Bailout Measure FAILS House Vote, Dow Falls, Next Steps Unclear

I agree Punditmom its time to put up.  If there is an alternative then lets see it.  Its not OK to just say not that there has to be some other idea put forward.  If this bill is bad then give us what you think should be done and why.  They are not elected to complain they are elceted to work.  I saw the one guy from I think Miss come out with letters from economist that the bill was bad as his reason for not supporting it. Then those economist should have an alternate plan.  I am ready for the alternate.  This one was like the cod liver oil my grandma used to give us.  Hold your nose and swallow.  If you got a better idea put up or shut up. 

Michelle

I blog at http://www.mommycan.blogspot.com/

Democrats have enough members to pass the bill without more Republican votes.  Why did 95 Democrats vote 'nay'?  Nancy Pelosi can point fingers at Republicans all she wants but the facts show that she can't influence her own party.

LePlusJeune - proud Independent

www.remodelle.net

Alright, I am not going to pretend to know much of anything about economics.  I don't understand investments, as I never really had much of anything to invest.  Although, I understand that this Wall Street crisis can spread if banks are less likely to offer credit due to the crisis.  I also understand that a 700 point drop in the DOW = Bad.  

 Why indeed did 95 democrats vote against it?  I know more voted for it than against it, but 40% of house democrats voted against it, in addition to the 2/3 of Republicans voting against it.   What did they oppose?  Is it purely political?

Corina Fiore from www.dtemama.com

The bailout proposal is scary. But here's some food for thought: From the Wikipedia entry on Herbert Hoover:

Hoover's stance on the economy was based largely on volunteerism. From before his entry to the presidency, he was a proponent of the concept that public-private cooperation was the way to achieve high long-term growth. Hoover feared that too much intervention or coercion by the government would destroy individuality and self-reliance, which he considered to be important American values. Those ideals, as well as the economy were put to the test with the onset of The Great Depression. At the outset of the Depression, Hoover claims in his memoirs that he rejected Treasury Secretary Mellon's suggested "leave-it-alone" approach.[13] Critics[who?], on the other hand, accused Hoover of sharing Mellon's laissez-faire viewpoint. It is often inaccurately stated that Herbert Hoover did nothing while the world economy eroded. President Hoover made attempts to stop "the downward spiral" of the Great Depression. His policies, however, had little or no effect. As the economy quickly deteriorated in the early years of the Great Depression, Hoover declined to pursue legislative relief, believing that it would make people dependent on the federal government. Instead, he organized a number of voluntary measures with businesses, encouraged state and local government responses, and accelerated federal building projects.

The Great Depression followed. How much because of his inaction, I could not say. But it gives me a degree of anxiety to hear the same rhetoric today.

Laura Scott, BlogHer Contributing Editor, Tech/Web
design, snap, blog, tweet

I think his blustering show of "leadership": flying back to DC as if he was going to solidify support singlehandly was very risky, and it failed. It shows he doesn't have the control over his party that say, a Tom DeLay did.

Which perversely, might make him more popular among independents, since Congressional Republicans are even more vilified than GW Bush. 

Morra Aarons-Mele
www.womenandwork.org

Our beloved Wachovia, sniff sniff. Gone. Just spent 15 minutes discussing bank failures with Michelle. It wasn't fun.

I'm slightly afraid to call my banker daughter (the really old 25 year old who is trying to plan a wedding and not think about bank failures.)

~Denise
BlogHer Community Manager

Flamingo House Happenings

A Hobson's choice is basically take it or leave it. Since we don't know what is in the bill exactly how can we evaluate if it is good or bad?

We know Wall Street wants this. We know that Congress wants this out of the way before the elections. Non-partisan Open Secrets.org might provide an answer as to why - they have a money breakdown of how much the industry invested in both the Democrats and Republicans. What? You thought this action was for the good of the country?

What is in the bill? How much have we just been or about to be shanked?

Thomas.loc.gov is the portal to find out information about U.S. House and Senate Bills, Public Laws and all kinds of juicy governmental type stuff.

On the front page LOC has put a direct .pdf link to the amendment to the Senate Amendment HR 3997 Also known as Emergency Economic Stabilization Act of 2008. There are 109 pages of governmental English but if you pace yourself you can find out what is and isn't being said by the press or by members.

There are other plain English interpretation:

Public MarkUp will let you jump to the section you are interested in and if you want to comment on the section you can.

National Association of Credit Union Supervisors take is nice and short.

Open Congress.org has a more visual breakdown of what happened, how the vote was split and you can get as much or as little information as you want.

And if you really want to give yourself a headache and heartburn you can read the General Accounting Office's GAO’s Efforts to Assist the 111th Congress and the Next Administration.

See it is not just about this bail out. These are major events that the next president must deal with in addition to this bail out.

Nobody in their right or left mind would want to be president after reading that document.

Gena - Out On The Stoop