each of you wanting to be rescued from your own financial woes would find yourselves (along with me) on the bread lines if Congress had failed to try to do something about this. You are right to say that Congress has not been doing there job, but you can't sit around talking about how the car wreck should never have happened when there are people bleeding in the street. I have no faith in government, but what I do know is that this is not a Henny Penny moment, and even with the bailout, we may still suffer a global depression. We all need to take responsibility at the voting booth EVERY year, we need to start saving instead of spending what we don't have, and we need to push forward on campaign finace reform -- even if it means amending the Constitution.
Posted by: North and South | October 3, 2008 2:42 PM
Watching San Fran Nan and "its not my fault" Barney Frank pose for a photo op with the signed bailout made me want to puke. They're smiling and laughing at the expense of the taxpayers!
Posted by: vla | October 3, 2008 2:22 PM
And John the Boner, are you saying he and the republicans are guilt free. I guess you're right. It's not like THEY got us into this mess or anything. It was those gosh darn Liberal Dems and their constant call for deregulation that musta done it. Oh sorry, deregulation is YOUR party's platform now isn't it? Man up loser! This is the McBush legacy and you own it!
Posted by: FrankK | October 3, 2008 2:44 PM
Thank you, Congress, for royally screwing up our lives for the next 10 years. You didn't rescue anything, you just gave Wall Street the right to "Pass Go Collect $700 Billion". They're not "golden parachutes" anymore, they're Diamond Parachutes! Another glass of Dom, senator? Another Cuban Cigar, Mr. CEO?
If our taxes go up as much as a single penny, we should sue the government for aiding and abetting known felons (CEO's of fradulent practices) and not only reclaim our money, but get subsequent damages paid (pain and suffering) with interest!
Screw Wall Street and screw Congress. They just signed our demise.
Posted by: JayKo | October 3, 2008 2:48 PM
Middle class.... Middle class.... Middle class... What ever happened to the poor tax payers...? The under fifty thousand a year people...? We see the writting on the wall...
Posted by: hays | October 3, 2008 2:54 PM
Beyond disgusting. If ever there was proof that the system is designed for the rich and the rest of us are just glorified serfs here it is. I like what Michael Moore had to say:
http://www.alternet.org/blogs/peek/101230/michael_moore%3A_here%27s_how_to_fix_the_mess_on_wall_street/ Even if you are not a fan, as I am often not, he is right. The rich should have had to pay for this out of their own bank accounts. It should not have come from the backs of the poor. Shame on every politician who supported it!!!
Posted by: FatNSassy | October 3, 2008 3:05 PM
"Thank you Republicans for getting in on one last big cash grab before Bush leaves office." what are you talking about? The Democrats have pushed this, along with Bush. B.O. is already taking the credit for getting this bill passed. Last time I looked, he was a Democrat!!! And now he's bailing out all his Democrat buddies that got rich off Fannie and Freddie: Raines, Johnson (his VP vetter that had to resign), Dodd, Obama himself with all his campaign cash from F&F. come on.
Posted by: Sheila | October 3, 2008 3:07 PM
They are TRAITORS . You can kiss the value of the dollar goodbye . You cried when you lost a few bucks in your 401k now those bucks are worthless . We'll be like that African country with an inflation rate of 11 million percent . They'll have their hand out by the end of the year with more threats and panic . Now I'm going to take my flag down and burn it this isn't the United States any more .
Posted by: Bruno Tam | October 3, 2008 3:08 PM
This is beyond disgusting. Do not let anyone tell you that bailing out the firms that got us into trouble was the ONLY way to ease the situation. This is paying the bail of the crooks who robbed the bank. I am not really a Michael Moore fan, but he is right:
http://www.alternet.org/blogs/peek/101230/michael_moore%3A_here%27s_how_to_fix_the_mess_on_wall_street/
It could have come from the personal assets of those who made the mess. If ever there was proof the system exists for the rich and we are just glorified peasants, this is it. I won't be voting for anyone who supported it.
Posted by: FatNSassy | October 3, 2008 3:09 PM
I think we should show them just how displeased we are. Go to your bank and withdraw your money. Better get there quick, before it gets sucked down the drain. All this bill will do is sink this country.
Come election time we should see some turn over but that wont be enough. Take action now.
Posted by: pkatt | October 3, 2008 3:09 PM
I think we should show them just how displeased we are. Go to your bank and withdraw your money. Better get there quick, before it gets sucked down the drain. All this bill will do is sink this country.
Come election time we should see some turn over but that wont be enough. Take action now.
Posted by: pkatt | October 3, 2008 3:10 PM
Well I have read the first 20 or so comments on this morning's abomination by the house and agree with all of them. Not one, not one is happy about this outrage which bails out greed, corruption, and fat CEOs at the taxpayers expense!; and as for the idiot members who voted for it, like Vasquez said in "'Aliens" on the ship to LB427, "I just wanna know one thing...WHERE THEY ARE! Revolt America at the polls next month with your last dollars!
Posted by: TJ | October 3, 2008 3:20 PM
If only they hadn't added all the pork to the bill, then I would have considered it the necessary evil needed. Now - I see it as another Congressional attempt to take advantage of the rest of us and save their arse because they can. I say - vote'em all out - all of them!
Posted by: Full Moon Woman | October 3, 2008 3:21 PM
Interesting...the news is reporting that the majority of American Citizens were for this bill, yet almost all of the comments I read from the American Citizens are moritfied that the bailout was even considered. Where are all of you citizens who were for it? Or, was that just one more lie from our so-called representatives?
Posted by: Deb | October 3, 2008 3:26 PM
This bill is disgusting. What the politicans need to focus on now is to FIX the policies and practices that got us into this mess in the first place. But they won't do that. Why? Just follow the money. And note: BOTH parties are guilty and dirty in this one.
Posted by: Sharon | October 3, 2008 3:36 PM
FACTS, people, FACTS:
1. 2001-April, the Bush administration, in its 2002 budget proposal, asserted that the size of Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac is a "potential problem," and that financial trouble in these Government Sponsored Entities, or GSEs, could "cause strong repercussions in financial markets."
2. 2003, autumn, the Bush administration pushed Congress to create a new federal agency to regulate and supervise Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac.
On 2003-Sep-10, then-Treasury Secretary John Snow, before the House Financial Services Committee, " We need a strong, world-class regulatory agency to oversee the prudential operations of the GSEs, and the safety, and the soundness of their financial activities."
On the same day, 2003-Sep-10, at the same hearing, the ranking Democrat on the House Financial Services Committee Congressman Barney Frank (now chairman of the same committee) said in response, "Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac are not in a crisis. The more people, in my judgement, exaggerate a threat of safety and soundness, the more people conjur up the possibility of serious financial losses, to the Treasury, which I do not see, I think we see entities which are fundamentally sound financially and withstand some of the disaster scenarios, and even if there were a problem the federal government doesn't bail them out. But the more pressure there is there, the less I think we see in terms of affordable housing."
The legislation the Bush administration put forward that day was blocked.
3. Alan Greenspan, 2005-Sep-17, to the House Financial Services Committee, on Fannie/Freddie, "Enabling these institutions to increase in size--they they will once the crisis in their judgement passess--we are placing the total financial system of the future at substantial risk."
4. Alan Greenspan, 2006-Apr-6, "If we fail to strengthen GSE regulation we increase the possibility of insolvency and crisis."
The same day, Democratic Senator Chuck Schummer, "I think Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac over the years has done a good job and are an intrinsic part of making America the best-housed people in the world. If you look over the last 20 or whatever years, they have done a very, very, good job."
5. Senate floor, 2006-May-25, John McCain, "For years I have been concerned about the regulatory structure that governs Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac... and the sheer magnitude of these companies and the role they play in the housing market... the GSEs need to be reformed without delay." In the Senate Banking Committee, the Fannie/Freddie reform legislation that McCain cosponsored, 100% of the Republicans voted FOR it, and 100% of the Democrats, including Chuck Schummer and Chris Dodd, voted AGAINST it. This bill that passed the Banking Committee on a straight party-line voted was blocked by Democrats from passing the full Senate. Senator Obama was silent on this legislation.
As we know now, Dodd received $133,900 in campaign contributions from Fannie/Freddie (per opensecrets.org), ranking #1 in Congress. Obama received $105,949 from Fannie / Freddie (per opensecrets.org), ranking #3 in Congress.
6. 2008-Sep-25, former President Clinton indicated he AGREED with Fox News assertions that Democrats are responsible for failure to rein in Fannie/Freddie--Bill Clinton told ABC's Chris Cuomo that for years, Democrats have been "resisting any efforts by Republicans in the Congress or by me when I was President to put some standards and tighten up a little on Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac."
Posted by: 5th Beatle | October 3, 2008 3:37 PM
I want names of Congressmen who voted yes. Where can I get this?
Posted by: Over it | October 3, 2008 3:38 PM
FUNNY some of these posts talking of banks not giving loans. Perhaps they should have gone to a different bank. I heard a fella call in on the Limbaugh show and his bank said as long as he qualified he could get a loan.
I also heard that there are banks out there telling people that they are not having MONEY PROBLEMS because they did not get into trouble for offering these worthless subprime loans to people. So I do believe the market would have naturally taken care of those who did. While I think it's a shame because I've read enough about the CRA and changes made in Clinton admin that pushed for a much stronger NUMBERS game rather than qualifications, and empowerment given to ACORN groups over banks that were astounding, and therefore I think banks got screwed.
However, it still boils down to the fact that WE COULDN'T EXPECT TO GET CHANGES TO THAT AREA in this bill, so MANY OF US DIDN'T WANT IT PASSED FOR THAT REASON and of course that it wasn't constitutional to ask tax payers to bailout a select group, but the bill did pass NOW, so it's back to the same old business as usual for ACORN and CRA.
So, now I decide who to vote for>THE MAN WHO WORKED ALONG SIDE ACORN in support of these bad loans... the man who still strongly supports and donates to them OR the ticket that will more than likely CLEAN THAT BUNCH OF BS UP. LET ME SEE hmmmm>McCain/Palin08
Posted by: THAT DIDN'T TAKE LONG | October 3, 2008 3:39 PM
Total Money lost by taxpayers just a little while back: $1,242,375,537,386.32
Of course that's if we pay it back in 10 years.
$2,996,254,507,629.49 if we let it fester for 30 years.
But it's alright...
It's charged against our children and their children so we get to pretend that it doesn't exist.
It's good to know that bank executive bonus pools will be overflowing this Christmas though...
Posted by: Carl | October 3, 2008 3:57 PM
If my math is right this $700 billion, divided among 300 million would be $2333.00 for every person in the U.S.A.? My family would have received a $16,331 dollar check. Why are we bailing out Wall Street? The check should go to us? jjz
Posted by: John Zinkel | October 3, 2008 4:03 PM
I called Lipinski's office and Lipinski voted "no". I just might have to vote for him again. The Congress is the only place where you can send a $700 billion bill back and then vote for an $800 billion plus bill. Does this make sense? Let's all take our money out of the banks. Send Congress and President a message.
Posted by: Kathleen | October 3, 2008 4:21 PM
I already called my Congressman, Mark Udall and voiced my opposition to it. He voted against the 1st version. I really hope he did not vote for the second version. He will definately not be getting my vote if he did.
We the people,just need to check and see and speak through the ballot box. It would be the greatest thing ever, if enough people got upset and voted a good portion of the yes people out of office. Maybe then they will understand that it is not good to pass a bill that the people oppose and MOST LEADING ECONOMISTS oppose. Please, don't give me this b.s. that this is good for the American people.
Posted by: Sublim1 | October 3, 2008 4:21 PM
"Over It":
I found a complete list of those who voted either way on the Washington Post site. You can look by state, party, gender, or several other ways. If you click on the name it gives a small bio-sketch, a picture, and a link to e-mail them.
I found it by Googling "US Congress voting record". See what you can find. I am relieved to say that my rep voted against both attempts; however, I was saddened by the names of people from several states (where I have lived in the past) whom I respected that voted for it.
Posted by: SadTaxPayer | October 3, 2008 4:34 PM
We need to identify the "congressmen" who added pork for NASCAR & rum importers and make sure they get voted OUT next election!!!
Posted by: reality | October 3, 2008 4:54 PM
FACTS, people, FACTS:
1. 2001-April, the Bush administration, in its 2002 budget proposal, asserted that the size of Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac is a "potential problem," and that financial trouble in these Government Sponsored Entities, or GSEs, could "cause strong repercussions in financial markets."
2. 2003, autumn, the Bush administration pushed Congress to create a new federal agency to regulate and supervise Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac.
On 2003-Sep-10, then-Treasury Secretary John Snow, before the House Financial Services Committee, " We need a strong, world-class regulatory agency to oversee the prudential operations of the GSEs, and the safety, and the soundness of their financial activities."
On the same day, 2003-Sep-10, at the same hearing, the ranking Democrat on the House Financial Services Committee Congressman Barney Frank (now chairman of the same committee) said in response, "Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac are not in a crisis. The more people, in my judgement, exaggerate a threat of safety and soundness, the more people conjur up the possibility of serious financial losses, to the Treasury, which I do not see, I think we see entities which are fundamentally sound financially and withstand some of the disaster scenarios, and even if there were a problem the federal government doesn't bail them out. But the more pressure there is there, the less I think we see in terms of affordable housing."
The legislation the Bush administration put forward that day was blocked.
3. Alan Greenspan, 2005-Sep-17, to the House Financial Services Committee, on Fannie/Freddie, "Enabling these institutions to increase in size--they they will once the crisis in their judgement passess--we are placing the total financial system of the future at substantial risk."
4. Alan Greenspan, 2006-Apr-6, "If we fail to strengthen GSE regulation we increase the possibility of insolvency and crisis."
The same day, Democratic Senator Chuck Schummer, "I think Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac over the years has done a good job and are an intrinsic part of making America the best-housed people in the world. If you look over the last 20 or whatever years, they have done a very, very, good job."
5. Senate floor, 2006-May-25, John McCain, "For years I have been concerned about the regulatory structure that governs Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac... and the sheer magnitude of these companies and the role they play in the housing market... the GSEs need to be reformed without delay." In the Senate Banking Committee, the Fannie/Freddie reform legislation that McCain cosponsored, 100% of the Republicans voted FOR it, and 100% of the Democrats, including Chuck Schummer and Chris Dodd, voted AGAINST it. This bill that passed the Banking Committee on a straight party-line voted was blocked by Democrats from passing the full Senate. Senator Obama was silent on this legislation.
As we know now, Dodd received $133,900 in campaign contributions from Fannie/Freddie (per opensecrets.org), ranking #1 in Congress. Obama received $105,949 from Fannie / Freddie (per opensecrets.org), ranking #3 in Congress.
6. 2008-Sep-25, former President Clinton indicated he AGREED with Fox News assertions that Democrats are responsible for failure to rein in Fannie/Freddie--Bill Clinton told ABC's Chris Cuomo that for years, Democrats have been "resisting any efforts by Republicans in the Congress or by me when I was President to put some standards and tighten up a little on Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac."
Posted by: SuperiorBank failure | October 3, 2008 5:28 PM
Let us not forget who really brought about this whole mess. As an octogenarian I've lived through the first
Wall Street debacle and remember the bread lines. Let us make sure that the current resident of the White House gets a chance to be in one. See what his War Mongering has caused.
Posted by: Louis M Zembruski Sr. | October 3, 2008 5:48 PM
"SuperiorBank failure": Would you like to explain to me how legislative efforts to reform Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac were supposedly "blocked by Democrats" at times when Republicans controlled Congress?
Posted by: Tim | October 3, 2008 6:53 PM
Giving more money to the biggest loser we have ever voted into office. This entire charade over the past 7.5 years has been a well planned demise of the middle class. Yes, it began during the Reagan years. And Cheney has been the final executioner of life as we have known it for the past 80 years. We are left with nothing but bills for: an un-necessary war, an enormous pay check for Wall Street, and gas prices to beat the band. How stupid we are to have elected the very people who while making unlimited money for their friends, have ruined our lives. We are bone heads.
Posted by: chi chi | October 3, 2008 7:04 PM
Where exactly is this money coming from? Which foreign government or business (same difference ) owns yet another piece of America ? What did the banks do with all the billions in credit the federal reserve bank bequeathed them ? Where are the guarantees banks will once again loan money to Americans for houses & cars ?
Why am I getting this feeling we the people hanve gotten the royal screw from the government ?
Posted by: Writer Of Wrongs | October 3, 2008 7:21 PM
Louis,
It is sad that someone with your age and experience could be so wrong as to the cause of this mess. It is a bi-partisan pile of horse hockey. It was the greed of the Wall Street "geniuses" who invented new ways to make money while producing nothing, and pawn off their junk on unsuspecting, trusting investors. The lack of regulations (brought about by both parties) and shoddy work by the regulatory agencies on those regs that still existed are also to blame.
Posted by: SadTaxPayer | October 3, 2008 8:08 PM
Those listening to Lou Dobbs tonight just heard that in 2007, the hundreds of thousands of stock investors made 75 billion, and the few top executives made 39 billion in salaries. What is wrong with this picture?
Also, want to know what meg-billionaire Warren Buffett just made on this bail-out? Let's just say, he is having an "all you can eat" buffet at the taxpayers expense.
Posted by: Marnie | October 3, 2008 8:16 PM
Chi Chi,
Be ready for at least another four years of it if Obama wins. His three top economic advisers are the former top guys from Freddie.
Posted by: SadTaxPayer | October 3, 2008 8:22 PM
Today, it was once again confirmed that the Executive and Legislative branches of OUR GOVERNMENT do not and will not listen to the will of the people. I do not know who has the ear of our government but it appear to be taking orders from someone else. I would love this Law to be deemed unconstitutional by the Supreme Court but I think it is sleeping and has a do not disturb sign on the chamber doors. If you would like to see the full context of our new law you can review it and who voted for it at the House of Representatives web portal (http://www.house.gov/), or at the Senates web portal (http://www.senate.gov/), look for resolution H.R.1424.
Posted by: Steven | October 3, 2008 9:02 PM
Clinton started it. Democrats blocked any attempt to stop it.
Shame on the Dems. We don't nee to let them lead this country for another day.
Vote for America. Vote Straight Repbulican.
We deserve better.
Posted by: Mandy | October 3, 2008 10:28 PM
Great article in the New York Times today http://www.nytimes.com/2008/10/03/business/03sec.html?ref=business regarding the infamous meeting in 2004 when the SEC opened the gates for the financial firms. Guess who was in charge of Goldman Sachs and pushed for opening the gates for these firms...Henry M. Paulson Jr., now our current Treasury Secretary and big pusher of the bailout package. What a disgrace. Same thing for Christopher Cox, chairman of the Securities and Exchange Commission. The SEC totally blew it by allowing these financial institutions to take on such huge debt. Thanks for wasting $700 billion of our tax dollars.
Posted by: Booby J | October 3, 2008 10:32 PM
October 3rd, 2008. "a day that will live in infamy" when the former american middle class taxpayers were thrown overboard with the bailout. And the "gentlemen" of wall street were very merry indeed!!!
Posted by: tj | October 4, 2008 1:03 AM
A day that will live in infamy.
Fun watching the press conf of Nancy & Co.
They couldn't get off the platform fast enough to leave the spotlight to Barny.
Barney pulled one of the oldest exit strategies of all time, got a note the "I have to take a phone call" then kept yammering for about 3 more minutes.
They think we won't remember, we'll all be distracted by SNL and Monday Night Football.
Maybe.
Maybe not.
You better hope Maybe.
The extent to which Barack, if elected, can unwind this and punish the wrongdoers and establish oversight, will be the first big test.
Posted by: ornery | October 4, 2008 1:51 AM
Is it more than a coincidence that this stock market crisis takes place now, as we approach voting time? I think the government should've rather declared this a jubilee year, forgiven every middle and lower income American's debt. Or, how might the government collect on the bad debts they've bought? Please tell me they won't be selling those bad debts to bad debt buyers in China. It's all too ludicrous and frightening.
Posted by: patti morey | October 5, 2008 3:04 AM
PA 15th district- charlie dent voted no first then yes second
now when I go to vote, it will be for anyone who is running against him no matter how bad they may be. time to get all these senators out of there who just sold us down the river!
Posted by: Tom | October 5, 2008 7:42 AM