Democratic Underground Latest Greatest Lobby Journals Search Options Help Login
Google

McClatchy: Bailout would come in stages that Congress could halt

Printer-friendly format Printer-friendly format
Printer-friendly format Email this thread to a friend
Printer-friendly format Bookmark this thread
This topic is archived.
Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion (1/22-2007 thru 12/14/2010) Donate to DU
 
chill_wind Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Sep-28-08 01:23 PM
Original message
McClatchy: Bailout would come in stages that Congress could halt
Edited on Sun Sep-28-08 01:24 PM by chill_wind


Bailout would come in stages that Congress could halt



By Kevin G. Hall | McClatchy Newspapers

WASHINGTON — Congress and the Bush administration reached tentative agreement early Sunday on a sweeping $700 billion rescue plan to take bad assets off the books of banks and other financial firms. The deal is expected to be put on paper in the course of the day and sent to legislators for debate and a vote later in the week.

The two sides were racing a self-imposed deadline to get a deal by 6 p.m. Eastern time before Asian financial markets opened for business. A deal was announced in the wee hours by tired, puffy-eyed lawmakers that had been working almost around the clock to reach accord.

As lawmakers neared the tentative deal, staff members had their phones confiscated to prevent leaks in what had become a heavily politicized negotiation. Lawmakers pledged to post a copy of the deal online later Sunday for an angry American public to take a look at the compromise ahead of a congressional vote.

A tentative deal had been announced last Thursday, only to have House Republicans balk. The new compromise gives Democrats more restrictions on the pay of Wall Street execs and a taxpayer stake if the program actually makes money. Republicans tacked on a parallel insurance plan that can work as an alternative to taxpayer funding and killed provisions that would have let federal judges modify distressed mortgages.
(...)

Specifically, the proposed compromise envisions:

-- $700 billion in a taxpayer rescue of Wall Street, with $250 billion available immediately, another $100 billion upon report to Congress and the final $350 billion available only upon action by Congress.

-- Money will be used to buy mortgage-backed securities and other troubled assets, taking them from investment banks, commercial banks, smaller community banks, pension plans and even local governments.

-- Government can use its power as the owner of the troubled mortgage bonds to facilitate modifications for the mortgages themselves.

-- Bipartisan oversight commission will monitor the program. If after five years there is a net loss to the taxpayers, president will have to submit legislative proposals to recoup funds from beneficiaries.

-- Democrats won new, unspecified restrictions on CEO pay and executive compensations for participating companies.

-- Republicans won language creating a parallel insurance program that companies can choose instead of giving up their bad assets.

-- Creation of warrants, which allows any windfall coming to participating companies to be shared with the government, thus the taxpayers.

-- Actions by Treasury will be posted online in real time.

--Judicial review of Treasury’s actions.



The presidential campaigns welcomed the compromise on the Sunday talk shows and took credit for it – even though Senate staffers say neither candidate was instrumental in getting a deal done.


http://www.mcclatchydc.com/227/story/53189.html
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
Eric J in MN Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Sep-28-08 01:28 PM
Response to Original message
1. Is the version the House will vote on today online? NT
NT
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
chill_wind Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Sep-28-08 01:41 PM
Response to Reply #1
5. From the OP
"Staffers warned Sunday that while they are confident the deal will pass, it's no certainty. House Republicans must be convinced that taxpayers will not somehow wind up paying billions to executives. The real test of the package's strength is likely later Sunday when GOP leaders, who have been a thorn in their president's side, present it to members."
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
soothsayer Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Sep-28-08 01:29 PM
Response to Original message
2. we don't live in a democracy. we have no voice.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Hugin Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Sep-28-08 01:31 PM
Response to Original message
3. If they start it why would they want to halt it?
They're so convinced it's the right thing to do after-all.

How many people have told them otherwise?

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
chill_wind Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Sep-28-08 01:37 PM
Response to Original message
4. While House Republicans do not have enough votes to scuttle the package.
" — Democrats have a majority of House seats — House Speaker Nancy Pelosi, D-Calif., said she wants about 100 GOP members to vote for it. Not only would that give the plan a bipartisan sheen, it would also give the Democrats political protection."

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Eric J in MN Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Sep-28-08 01:43 PM
Response to Reply #4
6. I hope Harry Reid has a similar policy, and insists John McCain...
...votes for this before any Democrats do.

(Though ideally, there would be no bailout bill.)
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Hugin Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Sep-28-08 01:45 PM
Response to Reply #6
8. Yes, and Republicans who are currently running for re-election in their State.
The others don't count.

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Eric J in MN Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Sep-28-08 01:58 PM
Response to Reply #8
13. Right. Insist the Norm Coleman and John Sununu vote Yes.
Or no deal.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
chill_wind Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Sep-28-08 01:44 PM
Response to Original message
7. Can we get this McClatchy one on the GP or is it already there?
I didn't see it..
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Vincardog Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Sep-28-08 01:45 PM
Response to Original message
9. 1) The Financial markets aided by the GOP policies have been pillaging the working class
2) The greedy bastards have been running a Ponzi scheme to steal the last bit from each other.
3) Ponzi schemes like Illegal Occupations always end the same way.
4) Given that this crash is the inevitable result of St. Ray Gun's Conservative beliefs and policies
The only thing that can have any possible positive effect now is to Repudiate the beliefs and policies, re regulate, and begin policies that bring secure well paying jobs to America's shores.
Only after these steps have been taken should any action be made to help the financial industry.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Tierra_y_Libertad Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Sep-28-08 01:45 PM
Response to Original message
10. Like they stopped funding the slaughter in Iraq?
Yeah, sure they will.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
chill_wind Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Sep-28-08 01:46 PM
Response to Reply #10
11. I hear you!
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
aquart Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Sep-28-08 01:48 PM
Response to Original message
12. "Unspecified restrictions"? As in NONE?
If it ain't specified, it doesn't exist.

"Judicial review"? LIKE THE RUBBERSTAMP FISA COURT?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Eric J in MN Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Sep-28-08 02:00 PM
Response to Reply #12
14. I read the Chris Dodd version of the bill.
The limits on executive compensation were bogus.

However, the judicial review was real.

I haven't read the House version yet, since it doesn't seem to be online yet.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Raksha Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Sep-28-08 02:05 PM
Response to Original message
15. Sounds like it still *IS* the $700 billion Paulson plan,
only with a lot of placating language about "doing it in stages" and "oversight" thrown in to confuse the voters. I'd have to see just how meaningful that oversight is to believe we aren't being screwed...AGAIN!!!

I don't trust Pelosi. She's beyond complicit...she's a MOLE! She actually works for the other side.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Pharlo Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Sep-28-08 02:25 PM
Response to Original message
16. "Republicans won language creating a parallel insurance program
that companies can choose instead of giving up their bad assets."

Tax payer sponsored 'insurance program' or private sector sponsored 'insurance program'?

If it's a tax payer sponsored insurance program, wouldn't that merely be an end run around any prohibitions imposed by the 'bail out' proper?

I'm concerned about that one.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
DU AdBot (1000+ posts) Click to send private message to this author Click to view 
this author's profile Click to add 
this author to your buddy list Click to add 
this author to your Ignore list Wed Apr 24th 2024, 04:02 PM
Response to Original message
Advertisements [?]
 Top

Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion (1/22-2007 thru 12/14/2010) Donate to DU

Powered by DCForum+ Version 1.1 Copyright 1997-2002 DCScripts.com
Software has been extensively modified by the DU administrators


Important Notices: By participating on this discussion board, visitors agree to abide by the rules outlined on our Rules page. Messages posted on the Democratic Underground Discussion Forums are the opinions of the individuals who post them, and do not necessarily represent the opinions of Democratic Underground, LLC.

Home  |  Discussion Forums  |  Journals |  Store  |  Donate

About DU  |  Contact Us  |  Privacy Policy

Got a message for Democratic Underground? Click here to send us a message.

© 2001 - 2011 Democratic Underground, LLC