Breaking: Bailout bill fails, Dow roller-coasters; Update: Pelosi speech added
posted at 2:00 pm on September 29, 2008 by Ed Morrissey
Share on Facebook | regular view
This has to be considered a shocker. The bailout bill failed in the House, and it wasn’t especially close. The final tally was 207-226, with Democrats supporting it 141-94, while Republicans opposed it 66-132.
How did the markets react? Initially, with panic. Dow dropped from around a -290 to more like a -660, but then recovered within minutes to a -400. Within a few minutes after that, it rose a little further to about -360, a 300-point gain, but it continued to go up and down, and probably will all day long.
What does this mean? The Senate can always initiate their own version of the plan and re-send it to the House, but that will take some doing. Can Republicans change their votes after taking this kind of stand?
If it stands, it will be a repudiation of the leadership in both House caucuses and the Bush administration. Pelosi couldn’t hold her caucus together, and Boehner, Cantor, Blunt, and Putnam will find themselves in the minority of theirs.
Update: I guess this puts lie to the notion that an agreement existed before John McCain went back to Washington. They got more Republicans today than they had last Wednesday, and it still didn’t pass.
Update II: Here’s the speech that probably killed the agreement. Pelosi blamed the collapse on George Bush and a lack of regulation, and called Republicans hypocrites for cheering free-market principles.
You must be logged in to post a comment.
Blowback
Note from Hot Air management: This section is for comments from Hot Air's community of registered readers. Please don't assume that Hot Air management agrees with or otherwise endorses any particular comment just because we let it stand. A reminder: Anyone who fails to comply with our terms of use may lose their posting privilege.
Trackbacks/Pings
Trackback URL
Comments
Comment pages: « Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 Next »
I will see your Seila Jackson Lee No vote and raise you a Maxine Waters Yes vote
My guy Linder voted NO – good for him
bill30097 on September 29, 2008 at 3:19 PM
highhopes on September 29, 2008 at 3:04 PM
The EXorders issued after 9/11 gives Bush the power needed to keep the country running during extreme times.
unseen on September 29, 2008 at 3:19 PM
Democrats COULD HAVE PASSED THIS BY THEMSELVES YOU DUMB ASSES. PLEASE PLEASE, call and explain that if you have a dumocrat congressman/woman in your state.
TWELVE PERCENT, NAN. YOU ARE NOT A LEADER!
HornetSting on September 29, 2008 at 3:20 PM
I’ll get back to what I posted several days ago. This is a perfect storm.
1. Serious economic situation.
2. The need for bipartisanship legislation free from the kind of pork the Democrats tried to slip in to help ACORN.
3. An angry and nervous electorate.
4. 36 days until the President, Congress, and one-third of the house face the electorate at the voting booth.
—–
IMO, The yeas and nays were for all sorts of reasons. Not enough “protection” for the greedy idiots who took out mortages they couldn’t afford probably lost some Democrats in urban areas because of the foreclosures going on… etc.
Fact of the matter is that this was as bipartisan a bill as could be crafted given the context (final weeks before election day) and partisans like Pelosi thinking she could force through legislation by dint of majority alone. The House GOP did a good job of getting in protections the administration and Democrats were loathe to provide the taxpayer. The House leadership voted the compromise- it was individual Congressmen of both parties that shot this down.
One final note- Pelosi had no business bringing this legislation to a vote if she didn’t have the votes to get it passed. The result on the Dow is probably worse than had the House taken the time to do it right in the first place.
highhopes on September 29, 2008 at 3:20 PM
And our choir of “Narrative first!” folks think the Republicans need to put on that chicken suit and dance real good for our Democrat masters, else the MSM will say bad things about us.
As if they aren’t in the business of doing exactly that at all times with no regard for reality.
By all means, put on the chicken suit and dance for the Democrats. Be their perennial whipping boy. Maybe you’ll get an earmark or two if you’ve been good.
Bleh… this is enough to give me an ulcer. Just pass the damned thing and move on. Washington is irretrievably infested with looters, and there’s not a person left that will fight for free markets. Why should they? There isn’t anyone left in the party that doesn’t couch their rhetoric in “Wall Street bad, Main Street good” pap.
spmat on September 29, 2008 at 3:20 PM
My guy S. Pearce voted NO, he is running for senate.
HornetSting on September 29, 2008 at 3:20 PM
Barney Frank among other Socialist Democrats own this baby. I’d beat their head in with “This is why Government interference does not work in a free market system.
Pelosi knows her party is responsible for the CRA and wanted to cover it up and share responsibility with the Republicans. I say let her drown..I say investigate this mess further and prosecute. Make it all public. In 2006 she promised the most standup, ethical congress ever. With this, the Republicans should take the White House, and retake both houses of Congress…
My guy John Mica voted no, my new favorite Congressman Thaddeus McCotter voted no, and as crazy as people think Ron Paul is, a lot of his ideas are the real deal. By the way, he voted no as well.
Good job House Republicans. Say no to socialism in America.
adamsmith on September 29, 2008 at 3:21 PM
To the blackboard with all of you: “I will not write what I’m thinking.” X 500
capitalist piglet on September 29, 2008 at 3:21 PM
Any “fix” that does not repeal the CRA is useless and just sets us up for the problem to reappear in a few years
bill30097 on September 29, 2008 at 3:21 PM
Blaming the economy on Bush:
Yeeeeeah… because nothing happened to hurt the economy in Bush’s first two years in office. Nothing at all.
Abby Adams on September 29, 2008 at 3:21 PM
Isn’t The Obamassiah supposed to be the leader of the Democrats? Didn’t he support the bailout? Aren’t the seas beginning to subside and the earth beginning to heal? If The One can do all that, why couldn’t Barack Obama get the Democrats in the House to pass this bill?
rbj on September 29, 2008 at 3:22 PM
I’ll forgive you…. for now anyway.
Mcguyver on September 29, 2008 at 3:22 PM
take your head out of your butt.
If you think the GOP is “EVIIIIL”… then why is everyone complaining about this Bail out?
Riddle me that one batman!
upinak on September 29, 2008 at 3:22 PM
Shepard Smith makes a good point – if Granny Nanny had enough democrats rounded up, they could have passed this thing on their own. AND – the whole time that Pelosi and Frank et. al were speaking, the DJIA dropped another 100 points.
uncivilized on September 29, 2008 at 3:22 PM
I heard Nancy Pelosi saying that they Democrats Understand the situation and thanked Paulson and George Bush for letting them know about the problem.. Well..
Where were the Democrats in 2003 when they were warned by the President and they blocked reforms? Where were they in 2005 when they Blocked the Federal Housing Enterprise Regulatory Reform Act of 2005 (Introduced in Senate) By Republicans Co-Sponsored by McCain and Blocked by Democrats It NEVER even got a vote on the Senate floor!, What about in too 2007? Still more blockage and stalling from the Democrats and you guys run the place!?
Chakra Hammer on September 29, 2008 at 3:22 PM
You’d think the Democrats would be falling all over themselves to vote for this thing. Here is their real chance to “socialize” the financial sector. If the government starts owning the banks and other financial institutions, it would go a long way towards their wet dream of wealth redistribution”
Dagnar on September 29, 2008 at 3:22 PM
Not you, my HA buddies…the democrats…
HornetSting on September 29, 2008 at 3:22 PM
That man is a hero!
CP on September 29, 2008 at 3:23 PM
To the point of unilaterally taking on $700B in debt and essentially nationalizing private corporations? I don’t think so.
highhopes on September 29, 2008 at 3:23 PM
bill30097 on September 29, 2008 at 3:21 PM
Couldn’t have said it better myself. That – or more accurately, Clinton’s revisions to it – is what got us into this mess in the first place.
Ryan Gandy on September 29, 2008 at 3:23 PM
Democrats control Congress.. Why can’t they pass the bill?
Are democrats playing politics?
Chakra Hammer on September 29, 2008 at 3:23 PM
San Fran Nan is about to have a nervous breakdown, she is having a problem speaking….
d1carter on September 29, 2008 at 3:23 PM
Street justice needs to be administered to these idiots asafp.
BallisticBob on September 29, 2008 at 3:24 PM
I will not allow the democrats to drive me to the bottle.
I will not allow the democrats to lie to the American people.
I will not allow Nancy’s botox riddled body to lead this congress after Jan 1st.
Go do your homework, all.
HornetSting on September 29, 2008 at 3:24 PM
BUSHBOT!!!EVIL RETHUGLIKKKAN!!!
You know the way the world err, MSM, works: if the vote had had one GOP nay and 200 Democrat yays, it would still be blamed on the Republicans. As it is, I’m waiting for a deflationary cycle to, eventually, boost the dollar back up. Sure, things are going to suck for a while, but I think that throwing another trillion at a problem that I see as likely to get worse anyway is just plain stupid.
We’ll see how it all plays out.
Physics Geek on September 29, 2008 at 3:24 PM
I just got this e-mail at my office.
phronesis on September 29, 2008 at 3:24 PM
Republicans voted against the bill because its a bad bill that includes very, very few Republican ideas. Mostly, it just stripped some of the worst Democrat ideas from the bailout “deal” to which Republicans were never invited.
Anybody who is rejoicing in the potential political gains from the defeat of this bill, you need to get out your violin and start playing like Nero, because our economy is burning.
If the Democrats had really wanted a bi-partisan bill that could pass, they could have gotten one. Of course, that means Democrats would have to stop yelling at us, and then start talking and compromising with Republicans.
Loxodonta on September 29, 2008 at 3:25 PM
?? I think you missed my point, Robin.
yo on September 29, 2008 at 3:25 PM
From the looks of the picture of her on Drudge, I think she threw a very serious hissy fit when it was over. She has obviously been crying her little eyes out.
CC
CapedConservative on September 29, 2008 at 3:25 PM
Pelosi: “We have to go now… but stay tuned”.
What!?! No praise for The Messiah!!! I’m shocked!!!!!!!!!!!!
Oh that’s right… they lost.
Neeeeeeeever mind!!!!
Mcguyver on September 29, 2008 at 3:26 PM
Then why did the public debt increase every year he was in office?
Vashta.Nerada on September 29, 2008 at 3:26 PM
Well, my Democrat congressman, Adam Schiff, voted no. I tend to think that this should not have passed in the first place. Look, if there is such a disagreement on how we got here in the first place, did anyone think that there would be an agreement to get out of it? Everyone is going to blame the GOP, but again, MY DEMOCRAT congressman voted no. And so did 89 other Democrats. Someone is going to have to explain that to me.
righty64 on September 29, 2008 at 3:26 PM
I’m loving the idelogical purity.
/s
phronesis on September 29, 2008 at 3:27 PM
I expected my neighbors to be beating down my door trying to borrow bread, toilet paper, flour, water…..
Only the UPS man, bringing me my latest Amazon order.
The sky is falling, the sky is falling….
More like:
Nan’s face is falling, Nan’s face is falling….
HornetSting on September 29, 2008 at 3:28 PM
On Ed’s numbers, for the Dems, it was 94 of 235 against.
That’s 40.4%. Where is the Democratic leadership? Obama has some clout.
BuckeyeSam on September 29, 2008 at 3:28 PM
NYSE now down over 9%.
KentAllard on September 29, 2008 at 3:29 PM
Turn that frown upside down, MSNBC…
They are replaying clips of the debate…
“The good old days, for dems/libs/marxists”.
HornetSting on September 29, 2008 at 3:30 PM
Yep…except, I wonder if many of these Democrats aren’t remembering why they got elected in the first place. If “throw the bums out” worked to get rid of Republicans who forgot that they were supposed to listen to their constituents, it might stand to reason that these guys know enough to dance with who brung ‘em.
uncivilized on September 29, 2008 at 3:30 PM
All the market needs is liquidity. Suspend the mark to market rule now, and debate the rest later.
Vashta.Nerada on September 29, 2008 at 3:31 PM
This theme, though true, misses a fundamental point about career politicians and the political class. Democrats passing this bill by dint of their majority status means that they own the results. Whatever were to go wrong with this legislation- which is not perfect- could be blamed directly on Democrats. Pelosi needed top cover from Republicans and even with the GOP leadership on board, there were too many leakers from the Democrat Party to make a unified front out of this dog of a compromise. 40% of Pelosi’s own party voted nay.
So what now? Lots of finger pointing but not a whole lot of discussion about how to get a bill that will be supported by a simple majority. Surely the Democrats won’t try to ressurect the pork for ACORN again in an attempt to get the CBC onboard because that would result in a firestorm of public outrage (36 days before an election). I repeat, what now?
Perhaps now is the time to seriously consider throwing all the bums, criminals, incompetent boobs, and other career politicians out of office and start anew. Not every Congressman but certainly 80% of the current crop and anybody who is on their third or more term in DC.-
highhopes on September 29, 2008 at 3:31 PM
I heard the stressed voice too.
She sounded like she had asthma and needed a breathalyser, which…. actually made it possible to listen to her.
Mcguyver on September 29, 2008 at 3:31 PM
There seem to be no adults in the Democratic Party who can stop themselves from yelling and screaming, then sit down and actually work out a compromise solution.
Loxodonta on September 29, 2008 at 3:31 PM
Two words…creative accounting.
uncivilized on September 29, 2008 at 3:32 PM
There must be something wrong with this, for so many Democrats to vote no. Do you think maybe the public isn’t behind another Democratic RTC fiasco?
I have a suggestion, lets redo the IRS rules for rental investment back to the way they were before the Tax Reform Act (TRA) of 1986 and the subsequent S&L collapse, and watch those houses fly off the shelves. Remember, mortgages connect to real property — And the TRA reform was designed to take away the tax advantages of owning rental property. Isn’t it odd how the Democrats make these changes with no warning and wonder why things go south.
After Democrats got past this debacle, the Tax Reform Act (TRA) of 1986, they moved on to “poor people can own houses to”. Who needs to work and save for a down payment, have a good enough job to pay the mortgage, when uncle sam will do all that for you — Of course, there is a cost.
Like with all things liberal, there always is a cost.
tarpon on September 29, 2008 at 3:32 PM
FIFY, but good point. Nancy should have had the votes to pass the bailout bill without any Republican votes.
Y-not on September 29, 2008 at 3:32 PM
That is probably true, but I wonder if the conservative Dems, especially in Rust Belt States, started to resent the fact that the bailout was going to those very same, er, urbanites.
Buy Danish on September 29, 2008 at 3:33 PM
LOFL.
Nancy, you are dumber than a sack of hammers. It’s hard to lead with your grandchildrens’ gavel when it comes to serious business and grown-up matters, isn’t it?
Kai on September 29, 2008 at 3:33 PM
Duh, highhopes, I was being sarcastic. Do I need to add the /S? I’m sorry you typed all that to “explain” this to me.
HornetSting on September 29, 2008 at 3:33 PM
The part that worries me is if all of the D’s would have voted for it if the Acorn pork (if it isn’t too corrupt to call pork) was still in it. If the narrative gets going that it only failed because McCain convinced them to ax that, it could look bad.
Even though all of us should thank McCain for getting it cut.
Count to 10 on September 29, 2008 at 3:33 PM
Crude oil prices down 10%…
Sweet!!!!!!!!!
Mcguyver on September 29, 2008 at 3:34 PM
Blue dogs, good point, Danish.
HornetSting on September 29, 2008 at 3:34 PM
It’s impossible to know if this bailout, or any, is absolutely crucial or not. We have neither the expertise nor the information to make a decision. We have few, if anyone, whose judgement we trust.
But it’s easy to see and understand that with the liberal democrats undermining our gov’t for so long, that we would arrive at this day sometime, the day when our government has led us into a crisis, and is in itself in a crisis.
We can’t be “governed” by the likes of Pelosi and Dodd and Reid and Obama, and Frank, et. al. for decades and generations and yet still think we will avoid some major fall eventually.
Along with everything else that comes to an end with this fiasco, I suggest an end to the “war on poverty.” Let’s just call it a draw. Millions were helped, but some refuse to be and continually pressure the system for never-ending wealth transfer. Fannie’s mission was perverted to that end. It isn’t the only institution in our society that has income redistribution as its goal. Toward this end, the socialists have enlisted the aid of minorities whose heads they fill with never-ending messages about the evils of the very society that sought to help them. I truly hope this ghastly charade comes to an end, along with the Socialists reign.
JiangxiDad on September 29, 2008 at 3:34 PM
That’s what happens in a deflationary depression. It’s not sweet. It is a sign of worldwide demand collapsing as the global economy burns.
phronesis on September 29, 2008 at 3:35 PM
That was in the bll lying on the floor as you probably already know!
patrick neid on September 29, 2008 at 3:36 PM
I don’t like the smell of this at all. Donks voting down their own by 40%… Something about what their pumping to the press ain’t right. That screams of someone’s agenda is running the show, not the consensus that they would have us believe – that is on both sides of the isle. Could people be actually listening to their consituency?
SkinnerVic on September 29, 2008 at 3:37 PM
LOL other then the fact that 94 dems didn’t vote on it either. The GOP is EVIL because it didn’t pass.
I don’t think you have much of a point. Eh!
upinak on September 29, 2008 at 3:38 PM
Actually I just used your post a a jumping off point for the theme that the Democrats could have done this all by themselves. Sorry, but it really wasn’t about you and my comments weren’t really trying to explain anything to you.
Though you probably should use /S if you want to make general statements about the readers of these threads being dumb asses.
highhopes on September 29, 2008 at 3:38 PM
…and, once again, it makes me wonder if this wasn’t engineered as a photo op for the Democrats. Unless Granny Nanny is a complete imbecile (and I’m not willing to concede that she isn’t; this question is simply rhetorical), why would she call a vote before she knew for a fact that she had enough votes to pass it?
uncivilized on September 29, 2008 at 3:38 PM
Gotta be the Acorn factor–my rep Watson, 33rd dist in LA
voted no also.
dragondrop on September 29, 2008 at 3:39 PM
Now the market wishes there were short sellers–they would be covering into the close.
There’s that law of unintended consequences again.
patrick neid on September 29, 2008 at 3:39 PM
When was the last time the nation’s two largest mortgage companies and largest bank all failed within a few months?
I think that’s some evidence there.
Loxodonta on September 29, 2008 at 3:39 PM
yo was being sarcastic about the evil GOP. His point was that there are enough democrats to pass the bill even if no Republicans voted for it.
Y-not on September 29, 2008 at 3:40 PM
I am absolutely losing my ASS in the market today.
nickj116 on September 29, 2008 at 3:40 PM
Speaker Pelosi said “What happened today cannot stand!”. I guess she forgot to add “The people be damned!”
CC
CapedConservative on September 29, 2008 at 3:41 PM
My bad, highhopes. Your post WAS right on.
HornetSting on September 29, 2008 at 3:42 PM
Does anyone have a list of how they voted?
indythinker on September 29, 2008 at 3:42 PM
I believe the GOP will cease to be a majority party within 3 years.
Nice job, guys.
/sarc
indythinker on September 29, 2008 at 3:43 PM
all hail president obama and the fillibuster-proof democratic senate.
phronesis on September 29, 2008 at 3:43 PM
Senate or Congress?
upinak on September 29, 2008 at 3:44 PM
The final tally was 207-226, with Democrats supporting it 141-94, while Republicans opposed it 66-132.
She can’t find 10 Democrats in the House?
They must be hiding under their chairs.
percysunshine on September 29, 2008 at 3:44 PM
I’m starting to think SkinnerVic is right. Something about this whole thing smells.
Y-not on September 29, 2008 at 3:44 PM
Yes, but what I mean is independently suspend MTM, and debate the other aspects later.
Vashta.Nerada on September 29, 2008 at 3:44 PM
I THINK it’s on page 2 of this thread.
HornetSting on September 29, 2008 at 3:45 PM
I could not agree more. I read about families right here in eastern NC who are third, fourth, or fifth – generation welfare recipients. Somehow, the point of the whole exercise has been lost – the name of the game is less of a hand up than a hand out. No incentive to do for yourself, no reason to want or need to. And there’s always society to blame.
uncivilized on September 29, 2008 at 3:45 PM
This is due partyly to the bribes being reduced in the latest bill, and partly due to a bad economy being good news for democrats going into an election.
Vashta.Nerada on September 29, 2008 at 3:45 PM
This is the vote tally:
http://briefingroom.thehill.com/2008/09/29/how-did-your-congressman-vote-on-the-bailout/
Y-not on September 29, 2008 at 3:46 PM
BINGO! Let the Dems go back to their cloakrooms and twist some more of their own MAJORITYS arms. Of better yet let the Markets eat their own losses and keep socialism out of our government.
Rovin on September 29, 2008 at 3:47 PM
I almost hope Pelosi puts that crap back in the bill and passes it with dems only. They would lose their majority in November.
Vashta.Nerada on September 29, 2008 at 3:47 PM
Thanks, P-lo!
Your ineptitude, evilness, and outright gasbaggery and lying saved the day!
VolMagic on September 29, 2008 at 3:48 PM
Well CNN just blamed the Repubs, Bush and of course McCain. Said it didn’t pass because of the 12 R’s who did not vote for it. ARghhh
artchick on September 29, 2008 at 3:48 PM
Are you surprised about CNN?
HornetSting on September 29, 2008 at 3:50 PM
LOL – you could set your watch by that stuff! Democrats can do no wrong, yay, nay, whatever they do – they’re right!
capitalist piglet on September 29, 2008 at 3:51 PM
Or, it might just be that the shutdown of the Texas refineries has lowered demand.
Count to 10 on September 29, 2008 at 3:51 PM
Think again. The only commodity not plunging is gold.
phronesis on September 29, 2008 at 3:52 PM
Is it even possible for the Dems to alter the bill to pass it only with Dems? If they load it with pork will the Blue Dogs and swing district Dems support it?
Mark1971 on September 29, 2008 at 3:52 PM
Stop watching and check back in a year.
Count to 10 on September 29, 2008 at 3:53 PM
I’ve e-mailed my congresswoman 3 times since Friday, urging her to vote no on any bill that contained pay-outs to ACORN, or that allowed the gov’t to purchase other than mortgage debt (such as the just-defeated bill, which allowed the gov’t to purchase any bad debt, including student loans, car loans, credit card debt, etc.).
She’s a Dim, and a first-termer, and she has voted with Pelosi 90% of the time over the last two years. To my surprise, she voted no. Now I’m wondering why. Did she hear from too many constituents like me, and fear her chances for re-election would be gone if she voted yes? Or did she just want more Democratic pork in the bill?
Can’t wait to find out.
AZCoyote on September 29, 2008 at 3:55 PM
That’s possible, my thought is a lot more cynical and is two-fold: 1.) The Dems are “giving a pass” to their folks who are up for election in what could be hotly contested states and 2.) They want to ensure that there are enough Reps along for the ride so if the bailout doesn’t work, they won’t have all the blame heaped on them.
It’d be interesting for someone to look at those Dem’s who voted “No” to see just how many of them are actually up for re-election this year.
Dagnar on September 29, 2008 at 3:55 PM
lowering demand….. umm no.
upinak on September 29, 2008 at 3:55 PM
Unless you are retiring in the next 6 months, don’t worry. If you are still putting money in the market, you are lowering your average cost per share, and it will pay off in the long run.
Vashta.Nerada on September 29, 2008 at 3:55 PM
Agreed. Here in the Peoples Democratic Workers Paradise of Maine, it’s the same story. The Dems run all branches of the State machine, and stand ready and willing to toss money and welfare programs at anyone, even illegals. Somali Immigrants come here by the bus load to get their free handouts, rental subsidies, etc.
Heck, the lady next door has three kids, one by each of her husbands, and they are all born far enough apart to ensure she can stay home to take care of them and not work and still get all the benefits.
It’s easy to see why the Dems keep getting elected up here. If they were tossed out, the gravy tap would be turned off and a whole load of folks would have to actually work for a living.
AW1 Tim on September 29, 2008 at 3:56 PM
Only? How only?
Besides, if less $ are going into the exchange because the US is buying less oil at lower prices, you might expect the $ to start climbing with respect to other curacies. Is it?
Count to 10 on September 29, 2008 at 3:57 PM
No accountability.
No accountability by Democrats in getting us into this mess.
No accountability by Democrats for making changes to insure it doesn’t happen again.
No surprise at the outcome.
Captain America on September 29, 2008 at 3:57 PM
Ahhh no. I’m furious that they completely omit who is in the majority. That maybe 12 more Ds could have voted for it.
artchick on September 29, 2008 at 3:58 PM
If the refineries aren’t producing, they wont be in the market for more crude oil. That is a reduction in demand.
Count to 10 on September 29, 2008 at 3:58 PM
But they didn’t mention the dems who didn’t vote for it either. Remember that.
upinak on September 29, 2008 at 3:58 PM
Comment pages: « Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 Next »