I was in on a conference call with Senator Hillary Clinton Tuesday morning when she let drop that the Senate, rather than the House, might vote first on a revised bailout (Did I say bailout? They're calling it rescue) plan. Sure enough, by day's end, that was the plan. That, and a lifting of the insurance on bank deposits by the FDIC from $100,000 to $250,000. In that same conference call, Senator Clinton talked about the possibility of "commerce grinding to a halt". The full court press by lawmakers supporting a bailout seems to have worked, just a little. Voters who gave an unequivocal thumbs down the other day are reporetdly starting to change their minds.
Yet the Congress could still blow it with the American people. There are fundamental questions that need to be answered. The fact this bill was rushed in the first place gave voters the impression lawmakers think they're too stupid to understand the complexities of high finance. That's led to the simmering anger of the public, to the Wall St. vs. Main St. mentality promoted by the media. Everyone involved needs to do better in explaining this bill.
Don't expect GW Bush to do it. As one writer said the other day, he looks more like a commentator on the economy than anyone who is trying to fix it. There are some basic questions. If the Treasury is going to buy up the bad debt of financial institutions, what price will they pay? How long will the government hold onto this paper? Do the distressed firms have sufficient hard assets for the government to recover in a worst case scenario? What specific relief is there for homeowners facing foreclosure? Is there any provision to stimulate the economy through jobs creation? And of course, what's Plan B if all this doesn't work?
I'm an idiot when it comes to most matters economic. Yet the questions asked above are pretty basic, and I'm not sure the answers are forthcoming from either house of Congress.
Who goes first, the House or the Senate, may not matter if the American people remain in the dark.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
Posts
2 comments:
William Greider was talking about the problem this morning. I am not sure what it means.When I heard Hillary Clinton say (on the tape)last night that they "were going to make changes to get more Republicans to vote 'yes'", I thought I heard wrong,but Greider said to Amy Goodman, the Senate is moving to the Right instead of to the Left.
Greider said people want the truth and are not getting to hear it from either candidate (in reply to a question), possiby for fear of election/voters response(=caution) by Obama campaign.
Two voters at my home wrote letters to House member early this AM & mailed, that if he gives his vote "yes" on a bad bill, one person will not vote in Nov.for first time since 1960 & the other said, "blank ballot after vote for President" in Nov. since had never voted for a Republican and will not now.
That the Dems would lead in this mess, this rush to bail out the Admin.&pals, is (almost) amazing to me. I have been saying Obama saved the Democratic Party by running for President, but I think the Democrats in Congress are going to destroy the Democratic Party if they vote a bad bill. I will make my first prediction:major backlash from voters, Democrats on Democrats punishment. Or just dropping out of voting. How sad.
PS Greider said the Senate is voting first because they think they have enough votes, 60 or 70, to pass it. To vote after sundown,when first two days of Rosh Hashonah, when workers take off, is over.
Post a Comment