Pantagraph.com Weather forecast, local radar and more
NewsTuesday, September 30, 2008 3:33 PM CDT
Comments Comments (88) | E-mail this page E-mail this page | Print this page Print this page | Enlarge type Enlarge type | Reduce type Reduce type | Search archives Search archives | RSS RSS feeds | Add to My Yahoo! Add to My Yahoo!
Lawmakers try to revise bailout, FDIC hike seen
By Charles Babington and Jim Kuhnhenn
Associated Press
Advertisement

WASHINGTON, D.C. -- Congressional leaders scrambled Tuesday to come up with changes to help them sell the failed $700 billion financial bailout to rank-and-file members. One idea gathering support: raise the federal deposit insurance limit to reassure nervous savers and help small businesses.

Presidential rivals John McCain and Barack Obama announced separately that they support a plan that some House Republicans had pushed earlier: raising the limit from $100,000 to $250,000. Within hours, the Federal Deposit Insurance Corp. chairman asked Congress for temporary authority to raise the limit by an unspecified amount.

That could help ease a crisis of confidence in the banking system, said chairman Sheila Bair.

President Bush spoke with both nominees during the day and made another statement in the White House. “Congress must act,” he demanded in front of the cameras.

As the pace of legislative jockeying quickened, the atmosphere on Wall Street seemed to be improving. The Dow Jones industrials rose some 485 points on the day after they had plunged 778. But more attention was on credit markets as a key rate that banks charge each other shot higher, further evidence of a tightening of credit availability.

“I recognize this is a difficult vote for members of Congress,” Bush said. “But the reality is we are in an urgent situation and the consequences will grow worse each day if we do not act.”

Republican House aides said the FDIC proposal might attract some conservatives who want to help small business owners and avert runs on banks by customers fearful of losing their savings.

House Republican leader John Boehner welcomed McCain’s and Obama’s embrace of a higher insurance cap, saying congressional Democrats had rejected it Saturday.

Another possible change to the bill would modify “mark to market” accounting rules. Such rules require banks and other financial institutions to adjust the value of their assets to reflect current market prices, even if they plan to hold the assets for years.

Some House Republicans say current rules forced banks to report huge paper losses on mortgage-backed securities, which might have been avoided.

Changes wanted by liberal Democrats

Liberal Democrats who opposed the bill are suggesting other changes. Their ideas include extending unemployment insurance and banning some forms of “short selling,” in which investors bet that a stock’s value will drop.

The White House signaled a willingness to accept some changes to the bill. Spokesman Tony Fratto said there are plenty of good ideas to help the financial markets and “we’re going to look at all of those.”

Senate Banking Committee Chairman Christopher Dodd, D-Conn., told reporters, “I’m told a number of people who voted ‘no’ yesterday are having serious second thoughts about it.” He added, however, “There’s no game plan that’s been decided.”

Senate Republican Leader Mitch McConnell of Kentucky said it was time for all lawmakers to “act like grown-ups, if you will, and get this done for all of the people.” He predicted a bill would pass this week, although the House, not the Senate, is the focus of the dispute.

The House on Monday balked at approving the measure, pilloried in many quarters as a handout to big business. The 228-205 vote sparked the largest sell-off on Wall Street since shortly after the Sept. 11, 2001, terror attacks.

Bush noted that the maximum $700 billion in the proposed bailout was huge, but was dwarfed by the $1 trillion in lost wealth that resulted from Monday’s stock market plunge.

“Because the government would be purchasing troubled assets and selling them once the market recovers,” he said, “it is likely that many of the assets would go up in value over time. Ultimately, we expect that much — if not all — of the tax dollars we invest will be paid back.”

“The dramatic drop in the stock market that we saw yesterday will have a direct impact on retirement accounts, pension funds and personal savings of millions of our citizens,” Bush said. “And if our nation continues on this course, the economic damage will be painful and lasting.”

Some lawmakers reported a shift in constituent calls pouring into their offices. Calls and e-mails were overwhelmingly opposed to the rescue plan before Monday’s vote, many offices said. But Monday’s stock market dive prompted calls Tuesday from Americans furious about Congress’ inaction, some said.

Rep. John Campbell, R-Calif., who voted for the legislation, said, “The calls now are saying, ‘I lost 10 percent of my retirement yesterday,”‘ Campbell said. “The calls I’m getting are thanking me now.”

But Joseph Brettell, a spokesman for Rep. Marilyn Musgrave, R-Colo., said calls to her office remain overwhelmingly supportive of her “no” vote.

House Republicans, meanwhile, stopped blaming Monday’s outcome on criticisms of the GOP that Speaker Nancy Pelosi, D-Calif., included in her address to the chamber shortly before the vote. On Monday, House GOP leaders said her partisan remarks caused a dozen Republicans to vote against the bill instead of for it.

Pelosi not to blame?

Democrats rebuked Republicans for basing a crucial vote on pique instead of conviction, and Republicans dropped the claim Tuesday. Rep. John Shadegg, R-Ariz., told MSNBC he did not base his “no” vote on Pelosi’s remarks, adding, “I don’t know a single Republican who did.”

On Tuesday, Pelosi and Reid wrote to Bush, saying, “We welcome your statement this morning and are committed to working with you and our Republican colleagues to enact a bipartisan bill without further delay.”

The rescue package was also Topic A on the presidential campaign trail.

“The first thing I would do is say, ‘Let’s not call it a bailout. Let’s call it a rescue,”‘ McCain told CNN. He said, “Americans are frightened right now” and political leaders must give them an immediate solution and a longer-term approach to the problem.

Obama issued a statement saying that significantly increasing federal deposit insurance would help small businesses and make the U.S. banking system more secure as well as restore public confidence.

Sen. Hillary Rodham Clinton, who narrowly lost the Democratic nomination to Obama, said the Senate may have to lead the way in passing a rescue package. But other senators seemed inclined to let the House work out its problems first.

The bill’s defeat came despite furious personal lobbying by Bush and support from House leaders of both parties. But the legislation was highly unpopular with the public; ideological groups on the left and the right organized against it, and Bush no longer wielded the influence to leverage tough votes. Even pressure in favor of the bill from some of the biggest special interests in Washington, including the U.S. Chamber of Commerce and the National Association of Realtors, could not sway enough votes.

The legislation the administration promoted would have allowed the government to buy bad mortgages and other deficient assets held by troubled financial institutions. If successful, advocates of the plan believed, it would have helped lift a major weight off the already sputtering national economy.

Take a look
President Bush finishes his statement about the economic bailout bill and financial crisis Tuesday in the Diplomatic Reception Room of the White House in Washington, D.C. (AP Photo/Charles Dharapak)
Republican John McCain, left, and Democrat Barack Obama proposed that the government to insure consumers’ bank deposits up to $250,000 by raising the $100,000 federal limit as each sought to navigate the unpredictable politics of the financial crisis. (AP photos)
An electronic sign at Mugsy's urges people to call Congress about the proposed $700 billion bailout. The sign read Monday, "If the bailout passes Paulson becomes financial czar with no recourse, no court review." (The Pantagraph/LORI ANN COOK)
Video
Most commented stories
Browse online archives
Recent issues:
Reader comments on this story - 88 total

Note: All views and opinions expressed in reader comments are solely those of the individual submitting the comment, and not those of the Pantagraph or its staff.

OGS wrote on Oct 7, 2008 2:55 AM:

" The FDIC is currently holding only about 1/2 of what it needs to cover every dollar in every account! "

abramj wrote on Oct 5, 2008 2:37 AM:

" Speaking of the Bush-chimp look alike photos, does anybody else noticed how much Biden looks like Spiro T. Agnew in some of his photos. Bush actually looks a lot like a young Johnny Carson who also looked like a chimp. Obama-Palin for president!

"Real haters don't even like family values." "

abramj wrote on Oct 5, 2008 2:16 AM:

" This great country of ours is full of cheaters and frauds. Americans cheat on their taxes, their bosses and their spouses. Why? Because nobody is supposed to impose values on others, that's why. Because nobody is supposed to be judgemental, that's why. We love our freedoms and the license that comes with them. Go Cubs Go! We are a country of liars and cheaters and deserve to go down in flames. Palin-Obama for president!

"Real haters don't even like family values." "

excuseme wrote on Oct 3, 2008 8:46 PM:

" Does Bush look like the Chimperor in this pic?...Just kinda caught my eye. "

Sweetcheeks wrote on Oct 3, 2008 8:48 AM:

" FTC:
If the repubs were trying to protect the taxpayers by defeating this bill then explain to all of us why Bush was so disappointed that it didnt pass. "

Sweetcheeks wrote on Oct 3, 2008 8:21 AM:

" FTC:
If the repubs were trying to protect the taxpayers by defeating this bill then explain to all of us why Bush was so disappointed that it didnt pass. "

FollowTheConsitution wrote on Oct 2, 2008 3:47 PM:

" It was a republican that came up with the idea of raising the FIDC limit to $250K

McCain and Obama are both merely supporting it!

BUT! Unless they changed this in the new bill, the old bill that was voted down said this limit increase was only TEMPORARY! "

The Cat wrote on Sep 30, 2008 10:42 PM:

" Interesting in who voted for and who voted against this abortion. Most that voted in favor were those who were leaving the congress at the end of this session or those (mostly Donkeys) who are in safe seats. Those voting against were those in contested races plus some on both ideological sides who either wanted less socialism than was in the bill or more socialism. I’m beginning to think this thing is being hyped a bit too much and seems to contain a lot of “features” that look like the usual “Xmas tree” congressional action such as the ACORN subsidy and protection for union pensions and cities and states. Unfortunately we are in this mess because of GOVERNMENT action with quasi-government “corporations” who by law back up mortgages and bad mortgages granted under threat of government force by lending institutions for “diversity” social engineering (coupled with a lot of Donkey political corruption). "

Rational Humanist wrote on Sep 30, 2008 8:56 PM:

" normalguy

Obama may support raising the FDIC limit, but I have heard House Republicans claim credit for the idea. And it is a good idea in any case. Money ain't what it once was and a $250, 000 per account level is much more in keeping with today's reality. "

FollowTheConsitution wrote on Sep 30, 2008 5:20 PM:

" normalguy

This had nothing to do with Obama nor McCain. They are BOTH running around taking credit for it as if THEY each came up with this idea, but it was not either of their ideas. They are supporting the idea.

Both John McCain and Barack Obama want more federal insurance for peoples' bank accounts but House minority leader John Boehner (R-West Chester) is taking credit for it. "

archie bunker wrote on Sep 30, 2008 4:00 PM:

" personally I think it would be a good idea if the two presidental canidates would donate the money raised for their campains. that would make a big dent in the money crisis. "

normalguy wrote on Sep 30, 2008 3:48 PM:

" seems like the only thing obama is reallly for, is protecting more money for rich people. raising the fdic to 250,000. wow thats going to help john q. public. no it will only help rich people feel more confident in the economy and about their money, which is the dirty little secret. poor people only suck the life out of it and rich people keep it going. and though 250k may not sound like much it can be spread around to various accounts, some with beneficiaries and the amount can easily top 1 million per account. "

Burns wrote on Sep 30, 2008 1:23 PM:

" Where exactly is all this 'tightening of credit'? The only stories I've seen are of people complaining they can't get credit who probably shouldn't get credit. If there was really a problem, airlines wouldn't be getting fuel, grocery stores wouldn't be getting food, and department stores wouldn't be getting George Foreman grills. They don't get these things with the store manager's handshake. Just because someone can't finance a new H3 or swimming pool with no money down, doesn't mean we're in a crisis. "

incognito wrote on Sep 30, 2008 12:54 PM:

" Follow the Constitution -

You are full of it. Obama COULD NOT HAVE VOTED PRESENT on the bailout package - because he is NOT A MEMBER OF CONGRESS!!!!! He would not show up to vote NO until a proposal went before the SENATE.

For goodness sakes - maybe you should review the Constitution before you encourage us to follow it, you need to understand the make up of our federal government.... Perhaps then you would NOT BE POSTING INACCURATE COMMENTS about votes that could NOT have been cast, much less counted. "

FollowTheConsitution wrote on Sep 30, 2008 12:34 PM:

" Just heard Obama giving a speech LYING through his teeth!

Obama was for the first bill to get passed and blamed McCain for derailing it.

McCain wanted stipulations to protect tax payers and not allow CEO's to get golden parachutes.

The latest bill had given full discression to Paulson to handle the money. The bill gave 20% to ACORN which is heavily tied to Obama.

The republicans voted no stopping this fraud!

Obama is LYING saying HE demanded protection for tax payers, yet there were none. Obama never showed up to vote NO on this since it was not what he claims he wanted for tax payers. He voted present as usual.

People were sucking up his LIES and cheering. Have we become a nation of SHEEP????

Has anyone seen this bill??? I read it! No wonder republicans voted NO! "

Jarhead71 wrote on Sep 30, 2008 11:55 AM:

" And where is the accountability statement in the bailout proposal??? I want some people held accountable for their fraudulent actions on Wall Street. AND, Nancy P, a bailout is what we are talking about NOT a buyin. I have a choice in whether I buy into something. The Congress is going to ram this down my throat with no choice on my part. My Rep is not seeking re-election and has already shown his support for this railroading of the working Americans. "

Rational Humanist wrote on Sep 30, 2008 10:57 AM:

" In Re: Geez!

Might as well, that would leave only the frauds and the grafters who supported Big/ Bad Business and it would serve all you Rightist Kooks right when they finished forcing the collapse of the economy. "

Cthulhu wrote on Sep 30, 2008 10:36 AM:

" As we can see today, the market IS fixing itself. NO BAILOUT!!! "

Proangel wrote on Sep 30, 2008 10:02 AM:

" Why should the taxpayers bailout Wall Street and Washington? Do we have alternative options? I.e., Can the market fix itself? "

illini boy wrote on Sep 30, 2008 10:01 AM:

" I wish our leaders and congress (if any of them actually know which I highly doubt) would tell us specifically what the 700B will be spent on number one and number two what would happen if it was not spent and why. Is it possible that only 350B can be spent and that we would be alright? They have know idea and are listening to one of the biggest crooks Wall Street had in Paulson and relying on him to be right because they don't have a clue. "

FollowTheConsitution wrote on Sep 30, 2008 9:59 AM:

" Devil's Advocate

It's to bad Ron Paul dropped out. Had he stayed in this election this would have been enough to push him over the top and win this election.

Now we are stuck with this! The people are forced to choose between the lesser of two evils. The most evil one Obama or the less evil one McCain. "

DevilDog wrote on Sep 30, 2008 9:32 AM:

" There are comments out here from the very intelligent to the absolutely absurd. However, it is good to finally see people getting involved. As a country the people need to take back the voices that they put in power! Too often politicians vote according to their beliefs, or that of special interest. We, the American "nobody's", need to let our voices be heard again. Not just today, tomorrow, or on election day, but EVERY day!

We have become apathetic to the process, and that does not work. We need to be part of the solution. "

Meh wrote on Sep 30, 2008 9:24 AM:

" Geez!, I feel the same way about the Republicans/Corporate socialists. "

Devil's Advocate wrote on Sep 30, 2008 9:14 AM:

" It is unfortunate that there is no viable third party candidate is running to represent the people in the upcoming election. If a Ross Perot type were running he would win big over these two stooges of the powers that be. Do not listen to big media's claims of financial doom. While it may be painfull to some, the markets will correct themselves without having to rape the taxpayers wallets. "

Rational Humanist wrote on Sep 30, 2008 8:56 AM:

" When the Conservatives insist on free and unfettered markets, deregulation and tax cuts, they are trying to define the ground rules. Now, since in this model, the consequences of failure re clear, then the losers should "die".

CEOs, stock analysts, investment bankers have never troubled themselves to care what happens to the "Little Guy" How can they possibly expect us to support them now? If Congress want to stimulate the economy and to truly help the average American, then gear this legislation to the direct benefit of that same average American. "

Noober wrote on Sep 30, 2008 8:52 AM:

" In a Free-market society the taxpayers should not be asked to bail out failed companies, even if they are Banks. Bailing out these companies will be like admitting the freee-market doesn't work. They knew the risks when they leveraged their assets. These risks paid off for years and they reaped the rewards. Now they have to pay for the risk, NOT THE TAXPAYERS. "

Dave wrote on Sep 30, 2008 8:48 AM:

" The vote yesterday saved America. Americans spoke up and it worked.
My only disappointment is my lame duck representee Ray LaHood went against over 90% of the people he's supposted to be representing and voted for the bill. He's probably a richer man today. Greed rules some people. "

Geez! wrote on Sep 30, 2008 8:45 AM:

" Too bad we can't vote out every single Democrat / Socialist in this coming election. "

incognito wrote on Sep 30, 2008 8:43 AM:

" My comment yesterday was misconstrued. I simply meant that to this point we have been insulated/isolated in McLean County. This is a simple OBSERVATION from what I have seen going on as I travel for work.

Since January of '08, I have been many places that once had a thriving housing market, where people have overextended to purchase a basic house in an inflated market, and have witnessed increased real estate with bank foreclosure signs, and extended time of houses on the market.

Looking ONLY in my neighborhood (North Normal), I see houses selling in less than three weeks, NO bank foreclosure signs, and a strong community that is not suffering.

I am just saying that prior to the FEAR FACTOR, we were doing fine at least observably in our community.

I also stated that I am NOT an economist - I am unsure what should happen next. I do not understand the complexities of the economy. "

Burns wrote on Sep 30, 2008 8:34 AM:

" coupie: Well if it's in Yahoo! News it's got to be true. Country and State Farm do no engage in derivative trading to maintain policy reserves. But, please, start a rumor and let it get out of hand. I hear there's no gas in B-N too, you better fill up or you'll be out of luck by end of week. Better yet, in this community, there's a shortage of beer. That'll start a nice panic run. "

OGS wrote on Sep 30, 2008 8:31 AM:

" Can you believe that most people here agree on something?

KEEP UP the phone calls people! Pressure works! "

Cthulhu wrote on Sep 30, 2008 8:14 AM:

" Mugsy's is right. "

memo wrote on Sep 30, 2008 8:11 AM:

" To Ummmm: You are correct we are not stress free here. Nobody should be stress free. However, B-N is not the 2nd on the list to have financial issues from this whole mess. The news report said that B-N COULD be affected more than other towns because around 26% of B-N's workforce works in the financial industry (State Farm and COUNTRY), which is second on the list behind a suburb of New York. In my opinion though, it would take a lot to bring down the two insurance companies in this town. And since I am working at one of those companies and have some insight to the investment practices I can tell you that this financial mess, although it does hurt, will not damage the company I work at as a whole. "

normalguy wrote on Sep 30, 2008 8:05 AM:

" I think the biggest reason the dems are upset this wasnt passed yesterday is that the longer it goes on, more and more people are exposed to the truth of what happened. this all started in the late 90s under bill clinton. he claimed banks were racist for not giving out bad loans to minorities. said banks were red lining. so democrats charter fannie and freddie who cook the books for there ceos. ( one of whom was forced out and is now a top advisor for obama). "

CharlieHustle wrote on Sep 30, 2008 8:01 AM:

" The passing of this bill would bring the fascists one step closer to what they failed at in the 30's - a takeover of government. We cannot let that happen. We must preserve what little freedom we have left, and let the free market be free. The companies that made these terrible decisions should be left to fail. "

Jarhead71 wrote on Sep 30, 2008 7:50 AM:

" And they have taken offline the email your Representative option. They are going to force this upon all working class Americans. Welcome to the first volley in the new economic warfare of the top 2% against the rest of America. "

Ummmm wrote on Sep 30, 2008 7:43 AM:

" Incognito we are not stress free here. If you had read or even listened to the news, you'd have heard or seen that Bloomington is 2nd on the list of cities to have financial issues from this. Why? Because we have big market insurance companies housed within our confines, also Mitsubishi. It's a scary thing in this time of financial stress to think that a little town of this size could possibly be hardest hit by this bailout or lack thereof. "

JMK wrote on Sep 30, 2008 7:36 AM:

" coupie: Point taken. I just felt that article was poorly researched. I guess my point is, I personally don't think we'll fair any worse than the rest of the country. Granted, it could get bad everywhere, and the worse it gets, the more likely more insurance and financial companies will struggle even if they were relatively strong before. "

Geez! wrote on Sep 30, 2008 7:31 AM:

" House Speaker Pelosi once again proved how much of a Partisan Witch she is. Then the Democrats blame the Republicans by falling 12 votes short of passing.

Had 12 of Barny Frank's own committtee members voted for it, they would have had their votes.

Having 95 Democrats voting against it didn't help the Democrat's whining and crying about it, either.

One more thing - the Republicans were prevented from bringing ANY other counter-proposals to the table. Yeah, that's great leadership from the Democratic Leadership, eh?

Geez! "

the_goat wrote on Sep 30, 2008 7:24 AM:

" Funny... she blames Bush but he tried to reform Freddie and Fannie starting back in 2002. American's wanted change... they voted change in back in 2006 giving Dems the majority. They've had two years to do something about this. Hrmm, come to think of it... gas has almost doubled as well. I guess we got change...

I'm glad the bail out failed. It might be tough for a little while, but the dollar is up, oil is down and I'm not paying off the debt of someone else. :) "

ONLY IN AMERICA wrote on Sep 30, 2008 7:23 AM:

" This whole problem has been Orchestrated by the DEMOCRAT PARTY- To make Obama look good against McCain.... "

real american wrote on Sep 30, 2008 7:15 AM:

" In this case, doing nothing should be the ONLY option. "

oppressed in illinois wrote on Sep 30, 2008 6:53 AM:

" How about term limits for the entrenched politicians? These guys from both sides of the aisle need to get their butts out of Washington. Lets remember how our Reps. voted come election time and clean house. "

Pontiac resident wrote on Sep 30, 2008 5:30 AM:

" The Democrats control both the house and senate in Washington, how come the Repulicans are getting blame over this? Nancy Pelosi should learn to keep her mouth shut and let sleeping dogs lie. "

cats55ire wrote on Sep 30, 2008 4:09 AM:

" Pelosi needs to have her big mouth taped shut! She's a piece of work! Her position in the US government has "gone to her head" and she's dangerous! "

Annienap wrote on Sep 30, 2008 12:47 AM:

" I'm glad this failed and, hopefully, will still be glad a year from now. The fear factor that has been used so frequently over the last nearly 8 years does not seemed to have worked this time. People found their voices and spoke up and we must continue to speak up and let our legislators know what WE, the American taxpayers who hired them, want. "

FollowTheConsitution wrote on Sep 30, 2008 12:32 AM:

" excuseme wrote on Sep 29, 2008 9:24 PM:
" Only In America: Actually Bush and McInsane got spanked....2/3 of the Repugs voted AGAINST it...They were supposed to vote with Bush and McSame...DUH!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! "

Nope! The only thing McCain did was get the republicans involved with the negitiations of getting a bill put together. They didn't get that! So it didn't pass.

How you want to bet the republicans get more safeguards added to this now?

The dems were ready to shove it through the first day and had nothing in it to limit liability on the tax payers and nothing to limit big payouts to CEO's. The republicans got some of that but not all of it. The bill still allows for big bucks to be paid and it only applies to FUTURE bailouts and none of the current or prior bailouts!

It should be ZERO for ALL CEO's, period!

And granting full control of this to Paulson is a huge mistake as well! Only a moron would have voted for this bill! Looks like 60% of the dems are morons! "

Devil's Advocate wrote on Sep 30, 2008 12:23 AM:

" Shocking only in the fact that the people saw through the panic mongering of the east coast media and the bankers who finance their lies... and the people called their bluff and said NO to them. "

FollowTheConsitution wrote on Sep 29, 2008 11:55 PM:

" pseudo-intellectual

This bailout will NOT fix anything! If anything it will merely slap a bandaid on things for a short time. Foreclosures won't just stop, job losses won't just stop, home prices dropping won't just stop. This will go on for a while yet. Then what? Print up another trillion and throw into wall street??? Then it will be 10 times worse than had we just let it ride and allow the market to correct itself.

Besides, they have excellent ways to do this without tax payers paying for it! Make them go with the other ideas. "

MICKWD1 wrote on Sep 29, 2008 11:52 PM:

" READ YOUR COMMENT, TOPGAL. BEST OF THEM ALL. YOU ARE RIGHT ON. TELL ALL YOUR FRIENDS, PASS ON THAT INFO, AND CALL YOUR SENATOR AND DEMAND HE EXERCISE YOUR WILL. "

MICKWD1 wrote on Sep 29, 2008 11:28 PM:

" PSEUDO-INTELLECTUAL
RESPECTFULLY, SIR, WE WOULD ALL BE BETTER SERVED IF YOU WOULD RESERVE YOUR PSEUDO ENTELECTUALISM FOR MORE PSEUDO INTELLECTUAL TOPICS AND FORUMS. WHILE YOUR INTENTION MAY BE HONORABLE, YOUR LACK OF EXPERTISE AND KNOWLEDGE AND YOUR MISINFORMATION DOES NOTHING MORE THAN CLOUD AND ALREADY UNCLEAR AREA FOR MOST. I DO NOT DEBATE YOUR POSITION, BUT PLEASE, IN THIS COMPLEX AND CRITICAL AREA FOR EVERY CITIZEN, PLEASE WITHDRAW YOUR FUTURE COMMENTARY REGARDING THE MECHANICS AND FUNDAMENTAL ECONOMICS AND THE FINANCIAL MAZE IN WALL STREET. SHOULD WE FIND WE ARE ILL EQUIPPED TO UNDERSTAND THE PROCESS AND ITS MEANINGS, THERE ARE NUMEROUS WEBSITES TO OFFER LAYMEN EXPLANATION.
THANK YOU FOR YOUR UNDERSTANDING. "

mickwd1 wrote on Sep 29, 2008 10:27 PM:

" Fellow citizens, please remain vigilant. Do not be swayed nor tempted to abandon your position in the face of threats of economic catastrophe as a result of no bailout. Markets will react as they do, and can only be manipulated for so long. The markets today reacted as expected, and is fundamentally not a result of a failed bailout. More attempts will be made to pass a bill, and markets may be tampered with to persude action. A bailout will not alter the course of our current economy. Don't be fooled. Stick with your gut feeling - this is not our problem.
Stand fast - NO BAILOUT.
LET CITIZENS PREVAIL. "

pseudo-intellectual wrote on Sep 29, 2008 10:19 PM:

" It's going to be difficult coming up with a revised bailout that will pass both houses. The citizenry is obviously against it by a big margin, and it is an election year. Unfortunately, most of the citizenry has only a hazy understanding about economic matters. Our economy runs on CREDIT. Without it, there will be chaos. Even profitable businesses occasionally need access to a temporary line of credit. Hardly anyone keeps big reserves around anymore. Companies who had nothing to do with toxic mortgages are already competing for dwindling credit. Everytime you use your credit card you're asking for a loan. How long before Visa and MasterCard run out of money for these quick loans? And what happens if your local bank folds? These are very real problems that might have been fixed by a bailout plan. Maybe not... but we still have to deal with them. "

mickwd1 wrote on Sep 29, 2008 10:14 PM:

" NO BAILOUT/TAKEOVER
One is not necessary.
It cannot be stressed enough how important it is for every single person who is able contact senator Obama's office (unfortunately, he is our rep) and demand that
the peoples' will be exercised, and demand that he not support ANY plan. It is nothing more than an attempt to privatize America's economy while covering the lost speculative investments made using the mortgage market as victim. Let us not end up being the next victim. It has been witnessed how strong the majority will is with this victory. Let's not drop the ball. We can force positive change.
Stand up and shout for our rights. "

MRS. wrote on Sep 29, 2008 10:00 PM:

" excuseme, why did the Democrats need the Republican votes? They only needed something like 10 votes for the bill to pass and more than 10 dems voted no. I believe we need to bite the bullet and let what ever is going to happen happen. It isn't just the housing market it is the way credit is passed out like candy in general. No one should get credit for a candy bar if they are living paycheck to paycheck. The American dream use to be work hard, establish yourself and save,save,save THEN get your first home. If a person can't save they have no business with a mortgage. That means one of to things. Either they aren't disciplined enough to save or they barely squeak by paycheck to paycheck. Neither scenario should have the responsibility of a home. Same goes for credit cards and car loans. Drive a used car if you can’t afford car payments. This has made it very difficult for credit worthy people to get credit. "

coupie wrote on Sep 29, 2008 9:51 PM:

" JMK, yes I actually read the article. I see your points (well-taken). However, I still find these rankings a little concerning. With a higher percentage of jobs in the financial/insurance sector, if the entire economy goes to hell-in-a-handbasket, we're going to be hurting. We won't be any more isolated than any other city in America. I respect your position, and I certainly hope the Farm and Country stay as strong as they have been. I did try to go back over the article, but haven't been able to locate it again. So much for my "googling" abilities, LOL! "

Jarhead71 wrote on Sep 29, 2008 9:36 PM:

" Recommendation, if you have money in one of the mega east coast based banks, pull your money and put it into a local bank that is locally owned and controlled. My bank is local and does not sell or bundle its mortgage paper. It is also still lending money for houses, cars, etc. The lies coming out of the east coast are too farfetched to be believed when local banks are still stable and solvent and lending. "

excuseme wrote on Sep 29, 2008 9:29 PM:

" Good thing this bailout failed....else ALL my republican friends would look like socialist. "

excuseme wrote on Sep 29, 2008 9:24 PM:

" Only In America: Actually Bush and McInsane got spanked....2/3 of the Repugs voted AGAINST it...They were supposed to vote with Bush and McSame...DUH!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! "

advocate wrote on Sep 29, 2008 9:20 PM:

" Can this country survive until January with no leadership in the White House and chaos in Congress? Perhaps "W" could salvage his Hoover style presidency and step aside for the sake of the world economy and the future of the country. "

excuseme wrote on Sep 29, 2008 9:18 PM:

" But..But..But..."I went to Washington last week to make sure that the taxpayers of Ohio and across this great country were not left footing the bill for mistakes made on Wall Street and in Washington," he told a crowd in Columbus, Ohio. "Some people have criticized my decision, but I will never, ever be a president who sits on the sidelines when this country faces a crisis."

On NBC's "Meet the Press" Sunday, top adviser Steve Schmidt said McCain managed "to help bring all of the parties to the table, including the House Republicans, whose votes were needed to pass this."

OPPS..MCInsane went to DC to get the bailout passed, took credit for it today...and now is eating CROW?....What happened to McInSane and the Repugs??? He was going to make sure it happened or else not continue his campaign?????????...ROFLMAO "

JMK wrote on Sep 29, 2008 9:13 PM:

" To coupie: Sorry to burst your bubble, but McLean county will almost certainly NOT be affected worst than anyone else during this challenging economic time. If you actually read the article that you are referring to (which puts B-N at #2 with cities having the most financial/insurance jobs), you'll see that they did no actual research - it's all based on demographics. Yes, McLean county has a lot of ins/fin jobs - Country and State Farm. All that really matters is if those two companies stay relatively strong - if they do, we are virtually unaffected. So far, there is no indication that either were overly involved in the type of derivatives that have sunk in value. I suppose that could change, but I'm thinking that if anything, we'll be more isolated to the damage than many areas of the country. "

OMG wrote on Sep 29, 2008 8:55 PM:

" coupie is likely correct. Business Week I believe originated the article. I'm so glad I no longer work there and moved onto the health care field. Some claim it won't hurt the B/N economy but we'll see and they keep building there....... "

ONLY IN AMERICA wrote on Sep 29, 2008 8:46 PM:

" Nancy Pelosi and the Democrat's just got spanked- by 94 people of their own people. As she tried to blame Bush for the downfalls of her party. She called republicans Un-patriotic for not going along with HER plans however, the same should go to her when she and her people walked out on the drilling package and shut the lights out with Republicans still working. Democrat's will always blame people who do not agree with their slanted views. They continue to want it both ways...
THE DUMBING OF AMERICA CONTNUES DAILY - THANKS NANCY !!!!! "

albundy54 wrote on Sep 29, 2008 7:51 PM:

" It Aint Me, I couldn't agree with you more. It is about time these out of touch elitists listened to us for once. I think this whole bailour is a sham on the part of both parties who equally benefited from Fannie and Freddie. I think it is throwing good money after bad to bail out these guys at our expense. "

The Original JD wrote on Sep 29, 2008 7:49 PM:

" It is not shocking. Main Street is rallying against Wall Street, and only a political fool would side with Wall Street this close to election. Now after the election, politicians will side with Wall Street because they know they have enough time to placate their constituents, who with the right sound bites and carrots, will totally forget their politicians sold them out. Thus they will be able to bail out their aristocratic fellows without having to worry about being held accountable. "

mdorf4 wrote on Sep 29, 2008 7:30 PM:

" Yeah, they listened, and now we're all going to pay for it. If you really think the purpose of the bailout is to help the financiers, you're badly mistaken. Why do you think both candidates (who can't agree on anything) are for this? So that when the economy recovers during their time in office, they can take credit for it. The ones who voted against it, for the most part, are ones who were afraid they wouldn't get reelected if they had voted for it. And we thought the housing market was bad before. This is going to spiral if nothing gets done. "

coupie wrote on Sep 29, 2008 7:18 PM:

" To: Incognito...sorry to burst your bubble, but Bloomington IL is most definitely affected. There was an article in Yahoo! News ranking the top 10 cities that could be affected most because of the financial mess we're in. Guess who was number 2 on the list? That's right folks, good ol' Bloomington IL. The rankings were based on the percentage of the workforce (working in financial jobs) in relation to population of each city. We have just over 26%, topped only by Darien CT with just over 27%. Google the article, it's an interesting read. "

it aint me wrote on Sep 29, 2008 6:55 PM:

" This the first time that I can say some of our elected officials finally listed those who they work for and elected them. I'm glad this bill was defeated. In my opinion it was meant for one thing, and that is to bailout the banks who decieved the american public with deceptive practices in attempt to make an extra buck. These banks should be left to rot. If the government isn't going to give every homeowner facing or risking forclosure the money to prevent it, then they better not give a dime to the big banking corporations. "

airhead wrote on Sep 29, 2008 6:43 PM:

" to no govt: That is what the Republicans would have liked. They wanted it to pass but not vote for it so they could have said you awful people you passed it and I voted against it. The agreement was that each would have a majority. Dems came through. Repubs didn't. Must have been because there leader Big John was out on the campaign trail bragging and blaming. Until of course he found there was nothing to brag about. And then he had the audacity to say now is not the time to place blame. That is because he knows he would get the majority of the blame. Why did he suspend his campaign again? Didn't he say he brought the Repubs together? Someone said he yelled charge and they all retreated. Great leader we got there! His gambles have not been going too well lately. "

topgal wrote on Sep 29, 2008 6:20 PM:

" The unconstitutionality of this whole process makes me livid! Who gave the Treasury Sec power over this who "bailout" scenario? And since when do we even consider bailing out Wall Street & banks?! And the AUDACITY of Pelosi to wag her finger at the Repubs & blame them for this mess! If I remember correctly in '05 '06 McCain raised serious questions about the ability of Freddie Mac & Fannie Mae to sustain the unbelievable loan criteria of these 2 institutions with no oversight to speak of. Barney Frank went on record and said he saw NO PROBLEM with it. McCain co-introduced legislation for more over sight and who shot it down! Thats right - the Democrats. Pelosi, Barney Frank, Dodd - they are all a bunch of self-serving crooks!! I propose we bite the economic bullet (yes, its going to hurt ALL of us), let the free-market reign and correct itself - and vote every Democratic and left-leaning Republican who wants to turn our country into a socialistic state out of Congress !!! "

beowulf wrote on Sep 29, 2008 6:11 PM:

" To Vinny5036 - Mike Rivero RULES!!!!!!!!!!! "

dman wrote on Sep 29, 2008 6:09 PM:

" what really happened?
Pelosi and the dems could have passed this without any Republican help. They needed to get some REPs to vote for it, in case it blew up in their faces. They could then pass on some of the blame.
Once Pelosi saw that McCain could come out of this smelling like a rose politically, she had to dump on it quick.
party bias and politics, of course come before the good of the country. Right Nancy "

whatever! wrote on Sep 29, 2008 6:09 PM:

" To Working Class Hero - that is hilarious. Too bad Toby Keith didn't write a song for the bailout....Boehner couldn't have gotten past the first tear stained refrain without supporting/passing this bill.
The words could be:
Why do you hate america?
Pass the Bailout for america
Do it for the Unit 5 kids' to have a swimmin' pool
It's just your tax dollars
Don't hate america
Pass the god blessed bailout
Don't let the terrorists win the anti-bailout

and, so on and so on. There are plenty of flag clutching lyrics to induce flag colored tears to wipe on your flag printed toilet paper. I'm getting misty just thinking about it. Don't hate america "

whatever! wrote on Sep 29, 2008 6:04 PM:

" This is crazy. All of you cheering the bailout...hope you don't want to sell a house in the near future, or buy one, or buy a car or do anything that involves credit. Or, how about the insurance industry in this town? No worries, there, right? WE all might be eating out of garbage cans soon, while you just sit there and gloat and blame it on Pelosi. To borrow the line of one of my fellow blogger, the DUMBING OF AMERICA CONTINUES DAILY! Remember this the next time you cut off your nose to spite your face. We're screwed people. "

No govt wrote on Sep 29, 2008 5:30 PM:

" Dems could have passed this without a single GOP vote. Wonder why it didn't pass? Sounds like Nancy P couldn't even get her party to go for it. "

evenflow wrote on Sep 29, 2008 5:20 PM:

" TO:LETSBEHONESTHERE
the FDIC only has 53 billion dollars for insurance. They can get money elsewhere, but there would be fees passed onto consumers for that.

Where is old Jerry Weller, on vacation for the few months of his term? He didn't vote today. "

workingclasshero wrote on Sep 29, 2008 5:17 PM:

" maybe we can suspend the iraq war for a year, get this settled, and then get toby keith to write a new song for the second coming. it would be like a do over, or a mulligan for you golfers. "

world gone crazy wrote on Sep 29, 2008 4:12 PM:

" I think it is just great that we can send 2 billion dollars to Georgia and send humanitarian aid to everyone but when its our economy on the line the buck stops before we get to use it.
I think we should stop sending all the money to other countries and use it here. Whats up with this....do we have a rule that we have to give all the money away. No money for the USA.....only for foreign countries.....
world gone crazy.... "

Gov't oppressed Mule wrote on Sep 29, 2008 4:03 PM:

" TO:LETSBEHONESTHERE

Possibly. It depends on the institutions policies and their practices. My personal recommendation (opinion, nothing more-but I do work in the financial industry) is to look into Credit Unions. SPECIFICALLY one that is NOT backed by a federal insurance company, such as NCUA (the eqivalent of FDIC). While the majority of Americans accts are completely safe, if your institution has sound practices and policies in place (that are being followed) then they are fine (even w/ FDIC) however IF every FDIC acct was to close tomorrow (HIGHLY IMPROBABLE) technically they do not have enough funds to ensure that everyone gets paid (while most private insures do-Non federally backed) "

LetsBeHonestHere wrote on Sep 29, 2008 3:11 PM:

" To: Anyone who knows the right answer..... Is our money safe if we have it in a FDIC institution? Also, I thought the Stimulus Checks were suppose to boost the economy? What happened there? Is that how a Bailout would end up? Failing also? "

Jarhead71 wrote on Sep 29, 2008 2:36 PM:

" They want to borrow money from us to pay Peter, to pay Paul. Only problem is that Paul is wanted for embezzlement and fraud and should have been in prison long ago but is living on a small island in the Mediteranian with no extradition agreement with the USA. "

incognito wrote on Sep 29, 2008 2:02 PM:

" Pseudo-intellectual - this package may have been voted down, but another will follow, and yet another, until a package is passed. Unfortunately, I am uncertain (as I think many Americans are) about whether or not it is necessary to bail-out Wall Street.

The bail-outs you list are all done by corporations, keeping the economy free. If the government steps in, via a package to bail-out Wall Street, we will be using public funds to finance private businesses who have made poor decisions. Meanwhile, those who are losing homes to foreclosure are not protected.

I wish that I understood this more clearly - the bottom line for us (in McLean County) is that we are fairly isolated from the economic stresses I am seeing in other parts of our country. In Virginia, where I travel extensively, foreclosure signs are everywhere. A housing market that was once a boom, has gone bust.

Clearly, the "crisis" is complex and since I am not a economist, I am clueless. I wish there was a clear path, because I simply DO NOT trust Washington, D.C. to do what is right for the "little guy." "

Vinny5036 wrote on Sep 29, 2008 1:48 PM:

" House holds vote clock open in last-ditch effort to persuade House Members to reverse their votes. The corporate media is not even showing any shame in their desire for 11 members of the House of Representatives to be "turned" and reverse their votes! The Representatives are SUPPOSED to represent their constituents. When the corporate media talks about "turning" 11 representatives while Pelosi holds the clock open, they are talking about subverting the most fundamental processes of our government for personal gain ... ON NATIONAL TELEVISION. This is obscene. This is like having a Presidential election and after candidate A wins, holding the polls open until you CAN CLUB ENOUGH VOTERS INTO CHANGING THEIR VOTES TO MAKE CANDIDATE B THE WINNER! If this House vote is reversed, this will prove that we live in a dictatorship. Congress will be forced to do what the decider wants done.

If they pass this, empty your bank accounts. That is a LEGAL form of protest. They cannot arrest you or taser you for taking back your money from the banks. "

tatbtime wrote on Sep 29, 2008 1:39 PM:

" Am I missing something? I thought the bail out passed, did it or not? "

Gov't oppressed Mule wrote on Sep 29, 2008 1:35 PM:

" PSEUDO-INTELLECTUAL

You are right, we are no better off, BUT our children and their children will be. THANK GOD this failed. Things may get bad for awhile, but we will be better off in the long run. Good things come to those who wait, not those that come up with quick "recovery" plans without thinking of the consequences. "

Cthulhu wrote on Sep 29, 2008 1:28 PM:

" Of course, a there will be revised bills that will follow until one passes. Taxpayers will not be off the hook from these Congressional thieves. "

pseudo-intellectual wrote on Sep 29, 2008 1:22 PM:

" Before anyone cheers too loudly or obnoxiously about the bailout going down in flames, consider this- what do you think has been happening the past 2 months? Have you been following the news? ONE BAILOUT AFTER ANOTHER. Just in the last 24 hours Wachovia has been taken over. Earlier it was Washington Mutual. These takeovers will continue, with or without a bailout "plan", which would have given some order to the proceedings. Now there is, for example, nothing in place to limit the millions the former CEO's will take with them when they run for cover. We're no better off because of today's vote in the House. "
Add your own comments

Please read the rules before posting comments.

You must be logged in to leave comments.
If you don't have a member ID, please register.

*Member ID:
*Password:
Remember login?
(requires cookies)
  Forgot Your Password?
 
Lee Enterprises Customer Service | 301 W. Washington St., PO Box 2907, Bloomington, IL 61701-2907 | Ph. 309-829-9000 | 800-747-7323
Copyright © 2008, Pantagraph Publishing Co. and Lee Enterprises. All rights reserved. | Terms of Use | Privacy Policy