The Big Bailout - why the parties cannot agree

Big sticking points of the big bailout – why the parties cannot agree

Republicans

• There is no time for discussion, the Republican plan must be approved right away, before the election and before the FBI investigation into potential criminal conduct


• There be “no strings attached”, that the $700B can be spent on the whims of the President and Treasury Secretary


• There must be no oversight of how the Treasury Department spends the money


• CEO and executive pay for failed financial institutions cannot be capped in the bailout


• US must also bail out foreign banks


• Assistance should go to the large investment banks and institutions, not mortgage holders


• Ignore the fact that the US was in a very similar situation in 1931, and Hoover took essentially the same action that Bush is now proposing - and it led to The Great Depression


• Ignore our party's platform of opposing bailouts - after all, we're ignoring it


• Ignore Paulson's $632,000,000 in Goldman Sachs stock options - really, there is not conflict of interest here. Really.

Democrats

• Spending $700B to $1T of taxpayer money deserves serious rationale, not a knee-jerk reaction of passing legislation without even having a plan


• There must be a plan publicaly laid out to show how the money will be spent


• There must be Congressional oversight on how taxpayer money will be spent


• CEOs and executives that helped bring about this failure should not receive bonuses – their salaries and severance packages must be limited


• Assistance should be given to distressed homeowners

Barack Obama

• Maintains position that the financial industry must return to being regulated to protect the American people from crises like this, which can lead to massive governmental bailouts at taxpayer expense


• Support the efforts of Treasury Secretary Paulson and Federal Reserve Chairman Bernanke to work in a bipartisan spirit with Congress to find a solution. In other words – don’t make this a partisan issue. Work together towards a common goal to stabilize markets and to maintain credit.

John McCain
www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/michaeltomasky/2008/sep/24/johnmccain.congress
www.cnn.com/2008/POLITICS/09/23/mccain.bailout/index.html
www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2008/09/22/AR2008092202583.html

• Initially blamed the Chairman of the SEC and said the President should fire him, which is not legal


• Previously, worked hard for deregulation and shrinking the government


• Previously supported the Bush Economic Plan


• Now, blames the Bush Economic Plan


• Now, wants to restore regulation


• Now, wants to create a new bureaucracy, the Mortgage and Financial Institutions trust.


• Says his campaign manager Rick Davis had no involvement with Freddie Mac for "several years," but the truth is that he's been paid $15,000/month continuously.
  

Other good articles

• Good ideas do not need lots of lies told about them in order to gain public acceptance


• The Big Bailout from DemocracyNow


• Blunt article on the patriotism of this action


• Sweeden shows us an alternative approach that will not reward the crooks, save taxpayer money, and actually work. Otherwise, the US approach in 1931 or Japan in the 1980s can be repeated, and presumably the ensuing economic failure can be repeated.


• When the big investment banks profit, they keep the profit. When they lose money, the taxpayers must eat their loss. Dennis Kucinich


• Does Bush's economic policy mean that bin Laden is winning? Why would Bush follow that plan?


• When Paulson was the CEO of Goldman Sachs, the average pay of its 22,425 staff was $521,000, but we're supposed to blindly trust him to work for average Americans?


• Sen. Bernie Sanders: America's Wealthy Should Pay For Bush's Bailout


• Banking Expert: Bailout Not Necessary, Industry Can Take Losses


• Why is Bush preparing to declare Martial Law in the United States?