CALL OR FAX THE HOUSE FINANCIAL SERVICES COMMITTEE; CONTINUE TO JUST SAY NO TO THE BAILOUT!!
Phone: 202.225.4247
Fax: 202.225.6952
If you cannot call, then fax.
As Naomi "Shock Doctrine" Klein said this morning, communicating our disapproval to our congressional representatives is working, and the only reason we're seeing a little bit of spine from the Dems is because we've been giving them an ear and an eyeful in expressing our displeasure.
Last night on Charlie Rose, Barney Frank said that there will be a bail-out because there's a credit squeeze and the markets are so tight that people who need one can't even get a car loan BUT he also said that they're not looking to give them the full trillion dollars, more like $400-500 billion which, in my view, is still too much. Frankly, I'm unhappy with Frank's stand on this, and I am faxing and calling the House Financial Services Committee as I post this comment.
Schumer just asked Bernanke if the money can be paid in increments; it sounded to me as if Bernanke spoke in circles - he certainly didn't answer yes or no succinctly.
We should resist the Shrub/Paulson/Bernanke-induced panic; this isn't a financial emergency! CONTINUE TO JUST SAY NO TO THE BAIL-OUT!
UPDATE! from Daily Kos diarist bonddad's Rec'd List diary:Why Congress Should Oppose the Bail-Out Package
1.) There is no oversight. Period. No one should be given this amount of power without any check and/or balance.
2.) Why this huge dollar figure?
"One of you mentioned that you will use about $50 billion dollars a month. If that’s the case, and you’re certainly not going to use all $700 billion immediately, and as you can see there are a lot of questions about whether this will work, we understand you’ve done your best and you think this will work best, but it’s clear we’re in uncharted waters. But what about doing this in tranches? Why couldn’t you ask us for $150 billion, and on January 15th or January 20th we would come back, we would assess how this worked and grant some more money if it’s really working?"
He's asking for 25% of the 2007 federal budget in one fell swoop. That's a ton of cash.
3.) Bernanke's statement regarding purchase prices yesterday is pure crap:
"Accounting rules require banks to value many assets at something close to a very low fire-sale price rather than the hold-to-maturity price,'' Bernanke said in testimony to the Senate Banking Committee today. ``If the Treasury bids for and then buys assets at a price close to the hold-to-maturity price, there will be substantial benefits."
Really? I've been involved with finance for 15 years, and I have never heard this distinction before. When I was a bond trader, I do remember getting calls at the end of the month asking for bids on bonds because clients had to mark their portfolios to market. But I don't remember anybody every saying, "let's mark this to "hold-to-maturity." This distinction is bullshit, plain and simple.
THERE'S NO GOOD THING FOR TAXPAYERS ABOUT THIS BAILOUT!
I just heard Bernanke say that THERE ARE RISKS AND THE $700 BILLION COULD DISAPPEAR!
AMERICANS RELUCTANT TO FUND BAIL-OUT!
Most Americans don't believe the government has responsibility for bailing out financial firms with taxpayer money, a core part of the rescue plan Congress is considering to halt the near-meltdown of the nation's financial markets, a Times/Bloomberg poll has found.
Reluctance to use public money to rescue private firms runs across the population, the poll found: Democrats and Republicans, high-income and low-income families alike.
Obama on greed and irresponsibility on Wall Street and in Washington:
US News and World Report: Financial Bailout Plan Meets Resistance
Fierce opposition to the Administration's bailout package from lawmakers of both parties could complicate congressional leaders' plans to push for swift passage of the plan. The Washington Times reports lawmakers remain "deeply skeptical about the bill," and warned yesterday "that it will take longer than a week to pass and will include provisions that the administration opposes." Roll Call, in a story titled "Bush Push Lacks Traction," says "the rank and file in both parties expressed deep concerns about" the deal and "leaders struggled to keep their Members open-minded in the face of surging outside opposition from a diverse range of voices."
The New York Times reports on its front page that House Speaker Nancy Pelosi, Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid, "and other Democratic leaders met Tuesday afternoon to form a strategy for bringing the bailout legislation to the floors of both chambers later this week." However, "there was no clear road map by the end of Tuesday." House Minority Leader John A. Boehner, meanwhile, "said that there seemed to be little appetite for the bailout among his conference."
In fact, the Financial Times says "growing Republican doubts will make it harder for momentum to build in favour of the proposal." Reid said yesterday "the Republicans needed to 'start producing some votes for us.'" The Hill reports, "Pelosi is telling Democrats that she will not support...Bush's $700 billion bailout of the financial sector unless there is significant Republican support for the controversial plan." The Washington Post and the Wall Street Journal also report on GOP opposition to the plan.
CALL/FAX THE HOUSE FINANCIAL SERVICES COMMITTEE AND YOUR SENATORS AND REPRESENTATIVES AND LET THEM KNOW THAT YOU DO NOT WANT THIS BAIL-OUT!
As SciVo and I posted on Daily Kos last weekend:
"We can tell that this isn't for the American people because it doesn't directly address the root cause of the crisis - EXCESSIVE LEVERAGE AND LACK OF TRANSPARENCY IN THE DERIVATIVES MARKET.
This plan is just an authoritarian corporatist power grab and crony giveaway; the last hurrah of a failed administration seeking to leave our cupboards totally bare while they live on their ill-gotten gains in the lap of luxury at the expense of the poor and middle class, such as it is."
CALL/FAX THE HOUSE FINANCIAL SERVICES COMMITTEE AND YOUR SENATORS AND REPRESENTATIVES AND LET THEM KNOW THAT YOU DO NOT WANT THIS BAIL-OUT!