Young votes no on bailout plan, which fails in U.S. House
Originally published Monday, September 29, 2008 at 11:24 a.m.
Updated Tuesday, September 30, 2008 at 10:18 a.m.
Digg
delicious
Facebook
Mixx
Reddit
Stumble It!WASHINGTON – Rep. Don Young on Monday voted against a $700 billion bailout of the ailing U.S. financial system, saying there was no public support for the plan.
The House voted 228-205 against the rescue plan, immediately sending stocks and other investments tumbling on Wall Street.
Republicans voted 2-1 against the bailout. Ninety-four Democrats also bucked leadership to vote against the controversial plan.
Young complained the bailout of at-risk financial institutions went against the nation's free market philosophy, and came with little guarantee it would benefit Main Street America.
"It's my feeling that the taxpayers would be hurt very badly with this package, primarily because we would be bailing out a lot of foreign companies," he said.
Sen. Lisa Murkowski said she was disappointed by the House vote but still planned to support the bailout when it reaches the Senate.
"It doesn't change my mind that we must take some action immediately," she said. "Inaction is just not something we can handle as a country."
Sen. Ted Stevens said he has reservations about the plan but warned the alternative of doing nothing could have dire consequences for the U.S. economy.
"If we do not act, the financial crisis will spread throughout the economy, crippling small businesses and hurting all Americans," he said.
President Bush had lobbied aggressively for the massive bailout, which was supposed to restore confidence in the financial markets and avert a credit freeze that threatens to cripple the economy.
The plan would grant Treasury Secretary Henry Paulson authority to buy up bad home loans and other troubled mortgage-related assets from over-extended banks in order to keep credit flowing.
The package was put together over the weekend by a bipartisan group of House and Senate leaders and the White House. Leadership of both parties urged their members to vote for it.
Bush spoke to Congress on Monday morning trying to rally support for the bailout, telling lawmakers that the bill was necessary to keep the "crisis in our financial system from spreading throughout the economy."
But the failed attempt to get the measure through the House revealed a lack of faith in an administration that many lawmakers hold responsible for the financial crisis in the first place.
Young and other House Republicans skeptical the plan could succeed, complained it unfairly placed taxpayers on the hook for the risky investments of Wall Street.
"Why should the government buy these toxic loans with taxpayer money?" Young said. "Once you start using taxpayer dollars you are infusing into the structure of our economy a government-controlled, Big Brother attitude, and I'm just against doing that."
News of the bill's failure caused the stock market to plunge nearly 800 points Monday afternoon. Murkowski said she feared further declines could weaken the economy.
"I'm concerned that we haven't seen the bottom yet," Murkowski said.
Young blamed House Speaker Nancy Pelosi, D-Calif., for giving what he called a partisan speech on the floor immediately before the vote, which prompted many Republicans to reverse their planned support for the package.
But many Democrats also opposed the bill. Congressional offices have been swamped with calls from taxpayers angry over what they perceive as a bailout for greedy banks who made risky investments.
Pelosi blamed the bill's failure on the administration for trying to force it through Congress right before a contentious election.
Both Democrats and Republicans said the Bush administration did a poor job of convincing the public of the necessity of the rescue plan, putting lawmakers in the position of voting for a widely unpopular bill less than five weeks before they have to face voters at the ballot box.
Young's office received more than 2,000 calls from constituents about the bailout package with the vast majority opposed to the plan, said Meredith Kenny, Young's spokeswoman.
"I've done what I believe is correct because that is what Alaskans asked me to do," Young said after the vote.
While Young objects to the bailout on principle, he said it could have passed the House if the administration would have done a better job of explaining it to voters.
"The bill wasn't that bad the way it was," he said. "The problem is that it's looked at as a bailout for Wall Street, who have been living very recklessly over the years."
If the markets continue to tank and Alaskans change their minds, Young said he might switch his vote.
"If the public would support it, I would be more inclined to," he said.
Murkowski said much of the opposition to the plan was spurred by the way Paulson and the White House tried to cram it down lawmakers' throats.
Many of the objections – the need for limits on executive compensation, greater oversight and an equity stake for the government – were hammered out in bipartisan negotiations before the bill went to the floor, Murkowski said.
"We've clearly come a long way from that original proposal," she said.
Stevens warned that doing nothing could have grave consequences for the economy and cause the stock market to continue to lose value.
"Not only could it severely devalue our Permanent Fund, it will seriously impact Alaskans' ability to obtain credit cards or loans for cars or home improvements," he said in a prepared statement released late Monday. "It will also impact the retirement accounts of both today’s workers and seniors who are relying on them now."
Lawmakers are off today in observance of the Jewish holiday, but the House was expected to revisit the bailout bill on Thursday. The Senate could vote as early as Thursday evening or Friday, Murkowski said.
Community Discussion
Newsminer.com doesn't necessarily condone the comments here, nor does it review every post. Read our full user's agreement.
Here comes the roller-coaster.
Let it tank! Maybe then the overinflated housing market will pop totally. Face it, some folks will have to starve.
Well, we will see what happens leading up to election day.
It is the first time in all the years he has been in D.C., that I have said, GOOD FOR YOU DON!
THANK YOU DON YOUNG!!!
You just earned my vote.
Stevens and Murkowski...You just lost my vote.
Do you want hard times for a year or 10 years? Check out Ron Paul's recent videos on YouTube [about the bailout] to get the big picture.
Now, this is the kind of leadership I could get behind! (and I'm not a Democrat) WOW! This is Marcy Kaptur, D-Ohio...
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=S27yitK32...
Yes, I think our household is changing our minds... to vote for Don Young afterall. He really came through.
go Don E...
PioneerAK
+1
Sigh. So much for Don Young having the foresight to save the economy. He avoids the short term unpopularity of being associated with a bailout of Wall Street but shows that he doesn't have the fortitude to make the tough decisions when they need to be made for the good of the country.
I am NOT looking forward to living in another Great Depression.
And the Dow drops 778 points. The biggest drop in HISTORY.
At the bare minimum, regardless of which party was more responsible for this catastrophe, it should make the 'less government regulation is always better' morons shut the hell up for a while...
It's funny... Old Man McCain doesn't talk much about deregulating the health care industry like he did the financial industry any more.
Don Young did the right thing. The credit crunch is bad, very very bad, for all of us, but a bailout would just prolong the agony.
All of us, yes all of us, will lose money if there is no bailout. We lose money in our retirement funds, the PFD portfolio will lose some value, but in the end it will work itself out.
Had the folks who were tearing up worthless stocks during the Great Depression held on to those stocks, they would in many cased be filthy rich now (or their family would).
Let the market sort itself out! Government backed securities (read: government influence in the market) is why we are in this mess to begin with (never mind that Republicans on the helm got us here), a government bailout is not the answer.
Only if folks lose a LOT of money in this process one can be reasonably sure that it will not repeat itself. A bailout is like saying: You screwed up, here's a cookie!
Yes, a failed bailout will hurt and cost all of us, not just the banking execs and shareholders, we will all pay, but it's better to take a hard hit and get over it than to have a creeping infection wearing us down.
As far as re-electing Don Young goes, come on! This vote was a graceful way to end his work on a positive note. It doesn't matter whether you elect a Democrat or a Republican in his place, but we desperately need someone younger, someone who is in touch with the reality of life as we know it.
The House and Senate can still pull this out and 'save' Wall Street but they don't have to bankrupt our future to do it.
I do agree with Don Young on this one (and I may actually vote for him even though I hadn't planned to).
God I hate it when I agree with Don Young.
Here's a good argument against the bailout written by a Harvard economics professor:
http://www.cnn.com/2008/POLITICS/09/29/m...
1. "that was agreed to over the weekend" apparently is wasn't. Or is it that full House & Senate didn't play ball with the back-room deal?
2. It was a business deal with private investors taking private risks to get private profits. Why is it now the burden of the public who is not going to see the profit?
3. Is this in effect, "nationalizing" the mortgage/banking industry?
4. Why did the "agreeing" parties add under the table spending to make 3 pages go to 78+ pages?
5. Is it possible that the "quick" action is to cover the improprieties of the CEO's connected to the the Democrats & Republicans?
The 778 points the DOW dropped isn't the biggest drop in history. It is the biggest point drop. It only dropped 7 percent. In 1929 the DOW dropped 24.5 percent over a two day period.
I hope the bailout never goes through. It is only prolonging the inevitable. May be worse if it doesn't work as planned.
Either way things are going to be real scary for awhile. Time to start saving those pennies. I need to write Santa and tell him that I won't be able to pay him this year. Maybe the Government will attempt to bail him out too.
pioneer, I wouldn't go that far, voting for him, just saying good for you Don is enough!
Are you kidding me? They need to vote for this rescue plan or Wall Street will crash and so will everything else. The only reason this was voted down was because all the members of the house want to be re-elected. I know they're politicians but how selfish can they be! It also amazes me how many of the voters will thing this is a good thing!
Maybe we should vote for the guy who wrote this
I'm against the $85,000,000,000.00 bailout of AIG.
Instead, I'm in favor of giving $85,000,000,000 to America in a 'We Deserve It Dividend.'
To make the math simple, let's assume there are 200,000,000 bonafide US Citizens 18+.
Our population is about 301,000,000 +/- counting every man, woman and child. So 200,000,000 might be a fair stab at adults 18 and up.
So divide 200 million adults 18+ into $85 billion that equals $425,000.00.
My plan is to give $425,000 to every person 18+ as a 'We Deserve It Dividend.'
Of course, it would NOT be tax free. So let's assume a tax rate of 30%. Every individual 18+ has to pay $127,500.00 in taxes. That sends $25,500,000,000 right back to Uncle Sam.
But it means that every adult 18+ has $297,500.00 in their pocket. A husband and wife have $595,000.00. What would you do with $297,500.00 to $595,000.00 in your family?
Pay off your mortgage -- housing crisis solved.
Repay college loans -- what a great boost to new grads
Put away money for college -- it'll be there
Save in a bank -- create money to loan to entrepreneurs.
Buy a new car - create jobs
Invest in the market - capital drives growth
Pay for your parent's medical insurance - health care improves
Enable Deadbeat Dads to come clean - or else
Maybe we should vote for the guy who wrote this
I'm against the $85,000,000,000.00 bailout of AIG.
Instead, I'm in favor of giving $85,000,000,000 to America in a 'We Deserve It Dividend.'
To make the math simple, let's assume there are 200,000,000 bonafide US Citizens 18+.
Our population is about 301,000,000 +/- counting every man, woman and child. So 200,000,000 might be a fair stab at adults 18 and up.
So divide 200 million adults 18+ into $85 billion that equals $425,000.00.
My plan is to give $425,000 to every person 18+ as a 'We Deserve It Dividend.'
Of course, it would NOT be tax free. So let's assume a tax rate of 30%. Every individual 18+ has to pay $127,500.00 in taxes. That sends $25,500,000,000 right back to Uncle Sam.
But it means that every adult 18+ has $297,500.00 in their pocket. A husband and wife have $595,000.00. What would you do with $297,500.00 to $595,000.00 in your family?
Pay off your mortgage -- housing crisis solved.
Repay college loans -- what a great boost to new grads
Put away money for college -- it'll be there
Save in a bank -- create money to loan to entrepreneurs.
Buy a new car - create jobs
Invest in the market - capital drives growth
Pay for your parent's medical insurance - health care improves
Enable Deadbeat Dads to come clean - or else
Remember this is for every adult U. S. Citizen 18+ including the folks who lost their jobs at Lehman Brothers and every other company that is cutting back, and of course, for those serving in our Armed Forces.
If we're going to redistribute wealth let's really do it...instead of trickling out a puny $1000.00 ("vote buy" ) economic incentive that is being proposed by one of our candidates for President.
If we're going to do an $85 billion bailout, let's bail out every adult U. S. Citizen 18+!
As for AIG - liquidate it. Sell off its parts. Let American General go back to being American General. Sell off the real estate. Let the private sector bargain hunters cut it up and clean it up.
Here's my rationale. We deserve it and AIG doesn't. Sure it's a crazy idea that can "never work." But can you imagine the Coast-To-Coast Block Party! How do you spell Economic Boom?
I trust my fellow adult Americans to know how to use the $85 Billion'We Deserve It Dividend' more than I do the geniuses at AIG or in Washington DC.
And remember, The Family plan only really costs $59.5 Billion because $25.5 Billion is returned instantly in taxes to Uncle Sam. Talk about a stimulus package!
Ahhh...I feel so much better getting that off my chest.
Kindest personal regards,
A Creative Guy & Citizen of the Republic
PS: Feel free to pass this along to your pals as its either good for a laugh or a tear or a very sobering thought on how to best use $85 Billion!!
Bukuof,
Rather than passing along something you got in your email, try the math. IT DOESN'T WORK. Comes out to $425 each. That barely covers one of my car payments, let alone someones whole morgage.
I particularly liked the story in the Wall Street Journal about how McCain is blaming Democrats for the bailout's failure -- even though two-thirds of House Republicans voted against it and two-thirds of House Democrats voted for it. (http://blogs.wsj.com/washwire/2008/09/29...) Too bad Gov. Palin got paired with such a doofus for the presidential ticket.
I have to give credit when credit is due.
Good Job, Don.
>God I hate it when I agree with Don Young.
Amen.
Preston,
Oh, its better than that - earlier in the day, McCain was taking credit for the bailout bill passing - because, according to his staff, McCain got the Republicans in Congress to agree. Until, of course, it failed, and then McCain rushed out a story saying it failed because of Obama...
Perhaps McCain's press team should just wait until there is a vote before they take credit...
Maybe we should look at the numbers before we start blaming either party, 95 Democrats and 133 Republicans agreed that this bailout was a bad idea for our country. It isn’t like one side alone stopped this bill.
Good job Don! The fatcats are crying crocodile tears now. They are going to take the drubbing they need to see what is like to be left in the cold. Bush and Paulson only had the money people in mind for this bailout. Not us. Our government should do nothing until they get a bill that helps us, those on main street, not Wall Street.
Hey DNM staff -- do you guys need a new proofreader?
"Don't nothing is not an option, though, Stevens said."
I don't think that's a correct sentence, is it?
Or is that really what Stevens said?
---
That whole "$425,000" thing just gets more humorous every time another mathematically challenged individual posts it! *chuckle*
Thank You Don Young. I pay my mortgage payment on time, and think everyone else should. Buyer beware is still a good piece of advice when buying a home and mortgage. If your job doesn't support an expensive house, then don't buy one! Simple. Having no equity in your home by borrowing against the house (home equity) for a new vehicle is also just stupid management of your money. When will this country finally let people be responsible for their own actions!
I am really concerned about which countries will be be buying our country out from under us now that it is becoming so cheap. This is where the rich leave and the rest of us get ready for war, or something like that. (I really need to start taking some anti-depressants) ;-)
Pass the friggin bill. What does anyone not understand about this? PASS IT! Otherwise it is total meltdown. Lost jobs, no paychecks, America can close its' doors.
Just for everyones' information: The Federal Reserve, with or without Congress, is getting to dump 630 billion dollars on the banks anyway:
www.bloomberg.com/apps/news?pid=20601087...
so who wants a job?..gold baby gold..this here is FBKS AK!
For all that are cheering the decision not too fund Wall Street.
Remember that PFD you just got this year well consider it the last one you will see for some time to come at that rate of return.
Work hard and have a 401K? well if it's like many unless you are near retirement you have probably lost anywhere from 10 to 30K within the last 6 months and will only get worse unless something is done.
Shopping for a home?
Might be a problem even if your credit is prestine. Credit have a minor blemish? Then better go check out the apartment leases.
All the small companies just starting out?
Sorry the banks will have little to risk on your business, so you may want to fire a few people to restructure.
Large companies will do the same.
Need to buy food? Sorry but the cost of food will also be inflated insuring the already weak dollar is even weaker.
The only ones need not worry are probably retired from government or will expect a pension like the politicians who are determining our future right now.
They can afford to wait or let it crash others can't......
Good Work Don Young.
Your logic will have no effect here, user6244.
We shur stuk it to them buk lurners up to woll street tho!
FYI.. check C-Span it is your most accurate source of information.
This pm .. some reps were talking.
(1)The Democrats have control of the house; they could have passed the w/out any Republican votes.
(2)The practical effect is: they voted to implement a free market solution. The DOW took a 775 point dive and oil went down 10 dollars.
(3)The House is taking a vacation for 2 days (because the issue is extremely important???)
(4)When they were talking about the bail out passing oil went up. (My observation)
(5)Donald Trump on fox news , this am, forecast the price of oil crashing down to 20 bucks or less. (if they don't do a bail out... )
(My opinion: If Trump is correct, and oil goes to 20 bucks.. that will have about the same effect as a bail out.. by freeing up our money to pay our bills)
(6)The Financial Times (news paper in London) reported big investors in the hedge funds are bailing out. (I suspect the hedge funds were manipulating the market for their profits.)
The Democrats won't pass the bill without the Republicans passing it as well. The Democrats have gotten caught too many times in lose-lose binds caused by this administration to venture there again.
If worst comes to worst it will be passed after the Nov. 4th elections.
"The only reason this was voted down was because all the members of the house want to be re-elected." You bet'cha! And it worked! Don's got my vote.
Looks like a case of fraud! Fuld, jail time!
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news...
Fire Cox!
http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20080918/ap_o...
I know I'm in the minority here, but I am truly in awe of you all. What is the main motivation for being so against this 'bailout'. Is it because some fat cat from Wall St. will benefit? Is it because some family in California who didn't pay their mortgage might get help? Okay, the second possibility is probably less likely.
The idea of the bill was supposed to be to hold the financial system together. Whether you all know it or not, we ARE on a precipice that is going to be very hard to recover. If there is no action we are ALL going to suffer, possibly profoundly. But no, your thirst for vengeance will be everyone's undoing.
Don't whine to me when you want to get a car loan, or a mortgage, or maybe even your paycheck from your employer. No don't come to me when it all falls down! I'm certainly not saying it will definitely do so, I'm saying if it does we all suffer. Then Main St. can have even more reason to be bitter, but alas it won't be Wall St. or Congress that will be to blame. It will be Main St. Seriously, adjust your attitudes and suck it up to find an alternative. Stop whining because of your own circumstances that you helped create. You voted for our leaders, you didn't pay your mortgages, you screamed at a 'bailout' of Wall St., that you helped create the conditions for.
Of course, I'm not blaming everyone in this comments section, or Fairbanks, or wherever. I'm only saying that Americans, both rich and poor, created this problem and Americans both rich and poor are going to either have to solve it or suffer for it.
therealisttruest
http://therealisttruest.blogspot.com/
Bailout Wall Street crooks, No way! > http://biz.yahoo.com/ap/080928/as_hong_k...
Look, there's plenty of other options, but congress can't figure out a game plan. Without the US pumping any available cash into this problem, you're looking at lost jobs, no paychecks, no businesses.
Banks are now on edge of closing around the world.
You can blame anyone you want, but the outcome without any acion is pretty damn clear.
My personal reservation:
I remember the vote on the Gulf of Tomkin Resolution. (LBJ stampeded congress into starting the Viet Nam war and the Senate voted yes 99 to 1. The inflammatory issue was North Viet Nam fired on an American Naval ship. Years later we find out the ship was well within North Viet Nam's waters and the their [probably return] "fire" knocked some paint off.)
The current issue is so dangerous, so pervasive, the sky is falling, falling, falling --- that the House is taking a 3 day religious holiday / vacation.
This sort of thing makes my paranoids twitch! Me thinks we are being screwed.
"95 Democrats and 133 Republicans agreed that this bailout was a bad idea for our country."
Sometimes bipartisanship works.
The Soviets spent seventy-four years artificially propping up their economy. Didn't work. We need to learn from this.
Roosevelt, BTW, didn't bring this country out of the Depression with the New Deal, World War Two did the job instead (as historians virtually unanimously agree). And it was Reagan who bailed us out of the economic malaise of the seventies.
So, either pray for a very big war or a president with some vision. Unfortunately, at the moment the first option seems more likely than the second.
Clipped from the web site mentioned above.
Hong Knog China news.
"Lehman Brothers Holdings Inc. filed the biggest bankruptcy in U.S. history on Sept. 15. It reported assets of $639 billion and debt of $613 billion."
I will bet you thought Lehman Brothers was broke! Hardly with 26 billion in the bank.
Why give the Wall Street Gang $700 billion?
http://www.rense.com/general27/stt.htm
SEC put a no short selling of bank stocks for 30 days, need to extend that till Jan.09 also put a short selling cap on all stocks 2 % of float, It's no wonder the vote went 228 - 205
Thank you, Don Young for doing the constitutionally-correct thing. It is such a treat to see someone with guts.
Don Young voted right. I wonder how Mr. Berkowitz would have voted. It took some guts to stand up to the House leadership and the President, with the media declaring a catastrophe if the bill didn't pass. Then again, I've heard that 3 out of 4 Americans were against the bill. If that's true, then 75% of the people heard all of the ballyhoo last week that the world was going to end if we didn't cough up 700 big ones by the weekend, and said "not good enough". And Rep Young read the tea leaves.
Mine is not an original thought. I'm not versed enough in economics to explain it. But wouldn't a smaller low interest loan to Wall St from the taxpayers, the FIDC styled insurance program, a vacation from capital gains (and whatever else that fits) taxes, legal scrutiny of wrong doers with indictments pending, and a prohibition of lending institutes lobbying Congress create a combination that would work?
The federal government would not get any further into the mortgage business. Better than that, the taxpayers wouldn't get stuck with the entire bill.
marlo---
I had to laugh when I read your early comment. That had to hurt you to write.
DON YOUNG, About time you came around. As you were saying then about Indian Country issue, that Venetie would previal you lied.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LfascZSTU...
One vote should not make Don Young the hero of all Alaskans. Did he make the right choice today? Yes. Should we keep in mind the corruption, side deals, and secret legal troubles on Election Day? Absolutely yes. I give credit to Don Young for sticking up for Alaskans today, but regardless my vote is still for Ethan Berkowitz. One vote is not enough to give Don Young his job back.
Don Young got it wrong. At the same time there are many strings attached to this proposed "bailout". What has happened is a result of greed, and not just the greed of the investment bankers and financials. It was the greed of people who wanted something for nothing -- the purchase of a home they could not afford using a loan for which they did not qualify. This is another form of entitlement. Those who got into the most trouble were those who could not wait to "earn" their bigger and better home, but rather jumped on the cheap money bandwagon. Remember as a kid when you bought a cheap toy, and it broke, and you were disappointed?
The subprime loan mess, just a part of our current crisis, was such an obvious disaster-in-the-making anyone could see it. And they probably did, and made a big mistake: THEY TRUSTED THEIR BANKER or loan agency without listening to their own inner voice. It would have been saying "This looks too good to be true."
Those who believe that a credit bailout is not necessary and that we have always "paid our own way" are ignoring history on a key point. This nation was built on credit. The early farmers, ranchers and gold miners borrowed for seed for spring planting, or for breeding stock, or a grubstake, to be paid back in the fall. The difference is that today's financial institutions offer, and the public blindly accepts, revolving credit IN RETURN FOR NOTHING. People who cannot afford it borrow heavily and then pay "interest only" and then blame the financial institutions for their situation.
The financials should be more responsible, and they should not be bailed out. However, this so-called bailout is more along the lines of a loan, like the bailout of Chrysler a generation ago. IT MUST BE PAID BACK and is NOT just a handout. But short of letting the credit industry collapse we have little choice. Sadly, the current bailout proposal is just the beginning. Even if more money is not needed, we will be in financial pain for some time to come. Money will be tight, and that is good in the way that financial discipline is good. The investment bankers should not get a pass on this either. I am not sure what punishment they should endure, but it better hurt, a whole bunch, in proportion to the way "the little guy" will be hurting!
It's enough to make you wish you'd banked some of those PFD checks and that energy rebate, huh?
For those who think this is some sort of conspiracy by the successors of the "Trilateral Commission" ask yourself how destruction of this cash cow called the free market economy could possibly benefit those whose greed has destroyed it.
What we should have done was give all the money to every American over 18. There's exactly 200,000,021 of them. Now, I'm not familiar with math, or any other foreign language, but that works out to approximately $94 trillion dollars per person, I would guess.
That's a fact. How can you say no to $94 trillion dollars? I can see the ads now, "Economic Bailout Special! Buy 50 million ATVs and get a free ATV factory! Buy 200,000 airplane tickets and own your own airline!
Seriously, I'm not sure if this would have been good or not, but right now, my retirement account tells me it was a bad idea to reject it! I've lost something like $8,000 today. Hopefully it will iron itself out one way or the other.
I do think SOMETHING should be done by the Feds, but whether or not this was the right choice, I'm not sure.
Ak Curmudgeon said it well.
I might add you gotta break some eggs to make an omelet.
We have been living a lie and putting off the inevitable and there comes a time to pay the piper.
This country needs a shaking by the scruff of the neck, we've been living in a la-la land; it was inevitable to have to face our problems after sweeping them under the rug for all these years.
These are the same jerks invested in Chinese poisonous food factories, out to squeeze every last bit of profit from whatever is produced.
The rest of America has been losing their pensions promised for decades now, the same Wall Street strollers got Congress and a compliant Supreme Court to roll right over them and now we too have been forced to pay attention.
The Social Security lie is another doozy.
Probably dropped a couple bil in the Permanent Fund today, my what a surprise.
The rot must be removed, unfortunately without anesthetic in this instance.
I have gotten a kick out of watching the CNBC crew freak out, Maria Bartiromo was shouting in New Joisy gutter accent as the walls came tumbling down after the vote today.....
P.S. They'll pass it on Thursday and all will be well (?) again.
I agree with the Alaska Curmudgeon, I hate to agree with Don Young but his time he was right on the money. The idea of further devaluing the dollar inorder to prop up housing prices which have been artificially inflated in the past ten years is just as detrimental (probably moreso) than doing nothing at all.
The people out there who are praying for this bailout most likely see it as a way to usher in socialism for all (if the bailout works, which it would not)
The most likely result of the bailout would be short term recovery followed by a larger crash where another bailout would be needed.
No matter how you look at this financial situation, we have mortgaged everything as a nation in this massive debt scheme where we either increase the number of dollars in circulation or suffer the consequences of market corrections. Either way, we are headed in one of two directions, one in which we have a painful market correction which would last 1-3 years or runaway inflation followed by drastic market correction that would last 8-15 years. Seems like an easy choice to me...
Good job, Don!
Congressman Young finally got something right. What amazes me is the number of supposed experts and politicians who say they didn't see this coming. Energy and housing costs have been going up for several years. People were living on credit hoping for better economic times. Wages have been stagnant, and banks and credit card companies extended tons of credit to people who were already over-extended. I'm just a lowly mechanic, and I saw this coming three years ago.
And today was not the "biggest one day loss" in history on Wall Street. It wasn't even in the top 10. It was 17th. It was the largest number drop, but it was only a 7% decline.
If the government wants to do something positive and clear these bad mortgages of the books, why not just pay them off for those who are facing foreclosure? I'd much rather see that than see 700 billion go in the pockets of the rich investment idiots who created this mess.
Pass the bill = Recession
Don't pass = Depression
700 billion blank check is media mis-information and came from the start of proposing a bill to aid the economy which had not been completely thought out.
Politicians short on time hammered out a bill that was far from perfect but wasn't a 700 billion dollar blank check either.
lawmakers from both sides like children didn't want to step up and lead the US out of this mess, instead they have chosen to bury there heads like many commenters on here or point fingers at whose fault it is.
Many comments suggest the failure of the bill was the right move and it's good to punish those on wall street.
There is no doubt there are bad people within wall street that deserve punishment or stripping them of the rights of the golden parachute but don't forget millions of hard working people invest via mutual funds, 401ks, and direct investment in the markets.
The State of Alaska is also heavily invested in the market and will also be punished.
Yes I have money in the market, directly and through my 401K and the companies I have invested in provide jobs and create products or move the products from point a to b many of these companies share values are being punished without even being the cause of the problem.Most have been doing okay despite the declining economy.I can only hope that they will manage to weather the storm despite some of the companies being small cap companies.
Finally for all that are cheering the destruction you won't be cheering very long if no leadership comes from washington and a depression develops opposed to just a recession. All the numbers on wallstreet reflect the confidence of the USA (today a trillion dollars vanished from the market), some help in the right direction can encourage confidence and stability, todays bill did not give out a blank check and may not have fixed the problem but it probably would have at least prevented the blood gushing on the streets of wall street today.
I must respectfully disagree with user 6244; the blood gushing on wall street must come. The debt in this country is far more than any market can bear. More to the point, the blood gushing will come sooner or later regardless of the bailout or subsequent bailouts.
This is a victory for the American People! Thank you Don Young.
The problem with this bill is simple - NO TRANSPARENCY.
#1. “limits on executive compensation” – what does that mean to the voter? I don’t know any billionaires but these guys should be in jail. How about we let them walk the streets in shame – I want forced apologies in every American newspaper. Then we should take all their owned assets, they can be repossessed if the item is being held in collateral; in debt consolidation home equity loans, a homeowner’s property is held as collateral. See this is what happens to the American worker when they can’t pay their bills, get sick, lose their jobs, or make poor financial decisions.
#2. Murkowski states “Inaction” – You call this inaction, this is the MOST ACTION I have seen from the American people in the eight years since Bush depleted the surplus, started a war in Iraq, and allowed for excessive deregulation of financial laws that protect against risky investments and over stating the value of assets to inflate the market creating this false economy.
#3. This Bill does not guarantee we stop spending. We have to stop spending right now! Stop trying to run the world and take care of business at home. Stop sending foreign aid to Israel and Georgia, let the oil companies use their $200 Billion they made just last year! Stop the subsidies for the rich – check out the celebrity farmers who get money.
#4. The $700 Billion dollars was a made up number, and what are they spending it on. I WANT DETAILS. From what I see lawyers were already working on deals to help these companies get the money out of the feds, what is that cut of the pie, which I made? And how about putting funding into investments for alternative energy projects here, not oversee. Start the drilling; develop the alternative energy, projects that create new jobs.
#5. Why would we believe Bush, we know he lied already. Weapons of mass destruction, more fear and fear and fear, the sky is falling.
#6. Why it didn’t pass - the bill allowed for total control of this funding given to the secretary and only the secretary. For 30 days imagine having $700 Billion dollars to hand out. That doesn’t include the Billions they have already handed out to AIG, B.S., Fannie, Freddie, Auto companies…and none of it is public – where is that money.
“The proposed bill would give The Secretary unprecedented powers over the economic and financial life of the U.S. Section 8 of Paulson’s plan states: “Decisions by the Secretary pursuant to the authority of this Act are non-reviewable and committed to agency discretion, and may not be reviewed by any court of law or any administrative agency.” Associated Press
Those of you who say PASS IT – read the bill
Read this: http://sociology.ucsc.edu/whorulesameric...
This not left or right issues, no R or D, it is the top or bottom. Don sided with Main St. NOT Wall St. on this one.
Since we are talking Blood.
Gushing alot of blood quickly and unrestricted (law doesnt pass) usually kills the victim.
Attempts to slow the bleeding and if needed giving the victim blood (law passes) can increase the chance of survival.
"The outlook is that if the House of Representatives comes out on Wednesday and says it's going to approve something, the market may suddenly turn around. This [market] isn't based on any fundamentals any more," Just an attempt to turn things around by washington will add confidence to the markets..
Well, I dunno. But I suspect we can't afford to do nothing. Hope they get it together and agree on something soon and quit acting like little kids in a schoolyard fight.
Don Young and all the other R's who voted this down did so for mostly for political survival. There are few Republicans left including McCain that truly still believe that markets work best when left to their own devises. If Young had voted to pass this bill can you imagine how much harder his bid for reelection would be? He is in loads of do do as it is. No surprise that it failed the House, with everybody up for reelection. The Senate let it pass because only 1/3rd are up for reelection and the American electorate have very short memories.
By JUSTIN FOX
1 hour, 35 minutes ago
http://news.yahoo.com/s/time/20080930/us...
By voting down the proposed $700 billion financial bailout package - and causing a spectacular stock market rout - a majority of members in the House of Representatives made a clear statement that they didn't want to put taxpayers on the hook for the failures of financial institutions.
But there's a catch: taxpayers are already on the hook for the failures of financial institutions, and it's possible that the bill will actually be larger without bailout legislation than with it. That's because the regulators who mind the financial industry - the Federal Reserve, Treasury and FDIC - will keep doing what they've been doing: stepping in to prevent the chaotic failure of banks and other large financial institutions. This means continuing to put hundreds of billions of taxpayer dollars at risk, but in a way that adheres to no clear plan of action and doesn't require members of Congress to explicitly approve their actions.
Federal authorities are going to keep doing whatever they can to keep the financial system from collapsing. Taxpayers will bear the risks and the costs of that, whether Congress votes to put them there or not. And it's possible - although nobody can know for sure - that this ad hoc approach will end up costing more than an up-front $700 billion bailout.
This is all very interesting and most of the people I know have been expecting something like this for years. It should not have been a surprise to anyone except those that were blinded by the easy money and their greed. Yes, we all, or most of us, know that the PFD lost money, that hard times are coming and all the rest. This is not about revenge but finally letting the needed corrections take place. This should have never been allowed to happen but unfortunately, politicians corrupt pretty easily when they become one of them rather than one of us. Let it crash. Those that bought homes they could not afford will just have to suffer with those that have stocks. I learned a lot about the last depression from both my parents that lived through it and am not uninformed as to how bad it may get. But this bailout is not the answer.
Is there a single person here that has actually read this bill? I know for a fact "user" hasn't.
Read section 103 pg 13-14. This bill allows the government to buy out debt of cities, counties and failing retirement plans. This opens up one hell of a door for anyone or any entity that is failing to be picked up by the feds. This bill is nothing more than a power grab by the federal government.
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2008/09/28...
Who hear wants to pay for the feds to bail out Vallejo, CA? It's going to happen if this sort of writing is passed into any bill.
I have read it.
Clearly stated this is not the perfect bill but better than no direction at all.
Once the bad debt is picked up there is real property underneath the bad paper, that can be unwound sometime down the road when the economy has recovered. Meaning some of the intial money layed out could be recovered.
SEC. 103. CONSIDERATIONS.
In exercising the authorities granted in this Act, the
Secretary shall take into consideration—
(1) protecting the interests of taxpayers by
maximizing overall returns and minimizing the im
pact on the national debt;
(2) providing stability and preventing disrup
tion to financial markets in order to limit the impact
on the economy and protect American jobs, savings,
and retirement security;
(3) the need to help families keep their homes
and to stabilize communities;
(4) in determining whether to engage in a di
rect purchase from an individual financial institu
tion, the long-term viability of the financial institu
tion in determining whether the purchase represents
the most efficient use of funds under this Act;
(5) ensuring that all financial institutions are
eligible to participate in the program, without dis
crimination based on size, geography, form of orga
nization, or the size, type, and number of assets eli
gible for purchase under this Act;
(6) providing financial assistance to financial
institutions, including those serving low- and mod
erate-income populations and other underserved
communities, and that have assets less than
$1,000,000,000, that were well or adequately cap
italized as of June 30, 2008, and that as a result
of the devaluation of the preferred government-spon
sored enterprises stock will drop one or more capital
levels, in a manner sufficient to restore the financial
institutions to at least an adequately capitalized
level;
(7) the need to ensure stability for United
States public instrumentalities, such as counties and
cities, that may have suffered significant increased
costs or losses in the current market turmoil;
(8) protecting the retirement security of Ameri11
cans by purchasing troubled assets held by or on be
half of an eligible retirement plan described in clause
(iii), (iv), (v), or (vi) of section 402(c)(8)(B) of the
Internal Revenue Code of 1986, except that such au
thority shall not extend to any compensation ar16
rangements subject to section 409A of such Code;
and
(9) the utility of purchasing other real estate
owned and instruments backed by mortgages on
multifamily properties.
http://www.latimes.com/media/acrobat/200...
User 6244 when they voted to bail out AIG the DOW jumped over 300 points. The next day it lost all it gained the day before. A long time ago my father told me to hold onto my cash because when the next depression comes there will be all kinds of deals.
We have come to think that we are owed some higher style of living and if we can't afford it we borrow. Now we want the government to bail us out because we didn't save our money.
Anyone who believes investing in stocks to retire has got it wrong. Stocks are just a gamble, not a certainty.
All the bailout will do is prolong the inevitable. I am sorry it is going to be hard on everyone, but this economic downturn was a long time coming. I don't really feel that I should pass the selfishness of my generation onto the next one.
I know I won't change your way of thinking, but you can always convert your 401K stocks into guaranteed interest accounts.
If a wind storm came through and blew the roof off your house and you would have to borrow the money to have it repaired , would you say aw it ain't worth it the banker where you would borrow the repair money might be crooked and a new wind storm might do it all over again next year . So you decide to just go on living in the house with no roof until you can save up enough money to pay for the repair bill , even though it may take ten or twenty before you could have it repairewd !!! A wind storm just hit the lending institutions , they might recover in ten to twenty years
Take a look at the Debt Clock. Our National Debt is increasing at 2.4 Billion a day. We can barely pay the interest on it and we will never pay off the principle. We're going to rack up another 700 billion just in a year. We look like fools to the rest of the world. We don't need any more debt.
I don't understand why people complain that Young does not listen, then when he does he gets slammed by the public? Young listened and cast his vote according to the wishes of the people. This WAS a very difficult decision. Should our country go into deeper and deeper debt and sell our souls to foreign countries for pennies on the dollar? Absolutely NO! This bill was rushed and it needs to go back to the drawing board. I am glad that Congress was NOT recessed yet; there is time to make some critical changes to this legislation.
As for the bank executives who mismanaged the funds that they held a fiduciary responsibility for, they SHOULD GO TO JAIL. By the way, who ARE these people? What are their names and which banks are involved? How much money have these banks lost??? Also, anything that they (the bank execs) purchased using the good hard earned money of their bank customers should be confiscated and sold at auction to repay their debt. I do not want one penny of my hard earned money to be used for any severance package for these bank executives. This group should go to jail for their actions.
As for supporting Representative Young, I plan to do so on November 4th. There is no way that the other congressional candidate would have had the you know what to "stand up" against HIS party (i.e. Pelosi) and vote against this bailout. Right on Young, you have my vote!