Proposed bailout plan's only oversight will be board to "ask" what is paid for each purchase

[clear eye]

Rep. Barney Frank reported on Countdown this evening on the latest Congressional decisions on what will be in the bailout plan. When questioned about the crucial issue of oversight, he emphasized that the Congressional bill would include real oversight. But when asked to elaborate he described an independent board, funded by Congress rather than the Treasury, Fed, or financial institutions, that would be able to "ask" Treasury after the fact what was paid for each asset purchase, and for an explanation of why that was the right price. Neither this board, nor Congress, would have any ability to halt a purchase even if the price is drastically off, or change the individuals making the pricing decisions. We've had eight years of government officials being publicly exposed for wrongdoing and continuing the same actions anyway, in effect saying, "So you (Congress) don't like it and the public doesn't like it, but you can't do anything about it, so we don't care." In light of this history, and Paulson's recently exposed corruption is this really all we need?

[mth44sc]

1. When I watched this

all I could think of it was that it sounded weak and after the fact...

[clear eye]

6. Please tell your Senators and Congressmember n/t

[ladjf]

2. I've got a good deal of respect for Congressman Frank, but, he

seems a bit to eager to get this deal done.

I fear a Republican trap that works but having all of the Republican Congressmen who are running this year to vote no and the others voting yes with the Dems who will get blamed for caving in to Bush and Socialism.

I think the best bet is to wait until after the election. Or, advance a smaller sum, say 50 B, putting all of the new safeguards in place. But, under no circumstance should we approve the entire amount. There is just no logical reason for making such a commitment.

[stillcool]

3. and Chuck Schumer too...

something is not good there.

[ladjf]

9. I agree.

[Beregond2]

4. I thought that sounded weak too.

But then, I was distracted by that weird smacking thing he does with his lips...

[TexasObserver]

5. Barney Frank is a disaster on this.

Some contributor must have him on a short leash now. He's useless.

[clear eye]

7. He was speaking for current Congressional intentions

not just himself, so if you don't like it, please tell your Senators and Representative.

[TexasObserver]

8. That's your opinion and his.

He's been talking out his ass the past two days.

He's useless on the bailout. He's running around already talking like a collaborator.

And if you don't like it, tough.

[clear eye]

10. My letter to my Congressmembers

Dear __________,

I am deeply disturbed at hearing Rep. Frank on Countdown describing the "oversight" Congress is proposing for the bailout plan as a board, funded by Congress rather than the Treasury, Fed, or financial institutions, that would be able to "ask" Treasury after the fact what was paid for each asset purchase, and for an explanation of why that was the right price. Neither this board, nor Congress, would have any ability to halt a purchase even if the price is drastically off, or change the individuals making the pricing decisions. We've had eight years of government officials being publicly exposed for wrongdoing and continuing the same actions anyway, in effect saying, "So you (Congress) don't like it and the public doesn't like it, but you can't do anything about it, so we don't care." In light of this history, and Paulson's recently exposed corruption, this is beyond inadequate and into the realm of stage dressing.

Pres. Hoover tried throwing money at the banks to deal with defaults arising from a troubled economy and it failed utterly. More recently Japan tried to cope with a serious recession by doing the same and found it useless. The financial institutions and their employees are as wrong on this as a solution as they were on mortgage-backed securities and derivatives. I also hear that requiring equity rather than asset purchases is no longer being considered; the taxpayers deserve having this reopened.

The only obligation you have is to leave the next President enough money and borrowing power to rescue the economy by other, "New Deal"-style means after this fails. If excess borrowing to finance this moneypit is extreme enough to tank the dollar, the gov't will be broke just when the economy desperately needs help.

Sincerely,

[BraneMatter]

11. No good.

Once the Executive Branch gets the money, good luck on Congress getting straight answers!

Once the money is given to Bush, Congress has no way to control the Executive other than impeachment, and we see where that has gone...