Update: In Why Bail? The Banks Have a Gun Pointed at Their Head and Are Threatening to Pull the Trigger, Dean Baker can't find a single real reason to support the bill.[end update]
The Pioneer Press reports in Minnesota delegation gives tepid support to the Economic Stabilization Act of 2008:
Members of Minnesota's delegation to Congress scrambled Sunday to digest details of the multibillion-dollar Wall Street rescue package. They weren't alone — so many people tried to download copies of the measure Sunday that the congressional computer servers crashed.
Members of Congress didn't have much time. The House is slated to vote on it perhaps as soon as today; the Senate vote is expected in a few days. . . .
The article relates the positions of McCollum, Coleman, Oberstar and Bachmann. Finally:
Rep. Tim Walz, D-Mankato, said the measure, which he was still studying Sunday night, made progress over the version proposed earlier, but he still was unsure about his support.
"I remain skeptical and am working with my colleagues to get answers to my questions about exactly how this plan will work," he said. "We must move fast to bring stability to the financial markets, but we must get it right."
The Washington Post has put a pdf of the bill online. The New York Times says that House minority leader John Boehner is encouraging Republicans to support the bill:
On Sunday evening, both parties convened closed-door sessions in the House to review the plan, and conservative House Republicans remained a potential impediment.
But the party leadership was circulating information aimed at refuting some of the main criticisms of the bailout, indicating they were poised to support it. “I am encouraging every member of our conference whose conscience will allow them to support this bill,” said Representative John A. Boehner of Ohio, the Republican leader.
The Washington Post says in Broad Authority, Lots of Money And Uncertainty:
Congress is on the verge of granting Treasury Secretary Henry M. Paulson Jr. sweeping powers to stabilize the nation's financial system. He would stand largely unfettered by traditional rules, largely unrestricted in his ability to spend $700 billion of federal money. . . .
And in Dr. Paulson's Tough Medicine, In a Pill the Public Can Swallow (yeah,right):
But nobody should view even this effort as sufficient to keep the U.S. economy out of recession, stabilize housing markets or prevent the failure of additional banks, investment houses, insurers and hedge funds. Although more than $600 billion in private-sector credit losses have already been posted, a number of private and public-sector analysts now estimate that won't be even half the final tab from the bursting of the greatest credit bubble the world has seen.
The National Post (Canada) reminds us that hopes of profits to taxpayers from past bailouts were not realized:
But, if history is any guide, taxpayers may end up losing a substantial chunk of the US$700-billion.
A report by the International Monetary Fund found that in past bailouts, the average recovery rate had been only 18%.
We hope that Congressman Walz acts on his skepticism. This bill doesn't look to have strong enough safeguards for the taxpayers and it's important to get it right. First District residents should let him know what they want.
Comments