Obama: Hey, maybe I should lift a finger to help the bailout pass; Update: Senate vote tomorrow

posted at 7:35 pm on September 30, 2008 by Allahpundit

What does it take to make The One roll up his sleeves? Just the prospect of economic calamity. Oh, and Karl Rove publicly humiliating him for doing jack to help pass this bill when he’s out telling voters is desperately needed to avert disaster.

Barack Obama on Tuesday stepped up his advocacy for the Bush Administration’s endangered $700 billion bailout plan by making a round of calls to rank-and-file Democrats in the House and casting congressional inaction in dire, real-world terms. He also massaged his pitch, no longer using the word “bailout” to describe the bill…

Obama reached out to individual House members Tuesday, signaling that the Democratic nominee was taking a deeper role in the process. The campaign would not disclose names, but said he was coordinating his efforts with the congressional leadership.

“He is urging members to take another look at it,” spokeswoman Linda Douglass said.

U.S. News and World Report claims that some House Republicans are prepared to let the credit markets twist until after the election because “[w]e cannot see at this moment any movement by voters that they would tell their members who voted ‘no’ to change their vote to ‘yes.’” Really? There’s this, from WaPo:

But then there’s this too:

You can reconcile that data in two ways: (1) The public wants some kind of plan but not the Paulson plan (for the moment at least), or (2) the public’s answers swing dramatically depending upon whether the questioner emphasizes the cost of the bailout or the amount of wealth potentially lost if nothing is done. It’s probably a moot point either way. Politico claims there are 110 votes shaping up on each side for a compromise, thanks no doubt to the addition of McCain’s and Obama’s proposal to lift the FDIC limit on individual accounts to $250K.

Exit question: When will the credit crisis start to hit consumers? Time claims it’s already here, albeit just the first drips, while CBS floats a cancer analogy to claim that it’s on the way. Quote: “‘This is like the advice you get from the doctor who says you should quit smoking,’ said Robert Brusca, chief economist at Fact and Opinion Economics in New York. ‘You know he’s right. But if you don’t, you’re not going to die tomorrow and you’re not going to die next week. But at some time, it’s probably going to get you.’”

Update: “Politicians, bloggers, and pundits celebrating the bill’s failure don’t seem to get just how much trouble we’re still in.”

Update: A nervous blogger eyes his meager little retirement portfolio and puts his broker on speed-dial: The Senate will vote tomorrow night.


Related Posts:

Breaking on Hot Air

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: 1 2

That’s why we’ll be in Texas, Mexico, or the hills if it comes to that….there are 3.5 guns for every man woman and child in this nation…if they think they’ll get ‘em all “come take ‘em” – sven10077 on September 30, 2008 at 9:04 PM

Screw Mexico. Texas will be the anchor state of the New Republic – when the secession is formalized.

ManlyRash on September 30, 2008 at 9:10 PM

Although I gotta say k2 that I am an admirer of Steve Forbes. I just wish some of these guys were screaming about this earlier. Who knows, they probably were but it never saw the light of day, like Bush in ’03 and McCain in ’05.

Vince on September 30, 2008 at 9:11 PM

Screw Mexico. Texas will be the anchor state of the New Republic – when the secession is formalized.

ManlyRash on September 30, 2008 at 9:10 PM

always plan for the worst case….settle for the middle and be wary of the best….

I told you we’ll rally in Lone Star and take Chihuahua and Sonora when Mexico tries to invade.

sven10077 on September 30, 2008 at 9:13 PM

New McCain ad on the finacial matters at hand. About time this ad got made.

Yakko77 on September 30, 2008 at 9:14 PM

ManlyRash on September 30, 2008 at 9:10 PM

I’ll be there.

Cardiganfox on September 30, 2008 at 9:15 PM

Cardiganfox on September 30, 2008 at 9:15 PM

I know you will. Long live the vision of the Founding Fathers!

ManlyRash on September 30, 2008 at 9:21 PM

I told you we’ll rally in Lone Star and take Chihuahua and Sonora when Mexico tries to invade. – sven10077 on September 30, 2008 at 9:13 PM

Don’t forget Cancun.

ManlyRash on September 30, 2008 at 9:21 PM

Vince on September 30, 2008 at 9:08 PM

Re: trust but verify — hard to follow commonly accepted loaning risk / reward principles when the government is suing you or interfering with your business practices.

And the market has been screaming about this for a while — in some cases (Cramer) literally – hah!

This is only a surprise for the ignorant.

k2aggie07 on September 30, 2008 at 9:26 PM

The SEC provided some relief today by placing a moratorium on the use of mark to market accounting. I don’t know if that decision had an impact on today’s market climb.

In the meantime, maybe someone needs to take a look at possible conflicts impacting decisions:

http://mensnewsdaily.com/2008/09/30/barbarians-at-the-gate/

Jim M. on September 30, 2008 at 9:29 PM

If the story about the dems and fannie and freddie can get traction, then McCain should tie this into the debate about health care. He should ask Americans if they want the dems to do the same thing to the health care industry that they have done to the financial industry.

mtbunji on September 30, 2008 at 9:30 PM

Fannie and Freddie are the Dems Jack Abramhoff. The only problem is that this story will break open only after the election.

highhopes on September 30, 2008 at 9:42 PM

Fannie and Freddie are the Dems Jack Abramhoff. The only problem is that this story will break open only after the election will never break open.

Fixed it.

ManlyRash on September 30, 2008 at 9:48 PM

This must pass.

phronesis on September 30, 2008 at 9:48 PM

Nothing MUST pass….

prior to the geniuses in government getting this deeply involved our longest depression lasted 2.25 years,

sven10077 on September 30, 2008 at 9:50 PM

sven10077 on September 30, 2008 at 9:50 PM

But why did the Fed cause the great depression? Because of contracting money supply. The Fed drained the money supply as bank failures were already contracting it. A similar massive contraction in money supply (the credit crisis) is what the Paulson plan aims to prevent.

phronesis on September 30, 2008 at 9:53 PM

But why did the Fed cause the great depression? Because of contracting money supply. The Fed drained the money supply as bank failures were already contracting it. A similar massive contraction in money supply (the credit crisis) is what the Paulson plan aims to prevent.

phronesis on September 30, 2008 at 9:53 PM

They contracted the money supply in part to allow the John Bulls to resume the gold standard at a discount. The money supply is not the credit supply. Paper on paper is what kills the goose just like the S&L crisis.

We can pass these jokes, but until we reestablish proper valuation of risk it is good money after bad and we lack the votes and will to reform so use the natural methods IMHO.

sven10077 on September 30, 2008 at 9:57 PM

Banks create money; massive bank failures and more strigent lending requirements destroy it. Leverage basically creates money. Deleveraging destroys it. These drains must be countered.

phronesis on September 30, 2008 at 10:01 PM

They played a clip on Hannity and Colmes. “For the first time in my adult life, I am going to keep my mouth shut” says Sean. Poor guy, didn’t want to be tomorrow’s “Worst Person In The World” or worse, a “Speshul Komment” for the obvious Hitler Youth comparisons.

Marcus on September 30, 2008 at 10:02 PM

woops, wrong thread while my head was turned!

Marcus on September 30, 2008 at 10:03 PM

Obviously MM spent every nickle she’s made and has nothing invested as everyday Americans do in responsible viable important companies. These companies are going to get taken out and shot along with the financials if we sit by and do nothing. Credit is the lifeblood.

pc on September 30, 2008 at 10:03 PM

This must pass.

phronesis on September 30, 2008 at 9:48 PM

All the actions of the fed in the last year haven’t affected libor in the way they want, but this bill will?

Spirit of 1776 on September 30, 2008 at 10:06 PM

Banks create money; massive bank failures and more strigent lending requirements destroy it. Leverage basically creates money. Deleveraging destroys it. These drains must be countered.

phronesis on September 30, 2008 at 10:01 PM

Money is not wealth. The banks that let themselves get led happily down the primrose path are the ones bearing the cost of their folly. I did not make them treat the CRA awards dinners like the special olympics they accomplished that all on their own.

When the avergae American backed “drill here, drill now” Wall Street upped their donations to Barry. If Wall Street does not give a damn about affordable energy for America I am pretty comfortable with America telling big business Frag off on welfare for billionaires.

If you look at my body of posts I did not feel this way until the business class and the newsies started backing SanFranNan’s spin on the down vote.

“screw them”

sven10077 on September 30, 2008 at 10:09 PM

All the actions of the fed in the last year haven’t affected libor in the way they want, but this bill will?

Spirit of 1776 on September 30, 2008 at 10:06 PM

oh this 700 billion in magic beans is the cure….and the timing is pure coincidence…..

sven10077 on September 30, 2008 at 10:10 PM

All the actions of the fed in the last year haven’t affected libor in the way they want, but this bill will?

Spirit of 1776 on September 30, 2008 at 10:06 PM

They weren’t enough. That’s the point. Everyone underestimated the amount of liquidity that was being drained by the system by the deleveraging and the failure of many credit providing firms. This has a decent chance of working and, given the alternative, must be tried.

phronesis on September 30, 2008 at 10:10 PM

Rove, you magnificent bastard!!

rockmom on September 30, 2008 at 10:11 PM

They weren’t enough. That’s the point. Everyone underestimated the amount of liquidity that was being drained by the system by the deleveraging and the failure of many credit providing firms. This has a decent chance of working and, given the alternative, must be tried.

phronesis on September 30, 2008 at 10:10 PM

they admitted it is a “guess” “we just need a big number” that is the sort of “precision” that the Goreons use to try to tilt us red…..

some of these banks were leveraged 60-1 sorry but I don’t get to pretend I have 600 bucks just because I have ten….maybe the banks need reminded of that fact.

If deleveraging is the “crisis” maybe we should bail them out pat them on the head and tell them to go 600-1 next time.

sven10077 on September 30, 2008 at 10:13 PM

Rove, you magnificent bastard!!

rockmom on September 30, 2008 at 10:11 PM

Indeed.

phronesis on September 30, 2008 at 10:14 PM

sven10077 on September 30, 2008 at 10:13 PM

not a guess… 14 trillion in mortgages. 5% estimated to be bad debts. 14trillion * 5% =700B.

phronesis on September 30, 2008 at 10:15 PM

sven10077 on September 30, 2008 at 10:13 PM

I think requiring firms to gradually use less leverage is quite reasonable. it will make things more stable. But you don’t do that it at the height of a credit crisis.

phronesis on September 30, 2008 at 10:17 PM

not a guess… 14 trillion in mortgages. 5% estimated to be bad debts. 14trillion * 5% =700B.

phronesis on September 30, 2008 at 10:15 PM

is a guess it is not just gonna be used to leverage mortgages friend….

we already gave amount “x” and in giving with no penalty to the institutions we are encouraging the “next bailout”….sorry if America has to make a 5-12% of GDP bailout every decade we NEED a reset of the market to get people’s heads on straight.

sven10077 on September 30, 2008 at 10:18 PM

I think requiring firms to gradually use less leverage is quite reasonable. it will make things more stable. But you don’t do that it at the height of a credit crisis.

phronesis on September 30, 2008 at 10:17 PM

if not now when?

every time its been tried we get called racists and told the “dog ate our homework” right before the 40+ donks declare a non-filibuster filibuster…..

I *want* Bobby Byrd forced to be there on lifesupport if he wants to play hardball…..

sven10077 on September 30, 2008 at 10:20 PM

sven10077 on September 30, 2008 at 10:18 PM

We learn from this crisis and try to prevent the next one. But there is no excuse to tank the economy just to “screw them”, as you say. That way nihilism lies.

phronesis on September 30, 2008 at 10:21 PM

They weren’t enough. That’s the point. Everyone underestimated the amount of liquidity that was being drained by the system by the deleveraging and the failure of many credit providing firms. This has a decent chance of working and, given the alternative, must be tried.

phronesis on September 30, 2008 at 10:10 PM

So instead of letting the markets self-correct, we should just up the ante. Our big firms over leveraged so we should just throw that back on the government? How about we run through some alternative plans since the guys that misgauged all the measures running up to this point are the ones screaming the loudest that we must have this.

Spirit of 1776 on September 30, 2008 at 10:22 PM

Spirit of 1776 on September 30, 2008 at 10:22 PM

I written post after post explaining this. This market is in a downward spiral not moving toward equilibrium. Asset prices credited a credit crunch but assets prices are also dependent on credit (to create buyers) so we are in a feedback loop that reinforces itself rather than tending toward equilibrium.

phronesis on September 30, 2008 at 10:25 PM

We learn from this crisis and try to prevent the next one. But there is no excuse to tank the economy just to “screw them”, as you say. That way nihilism lies.

phronesis on September 30, 2008 at 10:21 PM

the correction will be good for America…if it is bad it will reset our wages so we may well regain true industry, the opportunity would be there for cheap recapitalization of our infrastructure and physical plants. Sorry but I am not going to wet the bed if illegal aliens, welfare mothers, and crackheads don’t get mortgages….and if my credit cards tighten up layaway will come back into our repetoire….

Wall $treet will learn the price of laying with donks before I cave.

sven10077 on September 30, 2008 at 10:26 PM

I written post after post explaining this. This market is in a downward spiral not moving toward equilibrium. Asset prices credited a credit crunch but assets prices are also dependent on credit (to create buyers) so we are in a feedback loop that reinforces itself rather than tending toward equilibrium.

phronesis on September 30, 2008 at 10:25 PM

only if you think price is meant to be a stable thing. The value of a property is whatever it can be sold at not some imaginary number. I welcome a currency reset.

sven10077 on September 30, 2008 at 10:27 PM

Wall $treet will learn the price of laying with donks before I cave.

sven10077 on September 30, 2008 at 10:26 PM

Very well, but you shall not win this. This country shall not burn to give you your revenge.

phronesis on September 30, 2008 at 10:27 PM

phronesis on September 30, 2008 at 10:25 PM

I’m not arguing that that is wrong. The question is, is this the best option? On that, I have doubts.

Spirit of 1776 on September 30, 2008 at 10:28 PM

Um, excuse me.

What is the Senate going to vote on?

All spending bills must originate in the House of Representatives. The House voted down their bailout bill.

So, like, what is the Senate voting on here?

Tuning Spork on September 30, 2008 at 10:31 PM

I heard a little of The One’s speech in Nevada today. In it, he proclaimed something along the lines that “this is not the time to place blame,” or “when your neighbors house is on fire, you don’t blame him for smoking in bed.”

I got the distinct feeling he feels a ton a crap getting ready to come down on the Democrats as the secret of their role in this mess is on the verge of being dumped out.
Anybody else get that feeling?

Star20 on September 30, 2008 at 8:02 PM

Yep, I thought the exact same thing! BUT I would add that he also does not want a lot of digging either. IF ANYONE OTHER THAN THE INTERNET OR FOX ever did a story about ACORN, and connected it to THE ONE MANCHILD COMMUNITY ORGANIZER, then yes indeedy he would have some concern. I think there is concern because so many folks are opposed to the original bill, got wind of ACORN being in the bill and are learning what ACORN is and the role it played in Fannie Mae.

If you look further into his statement you can see that he does not want anyone to see the slight of hand by Meme Pelosi, Dodd, or Frank. Plus you have Raines and Johnson just waiting to be served some lovely legal papers.

Yes, I bet he is not wanting to play the blame game. He might also get tagged for the first bill not going through because he was AWOL. Whether we wanted it passed or not, it was clear he was nothing but a weasel in the engine!

freeus on September 30, 2008 at 10:31 PM

Very well, but you shall not win this. This country shall not burn to give you your revenge.

phronesis on September 30, 2008 at 10:27 PM

the country won’t burn regardless….

oh noes, oh noes I can’t get a H3 HumVee with 200 bucks down….oh noes oh noes…..

we’re a nation of hypochondriacs led by malignant narcissists who run around tilting at windmills.

You expect me to hand over a trillion dollars thus far to a crowd that has stated overtly through actions: “yeah we did it but SanFranNan’s got our back so screw you there’ll be no investigations or hearings!”

Sorry but when fixing the problem involves running smokescreens for the problem count me out and frankly count a lot of folks out. I suspect that people will happily weather a credit crunch with cheaper oil and stable stocks to teach the lenders a lesson.

sven10077 on September 30, 2008 at 10:32 PM

I’m not arguing that that is wrong. The question is, is this the best option? On that, I have doubts.

Spirit of 1776 on September 30, 2008 at 10:28 PM

I believe it is a fairly good option. It is a monetary stimulus of sorts (albeit using a fiscal lever) designed to inflate the toxic debt causing the problem. This should be more effective and less inflationary (in general) than the blunt instrument of a 0 or 25bps Fed funds rates. And it is clearly superior to deflationary depression.

phronesis on September 30, 2008 at 10:34 PM

Of course the credit market is sluggish. It’s waiting to see if Congress is going be dumb enough to pay more for the debt than the actual free market would.

angelat0763 on September 30, 2008 at 10:37 PM

Of course the credit market is sluggish. It’s waiting to see if Congress is going be dumb enough to pay more for the debt than the actual free market would.

angelat0763 on September 30, 2008 at 10:37 PM

money for nothing*……

*literally

sven10077 on September 30, 2008 at 10:40 PM

I believe it is a fairly good option.

In theory. We’ll see how it shakes out.

Spirit of 1776 on September 30, 2008 at 10:41 PM

Um, excuse me. What is the Senate going to vote on?

All spending bills must originate in the House of Representatives. The House voted down their bailout bill.

So, like, what is the Senate voting on here?

Dnn’t be naive. The Constitution is old and outdated. They’re stripping the text of a bill that already passed and inserting the text of the bailout bill.

Apparently they’ve given themselves permission to do that, because actually following the rules is too bothersome.

Third party third party third party….

angelat0763 on September 30, 2008 at 10:41 PM

Third party third party third party….

angelat0763 on September 30, 2008 at 10:41 PM

means we go socialist faster not slower….quickest way to go EUtopia junior is coalition democracy.

sven10077 on September 30, 2008 at 10:44 PM

You can reconcile that data in two ways: (1) The public wants some kind of plan but not the Paulson plan (for the moment at least), or (2) the public’s answers swing dramatically depending upon whether the questioner emphasizes the cost of the bailout or the amount of wealth potentially lost if nothing is done.

or 3) The polls are complete bullshit and they can tell by the flood of calls reportedly running 1,000 to 1 against – rivaling in volume the amnesty debacle – that the American people are dead set against bailing out Wall Street.

On CNBC today they were forced to admit in the thousands of email they were receiving they couldn’t find a single one supporting the bail out. Not one. So today, they wised up a bit and tried to sell it to the viewers by backing off their over heated rhetoric.

TheBigOldDog on September 30, 2008 at 10:44 PM

money for nothing*……

*literally

A lot of those houses have had everything ripped out of them. No cabinets, no steel garage door, no copper pipes…all gone with the “owners.”

Those are the houses we’re buying. Free standing housing projects. Such a deal.

angelat0763 on September 30, 2008 at 10:46 PM

means we go socialist faster not slower….quickest way to go EUtopia junior is coalition democracy.

Don’t care. The GOP doesn’t deserve my vote any more.

angelat0763 on September 30, 2008 at 10:48 PM

And can somebody please explain why interest rates aren’t going up if the credit supply is shrinking???

Except, of course, that Ben won’t allow it?

Price controls cause shortages. Economics 101.

angelat0763 on September 30, 2008 at 10:51 PM

Don’t care. The GOP doesn’t deserve my vote any more.

angelat0763 on September 30, 2008 at 10:48 PM

then cut out the freaks as middlemen and vote Bambi….

sven10077 on September 30, 2008 at 10:53 PM

And can somebody please explain why interest rates aren’t going up if the credit supply is shrinking???

Except, of course, that Ben won’t allow it?

Price controls cause shortages. Economics 101.

angelat0763 on September 30, 2008 at 10:51 PM

because we live in Chimpy McShrub’s “pure capitalism” machine……

//sarc

sven10077 on September 30, 2008 at 10:54 PM

And can somebody please explain why interest rates aren’t going up if the credit supply is shrinking???

Except, of course, that Ben won’t allow it?

Price controls cause shortages. Economics 101.

angelat0763 on September 30, 2008 at 10:51 PM

Short term inter-bank rates have skyrocketed… like from 3% to 7% from one day to the next (or there abouts according to a piece on tv earlier). BUT credit is still available…

CC

CapedConservative on September 30, 2008 at 10:59 PM

then cut out the freaks as middlemen and vote Bambi….

Instead of making the same mistakes over and over? Instead of rewarding them ? Heck, even Bambi is subjected to an open season.

“Always vote for principle, though you may vote alone, and you may cherish the sweetest reflection that your vote is never lost.” — John Quincy Adams

angelat0763 on September 30, 2008 at 11:13 PM

U.S. News and World Report claims that some House Republicans are prepared to let the credit markets twist until after the election because “[w]e cannot see at this moment any movement by voters that they would tell their members who voted ‘no’ to change their vote to ‘yes.’”

Really?

Yeah, really. You’re delusional.

Jesse Jackson, Jr. – my House Rep – will:

- not change his vote to ‘yea’, and
- will not suffer so much as a 1% drop in his 85% – 12% margin of victory from two years ago?

Jaibones on September 30, 2008 at 11:36 PM

There is a shift in the polls (as much as you can trust them anyway). Palin will most likely do wellat the debate Thursday night. America will watch it and she will pass the test. Then, the media will contort themselves in an all out effort to find fault. I think it is THIS that will be the straw that breaks the media’s back. America can forgive much but we HATE being played the fool and we LOVE to bring the mighty back down to earth.

skree on September 30, 2008 at 8:21 PM

Totally agree. I had the thought earlier this evening that America loves cheering for a winner only slightly more than we love to see the proud and arrogant get their just comeupance.

It’s time for the dems and their media enablers to fall from grace in the eyes of the American People and become the objects of ridicule they so richly deserve.

techno_barbarian on October 1, 2008 at 1:22 AM

Is Manly a Confederate? He keeps talking about the New Republic.

Not me. I am going to stand with the USA.

Terrye on October 1, 2008 at 7:22 AM

I hope the Senate {or someone} can come up with something that can bring some relief to the financial sector, if not the Paulson plan then a workable alternative. I think the long term effects of doing nothing might be worse than doing nothing. I also think that if the economy tanks, Republicans will get the blame. I know it is not fair, but fair has not got anything to do with it.

Terrye on October 1, 2008 at 7:25 AM

The long term effects might be more Democrats with more programs. I think I failed to make that clear in my previous post. I know that too often we mistake short and long term goals.

Terrye on October 1, 2008 at 7:27 AM

Not me. I am going to stand with the USA.

Terrye on October 1, 2008 at 7:22 AM

If the USA ever becomes the USSA then the deal is over as far as I’m concerned. I am not an American because of an accident of geography I am an American because of the Constitution and the Bill of Rights. A “leader” cannot enact hard scoialism without violating the two documents.

Barry has openly violated the notions of the first with his troof squads, I am fairly willing to bet he is willing to violate the second once elected. I’ll do everything in my power to stop him legally and if/when the writing is on the wall for freedom I’ll move to Texas and start over.

sven10077 on October 1, 2008 at 7:45 AM

The long term effects might be more Democrats with more programs. I think I failed to make that clear in my previous post. I know that too often we mistake short and long term goals.

Terrye on October 1, 2008 at 7:27 AM

The longterm impact of a nice trillion dollar “free money” day for the markets will be another trillion dollar free money day.

Franklin Raines and Jamie Gorelick each got almost 100 million from this mess….did you get your cut of the free money?

sven10077 on October 1, 2008 at 7:47 AM

Okay yesterday I got 4 to 5 offers for Mortgages new or help. Now I am getting the same thing today, along with Credit Card offers and the last one a Car Loan. This is just this morning, filling up my Spam box. Our Credit Dried up in this country. Somebody needs to get the message out GRIN.

Dr Evil on October 1, 2008 at 9:14 AM

Okay yesterday I got 4 to 5 offers for Mortgages new or help. Now I am getting the same thing today, along with Credit Card offers and the last one a Car Loan. This is just this morning, filling up my Spam box. Our Credit Dried up in this country. Somebody needs to get the message out GRIN.

Dr Evil on October 1, 2008 at 9:14 AM

indeed…I am getting offers for unsecured loans to secure my unsecured credit card debt….

“security” must be drying up…

sven10077 on October 1, 2008 at 9:19 AM

Dave Ramsey was on the radio this morning, saying that if the bailout passes, McCain loses. Take it for what you will.

Vashta.Nerada on October 1, 2008 at 9:19 AM

Um, excuse me.

What is the Senate going to vote on?

All spending bills must originate in the House of Representatives. The House voted down their bailout bill.

So, like, what is the Senate voting on here?

They’re going to be playing an interesting game of brinksmanship with this.

The government’s Fiscal Year ended yesterday. To keep the government running in the absence of a passed budget, what it typically passed is a “continuing resolution”… intended to be a stop-gap measure to keep things funded short-term.

The House passed a continuing resolution earlier this week (at about 345 pages, giving members only 24 hours to read it, and larding it up with 19.1 billion in pork). To complete the process, the Senate votes on their version of the CR, differences are hammered out in committee, and then sent to the President for signature.

The brinksmanship will come with the Senate attaching the “rescue plan” to the continuing resolution. This way, they don’t “originate” the spending (the House did that with the CR), they just extend the scope of it. If they pass a CR with the bailout/rescue rolled into it, and kick it back to the House, then either the House has to pass it or risk a government shutdown.

Stand by for fireworks starting at sundown.

VekTor on October 1, 2008 at 1:22 PM

It. Is. Not. A. Bailout.

Can we please, please stop calling it a ‘bailout’? It’s not. It is a (your adjective here) solution to the credit crunch – you know, this situation in which we find ourselves in. The one where banks are sitting in vaults full of cash, a la Scrooge McDuck, and refusing to lend any to each other or to pretty much anyone else.

The MSM have taken to calling it, incorrectly, a “Wall Street bailout,” which combines ignorance and demagoguery, and which lends itself nicely to brainwashing students:

Tauheedah Baker-Jones teaches world history at Newark’s Science Park High School, but with America caught in its worst financial crisis since the Great Depression, she figured maybe the Crusades could wait.

So this week she had her sophomores submerge themselves in media coverage of the debate over Washington’s $700 billion Wall Street bailout plan, then resurface for some lively give-and-take.

Y’see? “Wall Street bailout.” And how do tomorrow’s legislators, journalists, and other indoctrinated students feel about that?

“I don’t think we should bail them out. It’s just putting money into rich people’s pockets,” said Janique Sanders.

“Why should the taxpayers give money to the rich?” asked Jaime Reynoso. “You know, these people are so rich, it’s hilarious.”

And my absolute favorite quote:

Unimpressed by this cascade of falling financial dominoes, Devane Murphy, like nearly all his classmates, is dead set against any bailout.

“Paying money to bail out companies will just lead to a more capitalist society, and capitalism is bad and oppressive,” Devane said. “We should build up our power as a country by paying off our debts instead of bailing out people who are obviously hurting the public.”

Yes, ladies and germs, those are tomorrow’s leaders. The one who will follow in the footsteps of The One: as ignorant of economics as Nancy Pelosi, Barney Frank, and the rest of the knee-jerk tax-the-rich crowd that helped us get to where we are today: on the edge of the financial abyss.

So please, please, stop giving the MSM any more help. They don’t need it.

Oh, and lest you doubt my cutting remark about today’s journalists, she said that

the government took control of insurer American International Group

I will award 70 billion points to the first poster who can tell me why that statement – which betrays the usual MSM ignorance of finance – is flat-out wrong.

Paul_in_NJ on October 1, 2008 at 2:37 PM

Stratch my last regarding the brinksmanship maneuver. The Senate passed the CR on Saturday and Bush has already signed it.

So they’re setting themselves up for some other kind on hinkey maneuver to get around the “all appropriations must originate in the House” provision.

Hey, Rocky, watch me pull a rabbit outta my hat! (Again?)

VekTor on October 1, 2008 at 2:40 PM

Stratch = strike + scratch. Heh.

VekTor on October 1, 2008 at 2:41 PM

What I object to is the buying of the “worthless” paper. How do we know that the “credit tightening” that Banbridge is commenting about isn’t a move on the part of the various financial institutions that will benefit from a “bailout” to “pull back” in anticipation of the “bailout”?

Instead of the government buying the “bad” paper, why not set up a loan program or better yet an program where the financial institutions buy insurance against “worthless”paper?”

Wildcatter1980 on October 2, 2008 at 11:59 AM

Comment pages: 1 2