About Me

Name: Gabrielle Cusumano
Biography
Loading...

Create Your Own Blog Find Other Townhall Blogs

Comments

Archives

Issa Offers Proposal for Guaranteed Recovery Bonds to Rescue Financial Markets

Proposal Uses Private Equity to Keep Government from Buying Mortgage Assets, Assures Wall Street Won’t Get Rich While Taxpayers Get Stuck with Trillion Dollar Bill

September 27, 2008

Washington, DC – Rep. Darrell Issa, a businessman and entrepreneur before coming to Congress, today offered a new proposal to protect the economy without a taxpayer-funded bail out of Wall Street. Under Rep. Issa’s plan, private investors would provide the capital for a Rescue Fund through the purchase of government issued Guaranteed Recovery Bonds.  The Rescue Fund would be managed by the Treasury Department and would offer troubled financial firms interest accruing loans based upon their holdings of at-risk mortgage assets.

“My plan uses private investment and gives Wall Street the same liquidity as the Paulson plan and guarantees that investment firms don’t just dump rotting assets on taxpayers and go on to reap huge profits,” said Issa. 

Under the plan, Congress authorizes the Treasury to issue up to $700 billion dollars in unique callable T-Bills (Guaranteed Recovery Bonds) to be purchased by private investors to capitalize a Rescue Fund that will be managed by the Treasury Department.   Financial institutions borrow from the fund at a rate that fully covers the interest paid to investors in the Recovery Bonds plus an insurance premium to protect taxpayers.

Under the Issa plan, Financial institutions holding at-risk mortgage-backed securities would be able to borrow from the $700 billion rescue fund established through the special Guaranteed Recovery Bonds.  The amount each firm could borrow would be set by the Treasury Department using Secretary Paulson’s mark-to-market to maturity valuation of the mortgage backed securities they hold.  Financial institutions would continue to hold their mortgage assets and be responsible for liquidating them over time, so taxpayers would not be saddled with the liability or cost of disposing of troubled assets.  As firms pay-back loans to Treasury, the revenue is used to pay-off the Guaranteed Recovery Bonds.  The insurance premium paid by borrowers will protect taxpayers from default.

A point by point summary of Rep. Issa’s proposal and a comparison with the Paulson plan can be found below.
http://issa.house.gov/index.cfm?FuseAction=News.PressReleases&ContentRecord_id=a5619b9b-19b9-b4b1-1201-970709a07318
_________________________________________________________________________________________

Issa Guaranteed Recovery Bonds vs. Paulson Bailout
The Benefits of Making Wall Street an Emergency Loan instead of Buying Troubled Mortgage Assets

Less Risk/Reward for Taxpayers:
  • Under the $700 billion Paulson plan, the Treasury buys at-risk mortgage assets and taxpayers own the investment — if taxpayers overpay for risky assets they lose money while Wall Street firms are free to profit after dumping bad investments on taxpayers.

  • Under the Issa Guaranteed Recovery Bonds plan, Wall Street firms get liquidity from bonds but retain ownership of at-risk mortgage assets. Taxpayers can't get stuck holding the bill while Wall Street firms profit — taxpayers can only lose money if firms fail.
Wall Street Can't Profit while Taxpayers take Huge Losses:
  • Under the Paulson plan, Wall Street firms get to wash their hands of business decisions and hand the risk to taxpayers. They're free to make enormous profits while taxpayers get stuck with results of bad investment.

  • The Issa Bonds plan means that if Wall Street firms succeed, taxpayers make a profit. Wall Street can't make huge profits while taxpayers lose billions.
Keeping the Federal Government from Owning Troubled Mortgages:
  • The Paulson plan makes the government the owners of $700 billion in mortgage assets. We're the landlord and the Federal government will be under constant pressure to cut special deals for tenants that cost taxpayers even more.

  • The Issa plan means the government doesn't get itself into the mortgage management business. Wall Street firms are still in charge of business decisions and stilI have a financial stake.

Email ItEmail It | Print ItPrint It | CommentsComments (0) | TrackbacksTrackbacks (0) | Flag as offensiveFlag as Offensive

Congress, it's like the criminal who breaks into your house, hurts himself, then sues you for damages.

DESPICABLE DC POLS' MOST OUTRAGEOUS DEMAND YET

By CHARLES HURT

Posted: 3:53 am
September 29, 2008  Excerpt from http://www.nypost.com/seven/09292008/news/columnists/despicable_dc_pols_most_outrageous_deman_131277.htm

MEMPHIS - Here's why Americans are revolting over the Wall Street rescue plan.

It's not that taxpayers refuse to dig deeper to avoid an even bigger catastrophe.

It's that they're all puking over the notion that it's the same bums in Washington who caused the mess by allowing it to fester who are now demanding their money to fix it.

It's like the criminal who breaks into your house, hurts himself, then sues you for damages.

The reason Americans endure their federal government is that it is so inept and useless that it has little bearing on their everyday lives.

But in an economic meltdown like this, people don't have a choice but to feel the fallout of their government's incompetence. This is especially true in important swing states like Michigan, Ohio, Florida and Wisconsin, where factories are shuttering and neighborhoods are going into foreclosure.

And when taxpayers are suddenly told that the government will clip them for an additional $700 billion to clean up a mess it made, voters tend not to forget.

What is truly staggering is that neither of the presidential candidates has effectively reached voters on this issue. That's why they remain jumbled at 50-50 in the polls.

Obama's envisioned "joint statement" last week and McCain's sniveling attempts to skip Friday's debate were silly political posturing, as if a little handholding would do any good.

All these people do is hold hands, and that's why they've gotten us into such a crisis. When they're not clutching hands with strangers in airport bathroom stalls, they're clutching hands with people even worse - each other.

Or they're playing footsie with lobbyists and selling off America's future for a few bucks and a cushy job after they leave office.

To contine reading this excerpt go to The New York Post at:

  http://www.nypost.com/seven/09292008/news/columnists/despicable_dc_pols_most_outrageous_deman_131277.htm
 
Interest Read: The comments following this article on the New York Post's Website 
Email ItEmail It | Print ItPrint It | CommentsComments (0) | TrackbacksTrackbacks (0) | Flag as offensiveFlag as Offensive

BOEHNER: Americans are angry, and so are my colleagues.

House Republicans Address Economic Emergency Legislation

CQ Transcripts Wire
Monday, September 29, 2008; 3:01 PM

PUTNAM: We are obviously disappointed that this bill was unable to muster the necessary votes to pass. We remain committed to working on a bipartisan basis to bring a bill to the floor that will garner the necessary votes to avoid a financial collapse.

 

I was disappointed that a process that over the last several days has yielded a bipartisan product, involved negotiators from both sides of the building and both sides of the aisle, took a very marked partisan turn at the end of the debate, which was very different than the rhetoric that we heard out of Chairman Frank or Leader Hoyer or our leader, John Boehner.

 

And with that, I'd like to introduce our leader who's been at the -- from the earliest stages of this committed to working with both sides of the aisle to produce a product that is good for America.

 

John Boehner?

 

BOEHNER: Americans are angry, and so are my colleagues. They don't want to have to vote for a bill like this, and I understand that.

 

But I have concerns about what this means for the American people, what it means for our economy, and what it means for people's jobs. I think that we need to renew our efforts to find a solution that Congress can support.

 

I do believe that we could have gotten there today had it not been for this partisan speech that the speaker gave on the floor of the House.

 

I mean, we were -- we put everything we had into getting the votes to get there today.

 

BOEHNER: But the speaker had to give a partisan voice (sic) that poisoned our conference, caused a number of members we thought we could get to go south.

 

At the end of the day this is not about Democrats or Republicans, it's about our economy and what's best for the American people. And regardless of what happened today, we've got -- we have no choice, in my view, but to work together to try to find a solution to make sure that we save our economy and we save our constituents.

 

Roy Blunt?

 

BLUNT: Well, thank you, John.

 

We did think we had a dozen more votes going to the floor than we had. No more than that, but we thought we had a dozen more. I think, unfortunately, too many of our members were already on the floor when they heard that late speech by the speaker.

 

During this whole process, the tone in the room was so much better than the tone outside the room. We worked together well to try to come up with a compromise that could pass today, that the president could sign, that would do what needs to be done in the economy, but every time you'd turn on television or read an article about the press reports of what the other side was saying, it was all about how Republicans either were unpatriotic or were there too late or whatever.

 

Well, we're going to reach back out to them. We're certainly going to reach back out to our members. We're going to try to do our best to find a solution here that works for the American people.

 

No matter how many times I said or Mr. Boehner said or Mr. Hoyer said or Mr. Frank said, "We've got to put partisanship aside," there was way too much of that still going on and a clock that nobody could control. You know, clearly needing to respect the holidays of this week, the Jewish holidays of this week, meant that we had to rush things in a way that made that job very hard.

 

BLUNT: And we made it harder today by so much partisan discussion discussion in what should have been a bipartisan effort to solve this problem for the American people.

 

But we're going to reach back out to them. We're going to be talking to our members and see how we can come together in the next few days to reverse whatever negative impact there may be in the economy over the next few days because Congress has failed to act.

 

And, remember, we're not in the majority in the Congress that failed to act today. And we need to reach back out to that majority. And hopefully, they will allow us to be part of a solution, rather than continuing to pursue a partisan discussion.

 

Eric?

 

CANTOR: Right here is the reason, I believe, why this vote failed. And this is Speaker Pelosi's speech that, frankly, struck the tone of partisanship that, frankly, was inappropriate in this discussion.

 

There is -- there is -- and there were several meetings, day in and day out, of members on both sides of the aisle trying to get up to speed on this issue of the economy and of the capital markets, and, frankly, a lot of agreement.

 

And I think that this is a case of a failure of Speaker Pelosi to listen not only to her members, but certainly to our members and the common bonds that brought our members together on this very, very important issue facing the American people.

 

This is not a partisan crisis. This is an economic crisis facing everyone in this country. And to look at the votes today, 94 Democrats voted no -- 94.

 

Now, when we were in the majority, I think we would make a decision that we would be able to come to the floor and bring a solution to the American people and pass it.

 

CANTOR: They made a decision to leave 94 of their votes off the table, and frankly, as you can see, a majority of our votes that wouldn't go along.

 

Clearly, this is an instance where you see Speaker Losi's -- Speaker Pelosi's failure to listen, failure to lead. This caps off a year that I think has been probably the most unproductive year in the U.S. Congress that I've seen in my lifetime. No -- no production of any bailout bill. No energy bill. No appropriations process. Very little to show the American people.

 

So we're going to go and, as our leaders have said, go back to the drawing table and look to see where we can come together, listen to our members, and produce a solution for the American people.

 

QUESTION: Do you take any responsibility for (OFF-MIKE)?

 

BOEHNER: Absolutely not. As a matter of fact, I would argue that if I had not stood in the way of the original Paulson plan, there would have been far less votes on both sides of the aisle.

 

And the fact is, is that while we were able to move the bill drastically to the right, it wasn't -- it wasn't good enough for a lot of our members. And so, we've got to find a true middle ground that will bring enough votes in order to avert any crisis.

 

QUESTION: Mr. Cantor, you described what the speaker said as very partisan here, and then you said here a minute ago, you know, she had a failure to listen, a failure to lead.

 

Isn't that partisanship on your behalf?

 

BOEHNER: No.

 

CANTOR: I think it's just pretty apparent now, when she lost 93 of her colleagues on their side of the aisle as well as all the people's votes who went no on our side of the aisle.

 

Clearly, there was something lacking in the leadership here, that would bring a bill to the floor that couldn't meet the approval of that many number of members.

 

CANTOR: So we're saying, "Look, forget the partisan stuff. Let's look at the solutions. Let's look and see where members can come together and begin to provide a solution to this very, very tough economic challenge..."

 

(CROSSTALK)

 

QUESTION: Does Mr. Paulson need to come back and restart negotiations again?

 

BOEHNER: I don't know that we know the path forward at this point. But it's clear that it's going to take members on both sides of the aisle to work together in order to resolve this. And so we need to -- we need everybody to calm down and relax and get back to work.

 

QUESTION: Why couldn't you deliver more Republican votes? Why couldn't you deliver more Republican votes?

 

BLUNT: Well, we had more Republican votes going to the floor. I think some of them were reluctantly there anyway. It didn't take much to turn them off.

 

And, you know, Republicans all -- almost all the Republicans here remember the responsibility that the majority had when we were in the majority and there was a lot of, "Look, it's really their majority. They've got to bring a bill, a process to the floor in a timely way that works." We had a very short timeframe here after we finally were able to go to our members with the -- with the bill.

 

But we'd like to find a way to deliver enough Republican votes to make this happen.

 

Now, most people in this process over the last four days have really reached out and tried to find a bipartisan solution. But a bipartisan solution is only as good as the last person that throws a bomb into the room.

 

And so we've got to back away from that. I think -- I think the reality of the impact this can have on the markets will have a big impact in getting people back to wanting to work together and get this problem solved.

 

We're going to reach out to them. I hope they reach back out to us and find a solution that the Congress can come together on and get done. Thank you.

 

Email ItEmail It | Print ItPrint It | CommentsComments (0) | TrackbacksTrackbacks (0) | Flag as offensiveFlag as Offensive

(Videos)Darn Bill Clinton! This must be his fault. Or Jimmy Carter's...Or the DEMOCRATS!!!!

The truth about who is responsible.
Shocking Video Unearthed Democrats in their own words Covering up the Fannie Mae, Freddie Mac Scam that caused our Economic Crisis
Email ItEmail It | Print ItPrint It | CommentsComments (0) | TrackbacksTrackbacks (0) | Flag as offensiveFlag as Offensive

HOLC and bankruptcy relief not in bill because Obama didn't want them.

Not because the big bad Republicans objected, but because our fearless leader didn't want them. This is as much Obama's bill as it is Bush's. These are the priorities and choices of our party's leadership. The only question is, what are we going to do about it?[Speaking as a life-long Democrat, if it was the Republicans who killed this bill, I can only offer them my congratulations and heart-felt thanks. This was a bad bill. It was nothing but a give-away to Wall Street fat cats. I do understand that we needed to do something and quickly. But this bill was the wrong thing to do on every level. What’s more, this is a very disturbing portent of life under an Obama administration. Early on there was a strong consensus in the country that any bailout needed to also provide for greater regulation of the financial services industry, caps on CEO and investment banker compensation, some kind of equity stake in the banks and a transparent means of valuing both the toxic waste we were buying and the warrants we would be receiving. Above all else, however, the main demand of rank-and-file Democrats was relief for people in danger of losing their homes.]
...

[The fact that there is nothing about homeowner relief in this bill is an insult to rank-and-file Democrats everywhere! This was the main thing that the rank-and-file wanted in return for a bailout and we go nothing. Nothing. This bill has zero protection for homeowners and you may be absolutely certain that none will be forthcoming in an Obama administration. And do you know why? I’ll tell you why: Barrack Obama did not want them included in the bill. According to Dennis Kucinich, the bankruptcy relief provisions that were so important to rank-and-file Democrats were not in the bill because Barrack Obama didn't want them to be included.

Yes, that's right, HOLC and bankruptcy relief were not in the bill because Obama didn't want them. Not because the big bad Republicans objected, but because our fearless leader didn't want them. This is as much Obama's bill as it is Bush's. These are the priorities and choices of our party's leadership. The only question is, what are we going to do about it?

This package is not worth $700 billion. It does not meaningfully alter the system of excessive with executive compensation that got us into this situation. It does not prevent the banks and hedge funds from creating more toxic waste. It requires no sacrifices of any kind on the part of bank executives, investment bankers and people like Warren Buffett. It provides no new regulations on Wall Street's use of derivatives. The plan includes only a single provision that was a part of the supposed Democratic agenda, namely, equity participation. But, as I say, even that is of doubtful value to taxpayers since there is no fixed formula for the equity interest we receive. In short, the Dodd-Frank plan was a lot like the original plan but with a couple of fig leafs added to fool the rubes.

I am not prepared to make a gift of taxpayer money to Paulson's buddies on Wall Street. Not $700 billion, not $500 billion, not $100 billion, not anything.]

Posted by Mitch Guthman | September 29, 2008 2:43 PM

http://www.time-blog.com/swampland/2008/09/house_leaders_blame_pelosis_st.html#more

Email ItEmail It | Print ItPrint It | CommentsComments (0) | TrackbacksTrackbacks (0) | Flag as offensiveFlag as Offensive

Boehner: "Pelosi's Ugly Partisan Attack Defeated Bail-out Bill"

Boehner: "Pelosi's Ugly Partisan Attack Defeated Bail-out Bill"
MSNBC | 9/29/08
Boehner speaking (saw on MSNBC). Pelosi apparently gave such a vile, hate-spewing attack of Bush and the Republicans on the House floor, blaming the current financial problems on "Eight years of this administration and its allies in Congress" that, according to one report, the heads of some Repubs who heard it 'exploded' and they 'went berserk.' The attack was so ugly that several dozen Dems bolted, too. 
Watch Spkr. Pelosi Speech
House Floor Now on C-SPAN
Congressmen's Speeches
 

House GOP Leaders Blame Pelosi's Statement

Republican House Leaders John Boehner and Roy Blunt say they would have had about 12 more votes if Pelosi had not said the following from the floor. (They say they will try again. "I don't know that we know the path forward at this point," said Boehner. "We need everyone to calm down and relax and get back to work.")
Here is Pelosi's statement from the floor:

Madam Speaker, when was the last time someone asked you for $700 billion? It is a number that is staggering, but tells us only the costs of the Bush Administration's failed economic policies -- policies built on budgetary recklessness, on an anything goes mentality, with no regulation, no supervision, and no discipline in the system. Democrats believe in the free market, which can and does create jobs, wealth, and capital, but left to its own devices it has created chaos.

 

That chaos is the dismal picture painted by Treasury Secretary Paulson and Federal Reserve Chairman Bernanke a week and a half ago in the Capitol. As they pointed out, we confront a crisis of historic magnitude that has the ability to do serious injury not simply to our economy, but to the American people: not just to Wall Street, but to everyday Americans on Main Street. It is our responsibility today, to help avert that catastrophic outcome. Let us be clear: This is a crisis caused on Wall Street. But it is a crisis that reaches to Main Street in every city and town of the United States.
 
It is a crisis that freezes credit, causes families to lose their homes, cripples small businesses, and makes it harder to find jobs.

It is a crisis that never had to happen. It is now the duty of every Member of this body to recognize that the failure to act responsibly, with full protections for the American taxpayer, would compound the damage already done to the financial security of millions of American families.

Over the past several days, we have worked with our Republican colleagues to fashion an alternative to the original plan of the Bush Administration.

I must recognize the outstanding leadership provided by Chairman Barney Frank, whose enormous intellectual and strategic abilities have never before been so urgently needed, or so widely admired.

I also want to recognize Rahm Emanuel, who combined his deep knowledge of financial institutions with his pragmatic policy experience, to resolve key disagreements.
 
 
The American people did not decide to dangerously weaken our regulatory and oversight policies. They did not make unwise and risky financial deals. They did not jeopardize the economic security of the nation. And they must not pay the cost of this emergency recovery and stabilization bill.So we insisted that this bill contain several key provisions:

This legislation must contain independent and ongoing oversight to ensure that the recovery program is managed with full transparency and strict accountability.

The legislation must do everything possible to allow as many people to stay in their homes rather than face foreclosure.

The corporate CEOs whose companies will benefit from the public's participation in this recovery must not benefit by exorbitant salaries and golden parachute retirement bonuses.

Our message to Wall Street is this: the party is over. The era of golden parachutes for high-flying Wall Street operators is over. No longer will the U.S. taxpayer bailout the recklessness of Wall Street.

The taxpayers who bear the risk in this recovery must share in the upside as the economy recovers.

And should this program not pay for itself, the financial institutions that benefited, not the taxpayers, must bear responsibility for making up the difference.

These were the Democratic demands to safeguard the American taxpayer, to help the economy recover, and to impose tough accountability as a central component of this recovery effort.

This legislation is not the end of congressional activity on this crisis. Over the course of the next few weeks, we will continue to hold investigative and oversight hearings to find out how the crisis developed, where mistakes were made, and how the recovery must be managed to protect the middle class and the American taxpayer.

With passage of this legislation today, we can begin the difficult job of turning our economy around, of helping those who depend on a growing economy and stable financial institutions for a secure retirement, for the education of their children, for jobs and small business credit.

Today we must act for those Americans, for Main Street, and we must act now, with the bipartisan spirit of cooperation which allowed us to fashion this legislation.

This not enough. We are also working to restore our nation's economic strength by passing a new economic recovery stimulus package -- a robust, job creating bill -- that will help Americans struggling with high prices, get our economy back on track, and renew the American Dream.

Today, we will act to avert this crisis, but informed by our experience of the past eight years with the failed economic leadership that has left us left capable of meeting the challenges of the future. We choose a different path. In the new year, with a new Congress and a new president, we will break free with a failed past and take America in a New Direction to a better future.  http://www.time-blog.com/swampland/
Read without bias and as an American who has a choice then...
You Decide !!!
Email ItEmail It | Print ItPrint It | CommentsComments (0) | TrackbacksTrackbacks (0) | Flag as offensiveFlag as Offensive

House GOP leadership blamed Speaker Pelosi for the defeat of bailout bill.

The House GOP leadership blamed Speaker Pelosi (D-CA) for the defeat of the $700 billion financial intervention bill. Minority Leader John Boehner (R-OH) said members must "find a true middle ground to avert a crisis."
Watch Spkr. Pelosi Speech | Watch House GOP Ldrs.
Read Financial Markets Bill | Watch Pres. Bush
Read Fed. Chair Bernanke Statement
Read H.R. 3997 Vote Tally | Read GOP Blames Pelosi
House Floor Now on C-SPAN
Congressmen's Speeches
Finance Bill Fails in the House  at http://www.c-span.org/
Email ItEmail It | Print ItPrint It | CommentsComments (0) | TrackbacksTrackbacks (0) | Flag as offensiveFlag as Offensive

BAILOUT FINAL VOTE RESULTS FOR ROLL CALL 674

 
FINAL VOTE RESULTS FOR ROLL CALL 674
(Democrats in roman; Republicans in italic; Independents underlined)

      H R 3997      RECORDED VOTE      29-Sep-2008      2:07 PM
      QUESTION:  On Concurring in Senate Amendment With An Amendment
      BILL TITLE: To amend the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 to provide earnings assistance and tax relief to members of the uniformed services, volunteer firefighters, and Peace Corps volunteers, and for other purposes    http://clerk.house.gov/evs/2008/roll674.xml

Ayes Noes PRES NV
Democratic 140 95    
Republican 65 133   1
Independent        
TOTALS 205 228   1


---- AYES    205 ---

Ackerman
Allen
Andrews
Arcuri
Bachus
Baird
Baldwin
Bean
Berman
Berry
Bishop (GA)
Bishop (NY)
Blunt
Boehner
Bonner
Bono Mack
Boozman
Boren
Boswell
Boucher
Boyd (FL)
Brady (PA)
Brady (TX)
Brown (SC)
Brown, Corrine
Calvert
Camp (MI)
Campbell (CA)
Cannon
Cantor
Capps
Capuano
Cardoza
Carnahan
Castle
Clarke
Clyburn
Cohen
Cole (OK)
Cooper
Costa
Cramer
Crenshaw
Crowley
Cubin
Davis (AL)
Davis (CA)
Davis (IL)
Davis, Tom
DeGette
DeLauro
Dicks
Dingell
Donnelly
Doyle
Dreier
Edwards (TX)
Ehlers
Ellison
Ellsworth
Emanuel
Emerson
Engel
Eshoo
Etheridge
Everett
Farr
Fattah
Ferguson
Fossella
Foster
Frank (MA)
Gilchrest
Gonzalez
Gordon
Granger
Gutierrez
Hall (NY)
Hare
Harman
Hastings (FL)
Herger
Higgins
Hinojosa
Hobson
Holt
Honda
Hooley
Hoyer
Inglis (SC)
Israel
Johnson, E. B.
Kanjorski
Kennedy
Kildee
Kind
King (NY)
Kirk
Klein (FL)
Kline (MN)
LaHood
Langevin
Larsen (WA)
Larson (CT)
Levin
Lewis (CA)
Lewis (KY)
Loebsack
Lofgren, Zoe
Lowey
Lungren, Daniel E.
Mahoney (FL)
Maloney (NY)
Markey
Marshall
Matsui
McCarthy (NY)
McCollum (MN)
McCrery
McDermott
McGovern
McHugh
McKeon
McNerney
McNulty
Meek (FL)
Meeks (NY)
Melancon
Miller (NC)
Miller, Gary
Miller, George
Mollohan
Moore (KS)
Moore (WI)
Moran (VA)
Murphy (CT)
Murphy, Patrick
Murtha
Nadler
Neal (MA)
Oberstar
Obey
Olver
Pallone
Pelosi
Perlmutter
Peterson (PA)
Pickering
Pomeroy
Porter
Price (NC)
Pryce (OH)
Putnam
Radanovich
Rahall
Rangel
Regula
Reyes
Reynolds
Richardson
Rogers (AL)
Rogers (KY)
Ross
Ruppersberger
Ryan (OH)
Ryan (WI)
Sarbanes
Saxton
Schakowsky
Schwartz
Sessions
Sestak
Shays
Simpson
Sires
Skelton
Slaughter
Smith (TX)
Smith (WA)
Snyder
Souder
Space
Speier
Spratt
Tancredo
Tanner
Tauscher
Towns
Tsongas
Upton
Van Hollen
Velázquez
Walden (OR)
Walsh (NY)
Wasserman Schultz
Waters
Watt
Waxman
Weiner
Weldon (FL)
Wexler
Wilson (NM)
Wilson (OH)
Wilson (SC)
Wolf

---- NOES    228 ---

Abercrombie
Aderholt
Akin
Alexander
Altmire
Baca
Bachmann
Barrett (SC)
Barrow
Bartlett (MD)
Barton (TX)
Becerra
Berkley
Biggert
Bilbray
Bilirakis
Bishop (UT)
Blackburn
Blumenauer
Boustany
Boyda (KS)
Braley (IA)
Broun (GA)
Brown-Waite, Ginny
Buchanan
Burgess
Burton (IN)
Butterfield
Buyer
Capito
Carney
Carson
Carter
Castor
Cazayoux
Chabot
Chandler
Childers
Clay
Cleaver
Coble
Conaway
Conyers
Costello
Courtney
Cuellar
Culberson
Cummings
Davis (KY)
Davis, David
Davis, Lincoln
Deal (GA)
DeFazio
Delahunt
Dent
Diaz-Balart, L.
Diaz-Balart, M.
Doggett
Doolittle
Drake
Duncan
Edwards (MD)
English (PA)
Fallin
Feeney
Filner
Flake
Forbes
Fortenberry
Foxx
Franks (AZ)
Frelinghuysen
Gallegly
Garrett (NJ)
Gerlach
Giffords
Gillibrand
Gingrey
Gohmert
Goode
Goodlatte
Graves
Green, Al
Green, Gene
Grijalva
Hall (TX)
Hastings (WA)
Hayes
Heller
Hensarling
Herseth Sandlin
Hill
Hinchey
Hirono
Hodes
Hoekstra
Holden
Hulshof
Hunter
Inslee
Issa
Jackson (IL)
Jackson-Lee (TX)
Jefferson
Johnson (GA)
Johnson (IL)
Johnson, Sam
Jones (NC)
Jordan
Kagen
Kaptur
Keller
Kilpatrick
King (IA)
Kingston
Knollenberg
Kucinich
Kuhl (NY)
Lamborn
Lampson
Latham
LaTourette
Latta
Lee
Lewis (GA)
Linder
Lipinski
LoBiondo
Lucas
Lynch
Mack
Manzullo
Marchant
Matheson
McCarthy (CA)
McCaul (TX)
McCotter
McHenry
McIntyre
McMorris Rodgers
Mica
Michaud
Miller (FL)
Miller (MI)
Mitchell
Moran (KS)
Murphy, Tim
Musgrave
Myrick
Napolitano
Neugebauer
Nunes
Ortiz
Pascrell
Pastor
Paul
Payne
Pearce
Pence
Peterson (MN)
Petri
Pitts
Platts
Poe
Price (GA)
Ramstad
Rehberg
Reichert
Renzi
Rodriguez
Rogers (MI)
Rohrabacher
Ros-Lehtinen
Roskam
Rothman
Roybal-Allard
Royce
Rush
Salazar
Sali
Sánchez, Linda T.
Sanchez, Loretta
Scalise
Schiff
Schmidt
Scott (GA)
Scott (VA)
Sensenbrenner
Serrano
Shadegg
Shea-Porter
Sherman
Shimkus
Shuler
Shuster
Smith (NE)
Smith (NJ)
Solis
Stark
Stearns
Stupak
Sullivan
Sutton
Taylor
Terry
Thompson (CA)
Thompson (MS)
Thornberry
Tiahrt
Tiberi
Tierney
Turner
Udall (CO)
Udall (NM)
Visclosky
Walberg
Walz (MN)
Wamp
Watson
Welch (VT)
Westmoreland
Whitfield (KY)
Wittman (VA)
Woolsey
Wu
Yarmuth
Young (AK)
Young (FL)

---- NOT VOTING    1 ---

Weller
http://clerk.house.gov/evs/2008/roll674.xml
Email ItEmail It | Print ItPrint It | CommentsComments (0) | TrackbacksTrackbacks (0) | Flag as offensiveFlag as Offensive

CONGRESS DOESN'T HAVE TO VOTE "YES" FOR IT TO BE 700 BILLION.

CHECK OUT THIS BS TRICK!!!---CONGRESS DOESN'T HAVE TO VOTE "YES" FOR IT TO BE 700 BILLION. THIS IS A KEY POINT !!!

"12 (c) FAST TRACK CONSIDERATION.—
13 (1) IN GENERAL.—Notwithstanding any other 14 provision of this section, the Secretary may not exer15 cise any authority to make purchases under this Act 16 with regard to any amount in excess of 17 $350,000,000,000 previously obligated, as described 18 in this section if, within 10 calendar days after the 19 date on which Congress receives a report of the Sec20 retary described in subsection (a)(3), Congress en21 acts a joint resolution disapproving the plan of the 22 Secretary with respect to such additional amount."

Translation: As long as congress doesn't specifically schedule and have a vote (great Pelosi trick on so many issues) in 10 days after they go above the 350 billion, it just happens. No yes vote to do it needed, no accountability. Folks, this is a key point-NO ACCOUNTABILITY FOR IT TO GO TO 700 Billion!

NO VOTE NEEDED TO GO TO 700 BILLION!!!


 
They're (DEMS) trying to push a fast one over the Reps. This bill deserves a NO vote from the GOP caucus!

Bailout Bill's 5 Biggest Problems:

ACORN MONEY STILL IN THERE

TAXPAYERS BAILING OUT FOREIGN BANKS

NO VOTE NEEDED TO GO TO 700 BILLION

HOUSE CAN ONLY VOTE ON SENATE VERSION-NO AMENDMENTS

All Recipients of Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac Campaign Contributions, 1989-2008
Name Office State Party Grand Total Total from
PACs
Total from
Individuals
Dodd, Christopher J S CT D $165,400 $48,500 $116,900
Obama, Barack S IL D $126,349 $6,000 $120,349
Kerry, John S MA D $111,000 $2,000 $109,000
Bennett, Robert F S UT R $107,999 $71,499 $36,500
Bachus, Spencer H AL R $103,300 $70,500 $32,800
Blunt, Roy H MO R $96,950 $78,500 $18,450
Kanjorski, Paul E H PA D $96,000 $57,500 $38,500
Bond, Christopher S 'Kit' S MO R $95,400 $64,000 $31,400
Shelby, Richard C S AL R $80,000 $23,000 $57,000
Reed, Jack S RI D $78,250 $43,500 $34,750
Reid, Harry S NV D $77,000 $60,500 $16,500
Clinton, Hillary S NY D $76,050 $8,000 $68,050
Davis, Tom H VA R $75,499 $13,999 $61,500
Boehner, John H OH R $67,750 $60,500 $7,250
Conrad, Kent S ND D $64,491 $22,000 $42,491
Reynolds, Tom H NY R $62,200 $53,000 $9,200
Johnson, Tim S SD D $61,000 $20,000 $41,000
Pelosi, Nancy H CA D $56,250 $47,000 $9,250
Carper, Tom S DE D $55,889 $31,350 $24,539
Hoyer, Steny H H MD D $55,500 $51,500 $4,000
Pryce, Deborah H OH R $55,500 $45,000 $10,500
Emanuel, Rahm H IL D $51,750 $16,000 $35,750
Isakson, Johnny S GA R $49,200 $35,500 $13,700
Cantor, Eric H VA R $48,500 $46,500 $2,000
Crapo, Mike S ID R $47,250 $40,500 $6,750
Frank, Barney H MA D $42,350 $30,500 $11,850
Bean, Melissa H IL D $41,249 $34,999 $6,250
Bayh, Evan S IN D $41,100 $16,500 $24,600
McConnell, Mitch S KY R $41,000 $40,000 $1,000
Maloney, Carolyn B H NY D $39,750 $16,500 $23,250
Dorgan, Byron L S ND D $38,750 $30,500 $8,250
Miller, Gary H CA R $38,000 $31,500 $6,500
Rangel, Charles B H NY D $38,000 $14,750 $23,250
Tiberi, Patrick J H OH R $35,700 $32,600 $3,100
Bunning, Jim S KY R $33,802 $29,650 $4,152
Stabenow, Debbie S MI D $33,450 $32,000 $1,450
Chambliss, Saxby S GA R $33,250 $22,500 $10,750
Menendez, Robert S NJ D $31,250 $30,500 $750
Enzi, Mike S WY R $31,000 $27,500 $3,500
Van Hollen, Chris H MD D $30,700 $11,000 $19,700
Landrieu, Mary L S LA D $30,600 $20,000 $10,600
Murray, Patty S WA D $30,000 $23,000 $7,000
Clyburn, James E H SC D $29,750 $26,000 $3,750
Crowley, Joseph H NY D $29,700 $25,500 $4,200
Sessions, Pete H TX R $29,472 $24,000 $5,472
McCrery, Jim H LA R $29,000 $26,000 $3,000
Hooley, Darlene H OR D $28,750 $19,500 $9,250
Royce, Ed H CA R $28,600 $4,000 $24,600
Renzi, Rick H AZ R $28,250 $28,000 $250
Lieberman, Joe S CT I $28,250 $11,500 $16,750
Baucus, Max S MT D $27,500 $21,000 $6,500
Moore, Dennis H KS D $26,550 $25,500 $1,050
Coleman, Norm S MN R $24,690 $12,000 $12,690
Matheson, Jim H UT D $24,500 $24,000 $500
Schumer, Charles E S NY D $24,250 $1,500 $22,750
Durbin, Dick S IL D $23,750 $14,000 $9,750
Rogers, Mike H MI R $22,750 $21,000 $1,750
Lynch, Stephen F H MA D $22,500 $13,500 $9,000
Rockefeller, Jay S WV D $22,250 $5,000 $17,250
Smith, Gordon H S OR R $22,000 $20,000 $2,000
Mikulski, Barbara A S MD D $21,750 $16,500 $5,250
McCain, John S AZ R $21,550 $0 $21,550
Spratt, John M Jr H SC D $21,500 $17,000 $4,500
Brown-Waite, Ginny H FL R $21,000 $21,000 $0
Davis, Geoff H KY R $21,000 $19,500 $1,500
Velazquez, Nydia M H NY D $20,750 $16,750 $4,000
Baca, Joe H CA D $20,500 $20,200 $300
Alexander, Lamar S TN R $20,500 $20,000 $500
Allard, Wayne S CO R $20,250 $0 $20,250
Neugebauer, Randy H TX R $20,000 $20,000 $0
Nelson, Ben S NE D $20,000 $19,000 $1,000
Salazar, Ken S CO D $19,900 $17,000 $2,900
Jefferson, William J H LA D $19,250 $8,500 $10,750
Byrd, Robert C S WV D $18,500 $8,000 $10,500
Hatch, Orrin G S UT R $18,250 $12,500 $5,750
Miller, Brad H NC D $18,000 $16,500 $1,500
Sherman, Brad H CA D $18,000 $12,500 $5,500
Craig, Larry S ID R $18,000 $15,000 $3,000
Roberts, Pat S KS R $18,000 $18,000 $0
Waters, Maxine H CA D $17,800 $15,000 $2,800
Biggert, Judy H IL R $17,750 $15,500 $2,250
Gerlach, Jim H PA R $17,750 $16,500 $1,250
Reyes, Silvestre H TX D $17,550 $2,000 $15,550
LaTourette, Steven C H OH R $17,500 $17,500 $0
Brownback, Sam S KS R $17,300 $14,250 $3,050
Barrett, Gresham H SC R $17,250 $13,000 $4,250
Watt, Melvin L H NC D $17,250 $13,000 $4,250
Scott, David H GA D $17,000 $13,500 $3,500
King, Pete H NY R $16,750 $1,000 $15,750
Cummings, Elijah E H MD D $16,700 $10,000 $6,700
Grassley, Chuck S IA R $16,500 $14,500 $2,000
Cantwell, Maria S WA D $16,250 $0 $16,250
Domenici, Pete V S NM R $16,226 $7,000 $9,226
Herseth Sandlin, Stephanie H SD D $16,200 $4,500 $11,700
Putnam, Adam H H FL R $15,500 $15,500 $0
Feinstein, Dianne S CA D $15,250 $2,000 $13,250
Brown, Sherrod S OH D $15,000 $15,000 $0
Feeney, Tom H FL R $14,750 $13,500 $1,250
Sununu, John E S NH R $14,750 $0 $14,750
Hinojosa, Ruben H TX D $14,500 $13,000 $1,500
Capito, Shelley Moore H WV R $14,250 $8,000 $6,250
Burr, Richard S NC R $14,250 $13,500 $750
Jackson, Jesse Jr H IL D $14,000 $8,000 $6,000
Meeks, Gregory W H NY D $14,000 $13,500 $500
Cornyn, John S TX R $14,000 $12,000 $2,000
Collins, Susan M S ME R $13,000 $12,000 $1,000
Boxer, Barbara S CA D $12,750 $5,000 $7,750
McHenry, Patrick H NC R $12,500 $12,500 $0
Israel, Steve H NY D $12,050 $10,000 $2,050
Nunes, Devin Gerald H CA R $12,000 $12,000 $0
Davis, Artur H AL D $11,750 $11,500 $250
Martinez, Mel S FL R $11,750 $8,500 $3,250
Roskam, Peter H IL R $11,650 $8,500 $3,150
Pryor, Mark S AR D $11,650 $9,500 $2,150
Webb, James S VA D $11,550 $1,000 $10,550
Doolittle, John T H CA R $11,500 $11,500 $0
Harkin, Tom S IA D $11,450 $6,900 $4,550
Lee, Barbara H CA D $11,250 $11,000 $250
Thune, John S SD R $11,057 $1,000 $10,057
Klein, Ron H FL D $11,000 $11,000 $0
Mahoney, Tim H FL D $11,000 $11,000 $0
Fossella, Vito H NY R $10,750 $7,500 $3,250
Schultz, Debbie Wasserman H FL D $10,750 $9,750 $1,000
Thompson, Mike H CA D $10,600 $1,000 $9,600
Moran, Jim H VA D $10,500 $1,250 $9,250
Kennedy, Edward M S MA D $10,500 $3,000 $7,500
Clay, William L Jr H MO D $10,250 $8,500 $1,750
Payne, Donald M H NJ D $10,100 $5,500 $4,600
Dingell, John D H MI D $10,000 $7,000 $3,000
Lincoln, Blanche S AR D $10,000 $5,500 $4,500
Levin, Sander H MI D $9,800 $0 $9,800
Roybal-Allard, Lucille H CA D $9,800 $5,000 $4,800
Barrasso, John A S WY R $9,500 $9,500 $0
Nelson, Bill S FL D $9,500 $9,000 $500
Napolitano, Grace H CA D $9,300 $8,500 $800
Castle, Michael N H DE R $9,200 $7,000 $2,200
Drake, Thelma H VA R $9,000 $9,000 $0
Dreier, David H CA R $9,000 $7,000 $2,000
Bachmann, Michele Marie H MN R $8,850 $6,500 $2,350
Gonzalez, Charlie A H TX D $8,500 $5,000 $3,500
Lewis, John H GA D $8,500 $4,000 $4,500
Knollenberg, Joe H MI R $8,250 $5,000 $3,250
Moore, Gwen H WI D $8,250 $8,000 $250
Pastor, Ed H AZ D $8,100 $4,500 $3,600
Norton, Eleanor Holmes D DC D $8,000 $3,000 $5,000
Becerra, Xavier H CA D $8,000 $7,000 $1,000
Jackson Lee, Sheila H TX D $8,000 $0 $8,000
Larson, John B H CT D $8,000 $8,000 $0
Lewis, Jerry H CA R $8,000 $7,000 $1,000
Melancon, Charles J H LA D $8,000 $8,000 $0
Walsh, James T H NY R $7,750 $0 $7,750
Corker, Bob S TN R $7,750 $2,000 $5,750
Cramer, Bud H AL D $7,500 $7,000 $500
Cubin, Barbara H WY R $7,500 $5,000 $2,500
Ensign, John S NV R $7,300 $6,000 $1,300
Meek, Kendrick B H FL D $7,250 $6,500 $750
Wilson, Charlie H OH D $7,250 $7,000 $250
Leahy, Patrick S VT D $7,250 $2,500 $4,750
Cleaver, Emanuel H MO D $7,000 $7,000 $0
Marchant, Kenny Ewell H TX R $7,000 $7,000 $0
Thompson, Bennie G H MS D $7,000 $6,000 $1,000
Casey, Bob S PA D $7,000 $6,000 $1,000
Solis, Hilda L H CA D $6,800 $6,500 $300
Gordon, Bart H TN D $6,750 $4,000 $2,750
Pomeroy, Earl H ND D $6,750 $5,000 $1,750
Tiahrt, Todd H KS R $6,500 $6,500 $0
Boyd, Allen H FL D $6,000 $5,500 $500
Capuano, Michael E H MA D $6,000 $5,000 $1,000
Heller, Dean H NV R $6,000 $6,000 $0
Marshall, Jim H GA0 D $6,000 $6,000 $0
Whitfield, Ed H KY R $6,000 $6,000 $0
Klobuchar, Amy S MN D $5,650 $1,500 $4,150
Ross, Mike H AR D $5,550 $3,000 $2,550
McCarthy, Carolyn H NY D $5,500 $5,500 $0
Slaughter, Louise M H NY D $5,500 $5,500 $0
Hodes, Paul W H NH D $5,450 $5,000 $450
Cardin, Ben S MD D $5,300 $500 $4,800
Boren, Dan H OK D $5,250 $5,000 $250
Ackerman, Gary H NY D $5,000 $4,000 $1,000
Andrews, Robert E H NJ D $5,000 $0 $5,000
Camp, Dave H MI R $5,000 $5,000 $0
Cole, Tom H OK R $5,000 $5,000 $0
Davis, Lincoln H TN D $5,000 $5,000 $0
Hill, Baron H IN D $5,000 $5,000 $0
Pearce, Steve H NM R $5,000 $5,000 $0
Perlmutter, Edwin G H CO D $5,000 $5,000 $0
Weller, Jerry H IL R $5,000 $0 $5,000
Snowe, Olympia J S ME R $5,000 $4,000 $1,000
Wicker, Roger S MS R $5,000 $5,000 $0
Davis, Danny K H IL D $4,950 $2,000 $2,950
Chabot, Steve H OH R $4,750 $3,000 $1,750
Honda, Mike H CA D $4,750 $4,000 $750
Price, David H NC D $4,550 $2,050 $2,500
Hagel, Chuck S NE R $4,500 $0 $4,500
Lugar, Richard G S IN R $4,500 $1,000 $3,500
Kaptur, Marcy H OH D $4,350 $1,000 $3,350
McCollum, Betty H MN D $4,350 $0 $4,350
Carson, Andre H IN D $4,250 $4,000 $250
Obey, David R H WI D $4,250 $2,000 $2,250
Salazar, John H CO D $4,250 $4,000 $250
Sanchez, Loretta H CA D $4,250 $3,000 $1,250
Tanner, John H TN D $4,250 $3,500 $750
Cardoza, Dennis H CA D $4,000 $4,000 $0
English, Phil H PA R $4,000 $4,000 $0
Green, Al H TX D $4,000 $4,000 $0
Kilpatrick, Carolyn Cheeks H MI D $4,000 $3,250 $750
Murphy, Chris H CT D $4,000 $4,000 $0
Tester, Jon S MT D $4,000 $3,500 $500
Rodriguez, Ciro D H TX D $3,750 $3,000 $750
Donnelly, Joe H IN D $3,500 $3,500 $0
Matsui, Doris O H CA D $3,500 $2,500 $1,000
Paul, Ron H TX R $3,500 $0 $3,500
Price, Tom H GA R $3,500 $3,500 $0
Schmidt, Jean H OH R $3,500 $2,500 $1,000
Wexler, Robert H FL D $3,500 $3,500 $0
Wyden, Ron S OR D $3,500 $0 $3,500
Biden, Joseph R Jr S DE D $3,300 $0 $3,300
Gutierrez, Luis V H IL D $3,250 $2,500 $750
Harman, Jane H CA D $3,250 $0 $3,250
Hensarling, Jeb H TX R $3,250 $1,500 $1,750
Kennedy, Patrick J H RI D $3,250 $0 $3,250
Ryan, Paul H WI R $3,250 $2,500 $750
Myrick, Sue H NC R $3,200 $1,500 $1,700
Schwartz, Allyson H PA D $3,200 $2,000 $1,200
Diaz-Balart, Lincoln H FL R $3,000 $3,000 $0
Lucas, Frank D H OK R $3,000 $1,500 $1,500
McCarthy, Kevin H CA R $3,000 $3,000 $0
Souder, Mark E H IN R $3,000 $3,000 $0
Udall, Mark H CO D $3,000 $2,500 $500
Bingaman, Jeff S NM D $3,000 $3,000 $0
Levin, Carl S MI D $3,000 $3,000 $0
Stevens, Ted S AK R $3,000 $3,000 $0
Hobson, Dave H OH R $2,850 $0 $2,850
Johnson, Eddie Bernice H TX D $2,825 $1,000 $1,825
Berkley, Shelley H NV D $2,750 $2,000 $750
Jones, Walter B Jr H NC R $2,750 $0 $2,750
Ferguson, Mike H NJ R $2,700 $0 $2,700
Cannon, Chris H UT R $2,500 $2,000 $500
Childers, Travis W H MS D $2,500 $2,500 $0
DeGette, Diana H CO D $2,500 $2,000 $500
Ellison, Keith H MN D $2,500 $2,500 $0
Keller, Ric H FL R $2,500 $2,000 $500
Oberstar, James L H MN D $2,500 $0 $2,500
Serrano, Jose E H NY D $2,500 $1,500 $1,000
Shays, Christopher H CT R $2,500 $2,000 $500
McCaskill, Claire S MO D $2,500 $2,500 $0
Cuellar, Henry H TX D $2,450 $2,000 $450
Markey, Edward J H MA D $2,250 $0 $2,250
Smith, Adam H WA D $2,250 $2,000 $250
Butterfield, G K H NC D $2,000 $2,000 $0
Costa, Jim H CA D $2,000 $2,000 $0
Foster, Bill H IL D $2,000 $2,000 $0
Grijalva, Raul M H AZ D $2,000 $2,000 $0
Hastings, Doc H WA R $2,000 $2,000 $0
Moran, Jerry H KS R $2,000 $0 $2,000
Murphy, Patrick J H PA D $2,000 $2,000 $0
Olver, John W H MA D $2,000 $2,000 $0
Porter, Jon H NV R $2,000 $2,000 $0
Regula, Ralph H OH R $2,000 $0 $2,000
Reichert, Dave H WA R $2,000 $2,000 $0
Sanchez, Linda H CA D $2,000 $2,000 $0
Sires, Albio H NJ D $2,000 $2,000 $0
Tauscher, Ellen H CA D $2,000 $2,000 $0
Akaka, Daniel K S HI D $2,000 $2,000 $0
Cochran, Thad S MS R $2,000 $2,000 $0
Whitehouse, Sheldon S RI D $2,000 $1,000 $1,000
Allen, Tom H ME D $1,950 $0 $1,950
Stearns, Cliff H FL R $1,850 $1,850 $0
DeLauro, Rosa L H CT D $1,750 $1,000 $750
Towns, Edolphus H NY D $1,750 $0 $1,750
Hulshof, Kenny H MO R $1,700 $1,250 $450
Fattah, Chaka H PA D $1,500 $1,000 $500
Neal, Richard E H MA D $1,500 $1,500 $0
Diaz-Balart, Mario H FL R $1,450 $1,000 $450
Kucinich, Dennis J H OH D $1,349 $0 $1,349
Alexander, Rodney H LA R $1,250 $1,250 $0
Carnahan, Russ H MO D $1,250 $1,000 $250
Wilson, Heather A H NM R $1,250 $0 $1,250
Coburn, Tom S OK R $1,250 $0 $1,250
Feingold, Russ S WI D $1,250 $0 $1,250
Kyl, Jon S AZ R $1,250 $0 $1,250
Linder, John H GA R $1,150 $500 $650
Sestak, Joe H PA D $1,150 $0 $1,150
Specter, Arlen S PA R $1,100 $350 $750
Berry, Marion H AR D $1,000 $1,000 $0
Blackburn, Marsha H TN R $1,000 $1,000 $0
Boswell, Leonard L H IA D $1,000 $1,000 $0
Boucher, Rick H VA D $1,000 $1,000 $0
Boustany, Charles W Jr H LA R $1,000 $1,000 $0
Calvert, Ken H CA R $1,000 $1,000 $0
Campbell, John H CA R $1,000 $1,000 $0
Cazayoux, Donald J H LA D $1,000 $1,000 $0
Conaway, Mike H TX R $1,000 $1,000 $0
Cooper, Jim H TN D $1,000 $500 $500
Ellsworth, Brad H IN D $1,000 $1,000 $0
Filner, Bob H CA D $1,000 $0 $1,000
Graves, Sam H MO R $1,000 $1,000 $0
Hayes, Robin H NC R $1,000 $0 $1,000
Higgins, Brian M H NY D $1,000 $1,000 $0
Johnson, Hank H GA D $1,000 $0 $1,000
Latham, Tom H IA R $1,000 $1,000 $0
Lofgren, Zoe H CA D $1,000 $0 $1,000
McNerney, Jerry H CA D $1,000 $1,000 $0
Michaud, Mike H ME D $1,000 $1,000 $0
Mitchell, Harry E H AZ D $1,000 $1,000 $0
Musgrave, Marilyn H CO R $1,000 $0 $1,000
Ortiz, Solomon P H TX D $1,000 $1,000 $0
Rush, Bobby L H IL D $1,000 $0 $1,000
Schiff, Adam H CA D $1,000 $1,000 $0
Scott, Robert C H VA D $1,000 $0 $1,000
Smith, Chris H NJ R $1,000 $0 $1,000
Space, Zachary T H OH D $1,000 $1,000 $0
Terry, Lee H NE R $1,000 $0 $1,000
Walberg, Tim H MI R $1,000 $0 $1,000
Welch, Peter H VT D $1,000 $1,000 $0
Wolf, Frank R H VA R $1,000 $1,000 $0
Dole, Elizabeth S NC R $1,000 $0 $1,000
Lautenberg, Frank R S NJ D $1,000 $0 $1,000
Christian-Green, Donna D VI D $750 $0 $750
Inslee, Jay R H WA D $750 $0 $750
Duncan, John J Jr H TN R $600 $600 $0
Bilbray, Brian P H CA R $500 $0 $500
Bishop, Sanford D Jr H GA D $500 $500 $0
Castor, Kathy H FL D $500 $0 $500
Edwards, Donna H MD D $500 $0 $500
Hinchey, Maurice H NY D $500 $0 $500
LaHood, Ray H IL R $500 $0 $500
Mack, Connie H FL R $500 $0 $500
Pascrell, Bill Jr H NJ D $500 $500 $0
Pickering, Charles "Chip" Jr H MS R $500 $500 $0
Rehberg, Denny H MT R $500 $0 $500
Sarbanes, John H MD D $500 $0 $500
Shadegg, John H AZ R $500 $0 $500
Skelton, Ike H MO D $500 $500 $0
Smith, Lamar H TX R $500 $500 $0
Stark, Pete H CA D $500 $500 $0
Weldon, Dave H FL R $500 $0 $500
Wu, David H OR D $500 $0 $500
Graham, Lindsey S SC R $500 $0 $500
Brown, Corrine H FL D $450 $0 $450
Turner, Michael R H OH R $375 $0 $375
Hastings, Alcee L H FL D $300 $0 $300
Warner, John W S VA R $300 $0 $300
Aderholt, Robert B H AL R $250 $0 $250
Arcuri, Michael H NY D $250 $0 $250
Carney, Chris H PA D $250 $0 $250
Dicks, Norm H WA D $250 $0 $250
Lampson, Nick H TX D $250 $0 $250
Manzullo, Don H IL R $250 $0 $250
Platts, Todd H PA R $250 $0 $250
Watson, Diane E H CA D $250 $0 $250
Weiner, Anthony D H NY D $250 $0 $250
DeMint, James W S SC R $250 $0 $250
Sanders, Bernie S VT I $250 $250 $0
             
Total       $4,844,572 $3,017,797 $1,826,775

Includes contributions from PACs and individuals. 2008 cycle totals based on data released electronically by the Federal Election Commission on Sept. 2, 2008.

111 posted on Sunday, September 28, 2008 5:03:21 PM by snippy_about_it
 
All information here came from posting below from Free Republic.com  at this web site address: http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/2092540/posts
Text of the 106 page Bailout Bill
CNNMoney ^ | 9/28/2008 | CNNMoney

Posted on Sunday, September 28, 2008 3:40:32 PM by Red in Blue PA

Text of the abomination for those interested.

(Excerpt) Read more at money.cnn.com ...



Email ItEmail It | Print ItPrint It | CommentsComments (0) | TrackbacksTrackbacks (0) | Flag as offensiveFlag as Offensive

John Boehner calls the financial rescue deal a “crap sandwich” .

In a closed-door session with House Republicans, Minority Leader John A. Boehner just called the financial rescue deal a “crap sandwich” – then said he’ll vote for it when it comes to the floor Monday.

House Republicans are the key to the bill’s passage – Speaker Nancy Pelosi said earlier today that it’s a “bipartisan” bill and will need “bipartisanship” to pass – and it now appears that a substantial number of them will put cast their votes in favor of it.

According to a source in the room, the plan has so far won endorsements from Minority Whip Roy Blunt, who negotiated it on behalf of the House Republicans; Eric Cantor, the chief deputy whip; and Paul Ryan, a hard-core conservative from Wisconsin who may hold more sway with conservatives on this issue than any other member of the House.

Excerpted from (The Politico)  Boehner Calls Bill A "crap Sandwich" -- But He'll Vote For It  By Patrick O'Connor http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2008/09/28/politics/politico/thecrypt/main4484035.shtml
______________________________________________________________________________________________________________
ACORN IS STILL THERE — page 21, 22 of the Bill. Read it and be astounded.

ACORN is STILL IN THERE (Page 22 - lines 1 thru 8)

1 ø(A) 65 percent shall be deposited into the
2 Housing Trust Fund established under section
3 1338 of the Federal Housing Enterprises Regu4
latory Reform Act of 1992 (12 U.S.C. 4568);
5 and¿
6 ø(B) 35 percent shall be deposited into the
7 Capital Magnet Fund established under section
8 1339 of that Act (12 U.S.C. 4569).¿

Text of the 106 page Bailout Bill
CNNMoney ^ | 9/28/2008 | CNNMoney
Posted on Sunday, September 28, 2008 3:40:32 PM Text of the abomination for those interested.
(Excerpt) Read more at money.cnn.com ...
____________________________________________________________________________________
 
Kill The Bailout! (Michelle Malkin On The Fast Track Devil In The Details Alert)
Michelle Malkin.com ^ | 9/28/2008 | Michelle Malkin

I’ve just given the draft bailout bill a first read (link here; there’s apparently a more recent draft posted at the House Financial Services cmte website, but it’s currently inaccessible).

There’s a lot of b.s. stuffed in it (more to come), but let’s start with one section that warrants your attention– Section 115 (c). It appears that Hank Paulson and the cackling Democrats have written in a provision that codifies the short-circuiting of the democratic process:

(c) FAST TRACK CONSIDERATION.—

(1) IN GENERAL.—Notwithstanding any other provision of this section, the Secretary may not exercise any authority to make purchases under this Act with regard to any amount in excess of $350,000,000,000 previously obligated, as described in this section if, within 10 calendar days after the date on which Congress receives a report of the Secretary described in subsection (a)(3), Congress enacts a joint resolution disapproving the plan of the Secretary with respect to such additional amount.

Several readers translate this the same way I do: As long as Congress doesn’t specifically schedule and hold a vote in 10 days after the first $350 billion tranche, the next bailout wave automatically kicks in.

So much for “accountability.”

Please correct me if I’m wrong.

Read a little more and you’ll find a limitation on the number of hours our representatives are allowed to debate the next bailout resolutions, as well as restrictions on adding amendments and filing motions to postpone:

…(3) REFERRAL TO COMMITTEE.—A resolution described in paragraph (2) introduced in the House of Representatives shall be referred to the Committee on Financial Services of the House of Representatives. A resolution described in paragraph (2) introduced in the Senate shall be referred to the Committee on Committee on Banking, Housing, and Urban Affairs of the Senate. Such a resolution may not be reported before the 8th day after its introduction.

(4) DISCHARGE OF COMMITTEE.—If the committee to which is referred a resolution described in paragraph (2) has not reported such resolution (or an identical resolution) at the end of 8 calendar days after its introduction, such committee shall be deemed to be discharged from further consideration of such resolution, and such resolution shall be placed on the appropriate calendar of the House involved.

(5) FLOOR CONSIDERATION.—

(A) IN GENERAL.—When the committee to which a resolution described in paragraph (2) is referred has reported, or has been deemed to be discharged (under paragraph (4)) from further consideration of, a resolution described in paragraph (2), it is at any time thereafter in order (even though a previous motion to the same effect has been disagreed to) for any Member of the respective House to move to proceed to the consideration of the resolution, and all points of order against the resolution (and against consideration of the resolution) are waived. The motion is highly privileged in the House of Representatives and is privileged in the Senate and is not debatable. The motion is not subject to amendment, or to a motion to postpone, or to a motion to proceed to the consideration of other business. A motion to reconsider the vote by which the motion is agreed to or disagreed to shall not be in order. If a motion to proceed to the consideration of the resolution is agreed to, the resolution shall remain the unfinished business of the respective House until disposed of.

(B) DEBATE.—Debate on the resolution, and on all debatable motions and appeals in connection therewith, shall be limited to not more than 10 hours, which shall be divided equally between those favoring and those opposing the resolution. A motion further to limit debate is in order and not debatable. An amendment to, or a motion to postpone, or a motion to proceed to the consideration of other business, or a motion to recommit the resolution is not in order. A motion to reconsider the vote by which the resolution is agreed to or disagreed to is not in order.

(C) VOTE ON FINAL PASSAGE.—Immediately following the conclusion of the debate on a resolution described in paragraph (2), and a single quorum call at the conclusion of the debate if requested in accordance with the rules of the appropriate House.

But now we should just all shut up. Because questioning the rush to ram this trillion-dollar-plus “rescue” down our throats is, you know, “unpatriotic.”

***

Update 5:40pm Eastern. Gag. Unscrupulous borrower Chris Dodd is heaping praise on Nancy Pelosi. Pelosi is pushing her “Blame Bush” agenda. Reid says Wednesday is the target day.

The Dems keep repeating their “taxpayer protection” and “accountability” talking points.

Which reminds me of Section 101 of the draft bill titled “PREVENTING UNJUST ENRICHMENT:”

PREVENTING UNJUST ENRICHMENT.—In making purchases under the authority of this Act, the Secretary shall take such steps as may be necessary to prevent unjust enrichment of financial institutions participating in a program established under this section, including by preventing the resale of a troubled asset to the Secretary at a higher price than what the seller paid to purchase the asset. This subsection does not apply to troubled assets acquired in a merger or acquisition, or a purchase of assets from a financial institution in conservatorship or receivership, or that has initiated bankruptcy proceedings under title 11, United States Code.

Does not apply, in other words, to Fannie/Freddie, JP Morgan Chase/Bear Stearns, WaMu, and Lehman.

Email ItEmail It | Print ItPrint It | CommentsComments (1) | TrackbacksTrackbacks (0) | Flag as offensiveFlag as Offensive

It started with (Democrat Majority) Congress encouraging lending to lower-income people.

"It’s a perfect storm. It started with Congress encouraging lending to lower-income people. You went from subprime loans being 2% of total loans in 2002 to 30% of total loans in 2006. That kind of enormous increase swept into the net people who shouldn’t have been borrowing. "

Those loans were packaged into CDOs rated AAA, which led the investment-banking firms [buying them] to do little to no due diligence, and the securities were distributed throughout the world, where they started defaulting.

When they started defaulting, out of bad luck or bad judgment, we implemented fair value accounting….You had wildly different marks for this kind of security, which led to massive write-offs by the commercial banking and investment-banking system.

In the face of those losses…you needed to raise new equity…which came from sovereign-wealth funds in part, which then caused political resistance to sovereign-wealth funds, who predictably have withdrawn from putting money into the system….It seemed pretty obvious that would happen. We now find ourselves with a liquidity crisis where fundamentally the cost of money for financial intermediaries [such as investment banks] is significantly in excess of their cost of lending it. So several institutions found themselves in a structurally impossible position. We had a series of bankruptcies, whether Bear Stearns or Lehman, or forced sales like Merrill. Goldman reverted to a banking charter for a lower cost of funds, which today is still not low enough for the business.

So that’s the story of how we got there.   Excerpt from:

Wall Street Crisis: Stephen Schwarzman Explains It All

  1. (2008) Barney Frank, (D-Mass) chairman, House Financial Services Committee

    Last year's challenge: Strike a balance between regulation and free markets.

    How he's doing: Frank backed the Fed's bailout of Bear Stearns and its decision to offer loans to Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac. Frank and Fed Chairman Bernanke (who speak regularly) have together toughened mortgage and credit-card lending rules and regulations.  From The Ten to Watch ‘08 Aug 1, 2008 The most interesting, power-wielding players in the financial services business today.  http://registeredrep.com/advisorland/ten-watch-08/index2.html

___________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________
October 1, 2007

Even though
Helicopter Ben pumped some liquidity into the ailing U.S. financial system last month, it's undeniable that the blame game will continue. Who is at fault for the credit crisis caused by sub-prime loans gone bad? Bet you can guess; It's you. Well, more precisely, your firm — that is if you work for a big securities company whose propeller heads at the home office securitized the debt, and then moved it off balance sheet via some special purpose investment vehicle. Of course hedge funds had something to do with this, right? Because they are loaded with cash, make too much money, and are, well, evil. And don't forget that pernicious mortgage broker down the street who sold whatever made him the most money to an unsuspecting homebuyer. It's all a big scheme by the boys with the capital to screw the laborer. Or so that's the theory emerging from Washington.

Barney Frank (D-Mass.), the U.S. House Financial Services Committee chairman, groused in early September that, “It is clear that financial innovation outstripped regulation,” and that more regulation may be needed. A week before that, Sen. Charles Schumer (D-NY) got before some reporters brandishing a mortgage company's newspaper advertisement, and laid out the problem from Washington's perspective. And that was this: As usual, unscrupulous big business interests — in this case, mortgage brokers — were fleecing their clients. In fact, he thundered, they continued to do business as usual, despite the spike in the nation's foreclosures. Schumer declared, “We have to stop them — plain and simple.”

But notice what Schumer refrained from saying: “I am amazed that my constituents would lie on mortgage applications about their income; that they would greedily take on more debt than they could handle via some tricky nothing-down, interest-only, floating-rate mortgages to speculate on houses; and that some would agree to take on hundreds of thousands of dollars of debt, knowing that they couldn't afford these aggressive loans if some macro events turned against them.” He might have also said, “It's unbelievable, the things people will do in my home state, my hometown, to profiteer, to flip a brownstone in Brooklyn.”
 
Excerpted from

Big Boy Did It

Oct 1, 2007 12:00 PM, David A. Geracioti Editor-In-Chief  at :http://registeredrep.com/mag/finance_us_financial_system/index.html

Email ItEmail It | Print ItPrint It | CommentsComments (1) | TrackbacksTrackbacks (0) | Flag as offensiveFlag as Offensive

Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac -- are not facing any kind of financial crisis,'' said Barney Frank, 2003.

''These two entities -- Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac -- are not facing any kind of financial crisis,'' said Representative Barney Frank of Massachusetts, the ranking Democrat on the Financial Services Committee. ''The more people exaggerate these problems, the more pressure there is on these companies, the less we will see in terms of affordable housing.''

Representative Melvin L. Watt, Democrat of North Carolina, agreed. ''I don't see much other than a shell game going on here, moving something from one agency to another and in the process weakening the bargaining power of poorer families and their ability to get affordable housing,'' Mr. Watt said.

 
From:

New Agency Proposed to Oversee Freddie Mac and Fannie Mae

[The Bush administration today recommended the most significant regulatory overhaul in the housing finance industry since the savings and loan crisis a decade ago.  Under the plan, disclosed at a Congressional hearing today, a new agency would be created within the Treasury Department to assume supervision of Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac, the government-sponsored companies that are the two largest players in the mortgage lending industry.  ]

[''The regulator has not only been outmanned, it has been outlobbied,'' said Representative Richard H. Baker, the Louisiana Republican who has proposed legislation similar to the administration proposal and who leads a subcommittee that oversees the companies. ''Being underfunded does not explain how a glowing report of Freddie's operations was released only hours before the managerial upheaval that followed. This is not world-class regulatory work.'' ]http://query.nytimes.com/gst/fullpage.html?res=9E06E3D6123BF932A2575AC0A9659C8B63&sec=&spon=&pagewanted=print
Email ItEmail It | Print ItPrint It | CommentsComments (0) | TrackbacksTrackbacks (0) | Flag as offensiveFlag as Offensive

Video, Democrats Covering up the Fannie Mae, Freddie ...

Shocking Video. At a 2004 hearing see Democrat after Democrat covering up and attacking the regulations to protect Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac (their Cash Cows) that are now destroying our economy because the Democrats let them cheat. (more)

video
 
Democrats in their own words Covering up the Fannie Mae, Freddie Mac Scam that caused our Economic Crisis. At a 2004 ... (more
 
Email ItEmail It | Print ItPrint It | CommentsComments (1) | TrackbacksTrackbacks (0) | Flag as offensiveFlag as Offensive

"Barney Frank once romantically involved with a Fannie Mae executive."Business & Media Institute

"...National Mortgage News called Moses a “mortgage guru” and said he developed ...

Media Mum on Barney Frank's Fannie Mae Love Connection

Democratic House Financial Services Committee Chair promoted GSEs while former 'spouse' was Fannie Mae executive.

By Jeff Poor
Business & Media Institute
9/24/2008 4:00:57 PM http://www.businessandmedia.org/printer/2008/20080924145932.aspx

      Are journalists playing favorites with some of the key political figures involved with regulatory oversight of U.S. financial markets?

 

     MSNBC’s Chris Matthews launched several vitriolic attacks on the Republican Party on his Sept. 17, 2008, show, suggesting blame for Wall Street problems should be focused in a partisan way. However, he and other media have failed to thoroughly examine the Democratic side of the blame game.

 

     Prominent Democrats ran Fannie Mae, the same government-sponsored enterprise (GSE) that donated campaign cash to top Democrats. And one of Fannie Mae’s main defenders in the House – Rep. Barney Frank, D-Mass., a recipient of more than $40,000 in campaign donations from Fannie since 1989 – was once romantically involved with a Fannie Mae executive.

 

     The media coverage of Frank’s coziness with Fannie Mae and his pro-Fannie Mae stances has been lacking. Of the eight appearances Frank made on the three broadcasts networks between Jan. 1, 2008, and Sept. 21, 2008, none of his comments dealt with the potential conflicts of interest. Only six of the appearances dealt with the economy in general and two of those appearances, including an April 6, 2008 appearance on CBS’s “60 Minutes” were about his opposition to a manned mission to Mars. 
 

     Frank has argued that family life “should be fair game for campaign discussion,” wrote the Associated Press on Sept. 2. The comment was in reference to GOP vice presidential nominee Sarah Palin and her pregnant daughter. “They’re the ones that made an issue of her family,” the Massachusetts Democrat said to the AP.

 

     The news media have covered the relationship in the past, but there have been no mentions since 2005, according to Nexis and despite the collapse of Fannie Mae. The July 3, 1998, Reliable Source column in The Washington Post reported Frank, who is openly gay, had a relationship with Herb Moses, an executive for the now-government controlled Fannie Mae. The column revealed the two had split up at the time but also said Frank was referring to Moses as his “spouse.” Another Washington Post report said Frank called Moses his “lover” and that the two were “still friends” after the breakup. 
 

     Frank was and remains a stalwart defender of Fannie Mae, which is now under FBI investigation along with its sister organization Freddie Mac, American International Group Inc. (NYSE:AIG) and Lehman Brothers (NYSE:LEH) – all recently participants in government bailouts. But Frank has derailed efforts to regulate the institution, as well as denying it posed any financial risk. Frank’s office has been unresponsive to efforts by the Business & Media Institute to comment on these potential conflicts of interest.

 

     While the relationship reportedly ended 10 years ago, Frank was serving on the House Banking Committee the entire 10 years they were together. The committee is the primary House body which along with the Office of Federal Housing Enterprise Oversight (OFHEO) has jurisdiction over the government-sponsored enterprises.

 

     He has served on the committee since becoming a congressman in 1981 and became the ranking Democrat on the committee in 2003. He became chairman of the committee, now called the House Financial Services Committee, in 2007.

 

     Moses was the assistant director for product initiatives at Fannie Mae and had been at the forefront of relaxing lending restrictions at the company for rural customers, according to the Feb. 23, 1998, issue of National Mortgage News (NMN).

 

     “Herb Moses, who helped develop many of Fannie Mae’s affordable housing and home improvement lending programs, has left the mortgage industry,” Darryl Hicks wrote for NMN.  “Mr. Moses - whose last day was Feb. 13 - spent the past seven years at Fannie Mae, most recently as director of housing initiatives. Over the course of time, he played an instrumental role in developing the company’s Title One and 203(k) home improvement lending programs.”

 

     Hicks explained in his story how Moses orchestrated a collaborative effort between Fannie Mae and the Department of Agriculture.

     “The Dartmouth grad also played a crucial role in brokering a relationship between
Fannie Mae and the Department of Agriculture,” Hicks wrote. “This led to the creation of Fannie Mae’s rural housing program where the secondary marketing agency agreed to purchase small farm loans insured through the department.”

 

     While Moses served at Fannie Mae and was Frank’s partner, Frank was actively working to support GSEs, according to several news outlets.

 

     In 1991, Frank and former Rep. Joe Kennedy, D-Mass., lobbied for Fannie to soften rules on multi-family home mortgages although those dwellings showed a default rate twice that of single-family homes, according to the Nov. 22, 1991, Boston Globe.

 

     BusinessWeek reported in its Nov. 14, 1994, issue that Fannie Mae called on Frank to exert his influence against a Housing & Urban Development proposal that would force the GSE to focus on minority and low-income buyers and police bias by lenders regardless of their location. Fannie Mae opposed HUD on the issue because it claimed doing so would “ignore the urban middle class.”

 

     Moses left Fannie in 1998 to start his own pottery business. National Mortgage News called Moses a “mortgage guru” and said he developed “many of Fannie Mae's affordable housing and home improvement lending programs. Moses ended his relationship with Frank just months after he left Fannie.

 

     Even after the relationship ended, however, Frank was a staunch defender of Fannie Mae even as other experts suggested there were serious problems building in Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac.

 

     According to an article by Kathleen Day in the Oct. 8, 2003, Washington Post, Frank opposed giving the Bush administration the right to approve or disapprove business activities that “could pose risk to the taxpayers.” He told the Post he worried the Treasury Department “would sacrifice activities that are good for consumers in the name of lowering the companies’ market risks.”

 

     Just a month before, Frank had aggressively thwarted reform efforts by the Bush administration. He told The New York Times on Sept. 11, 2003, Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac’s problems were “exaggerated,” a gross miscalculation some five years later with costs estimated to be in the hundreds of billions.

 

     “These two entities – Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac – are not facing any kind of financial crisis,” Frank said to the Times. “The more people exaggerate these problems, the more pressure there is on these companies, the less we will see in terms of affordable housing.”

 

     Frank has also reaped campaign contribution benefits from Fannie Mae and its counterpart Freddie Mac. According a front page story in the Sept. 19, 2008, Investor’s Business Daily by Terry Jones, Frank has received $40,100 in campaign cash over the past two decades from the GSEs.

 

     Frank is ranked 16th on a list that includes both houses of Congress and fifth among his colleagues in the House. According to data from the Center for Responsive Politics’ OpenSecrets.org, political action committees financed by both Freddie and Fannie have contributed $3,017,797 to members of Congress since 1989. And according to the July 16 issue of Politico, the two entities have spent a whopping $200 million to buy influence – including not only campaign donations to members of Congress, but also presidential campaigns and lobbying efforts.

 

     In a July 23 op-ed, Wall Street Journal Editorial Page Editor Paul Gigot put the blame for the GSEs’ collapse firmly on the members of the liberal establishment who took money from Freddie and Fannie. “Fan and Fred also couldn't prosper for as long as they have without the support of the political left... This includes Mr. Frank and Sen. Chuck Schumer (D., N.Y.) on Capitol Hill, as well as Mr. [Paul] Krugman and the Washington Post's Steven Pearlstein in the press.”

 

     Frank was asked by CNN’s John Roberts on the Sept. 22, 2008 “American Morning” about this and his opposition to reform Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac. Originally, he claimed he didn’t think the two GSEs were facing any problems when the issue first surfaced in 2003. He instead blamed the Republican-controlled Congress for their ultimate fall, failing to mention his friendly relationship with Fannie Mae and the contributions it had made to his campaign over the years.

 

      “Yes, I did not think we were facing a crisis in 2003, but that didn't mean we didn't have to have reform,” an animated Frank said when confronted with the question. “Here’s the deal, the Republicans controlled Congress from 1995 through 2006. They did zero to reform Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac.”

 

     However, on Sept. 17, 2008, former Bush administration Deputy Chief of Staff Karl Rove elaborated on the Bush administration’s efforts to curb abuses at the two GSEs in 2003. He told Fox News’ “Hannity & Colmes” that Frank was among the most aggressive opponents of White House attempts to reform Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac.

 

     “All of this bad stuff on Wall Street happened because people got greedy and the greed started at Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac,” Rove said. “And I know this because five years ago, the administration was alerted by the regulator, James Lockhart, that there was insufficient authority and that these institutions – particularly Fannie – were out of control.”

 

     Rove said the Bush administration’s efforts to reform Fannie and Freddie were opposed by congressional Democrats – specifically Frank and Senate Banking Committee Chairman Christopher Dodd, D-Conn.

 

     “And I got to tell you, for five years, I was part of an effort at the White House to fight this and our biggest opponents on the Hill who blocked this every step of the way were people like Chris Dodd and Barney Frank. And Fannie and Freddie are the $200 billion contagion at the center of this.”

 

      Frank has been quick to blame deregulation for some of the problems in the financial environment, as he did on Bloomberg television’s Sept. 19 “Political Capital with Al Hunt.” However, as earmark crusader Rep. Jeff Flake, R-Ariz. pointed out – it’s not deregulation, but it was the structure of Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac that had been guarded by Frank and other members of Congress.

 

     “Some people point at deregulation,” Flake said to the Business & Media Institute on Sept. 23. “It’s not deregulation at all. We have for far too long shielded Fannie and Freddie for example, with the implicit and now explicit guarantee. I just found it humorous.”

 

     Flake specifically named Frank as one of the members behind letting allegations of transgressions at the two GSEs for slipping by without oversight from Congress.

 

     “Just a few minutes ago, a reporter was asking me about this and saying, ‘Barney Frank is saying that’s just – because there were allegations,’ correct ones – ‘that Fannie and Freddie have been the playground for politicians for years and now the other side is saying Fannie and Freddie were just a small part of this and this goes far beyond.’ It does, but these same people a couple of weeks ago said, ‘You got to bail out Fannie and Freddie because they touch everything out there. They touch nearly every mortgage out there.’ And because of that explicit guarantee – that we would come and bail them out, nobody has been subject to market discipline.”

 

     Frank claims differently, according to a letter to the editor published in the Sept. 17, 2008 Wall Street Journal.  Frank noted that in 2005 he supported regulating compensation for Fannie and Freddie executives.

 

     “In fact, my reform efforts had begun when we were still in the minority. In 2005, I joined Michael Oxley, then chairman of the House Financial Services Committee, in supporting legislation to increase the regulation of Fannie and Freddie that passed the House by a vote of 330 to 90,” Frank wrote. “When former Congressman Richard Baker proposed to examine the compensation structure of Fannie and Freddie's top executives, and some members of Congress tried to block him, I explicitly spoke out in support of his right to do that and our right, as a Congress, to examine the GSE’s compensation practices.”

 

     The red flags were raised long before the government bailed out the two GSEs in August 2008. The first egregious scandal involving Fannie Mae occurred in 2004. A 2004 Wall Street Journal editorial was first to point out claims in an OFHEO report that showed accounting malpractices by the GSE. Excerpt. For More Go to: http://www.businessandmedia.org/printer/2008/20080924145932.aspx


See Related Sidebar: Networks, Once Silent on Fannie Mae, Blame Capitalism for Debacle 
_______________________________________________________________________________________________________
 
Rep. Barney Frank, Minority Wit

 

 


  • By Sally Quinn
    Washington Post Staff Writer
    Friday, December 18, 1998; Page D01

    Out and About  http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-srv/politics/special/clinton/stories/frank121898.htm

    Frank waited until he was "47 years and 3 months old" to come out of the closet. By that time, he says, "I was pretty sure that if I came out I would not lose my job in Congress. I thought it would diminish my influence in Congress. It did not." His base in suburban Boston, in fact, is so safe that he hasn't had to make a campaign commercial for TV in 16 years.

    He thinks the average American is "less homophobic than he thinks he's supposed to be and more racist than he's willing to admit."

    Frank credits President Clinton for doing "anything a president could do by his own executive action to fight anti-gay and lesbian prejudice." But his "biggest disappointment" with Clinton is on the "don't ask, don't tell" issue of gays in the armed forces, which he regards as a meaningless compromise. "I think because of his own problems, obviously with Vietnam, the one area of public policy where he almost always caved is the military."

    Unlike other aspects of his private life, Frank warms to the subject of his homosexuality, becomes softer and less irritable as he talks about it. He smiles and jokes and is generally more cordial.

    He recently broke up with Herb Moses, whom he referred to as his "lover," after a relationship of more than 10 years. The two are still friends.

    Frank delights in telling stories about their experiences. Once at a charity ball, a woman asked them to stop dancing together. "It was going to be a fast dance and it became a slow dance and we weren't very good at it. The music changed on us in the middle. There may be some people who were uncomfortable but we just said, 'Look, we're not.' Our rule was very simple. We almost never did anything to make a point. But we never not did anything to make somebody else's point. We just decided we're going to live the way we want to live and if that bothered people that was their problem." Excerpt from  Washington Post.
     
    _________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________
     
    OBAMA'S CROOKED CRONIES IN THE WALL STREET MELTDOWN
    Print E-mail
    Written by Jack Kelly   
    Thursday, 18 September 2008

    Lending money to people who probably won't pay it back isn't good business.  If you wrap crummy loans in a clever package, they're still crummy loans.

    Your typical Wal Mart shopper understands this.  But the Masters of the Universe on Wall Street and in Washington evidently didn't.

    There are a lot of people to blame for the subprime mortgage crisis. The Federal Reserve Board under Chairman Alan Greenspan (1987-2006) pursued what seems in hindsight clearly to have been way too loose a monetary policy.  Banks were awash with money to lend, and got careless in how they lent it.

    Ostensibly to aid the poor, the Clinton administration and Congress encouraged lenders to give mortgages to poor credit risks. The combination of easy money and the expansion of the number of borrowers by extending loans to poor credit risks sent housing prices through the roof, creating the bubble whose bursting has led to this crisis.

    Congress in 1999 repealed the law (the
    Glass-Steagall Act) that established a bright line between commercial and investment banks.  This meant bad investments by banks could jeopardize depositors.   Wall Street created "derivatives" which multiplied profits in good times, but which also multiplied risk if there were defaults.

    Most important was corruption and mismanagement at the Federal National  Mortgage Association (Fannie Mae) and the Federal Home Loan Mortgage Corporation (Freddie Mac), which together controlled 90 percent of the secondary mortgage market.

    Once your bank has lent you money to buy a house, it can't lend the money again until you pay it back.   But if your bank sells your mortgage, it can make another loan right away.  Without the secondary market, most of the funds for home mortgages would dry up.

    Fannie and Freddie went broke because they had bought billions of dollars worth of subprime mortgages, on which borrowers defaulted when the housing bubble popped. Fannie bought most of its bad mortgages from Countrywide Financial, whose CEO, Angelo Mozilo, gave sweetheart loans to senior executives of Fannie Mae.

    Fannie and Freddie cooked their books so senior executives would be paid millions of dollars in bonuses to which they were not entitled.  Inadequate regulation kept the book-cooking from being discovered until the crisis had become a catastrophe.  

    President Bush proposed regulatory reforms in 2003, but Congress took no action.  In 2005, John McCain and three other GOP senators proposed a strong reform bill.  It died when Democrats threatened a filibuster.  When the bill was reintroduced in this Congress, Sen. Chris Dodd, the new Democratic chairman of Banking Committee, refused even to hold a hearing on it.

    Democrats opposed reform in part because they feared it would mean fewer loans to poor people.

    "Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac are not facing any kind of financial crisis," Rep. Barney Frank, D-Mass, told the New York Times when the Bush bill was introduced.  "The more pressure there is on these companies, the less we will see in terms of affordable housing."

    Democrats and some Republicans opposed reform because Fannie and Freddie were very good at greasing palms.  Fannie spent $170 million on lobbying since 1998, and $19.3 million on political contributions since 1990.

    The principal recipient of Fannie Mae's largesse was Sen. Dodd.  Number two was Barack Hussein Obama.

    Sen. Dodd was also the second largest recipient in the Senate of contributions from Countrywide's PAC and its employees.  The number one senator on Countrywide's list?  

    Barack Hussein Obama.

    Fannie Mae CEO Franklin Raines was forced to resign in December, 2004, because of "accounting irregularities."  The
    Washington Post reported July 16 the Obama campaign has called Mr. Raines "seeking his advice on mortgage and housing policy matters."

    Sen. Obama appointed Mr. Raines' predecessor, James Johnson, as head of his vice presidential search committee, until he was also implicated in "accounting irregularities," and it was revealed he'd received cut rate loans from Countrywide.

    Chicago billionaire Penny Pritzker, chairman of Sen. Obama's finance committee, cooked the books to conceal losses from subprime mortgages at her now defunct Superior bank.  The holding company her family owned collected $200 million in dividends on phony profits.

    The trouble with crony capitalism isn't capitalism.  It's the cronies.

    Jack Kelly is a former Marine and Green Beret and a former deputy assistant secretary of the Air Force in the Reagan administration. He is national security writer for the Pittsburgh Post-Gazette.   From: http://www.sfgop.org/index.cfm/press_release_148.htm
     
    Email ItEmail It | Print ItPrint It | CommentsComments (0) | TrackbacksTrackbacks (0) | Flag as offensiveFlag as Offensive