Kos: Congress Did The Right Thing

[THUNDER HANDS]

I'm glad this thing failed. The right and left may have had different reasons for voting this bill down, but fact is, the "consensus center" rushed into this bill with little transparency or public input deserved to die. Was this the right bill? Maybe, maybe not. but we certainly didn't have a fair debate on it. Some of you may be quick to trust your representatives in DC. I'm not willing to give them the benefit of the doubt.

On the merits, the bill fell short. The CEO compensation provision was a joke, the oversight provisions were a joke, Congress had no ability to block additional disbursement of the money without an affirmative vote (subject to filibusters), and not a dime was directed at average Americans. It was a reverse Robin Hood -- the largest transfer of wealth in our nation's history from the working class to the upper class. And transferring that wealth to healthy financial institutions and foreign ones was morally repugnant.
But there is a finance problem. Just because this solution sucked, doesn't mean that nothing should be done.

So now, with a little more time, perhaps we can have an honest appraisal of the alternatives. I've seen several options floated. I can't find and link to them since I have to soon rush back into the jury pool waiting room, and they don't have wi-fi in there (though they will soon! they promise unhelpfully), but I've linked to some in the past, and others have as well. Now we'll hopefully get a chance to look more closely at those alternatives.

And with those alternatives, hopefully we have options that offer solutions to the problem, but don't destroy an Obama's administration to invest in progressive priorities like health care, education, and alternate fuels. Hopefully we have a solution that places the burden of the bailout on those who most benefited from it. Hopefully we have a solution that provides tangible benefits to those most harmed by this crisis, not those who have benefited. And sure, the wingers may not like it (since what they seem to want is more regulation, which is what got us here in the first place!), but we have the majorities. And if the crisis is as bad as Bush claims, let him try to veto a more equitable solution to the crisis.

http://www.dailykos.com/

[Joanne98]

1. I agree!

[ORDem]

29. I agree also! This bailout stinks to high heaven. All they are doing is

relieving the banks of all the bad loans THEY made and it does NOTHING to help the people who are losing their homes because of those bad loans. Most of those people who got sucked into ARMs would have been fine with a standard 30 year fixed rate loan, and that's exactly what the bill should specify, that those loans are re-written. Of course all the hot shots on Wall St. who sliced and diced these loans into a million and one derivative products don't want to see that because it messes with THEIR products that have nothing to do with the purpose of making home ownership affordable to the public.

Furthermore, the taxpayer is being told to pony up all this debt to pay for crap we don't even know the value of. $700B was pulled out of the air, and you can bet if this passes they'll be back for more. Once again, Bush is telling us the end of the world is near and we should just go along with his administration on this, just like we got pulled into Iraq. This is not the end of the world and there is time to consider more equitable and sensible options.

:dem:

[rucky]

2. I agree with Kos

100%

[1corona4u]

3. I disagree. They had a several days to come up with another PLAN

if the republicans didn't like the current plan. They torpedoed the bill, plain and simple. They want to structure it, so they look like they saves the country.

[Eric J in MN]

11. Congress should spend months listening to a variety of economists...

...not rush a bill through.

I'm glad the bill was defeated today.

[Occam Bandage]

13. If there's an economy to speak of in a few months.

[1corona4u]

15. I'm sure you are. now.

[WeDidIt]

4. I completely disagree with Kos n/t

[Eric J in MN]

5. Yes, the limits on CEO compensation weren't really limits.

A corporations could have accepted billions under that bill, and then doubled the salary of the CEO from $30 million/year to $60 million/year.

This is important because unless the executives at participating corporations get less compensation, they have no deterrent to engaging in more risky behavior and then asking for another bailout.

[PM7nj]

6. There are 777 reasons he is wrong. nt

[girl gone mad]

21. The stock market has never been..

guaranteed by the government.

Why start now?

[Bucky]

46. because

So much of my ability to retire in dignity was tied into the stock market.

[martymar64]

49. I don't have that luxury

So you're saying that I should pay for your cushy retirement when I'll have to survive on Social Security, just because you bet it all in the casino?

[Bucky]

55. My cushy retirement?

I'm sorry, do you know me personally?

[Zynx]

7. Disagree strongly.

[anigbrowl]

8. Seconded.

[jefferson_dem]

9. Whatever, Markos.

Your pretend purity does not impress. Today was a gigantic FAIL...for America. This bill was the best solution given the current circumstances. Problems could be mended when Barack is sworn in in January. So put your dancing shoes back in the closet.

[martymar64]

50. We need to wait until Obama is safely in the WH before a bailout happens

Anything sooner is pissing that money away. And even then, those of us that work for a living shouldn't have to float those that lost their ass in the Wall St. Casino. Every investment bank officer should be in prison or executed for what they've done to us.

[Occam Bandage]

10. I entirely disagree. I doubt we'll be seeing the "more equitable" solution, especially since

Congress can make up the difference more easily with Republicans than with Democrats.

[movonne]

12. I agree...and it looks like on here at DU it is running about 50% for

it and 50% against it..

[msallied]

14. We'll see what Kos says in a few months when people are standing in bread lines.

[movonne]

16. And wonder if we give them the money and we are still standing in

bread lines...they could squander this and will be just that more into debt...

[msallied]

26. Lie to yourself if it makes you feel better.

Today was a shameful chapter in American history. But you can still rejoice.

[martymar64]

53. And if the bailout happens and we're still screwed . . .

We'll be coming to your gated community to have a little talk with you.

[pberq]

22. Fear mongering!

As David says below this bill was an insulting atrocity.

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=103&topic_id=388842&mesg_id=388842

Top 5 Reasons to Vote Against Wall Street's $700 Billion Bailout

By David Sirota

September 28th, 2008 - 4:01pm ET


. . . Though the deal negotiated between congressional leaders and the White House is better than what Treasury Secretary Henry Paulson originally proposed early last week, it remains an insulting atrocity, having omitted even basic aid to homeowners, bankruptcy reforms and any modicum of future financial industry regulation. Now, the New York Times reports that the Democratic leadership may not have the votes to pass this bailout. So without further ado, here are the top 5 reasons (in no order) why every single member of Congress - Democrat and Republican - should vote this sucker down. Please feel free to copy and paste this post into an email to your congressperson. They are deciding right now - let them hear your voice.

1. BAILOUT'S INHERENT FISCAL INSANITY COULD MAKE PROBLEM WORSE

. . .

2. EXPERTS ON BOTH THE LEFT AND RIGHT SAY THIS BAILOUT COULD MAKE THINGS WORSE

. . .

3. THERE ARE CLEARLY BETTER AND SAFER ALTERNATIVES

. . .

4. ANY INCUMBENT VOTING FOR THIS PUTS THEMSELVES AT RISK OF BEING THROWN OUT OF OFFICE

. . .

5. CORRUPTION AND SLEAZE ARE SWIRLING AROUND THESE BAILOUTS - AND AMERICA KNOWS IT

. . . (see link for details on each reason)

[msallied]

27. I take no joy out of people who jump for joy when the world crumbles.

But you do whatever you need to do whenever Americans start losing their jobs, mkay? I'm sure you've got yours and you'll be fine. OTherwise you might not be feeling so triumphant right now. Have fun watching the world burn. I'll be trying to make sure my kids get fed.

[pberq]

30. More fear mongering

I am not jumping for joy.

The point is there are other ways of dealing with the mess on Wall Street than robbing the U.S. Treasury.

Look at this from David Sirota's column:


http://www.ourfuture.org/blog-entry/2008093928/top-5-reasons-vote-against-paulsons-700-billion-bailout

3. THERE ARE CLEARLY BETTER AND SAFER ALTERNATIVES

The mantra throughout the week has been that America has "no choice" but to pass Treasury Secretary Henry Paulson's $700 billion giveaway - that, in effect, there are no alternatives. But that's an out-and-out lie - one with a motive: Making it seem as if the only thing we can do is hand the keys to the federal treasury over to both parties' corporate campaign contributors.

The truth is, there are a number of alternatives. Here are just a few:

* In the Washington Post last week, Galbraith outlined a multi-pronged plan shoring up and expanding the FDIC, creating a Home Owners Loan Corporation, resurrecting Nixon's federal revenue sharing, and taxing stock transactions (a tax that would fall mostly on speculators) to finance the whole deal.

* The Service Employees International Union has drafted a plan based around a massive investment in public services and national health care, and regulatory reforms preventing foreclosures and forcing banks to renegotiate the predatory terms of their bad mortgages.

* For those in the mindless, zombie-ish "someone has to do something, so we have to do what the White House says!" camp, consider the possibility that you are under the spell of the same kind of White House fear that led us to invade Iraq because of Saddam's supposed WMD. Consider, perhaps, that there may not even be a compelling basis for doing anything just yet (or at least not anything nearly so huge), and that the whole reason there is this urgent push right now has nothing to do with the financial situation, and everything to do with creating the political dynamic to pass a wasteful giveaway - one that couldn't be passed otherwise without a sense of emergency. And ask yourself why you would listen to this White House instead of listening to those experts who have been predicting this crisis and are now advising against this bailout - experts like CEPR's Baker. In two separate posts (here and here), he says that letting the problem play out could be the best path, because Treasury and the Fed may already have the tools they need. Following this path, the worst thing that happens is "The Fed and Treasury will have to step in and take over the banks is exactly what many economists argue should happen anyhow," Baker writes. "So the outcome of the worst case scenario is a really frightening day in which the whole world financial system is shaken to its core, followed by a government takeover of the banks. Eventually the government straightens out the books and sells them off again. But the real threat here is not to the economy, it is to the banks."

* Then there is the idea of simply taking the $700 billion and simply give it to struggling homeowners to help them pay off part of their mortgages. This hasn't even been discussed but the thought experiment it involves is important to understanding why there is, indeed, an alternative to the Paulson plan. If the root of this problem is people not being able to pay off their mortgages, and those defaults then devaluing banks' mortgage-backed assets, then simply helping people pay their mortgages would preserve the value of the mortgage-backed assets and recharge the market with liquidity. That would be a bottom-up solution helping the mass public, rather than a top-down move helping only financial industry executives.

On this latter proposal, some may argue that giving any relief to homeowners is "unfair" in that those homeowners created their problems, so why should taxpayers have to help them? But then, is helping homeowners any less fair than simply giving all the money away to Wall Street, no strings attached? I'd say no - and helping homeowners also serves a second purpose: namely, keeping people in their homes, which not only helps them, but helps an entire neighborhood (as any homeowner knows, nearby properties can be devalued when foreclosures hit).

[msallied]

36. Don't you understand that the time for that is PASSED?

It's like when you have to piss while you're driving down the freeway and you pass a rest area and say: "Well, that one wasn't very clean. I'll wait for the next one." Little do you know that there won't be another rest area for another 100 miles or so. Meanwhile, you either have to stop and piss in a ditch or just piss down your leg, and all the while you're thinking: "I would have rather taken a piss in the rest area." Oh well, too late!

[martymar64]

57. Good luck with feeding your kids with worthless money.

If it gets too bad, at least you'll have them to eat.

[gordianot]

17. I do not which way is/was right. We will find out the hard way.

I have never advocated the "Shoe me" philosophy guess we will find out.

[nomaco-10]

18. GOOD GRIEF, are memories so short around here...

We were told that Iraq was a "grave and gathering threat" that must be invaded after 911. This is the same admin that was positive that Iraq possessed WMD's! We were also told the same thing about The Patriot Act and Tax Cuts. We were also strong armed about the NSA bill, the Prescription Drug Act and Homeland Security that spawned the envelopment of FEMA that failed miseribly to react to Katrina.


Take some deep breaths and really look at this bill that was defeated today and decide if it was really a bad thing.

[pberq]

31. Amazing, isn't it?

So many DUers have drunk the kool aid on this one

[RoccoR5955]

33. DING DING DING... We have a winnah!!!!

This is just another example of the Shock Doctrine at work. They want to scare the heck out of us, and take stuff from us... Our rights, our money.

[JuniperLea]

48. Are you as shocked as I am at the amount of Kool Aid being swallowed around here?

I mean, seriously!

Everyone needs to read this thread:

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=389&topic_id=4125216&mesg_id=4125216

And this story:

http://www.cnn.com/2008/POLITICS/09/29/miron.bailout/index.html

All this fear-mongering is on my last fucking nerve!

[pberq]

19. Was this the right bill? HELL NO!!

Dennis Kucinich explains it beautifully:

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=385x201600

[1corona4u]

32. Fuck Dennis!

Jesus. He let Cincinnati go BANKRUPT. WHAT A FUCKING LEADER HE IS. NOT.

Kooch is so irrelevant.

[Ikonoklast]

40. Fail.

Cleveland defaulted on muni bonds because the banks conspired with the Illuminating Company in order to steal Cleveland PUBLIC Power from the citizens.

They refused to roll over the bonds unless they got their way.

They failed.

[1corona4u]

42. It happened on HIS watch.

make all the excuses you want for him. You'd think if he's as smart as he thinks he is, he would have been ablle to avert the whole situation....

[Ikonoklast]

43. He was forced into it.

Do some reading, you'll see it was a squeeze job to raise electric rates.

I'm no fan of Dennis, but he was right on this one.

[1corona4u]

44. LOL....big tough guy Denny? Forced into something....

laughable.

[Drunken Irishman]

20. I agree! Who needs an economy anyway?

[grantcart]

37. Yeah and House Republicans are such good indicators of the right thing to do lol

[beachmom]

23. Markos is wrong, and it's unfortunate that not one front pager over

there gave a dissenting opinion. I don't know what is going to happen next.

[mzmolly]

24. If Dems are going to pass this without Republican support

I agree. Let Bush veto a better plan with a new bankruptcy reform bill, and a job stimulus package in the mix.

[debbierlus]

25. Be careful Kos - you will be flamed as a Republican loving traitor

I have been speaking out all day, and I am being thrashed.

Surreal day, no doubt.

[msallied]

28. Yeah, it's surreal when lefties agree with fringe righties.

And jump for joy as America is flushed down the toilet along with jobs and people's hard-earned life savings. I bet you feel real proud of yourself.

[ClarkUSA]

34. So now Kos is a macroeconomic finance expert? Gee, what doesn't he know?

:eyes:

[Kurt_and_Hunter]

35. Nice to see that everyone is playing their part. Markos has always been a f**king idiot.

[grantcart]

38. Absolutely I want my local baker and solar energy contractor to be forced out of business

so we can teach those idiots that have already lost their equity a lesson.


So there!!

[ProSense]

39. Sure, let's encourage the Republican spin so they

can continue spinning any bailout the Dems put forward as bad.

Indirectly, Krugman and many economists say Kos is being an ass here.

If the excuse is that the Dems in tight races voted against the bill, then so be it. I'm not in a tight race. My understanding is the Republicans fucked up.

[torbird]

41. Yeah, well, awesome. For you, maybe, Markos.

Our system isn't perfect. This bill wasn't perfect. But to shout about how proud it makes you feel that millions of Americans are about to suffer even more is inappropriate and gauche. Markos, and many others on this board, like to pretend that anything that isn't absolutely perfect doesn't deserve to pass Congress -- because it failed to live up to our righteous standards. We are, after all, the party that would rather feel morally superior than win elections (right, Al? Right, John?) Markos also apparently forgets that with a new administration comes new rules, new bills, new priorities.

But fuck all that. Let's beat our chests today and crow about how we "defeated fascism" while other Americans go down to ruin.

Bully for us. We're so great.

[Stop Cornyn]

45. The corporatist wing of the Democratic Party will disagree, but 90% of voters are thrilled the

bailout failed.

[Phx_Dem]

47. Strongly disagree, and since Kos is not an

economist I'm not particularly interested in his opinion.

[blondeatlast]

51. Kos has always confused himself with God. Just one more example. nt

[bvar22]

52. Would YOU buy a used car from these people?

How about a $700Billion dollar blind "Bailout" for Wall St financed with your children's money?

[polichick]

54. I agree - NEVER RUSH when Bush & Co. claim the sky is falling.

[mhatrw]

56. Nice post, Kos!

Even a blind squirrel finds a nut once in a while!

[Inuca]

58. I disagree

and also disagree in general with those that pass judgement on a very complex issue without having the proper expertise or information.

[and-justice-for-all]

59. I agree...nt

[TheKentuckian]

60. I suspect many are just pissed because they fell for

Iraq or the Patriot Act. Well, many of us didn't but feel that in this case something had to be done.

Defeating Dodd's bill is shortsighted and dangerous for everyone. All the fatcats people are up in arms about bailing out will still be fatcats, it is the working class that will get stomped on this one.

[WildEyedLiberal]

61. God, Kos is a stupid motherfucker and I have no idea why anyone takes anything he says seriously

He is possibly one of the most uninspiring and intellectually lazy bloggers on either side of the blogosphere. His site became famous because of its unique structure which allowed for a great deal of member-created content, not because of any brilliance or insight offered by his tedious posts. Why on earth lefty bloggers regard him as some kind of wizened elder I have NO idea.

FTR, I have mixed feelings about the bailout, and I certainly do have some misgivings, but almost every single "reason" Kos elaborates upon in his interminably obnoxious self-congratulating manner is spurious and dishonest.

[WildEyedLiberal]

62. Argh, dupe

[Guaranteed]

63. He's right. The market is going to suffer for another week, but we've only got one bullet here and

we've got to do it right- the first time.

No more messes because we didn't think things through. There are better places to put that money than- all of it- straight into the hands of bankers.