October 28, 2008
-- by Dave Johnson
I suggest that the day after the election we start a RECALL of ANY members of Congress who voted for the bailout package.
It did not have sufficient protections and guarantees for taxpayers. It just handed a ton of our money over to the Bush administration to do with as they pleased.
It didn't limit compensation. It didn't specify how the money was to be used by the receiving companies. It didn't require that the public receive a voting share of control of the companies. It didn't require that the public receive sufficient oversight of the process.
Posted by Dave Johnson at October 28, 2008 7:26 AM
Leftys have historically and routinely been fractionated over the means to, and extent of "reforms". The economic meltdown has, at least temporarily, unified the progressives to permit a wholesale shift in American politics if the polls are right. This has created a polarization of the largely class-based camps and the breakdown of the previously controlling elite-religous consortium. The polarization leads to strident, even shrill claims of world-ending scenarios. Definitional labeling such as "Socialist" does little to advance the substantive discourse. It is hard to think of any government policy that is not redistributive in some way. An example of discourse that should have occurred: Obama took a public position favoring a homeloan modification program administered by Bancruptcy judges be included in the bailout/rescue. Reps said thanks, but no thanks to the proposal and it was transformed into a toothless program without the judges. Obama lobbied Dems for support basically saying that the proposal could be brought up again after the election when they would likely be in a stronger position. Fast forward. We're now looking at 27,000 home foreclosures a month with more ARM resets to occur over the next three years. Even financial companies (e.g. PNC) that take bailout redistribution are balking at actually allowing mortgage modifications for home owners, claiming their constitutional right against "impairment of contract". What's really going on? Existing Federal law for years has given bancruptcy judges the power to modify mortgages for second, vacation, or investment homes (and luxury boat loans)so that the debtors can keep them after declaring bancruptcy; but not primary residences. Is it really "socialist" to have the same protection for folk that actually live in the home? Redistribution to the elites justified with a "tricle-down" theory is good, but the life as we know it will end when the theory is modified to a bottom-up approach? The vast number of non-performing mortgages could be restored to some level of performance, and their derivatives could hence regain value using an effective mortgage modification program. It is unlikely under the current administration where Sec. Paulson gives away $7.7 Billion bonus to PNC and doesn't require that ANY mortgages actually be modified for our kid's money. See
Post a comment
Thanks for signing in, . Now you can comment. (sign out)(If you haven't left a comment here before, you may need to be approved by the site owner before your comment will appear. Until then, it won't appear on the entry. Thanks for waiting.)