Massachusetts Cop Forum banner
1 - 20 of 28 Posts

·
MassCops Angel
Joined
·
121,497 Posts
Discussion Starter · #1 ·
House Rejects Historic Bailout Package

Timeline: U.S. Credit Crunch & Financial Failures


View Market Summaries & Leading Stock Changes


WASHINGTON (AP) ― The House on Monday defeated a $700 billion emergency rescue package, ignoring urgent pleas from President Bush and bipartisan congressional leaders to quickly bail out the staggering financial industry.

Stocks plummeted on Wall Street even before the 228-205 vote to reject the bill was announced on the House floor.

When the critical vote was tallied, too few members of the House were willing to support the unpopular measure with elections just five weeks away. Ample no votes came from both the Democratic and Republican sides of the aisle.

Bush and a host of leading congressional figures had implored the lawmakers to pass the legislation despite howls of protest from their constituents back home.

The vote had been preceded by unusually aggressive White House lobbying, and spokesman Tony Fratto said that Bush had used a "call list" of people he wanted to persuade to vote yes as late as just a short time before the vote.

Lawmakers shouted news of the plummeting Dow Jones average as lawmakers crowded on the House floor during the drawn-out and tense call of the roll, which dragged on for roughly 40 minutes as leaders on both sides scrambled to corral enough of their rank-and-file members to support the deeply unpopular measure.

They found only two.

Bush and his economic advisers, as well as congressional leaders in both parties had argued the plan was vital to insulating ordinary Americans from the effects of Wall Street's bad bets. The version that was up for vote Monday was the product of marathon closed-door negotiations on Capitol Hill over the weekend.

Even as the electronic roll call began, Democratic and Republican leaders were uncertain about having enough votes to pass the politically unpopular plan. It's the most sweeping government intervention in markets since the Great Depression.

Buffeted by unusually aggressive pressure from the White House, House members debated hotly-contested Wall Street bailout legislation Monday as a key architect conceded its unpopularity.

"Many of us feel that the national interest requires us to do something which is, in many ways, unpopular," said Rep. Barney Frank, the Financial Services Committee chairman. "It is hard to get political credit for avoiding something that has not yet happened."

The House was moving toward an early afternoon vote on the much-maligned legislation. The $700 billion rescue plan was the product of marathon bargaining over the weekend among various House and Senate representatives.

President Bush once again urged the bill's passage, saying in a White House appearance Monday morning that "every member of Congress and every American should keep in mind that a vote for this bill is a vote to prevent economic damage to you and your community."

"With this strong and decisive legislation," he said, "we will help restart the flow of credit so American families can meet their daily needs and American businesses can make purchases, ship goods and meet their payrolls."

As debate opened, Frank, D-Mass., called the measure "a tough vote," but a necessary one to stave off a financial meltdown. It lets the government buy sour assets -- mostly mortgage-backed securities -- from struggling financial institutions in a bid to clear out clogged avenues of credit for businesses and individuals alike.

At the White House, spokesman Tony Fratto confirmed vigorous efforts to get the bill through.

"We're going to keep working with them right up until the vote," he said.

Fratto also said that Bush, Vice President Dick Cheney, Treasury Secretary Paulson, White House chief of staff Josh Bolton and other top officials were contacting House members in an effort to rally support, and that the president himself had a call list of "a couple dozen members."

Fratto said Bush was telling aides some of those he'd talked to were committed to voting for the bill while "others remained skeptical."

With their dire warnings of impending economic doom and their sweeping request for unprecedented sums of money and authority to bail out cash-starved financial firms, Bush and his economic chiefs have focused the attention of the world and the markets on Congress, said Republican Rep. Paul Ryan of Wisconsin. Without the bill, Ryan added, "the worst is yet to come."

"We're in this moment, and if we fail to do the right thing, Heaven help us." he said.

As Democratic and Republican leaders hunted for votes, leaning on lawmakers to take a political hit for the good of the country, Ryan said, "We're all worried about losing our jobs. ... Most of us say, 'I want this thing to pass, but I want you to vote for it-not me.' "

Two leading players also spoke early Monday, lobbying on morning television news shows for approval of a package deeply unpopular with a public angry that taxpayer money will save Wall Street firms from heavy risk-taking. Thousands of angry phone calls, e-mails and letters have poured into Capitol Hill from constituents. Supporters essentially acknowledged that it was a hold-your-nose-and-vote matter.

Critics on the left and right said Congress was being stampeded into hasty action on a plan that wouldn't make a dent in the nation's economic woes, which have at their root a subprime mortgage meltdown and the bursting of the housing bubble, followed by a wave of foreclosures.

The legislation does not require any federal action to prevent foreclosures, although it mandates that the government try renegotiating the bad mortgages it acquires with the aim of lowering borrowers' monthly payments so they can keep their homes.

"Like the Iraq war and the Patriot Act, this bill is fueled on fear and hinges on haste," said Democratic Rep. Lloyd Doggett of Texas.

Republican Jeb Hensarling of Texas, a leading conservative, said the bill puts the country "on the slippery slope to socialism. If you lose your ability to fail, soon you will lose your ability to succeed."

The Senate planned a vote as early as Wednesday.

Sen. Chris Dodd, D-Conn., said that failure to act would spread the contagion of frozen credit markets even further. "This is not just about Wall Street," said the Banking Committee chairman.

Sen. Judd Gregg, R-N.H., told The Associated Press: "It's one of those situations where if it passes and works, people will never know how close we were to the brink."

Still, both men said the necessity of such massive government action is a sad day for the nation. They were speaking not just to rank-and-file lawmakers who are under a spotlight in the contentious, dramatic congressional debate, but to U.S. and global markets which have displayed nervousness about Washington's determination to act.

Investors worldwide and in early trading in the United States continued to show doubt about whether the bill would go through, much less go a long way toward curing the systemic problems that have unnerved financial markets across the globe for weeks.

There was a further sign of general economic deterioration Monday as the Commerce Department reported that consumer spending was unchanged in August-even worse than the small 0.2 percent gain that economists had anticipated. It was the weakest showing since spending was also flat in February.

Federal Reserve Chairman Ben Bernanke said the bill "should help to restore the flow of credit to households and businesses that is essential for economic growth and job creation."

Lawmakers wrote a number of restrictions into the pending legislation, including oversight over the operation of the program, curbs on "golden parachutes" for top executives of firms getting help, and assurances that taxpayers would ultimately be reimbursed by the companies for any losses. But the government would have broad discretion to decide how to implement the rescue.

The legislation also requires that the government take ownership stakes in companies that receive federal infusions, so it could share a piece of potential future profits.

Bush said the ultimate cost of the bailout will be much less than the $700 billion authorized.

Treasury Secretary Henry Paulson sought the unprecedented amount of money with little supervision.

Instead, the bill lets Congress block half the money and force the president to jump through some hoops before using it all. The government could get at $250 billion immediately, $100 billion more if the president certified it was necessary, and the last $350 billion with a separate certification-and subject to a congressional resolution of disapproval. Still, the resolution could be vetoed by the president, meaning it would take extra-large congressional majorities to stop it.

http://wbztv.com/national/bailout.plan.vote.2.827958.html
 
G

·
Maybe it's time that rich people, and the government learn what regular people have to do when our financial shit hits the fan. Buckle down, control spending, and LEARN YOUR LESSON. I am so fed up with the government looking to bail out people (rich or poor) for their poor decision making. and WTF are Chris Dodd and Barney Frank doing still out front on this issue? They had a huge hand in orchestrating these fucked up loans... Maybe it's time to stop looking for the governement to solve all these problems, let a couple Senior VPs take a leap off the 40th floor, and see if their Golden Parachute opens.

Also, a big FUCK YOU to Charles Rangel from NY. I can't stand you on any level.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
843 Posts
Fuckin good! It was a half assed bullshit plan anyway. Lets throw money at it and try to make it go away. Nice job again Bush, i think Hitler has a higher approval rating then that guy now.

If we bought up all the banks bad credit, whose to say they wont continue with those practices again in the future and still contribute to this problem. NOTHING!

It was a farse from the get go.

Its their fault they took advantage of people and now it bit them in the face. Good luck you fucks.
 

·
MassCops Angel
Joined
·
121,497 Posts
Discussion Starter · #8 ·
Senate Passes Sweetened $700B Bailout

House To Vote Friday

The Senate has passed a $700 billion bailout for the financial industry aimed at preventing the economy from plunging into a recession.

Wall Street Turmoil


Democrats and Republicans teamed to approve the bill after sweetening it with tax breaks. The House plans to vote on it Friday.

Both presidential candidates, Democrat Barack Obama and Republican John McCain, returned to Washington for the historic vote.

Senate leaders in both parties added $110 billion in tax breaks and other sweeteners aimed at picking up enough votes in the House to pass the bill a month before the election. The House rejected the bill on Monday.

The government would use most of the money to take over bad mortgages from tottering financial companies and investors.

Stocks Close With Modest Losses

Wall Street zigzagged through a relatively calm session Wednesday, closing with modest losses as financial markets uneasily awaited the Senate vote on the bailout package.

The credit markets, meanwhile, were still under strain pending the vote expected Wednesday night. Several big companies are reporting that they're feeling the impact of reduced lending.

Disappointing economic news, including a report of further weakening in the manufacturing sector, also weighed on stock trading.

The Dow Jones industrials, down more than 200 points in early trading, recovered to a loss of about 19 points at the 10,831 level. The Nasdaq composite index fell more steeply, losing 1 percent.

Europe's Central Banks Keep Money Flowing

Another $60 billion is flowing from European central banks to global money markets to keep the financial system flush with cash.

The European Central Bank has offered $50 billion and the Bank of England has offered $10 billion in overnight operations.

The Bank of England also said it is offering another $30 billion to markets on top of the overnight operation.

Central banks worldwide, including the Federal Reserve and ECB, have been pumping billions into money markets worldwide since Lehman Brothers filed for bankruptcy two weeks ago.

Analysts said the banks' support of the financial system will have to go on for some time.

Previous Stories:

http://www.thebostonchannel.com/save-money/17596060/detail.html
 

·
Grim reaper
Joined
·
1,361 Posts
Democrats and Republicans teamed to approve the bill after sweetening it with tax breaks. The House plans to vote on it Friday.

Senate leaders in both parties added $110 billion in tax breaks and other sweeteners aimed at picking up enough votes in the House to pass the bill a month before the election. The House rejected the bill on Monday.
Sweeten? You mean "buy" so instead of being afraid of the constituents, they suck up to the money.

How does this work?!?!? Tax breaks for (formerly) wealthy companies of Wall Street? We give them tax dollars to live again but tell them you don't have to pay as much in taxes?

We all know where the "tax break" income will be made up from.
 

·
MassCops Angel
Joined
·
121,497 Posts
Discussion Starter · #10 ·
Bush Says He'll Quickly Sign Bailout Bill

House Passes Bill On 263-171 Vote

Saying the government "acted boldly" to prevent the Wall Street crisis from spreading, President George W. Bush said Friday that he would sign the $700 billion bailout bill as soon as Congress gets it to him.

House OKs Bailout | Bad Economy| Save Money

Bush appeared outside the White House in the early afternoon, not long after the measure was passed by the House 263 to 171. That represented the final stage of the legislative process.
The president said he believes in a free-market system and that the government should intervene "only when necessary." He said he thought it represented "decisive action" by Washington to ease the widening credit crunch across the country.

"We have acted boldly to prevent the crisis on Wall Street from becoming a crisis in communities across our country," Bush declared.

The $700 billion measure lets the Treasury Department buy up bad debt from lending institutions in an effort to bring stability to reeling financial markets. The House rejected an earlier version of the plan on Monday.

Before the vote, member after member went to the well of the chamber to voice discomfort and displeasure with many aspects of the bailout legislation. But they also said said they would vote for it anyway.

And nearly 30 who voted against it on Monday said they had changed their minds.

The Dow Jones industrial average on Wall Street had been up by more than 300 points before the House began voting on the financial rescue package, but it gave up some of those gains afterward. Stocks have had sizable gains and losses in recent days based on whether it looked like the bailout plan would pass.

House Speaker Nancy Pelosi called it a vote for "Mr. and Mrs. Jones on Main Street."

Republicans and Democrats alike said appeals from credit-starved small businessmen and the Senate's addition of $110 billion in tax breaks had persuaded them to drop their opposition.

But, some votes appear to have also changed to a likely "no."

A handful of Republicans who voted for it on Monday appeared less likely to do so Friday.

Enticing Tax Breaks

Virtually all the tax breaks added to make the bill more palatable to the House already exist. But many expired Jan. 1. Others will expire in three months.

The largest group of beneficiaries is about 20 million mainly upper-middle income taxpayers. Without congressional action, the Alternative Minimum Tax, or AMT, would add about $2,000 in taxes this year for people mostly earning under $200,000 a year. It originally was supposed to affect only the very rich.

Thousands of businesses are anxiously awaiting renewal of the research-and-development tax credit.

Still, the outcome is far from assured. Vote-counters in both parties need to come up with a dozen or so supporters to reverse Monday's stunning defeat of the $700 billion measure.

Fallout Reaching Main Street

The financial system rescue plan may save parts of the financial industry, but it's not likely to help hundreds of thousands of homeowners who are behind on their mortgages avoid foreclosure.

It only requires the Treasury Department to "maximize assistance for homeowners," and to write up monthly progress reports.

It's estimated that within 12 to 18 months, about 40 percent of U.S. borrowers will owe more on their mortgages than their homes are worth. That's almost the same number of American households that are spending 30 percent or more of their income on housing, according to the U.S. Census Bureau.

And as Congress considers the rescue plan, some consumer advocates are upset that it would help the same Wall Street banks that gave funding for the explosion of subprime loans -- without any definitive relief for homeowners.

Even if the government were to push aggressive efforts to modify troubled loans, it could take months to put such an effort in place.

Meanwhile, current financial turmoil is also hitting stores nationwide.

In order to attract more shoppers, they've posted sale signs on everything from fall sweaters to furniture, and are getting out the Christmas goodies even earlier than last year.

One industry analyst said holiday items are already starting to flow into stores and are expected to be discounted immediately.

Previous Stories:

http://www.thebostonchannel.com/save-money/17613979/detail.html
 
G

·
And how did they get it to pass? By greasing the palm of every FUCKING state rep that voted no originally. We are facing the biggest financial meltdown in a while, and they still spend like they can print money. Oh wait... they can.

I might just move my family to China. What's the difference?
 

·
Subscribing Member
Joined
·
7,237 Posts
Just looked over a report and guess what...they included money for all sorts of things to make things more palatable to congress and guess where they are getting more money from to pay for those things? China. Here is a list of some of the add ons:

All day we've been sorting through pages and found some unusual requests, that Democrat Senator Bill Nelson says could increase the cost of the bill to $850 billion dollars. "They've added on $150 billion dollars of more spending, that's not paid for. It will have to be borrowed from the government of China," Senator Nelson said.
That money from China could go to a number of things, including:
- People who sued Exxon over the 1989 Valdez oil spill (Sec. 504-Page 301-line 20)

- $148 million dollars to wool research (Sec. 325 - Page 295- Line 7)

- $100 million dollars to improve auto race tracks across the country (317- Page 290, line 1)

- $ 192 million dollars in excise taxes to Puerto Rico and Virgin Island for rum (Section 308- Page 279-line 11)


So we pay off Exxon's law suit.
We pay to check on shrinkage.
We pay for auto race tracks so Exxon can make more on gas for race cars
We Puerto Rican and other multi-millionaire rum barons to keep us happy.
And we have to add in the interest as we pay off the Chinese.

And this is good for America?
 

·
Administrator
Joined
·
8,417 Posts
Give Delahunt and Lynch credit, they held their ground. Tierney folded like a cheap suitcase.

JAP - she may be a moonbat, but Porter stood ground too. As did Hodes.
Sununu and Gregg sold us out this time.
Our Senators (1 of which there is a sign of in my front yard), cast he same vote as Kerry, Schumer, Leahy, Reid and Lautenburg.
 

·
Subscribing Member
Joined
·
7,237 Posts
From what I'm reading the whole add ons were by Republicans who then turned around and twisted democratic arms, including Obamas by indicating those who would block this bill would be painted as ruining the U.S. economy thus sending the American middle class down the tubes. The winners, Exxon, financiers, rum distillers, etc. all used their influence with many Republicans, including John McCain (who was featured guest recently here in NH at guess where? An auto race track). The whole thing blowing up is sending some Republican running away from their own party now. As an example look at this out of Virginia:

It's tough if you're running for office and the retiring incumbent from your own party still refuses to endorse you just weeks before the election. Blame the political fallout of last week's $700 billion federal bailout of the credit markets.
Sen. John Warner, a Republican from Virginia who is retiring from the Senate this year, may not endorse his would-be G.O.P. successor, James Gilmore, according to the Washington Post. In fact, Warner may back Democrat Mark Warner, a former governor - they're unrelated - who he actually ran against for Senate in 1996. That rivalry is apparently all water under the bridge now, because the two Warners are reportedly friends.
In a conference call with reporters on Saturday, Sen. Warner didn't go so far as to say that he would endorse the other Warner -- yet. However, he did say that he is very disappointed that Gilmore is being so vociferous in his criticism of the federal bailout.
In a televised debate on Friday night, Gilmore, the underdog in the race, said that the bailout was an unnecessary use of taxpayer dollars, which will primarily benefit the wealthy. His rival for the Senate seat has voiced supported the bailout. Sen. Warner, who voted for the bailout on Wednesday, said that it was a vote "for Virginia's economy."
Recent polls put Warner ahead of Gilmore in the race by a huge margin.
 

·
Administrator
Joined
·
8,417 Posts
Inspector, the republicans have ZERO clout in the house and senate, don't buy into

theories. WE are the losers and THOSE THAT FUCKED UP THE SYSTEM are the winners. (Which is always those in charge, which always means Republicans AND Democrats.)

The absolute winners and losers are:

WINNERS:

  • Bill Gross who runs PIMCO which owns $500 billion in mortgage backed securities.
  • China's People's Bank. China's national bank owns $340 billion in mortgage backed securities.
  • Former Fannie/Freddie CEOs. Daniel Mudd and Richard Styron Fannie and Freddie who have consulting contracts which will last until November 4th, following which they stand to receive $9.3 million and $14.1 million, respectively, in severance, according to the New York Times.
  • Wall Street. By keeping Fannie and Freddie functioning, the government will likely restore the $1.5 billion worth of fees that used to flow to Wall Street for issuing their securities.
LOSERS:

  • American taxpayers. (Per usual.)
  • American homeowners. (Per usual.)
 

·
Subscribing Member
Joined
·
7,237 Posts
All this convinces me I ain't gonna vote for either of the above!
The greed which prevails has brought about the downfall of our financial system and replaced it with something far removed from the basics, a system which now relies on government for guarantees and that sets up soft cushions for the few to fall upon while the majority is left paying for the stuffing. This destroys confidence and without that confidence we are up the creek without the paddle.
 
1 - 20 of 28 Posts
Top