From wire reports
WASHINGTON
The Senate endorsed the $700 billion economic bailout plan on Wednesday, leaving backers optimistic that the resounding approval, coupled with an array of additions, would lead to House acceptance by Friday and end the legislative uncertainty that has rocked the markets.
In contrast to the House rejection of the plan Monday, a bipartisan coalition of senators – including both presidential candidates – showed no hesitation in backing a proposal that had drawn public scorn, though the outpouring eased somewhat after a market plunge after the House defeat. The Senate margin was 74-25 in favor of the White House initiative to buy troubled securities in an effort to avoid a looming economic catastrophe.
Only Sen. Edward M. Kennedy, who is being treated for brain cancer, did not vote.
The presence in the Senate of both presidential candidates in the final weeks of the campaign gave weight to the moment. Sen. John McCain, R-Ariz., did not make remarks on the legislation. Sen. Barack Obama, D-Ill., said in his speech that the bailout plan was regrettable but necessary, and he referred to the stock market drop after the House vote.
“While that decline was devastating, the consequences of the credit crisis that caused it will be even worse if we do not act now,” he said.
The rescue package lets the government spend billions of dollars to buy bad mortgage-related securities and other devalued assets held by troubled financial institutions. If successful, advocates say, that would allow frozen credit to begin flowing again and prevent a deep recession.
In the House, officials of both parties said they were increasingly confident that politically enticing provisions bootstrapped to the original bill – including $150 billion in tax breaks for individuals and businesses – would win over at least the dozen or so votes needed to reverse Monday’s outcome and send the measure to President Bush.
The stock market reflected nervous jitters over a vote that was to occur after it closed but that could affect the future of many Wall Street workers. The Dow Jones industrial average was off almost 220 points during the day but recovered to close down just 19.59 points, or 0.18 percent, at 10,831.07.
Besides the tax breaks, senators also made a change that had drawn widespread support in recent days – an increase in the amount of bank deposits covered by the Federal Deposit Insurance Corp., to $250,000 from $100,000. And the entire package was attached to legislation requiring insurers to treat mental health conditions more like general health problems – a long-sought goal of lawmakers who demanded such parity.
As the shape of the new bill became clearer Wednesday, some House Republicans and Democrats indicated that the changes were enough to get them to take another look at the measure and perhaps change their minds – even though the new items being added would substantially increase the burden on taxpayers.
Rep. John Yarmuth, D-Ky., who on Monday voted no, said he found the new proposal more acceptable, as did Rep. Jim Ramstad, a retiring Republican from Minnesota who voted in opposition as well.
“The inclusion of parity, tax extenders and the FDIC increases has caused me to reconsider my position,” Ramstad said. “All three additions have greatly improved the bill.”
Leaders of both parties in the House, who spent much of Wednesday on the phone taking the temperature of lawmakers not scheduled to return until today, said they were identifying other potential converts as well and were finding a more receptive audience for the revised measure because of the tax package and other changes.
Some House Republicans and Democrats remained adamantly opposed.
“The bailout legislation that the Senate is sending back to the House is a fraternal twin to the one I voted against on Monday,” said Rep. Joe Barton, R-Texas. “Meet the new bill, same as the old bill.”
The tax breaks, which had been the center of a dispute between House and Senate Democrats, caused problems as well.
A coalition of Democrats led by Rep. Steny Hoyer of Maryland, the majority leader, had refused to back the tax benefits unless they were deficit-neutral – offset by tax increases or spending cuts elsewhere. The bill now includes the Senate version of the tax plan, which adds most of the cost to the deficit over the next decade.
But the Senate leaders decided to present the House with a take-it-or-leave-it choice, and it is possible some Democrats could desert the bill over the tactic.
Hoyer said he was disappointed by the Senate’s decision and worried that it could cost Democratic votes.
“Certainly there are people who are upset we are making the deficit worse as we are trying to stabilize the economy,” Hoyer told reporters. But in a telephone conference call among the Democratic leadership Wednesday morning, he told his colleagues he would back the measure because the economic rescue needed to take priority, according to participants.
In the end, Senate leaders decided to overcome some of the ideological and political resistance that doomed the measure in the House by stuffing the bill with provisions that would make it hard for many lawmakers to resist.
“All I’m trying to do is get this thing passed,” said Sen. Harry Reid, D-Nev., the majority leader, denying he was trying to jam the House by giving members no choice but to accept the tax proposal he favored or again reject the bailout.
The multiple tax breaks, called extenders in the Capitol because they renew or extend expiring tax benefits, appeal to many lawmakers and could provide a political argument for backing a bill that has otherwise been unpopular.
Instead of siding with a $700 billion bailout, lawmakers could now say they voted for increased protection for deposits at the neighborhood bank, income tax relief for middle-class taxpayers and aid for schools in rural areas where the federal government owns much of the land.
The approximately $150 billion in new tax breaks, which offer incentives for the use of renewable energy and relieve 24 million households from an estimated $65 billion alternative minimum tax scheduled to take effect this year, would be offset by only about $40 billion in spending cuts or tax increases elsewhere.
This story was compiled from reports by The New York Times and The Associated Press.
Delicious
Digg
Reddit
Facebook
Google
Yahoo
Mine voted no
A big shout out to the democratic representative from NC- G.K. BUTTERFIELD
This man had an ear for what the voters had to say. Thank you!
You da' man.
Too trusting
The public are not idiots, but simply, WE have been too trusting for too long when it comes to our elected officials. Time and time again, they have shown ulterior motives, which doesn't include keeping their promises to the American people.
As far as the bailout...if the government can come up with this kind of money, what has been stopping them from implementing a health care program which is so desparately needed by so many? Just think what $700 billion dollars could do!
Personally...I would like to say that I am really glad to see so many of you posting comments. This gives me hope knowing that others are really thinking, and finally trying to do something...words do have power!
Let them know how you feel.
Call Rep Drake at 202-225-4215. Let them know if you are against this! Or for it.
Also, call these House leaders:
Nancy Pelosi: 202-225-4965
John Boehner: 202-225-6205
Let them hear our voices NOW and in NOVEMBER!!!
no worries mon
Apparently we have plenty of money. The pork proves this.
I am stunned by the audacity of what is being attempted a month before a national election. They truly do think the public is full of idiots. They may be right.
pork
oink oink! i salute the 25 hold outs,you are the true heros
What makes this bill "sweetened"?
It must be all the pork that's been added to it!
Does anyone recall a little phrase of "No taxation without representation"? When Diane Feinstein can say on public TV that two thirds of her constituants wanted her to vote against this bill, but she voted for it because the people just don't know what's good for them...sounds kind of like a dictator, doesn't it?
Every poll shows that the majority people don't want this...more debt supposedly fixing debt. And we've put the pork in there to entice those who don't agree with the bill to say yes! Who's going to pay...our kids and grandkids? They won't have enough to live on after taxes.
Yes, we need to do something...but this is not it!! Check out Dave Ramsay's Common Sense Plan. If we do something like that to get things moving, and then deal with the real problem, the root problem. Government shouldn't even have it's hands (and our money) in a lot of programs. They should get back to protecting and defending...they sure should not become a central bank!! Enough debt!!! Prosperous nations need to live responsibly...we are destroying ourselves! We've got to stop this cycle.
FANNIE MAE IS A GOVERMENT SPONSORED ENTITY
FM buy's mortgagaes from other companies. it is backed by tax payers for all losses but keeps profits. 1997 Clinton loosens home loan requirements. Banks begin making 0 down, no doc loans for 120%. 1998 Franklin Raines & Jamie Garelcik from Clintons admin are appointed to run Fanny May. Huge bonuses are offered for loan targets. 2003 Bush proposes more oversight to clean up FM. Dems tout it will hurt the poor (Wyatt D-NC).199-2004 Gaines earns 100M Garelick earns 75M in bonuses. 2004 As a result of Enron Sorbanes-Oxley is passed. It finds massive fraud at FM. No enforcement is carried out. Why? Dood, Obama, Schumer and Frank are the top 4 recipients of donations.
TOO BE CONTINUED- REPEATS NOT ALLOWED.
HOW does 700 billion dollars appear???
How is it possible to come up with 700 Billion dollars to bail out Wall street so investors wont lose their money??? And if it is easy why cant we bail out Social Security I dont speculate/gamble in the stock market I could never afford to Raising a family on a tight budget does not allow one to gamble on anything except your love ones needs BUT what I have done all my working life is pay into Social Security If it fails and I cant withdraw from it my share of entitlements THAT would have a bigger impact on my life If this bail out does happen I dont think it will effect me in any manner Im in the lower middle class everything I have is paid for up front or its not needed
Best line this week form a Congressman
Jim Moran (D) from northern VA, when asked about feedback from his constituents on the bailout said 'They're about equally divided, with 50% saying "No" and 50% saying "Hell No."
This bailout compensates those who despise average Americans
This bailout reflects a much deeper, difficult and sinister problem - a very fundamental disdain for democracy. You see, anyone in government who believes this is the way to treat the vast majority of your citizens certainly does not believe in the common good or the value of individuals within a democratic system.
We are just depositors in THEIR bank accounts - they need US to foot the bill for THEIR party. And we're not invited to any table at all. We are simply delegated to picking up THEIR trash. They made their self-serving choices, so let them suffer their self-induced consequences. We'll rebound.
Double standard
lets see it was a big criminal investigation and trial for Enron.
because the bosses there drove the company into the ground and fooled investors.
How come we are not bringing up charges on all the failed banking institutions that are about to cost us $700 billion for starters ?
because the Politicians all have personal finances tied up in those institutions. some still recieving checks from them, including Pualson.
No one gets punished for this, no one needs to be responsible for this other than the common tax payer, which can't live without over extended credit !
This rescue plan is for Congress and The House not us, definitely won't help the U.S. other than making our market a socialist one.
It won't work and when they get back from vacation and elections we will have to do it again and keep doing until the country is destroyed.
GREED IS A PARASITE !
I keep hearing the "right" thing to do
The right thing to do would be to determine the root causes and address those issues versus throwing over 1.7 TRILLION dollars towards solutions that may or may not work. The goverment has already thrown 900 billion at the problem this year, many of the programs which are only this week starting to take effect, and now want to throw another 850 billion at the problem without even assessing the impact of the programs they already initiated. This is simply a power play by government to take control of the financial markets and falsely prop up asset values in the hopes that "some day" these asset values will recover (Do NOT confuse derivatives with the actual mortgages themselves). In the meantime, the only people who can really benefit from this package are the same people who brought us to this point in the first place. Without addressing the root causes now it is just making the problem worse and pushing the bigger problem down the road to make it more painful in the long run.
thanks imo
I am sending it out on the NC side right now.
On letters like 'davies', the real question is do you want the pain now or later? Let's get out of the way buddy. Call your broker and invest in Asian stocks or cash out.
Cutting Off One's Nose
Although I can certainly understand why so many are opposed to the notion of bailing out greedy Wall Street fat cats with taxpayer $$, I wonder how many of these same people realize how much the looming financial catastrophe may affect them personally, especially if a rescue/bailout bill doesn’t get passed soon. Do they understand how severe the effect on Main Street and the average working Joe is likely to be? Are they prepared to lose their job, or see their IRA, 401K, or other retirement savings take more steep nosedives? How about not being able to buy anything on credit or being unable to sell their house because a potential buyer can’t get a mortgage loan? Some of this has already started to happen. Although passing the bill may be a bitter pill to swallow, I would just caution people to be careful that they are not “cutting off their nose to spite their face”.
Phone, Fax Meltdown
If you want to phone or fax your congressman to object to passing the so-called Rescue Bill and cannot get through be sure to e-mail them at the links provided on their web pages at http://www.house.gov. I never could get through to his Washington D. C. number but was able to get his local office where I live. If the e-mail sent takes longer to appear, it is because their in-box is smoking like their phones and fax machines.
Vote NO please...right
Sure, vote no! I'm more than ready for a depression. I've never been through one and it will give me great stories to tell when I'm old, just like my grandfather told me. The house he built from old railroad ties stood until 2000. I used to have great fun watching a ball roll from one end of the house to the other (Grandpa couldn't afford a level back then).
From what most of the people who have posted here, you must be ready too!
I've been putting all that money into a retirement account that will disappear when everything crashes. The only people who should be against this bill are those of you that have a million dollars in your mattress!
Remember this promise....
We were told by Republicans running for re-election that they would eliminate the inheritance tax. Did we ever think it would happen by eliminating OUR INHERITANCE!
Even more absurd
The FDIC could insure accounts for a Billion each and it wouldn't mean anything. Th FDIC only has 1.5% reserve of its insured accounts as it is.
A single large bank failure would use up all it has to pay depositors. If there is a general bank failure, those with funds in the worst run, and thus first t fail, banks will get paid while those with funds in the better managed banks will be left empty handed.
In a free market, private sector players depend on their reputations in order to do business with willing customers who can take their business elsewhere. Government need not worry about maintaining a clean record as they can force you to "do business" with them.
Trusting government to protect you from the private sector is insane.
Simply Absurd
It is simply absurd to think that any American with a lick of sense would fall for the BS our leaders are espousing. I will admit the ecomony is headed for the tank, but there are many smart people with excellent ideas that have a much higher potential at significantly less taxpayer risk (look at some of the other proposed plans from House members that were stomped on the in rush to idiocy). For example, the FDIC could have insured the full amounts of deposits under current law without congressional approval. While I am 100% behind tax cuts for Puerto Rican rum (being known to imbibe on more than several occasions), even I am not stupid enough to believe that by buying assets that have literally, NO value, our government will help the economy. They should have passed the tax breaks on the rum first, got us totally hammered, then tried to sell us this Brooklyn Bridge!
Bailout is a sham
Why is it that we are forced to bail out all of the bigwig CEO's and CFO's on Wall Street? Why can I not get bail out help with MY credit crisis from congress? When the previous bill failed, the controllers on Wall Street created the drop which in turn scared everyone else. The only ones in control are the spin doctors and lobbists. The congress and senate are looking out only for their interests. It is very funny that the U.S. will not "negotiate with terrorists" but they DO negotiate with Corperate terrorists!
No IRA
I'm at my house, nursing yet another beer...hence the reason to restock my fridge.
After reading and rereading what came out of our Senate and is now in front of the House, I'm thinking about changing the title of this bill from this EMERGENCY ECONOMIC STABILIZATION to CONGRESSIONAL COMEDY OF ERRORS.
I'd like to add to Section 325 Wool Research Fund: determine reasons why men acquire navel lint while females do not; research reasons why one sock comes up missing is the washing machine.
Thank God there's tax relief for Puerto Rican Rum. I'm going to begin abusing that stuff pretty soon.
Bottom line-the Legislative Branch isn't taking this seriously, therefor it must be as big of a problem as the media and Wall Street are making it out to be.
Pigs in pinstripes.
I expected better of Senators Webb and Warner, and our other Republican Senators. It's too bad that they don't have the testicular fortitude of Senator Elizabeth Dole, who stood up and rightly said "no!" to this revised-for-the-worse, pork-laden bailout. Remember when the GOP stood for low taxes and less government involvement in our lives? Now, they stand up in front of the TV cameras, grinning from ear to ear, alongside Nancy Pelosi, Harry Reid, Chuck Schummer, Joe Lieberman and others of their ilk, and happily pass junk like this bill.
The Big Lie is a propaganda technique, defined by Hitler, as a lie so "colossal" that no one would believe that it wasn't the truth. It worked in WWII, when he conned the German people. It worked when the neocons sent our kids off to Iraq. It will work again on Friday, when the House of Representatives will pass a bill that will ultimately be the last nail in our economic coffin. The pigs in pinstripes win every time, over the honest, everyday, hardworking citizens.
?
Are you staying at Ryan Fredericks house?
I have it here:
http://money.cnn.com/2008/10/01/news/pdf/index.htm
Thanks for your help. Oh, and to highlight how ittle people are trying to actually read I would like to highlight this comment from below:
"They should have included a provision to allow people going through forclosure to re-finance their mortgages at current rates and not the balloon rates that they were suckered in to in the first place."
All dead beats should see Sec 110 -&-
Socialist appreciate your support Chris:
"I don't understand everything about this, but I hope it works for America's sake."
vabeach757
Agree. We also need to remember that Mark Warner stated he would of voted "yes" for this bill - while Gilmore would of voted no.
Waste
Typical Washington. Take an unpopular bill - fill it with pork spending - then watch the pigs come running to support it. We must change this Washington habit by voting out politicians who add unnecessary and unrelated spending to bills. Until we do we have no one to blame but ourselves.
How it happened (Quote)
Ann has it right. The Liberals are voting YES because they are beholden to the banking industry.
"Under Clinton, the entire federal government put massive pressure on banks to grant more mortgages to the poor and minorities. Clinton's secretary of Housing and Urban Development, Andrew Cuomo, investigated Fannie Mae for racial discrimination and proposed that 50 percent of Fannie Mae's and Freddie Mac's portfolio be made up of loans to low- to moderate-income borrowers by the year 2001.
Instead of looking at "outdated criteria," such as the mortgage applicant's credit history and ability to make a down payment, banks were encouraged to consider nontraditional measures of credit-worthiness, such as having a good jump shot or having a missing child named "Caylee."
Threatening lawsuits, Clinton's Federal Reserve demanded that banks treat welfare payments and unemployment benefits as valid income sources to qualify for a mortgage. That isn't a joke -- it's a fact.
When Democrats controlled both the executive and legislative branches, political correctness was given a veto over sound business practices.
IRA
I got the Senate bill link on hotair.com after doing a GOOGLE search.
I don't think the text of what the house is looking at is available yet. It may very well be what we can online. Of course, I'm not about to spend all day searching for, reading and studdying this thing either...I need to put more beer in my fridge, pick up the party favors in my yard (dog poop) clean up the carbon/toner/whatever the powder is that the police forensic team dusted around my work shop, etc.
Try this link
http://hotair.com/archives/2008/10/01/senate-bailout-bill-hits-the-internet/
I didn't think about it this way
Someone posted on a blog I skim over that the $700 billion bailout isn't about saving anything, it's about buying time to the wealthy elite can loot the country a few more times and move their wealth elsewhere.
Here's a fascinating article linking the Spitzer issue to the bail outs. I plan to look up the sub-prime steering claims, and lawsuit, this weekend:
http://www.globalresearch.ca/index.php?context=va&aid=8336
Bailout
It is a sad time in America. But maybe this is happening, so that we Americans start being aware and wake up out of the coma that so many seem to stay. The fact that the Senators from Virginia voted "yes" is no surprise to me. Virginia has some of the worst laws on the books, which in my opinion, only serve to protect big business and money people. Don't forget, most of the those who are in support of this bailout, certainly are not of the low or middle class americans. They are in support of this bill to save their own you know whats. They have a lot more to lose!
Craig
The link is not working. I have been at :
http://www.senate.gov/pagelayout/legislative/b_three_sections_with_teasers/active_leg_page.htm
But cannot get an actual copy of the legislation headed to the House. Can someone help w/ this"
For those who oppose pork, lets all look. We can start w. these:
Film and Television Productions (Sec. 502)
Wooden Arrows designed for use by children (Sec. 503)
6 page package of earmarks for litigants in the 1989 Exxon Valdez incident, Alaska (Sec. 504)
Virgin Island and Puerto Rican Rum (Section 308)
American Samoa (Sec. 309)
Mine Rescue Teams (Sec. 310)
Mine Safety Equipment (Sec. 311)
Domestic Production Activities in Puerto Rico (Sec. 312)
Indian Tribes (Sec. 314, 315)
Railroads (Sec. 316)
Auto Racing Tracks (317)
District of Columbia (Sec. 322)
Wool Research (Sec. 325