The Bailout

I have read the 110-page bailout plan (available from the NY Times), and have a few comments:

First, the Treasury Secretary can buy almost anything he deems to be a troubled asset. This is more than a little too broad for my comfort. In addition, the first "oversight" committee consists of the Treasury Secretary (huh?), the Fed. Chair, the Director of the Federal Home Finance Agency, the SEC Chairman, and the Secretary of HUD -- in other words, five people appointed by the President, including the guy who's in charge of the program.

Another problem -- the Treasury Secretary can waive parts of the "Federal Acquisition Regulation," specifically those parts that require minority participation and opportunities, very easily and with almost nobody allowed to complain about that.

We're just getting started; there's more.

Forget $700 billion -- it could cost $1 trillion. The additional $300 billion could come from the "HOPE for Homeowners Act," and used to bail out those who took out oversize mortgages (and tenants who would be affected by foreclosures). While I like the help for homeowners and tenants, be aware that it could cost an additional $300 billion.

Executive compensation -- the "limits" are pathetically weak, and practically unenforceable. I can figure out simple loopholes for every limit. This is outrageous and unacceptable.

There are three levels of spending. At first, the Treasury Secretary can spend up to $250 billion. He can spend an additional $100 billion if he gets the President to say that he needs to do it. The last $350 billion requires another letter from the President, and can be overridden by Congress.

A couple of other oversight systems: The Comptroller General and a new Inspector General can also dig through what's going on and must submit reports regularly. A new Congressional Oversight panel will also sniff around.

There's a provision for a study on whether "leveraging" caused any or all of the problems. It's ridiculously inadequate, because it doesn't look at other problems (such as deregulation).

There's a provision for judicial review of what the Treasury Secretary does, but it specifically bars any real relief for those who are hurt if he does something wrong. This is inadequate.

5 years down the road, if the government ended up spending more money than it got back, then Congress can pass a law requiring the "financial industry" to make up the difference. In other words, this is supposed to be designed to cost us nothing in the long run. We'll see how well that works.

***************

In short, there are several problems that need to be fixed before this goes into effect. Unfortunately, I strongly doubt they will even be addressed, much less fixed. But feel free to call your Representative (find your Rep. at the House website in the upper left-hand corner), or Senators Clinton -- (212) 688-6262 or (202) 224-4451 -- or Schumer -- 212-486-4430 or 202-224-6542. Tell them not to pass this until it's fixed.

http://dailygotham.com/blog/dan_jacoby/the_bailout
Mouse over the text to select it, then press Ctrl-C to copy it.
0
Dan Jacoby's picture



Comment viewing options

Select your preferred way to display the comments and click "Save settings" to activate your changes.
Dan Jacoby's picture

Pelosi goes Palinesque, and Paulson's pals

Could Nancy Pelosi sound stupider than in this clip on YouTube? The "fun" begins at the 2:40 mark. The key phrase is about 15 seconds later -- "No longer will the U.S. taxpayer bail out the recklessness of Wall Street." As if that's not exactly what she's doing!

Meanwhile, it turns out that Hank Paulson only stepped in to bail out AIG because it helped his old company, Goldman Sachs. Otherwise, he was prepared to dump it, just as he let Lehman Brothers go. Not my words, this from an article in the NY Times.

Call your representative now!

Not yet rated.
Dan Jacoby's picture

One more question

When the federal government buys these "assets," who will manage them? Who is going to renegotiate mortgages, and figure out the tangled web of mortgage-backed securities and credit default swaps?

Nobody seems to know. That's another reason why this bill must be fixed before it is passed.

Not yet rated.
Michael Bouldin's picture

Even more importantly

The Federal government doesn't pay local property taxes. If the Feds become essentially the largest residential real estate owner in the nation, where is that revenue going to come from?

And since many of those properties are unoccupied, who's going to maintain them so they don't lose further value or blight their neighborhood?

Not yet rated.
Michael Bouldin's picture

Exactly.

You'd think by now that Democrats would reject Bush administration proposals sight unseen, but no.

Not yet rated.
Dan Jacoby's picture

Paul Krugman speaks out

This morning, Paul Krugman spoke out on his NY Times blog. Basically, he says this plan will have to do, not because it's good (it isn't), but because the Democratic Party cannot be seen to have ownership of a good plan.

Politics at its worst! I've been railing for years against Demcratic wimpiness; this is just one more example.

Not yet rated.

Comment viewing options

Select your preferred way to display the comments and click "Save settings" to activate your changes.

Upcoming events

  • No upcoming events available

In keeping with the "city that never sleeps" tradition, keep up to date with our daily syndication digest.



Powered by FeedBlitz

The Publisher
Liza Sabater

Fresh dissent served daily
culturekitchen

Grassroots News and
Activism for New Yorkers

Daily Gotham

Feminist Bloggers Network
BlogSheroes

A new kind of voyeurism
Voogling

Art + Code + Philosophy
Potatoland.blog

Got any dirt, tips, leads or money for us? Then drop us a line or two at editors [at] dailygotham [dot] com or use our general contact form to reach everybody in the editorial team ASAP.

User login