Reid to GOP: Get on board, or get run over
After watching months and months of attempted negotiation with GOP senators produce nothing in the health insurance debate, Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid isn’t in the mood to watch a rerun.
Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid (D-Nev.) said Thursday that he will not wait for Democrats and Republicans to reach a bipartisan compromise on a Wall Street reform bill, scheduling the first key test vote for Monday.
“I’m not going to waste any more time of the American people while they come up with some agreement,” Reid said. “The games of stalling are over.”
The move puts pressure on Senate Banking Committee Chairman Chris Dodd (D-Conn.) and Alabama Sen. Richard Shelby, the ranking Republican, to reach some resolution on their bipartisan talks. Both senators have said they were progressing toward a deal, but Republicans have suggested that they would need more time than Democrats are willing to give….
Democrats have made a political calculation that at least some Republicans will feel compelled to back the bill Monday, even without any changes – and if they don’t, it’s the GOP that looks bad. If they fail on Monday, Democrats would likely head back to the negotiating table with Republicans to reach a deal, and continue to force votes until at least one Republican joins them in opening the debate.
“We feel we have the upper hand,” Sen. Chuck Schumer (D-N.Y.) said.
The New York Times account is a little more detailed about the content of Reid’s press conference, including a description of videotapes rolled out by Senate Democrats:
Mr. Reid, however, noted that Democrats had tried for two months to reach a deal with Senator Richard C. Shelby of Alabama, the senior Republican on the banking committee, and another month working with Senator Bob Corker, Republican of Tennessee, who is also on the committee….
But it was the unusual use of video clips that was most striking about the Democrats’ aggressive posture. First they showed (Minority Leader Mitch) McConnell repeatedly denouncing the legislation, saying it would encourage, rather than prevent, future taxpayer-financed bailouts of big banks. Both sides agree the bill is intended to end bailouts.
“This bill not only allows for taxpayer-funded bailouts of Wall Street banks, it institutionalizes them,” Mr. McConnell says on the video in a speech on the Senate floor. In another clip, Mr. McConnell says, “It provides for an endless taxpayer bailout of Wall Street banks.”
Senator Richard J. Durbin of Illinois, the No. 2 Democrat, accused Mr. McConnell of ignoring the legislative text.
“If you listen to this comment by the minority leader of the United States Senate you wonder if he has read the bill, particularly if he has read the section between pages 110 and 295, which is entitled ‘Orderly Liquidation Authority,’” Mr. Durbin said.
“Liquidation is the end of the bank,” Mr. Durbin said, “not a bailout that it could continue in business. It describes all the steps that would be taken under the bill to liquidate the bank. The management team is fired. The shareholders are wiped out. The firm’s assets are sold off to pay any firm debts. Once the money is gone, the creditors are wiped out. The taxpayers don’t pay for any part of this, and at the end of it, the company is gone. There is nothing to bail out.”
I’d say that Senate Republicans are reaping what they have sown over the past 18 months. Apparently, McConnell’s willingness to tell blatantly obvious lies about the legislation in question made Reid question his sincerity about wanting to negotiate in good faith, and I can hardly blame him.
Tell us what you think about the site
Customer Care »
Vacation stops, manage subscriptions and more
AJC Services
Sections
Other Editions
Visitor Agreement | Privacy Statement
© 2013 The Atlanta Journal-Constitution
260 comments Add your comment
getalife
April 22nd, 2010
7:01 pm
The gop blocked debate and blamed the dems.
Politics as usual.
@@
April 22nd, 2010
7:03 pm
And just in case you missed it Keep. Right hand margin.
A target symbol followed by the words “Targeted Republicans.”
Get lost!
josef nix
April 22nd, 2010
7:05 pm
PAUL
Laying the jokes aside, I can’t remember ever having met a person from Cleveland I didn’t like…they know how to laugh at themselves and, hey, what more can you say when you’ve got that symphony!
TaxPayer
April 22nd, 2010
7:05 pm
The Republicans have their “family values” storyline down so well now all they have to do when asked is show each member’s price tag. They prefer to attach them under the arm with one of those little plastic anchors.
@@
April 22nd, 2010
7:05 pm
josef:
I watched a video of Michelle today. She is very good in her interactions with children. A natural.
josef nix
April 22nd, 2010
7:10 pm
@@
I didn’t set out to like her, but I’ve warmed up to her considerably and her focus on children is the reason…
Keep up the good fight!
April 22nd, 2010
7:10 pm
Again @@ the context…. “target” has many nonviolent uses in our language. Gun sights, reload, rearm…. and as I indicated the nuances were probably too much for you to digest….again I defer to the Stewart Fox Reply.
Hillbilly Deluxe
April 22nd, 2010
7:15 pm
Speaking of Lefty, Bill Anderson was a co-writer on this song, as well as a graduate of Avondale High School.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hqMCeA_1XW8
@@
April 22nd, 2010
7:15 pm
Keep:
You need to believe that. You’re a member of the nuantzy party.
GFY2
Bosch
April 22nd, 2010
7:17 pm
Sinkwich,
Well, I think YOU’RE wrong, so there. But seriously, I at least put out a number, geez.
TaxPayer
April 22nd, 2010
7:19 pm
GFY2
Wow! There’s a sequel.
Keep up the good fight!
April 22nd, 2010
7:24 pm
And now for something completely different!
Harry knows the Repugs sandbagged him in healthcare while they lied, distorted and let Fox run with the absurdities…..Its time to push the Republicans. If you are going to filibuster…then do it. Let’s get this one done and get on to DADT and maybe immigration.
Time to stop the real threat to democracy…Arizona!
TnGelding
April 22nd, 2010
7:29 pm
Lies? Who really knows what the result would be until the regulations are written? But it really doesn’t matter. The whiz kids will find ways around any legislation and render it ineffective. Tread cautiously!
Paul
April 22nd, 2010
7:30 pm
Keep up
So… you’re saying the feds have met their obligations so Arizona’s actions are in response to an imagined need?
Dave R.
April 22nd, 2010
7:36 pm
Bosch, I’m shocked! Someone posted something about Olympia Snowe earlier, and you didn’t swoon.
Have you found someone else?
Bruno
April 22nd, 2010
7:38 pm
Here’s one for the ladies:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vfwXoWY8B3M
Bosch
April 22nd, 2010
7:40 pm
Dave R.,
What? Where? I missed an Olympia Snowe, Goddess of the Senate, post? No….
Dave R.
April 22nd, 2010
7:40 pm
Oh, and back on topic, if there is not prohibition specifically in the reform bill for bailouts, then this is all just smoke and mirrors by the usual “we want to control everything even when we don’t know the first thing about what we are doing” crowd.
BTW, CBO now says that most of the fines for not having health care under the new law will average about $1,000 and that will hit the middle class mostly, also stating that it will break one of Hope & Change’s promises of not raising taxes on people below $200,000.
I’m sure you’re all just shocked. . .
Bosch
April 22nd, 2010
7:41 pm
And Dave R.,
I have to confess….. I have been in negotiations with Susan Collins for the position.
Dave R.
April 22nd, 2010
7:41 pm
Bosch, what would happen if Olympia Snowe dressed up as a . . . clown?
Would you still lust for her?
Keep up the good fight!
April 22nd, 2010
7:44 pm
No Paul….I am saying that the AZ bill probably is unconstitutional because of its “reasonable suspicion” profiling. But really what self-respecting wingnut (probably a contradiction I realize) says that the government should have the right to stop ANYONE and demand they show their “papers.” Do you miss the irony?
josef nix
April 22nd, 2010
7:46 pm
Bruno
So, just how am I supposed to get in touch with you with that autographed one? I can’t very well post my e-mail here given Jaden but there is a person who has my permission to send it to you if you will send your current one to him…
josef nix
April 22nd, 2010
7:53 pm
BOSCH
Been thinking of you today…three, that’s right, three of my neighbors are out of town this weekend and I’m taking care of their cats. It’s a good thing I’m an honest person…keys to three houses! Cat people are a strange lot…
Bruno
April 22nd, 2010
7:54 pm
“After watching months and months of attempted negotiation with GOP senators produce nothing in the health insurance debate, Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid isn’t in the mood to watch a rerun.”
Out of curiosity, are any of the intelligent lefties here buying Jay’s load of manure tonight? There was never any honest debate or good faith negotiations on the part of the Democrats as witnessed by the hostile rhetoric from the git-go. And the disastrous final product shows me what a bunch of F-ing idiots they are. They chose the least efficient, most costly way to deliver health care possible. I’m still waiting for someone to explain what the cheering is about.
“CBO now says that most of the fines for not having health care under the new law will average about $1,000″
Dave–So much for liberal “compassion”–they just turned 25 million hard-working honest people into criminals for no good reason that I can see.
TGT
April 22nd, 2010
7:59 pm
“I’m not going to waste any more time of the American people while they come up with some agreement,” Reid said. “The games of stalling are over.”
I’d say that Senate Republicans are reaping what they have sown over the past 18 months.
The long suffering and hemorrhaging GOP is likely to lose some more blood on this issue.
Yeah, because the Republicans have suffered SOOOOO much this last few months during the health care debate. So the Dems are better positioned NOW, with only 59 Senate seats, to get their agenda passed?! That makes A LOT of sense.
It’s the Dems who are “fiddling” while the country burns (jobs, that is).
In the words of the President, bring it on.
Hillbilly Deluxe
April 22nd, 2010
7:59 pm
Cat people are a strange lot
So many lines; so little time.
Keep up the good fight!
April 22nd, 2010
8:00 pm
Bruno…your shorts may be too tight and restricting blood to your backside….
intelligent lefties know that Jay’s post is true. There was honest and good faith negotiation….its you who fail to see the writing on the wall. And of course you ignore the fact that the actual law states that no one shall be fined or jailed for not buying health insurance. But again…dont let the facts get in your way.
Keep up the good fight!
April 22nd, 2010
8:02 pm
Guess we’ll see TGT……. I’m betting the Party of No will have a few break off to vote yes on financial reform.
Bruno
April 22nd, 2010
8:06 pm
“And of course you ignore the fact that the actual law states that no one shall be fined or jailed for not buying health insurance.”
Excuse me? Every draft I’ve seen of the health care bill calls for a graduated fine reaching 2.5% of your income with a $650 minimum fine. What bill/law are you referring to? The centerpiece of the plan is the mandated purchase of insurance. And without a religious exemption, you are a criminal if you don’t purchase a government-approved plan.
The bottom line, once again, is that the Dems chose the least efficient, most costly way to deliver health care. What exactly are you cheering about? I don’t think you even know. All you know is that the Dems “won” something.
@@
April 22nd, 2010
8:07 pm
And now for something completely different!
Wise decision on your part, Keep.
New ‘Profile’ Screenings Set for US Airports
In the interest of security.
AmVet
April 22nd, 2010
8:11 pm
“In the words of the President, bring it (em) on.”
TGT, ironic. Those were the words of the “War President” about the time he was going to get another 4500 American kids KIA’d in Iraq.
Three years later…
“US President George W. Bush admitted on Thursday that his bellicose “bring ‘em on” taunt to Iraqi insurgents was a big mistake…”
Bruno
April 22nd, 2010
8:13 pm
“But again…dont let the facts get in your way.”
http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2010/04/22/politics/main6422023.shtml
F-ing idiot.
Algonquin J. Calhoun
April 22nd, 2010
8:22 pm
The Republicans know they’re lying to the American people but they have to. In order to represent the special interests that own them, they have to pretend the bill is bad for the American people and good for the thieves they bailed out before Obama took office. The truth is this bill is good for the American people and will force the thieves to be at least somewhat honest. That’s the problem the lying Republicans have with it! Honestly representing the people will cause these criminals to lose some money from the devils who purchased their sin-stained souls!
Dusty
April 22nd, 2010
8:22 pm
This blog is about as exciting as the Braves game tonight. Those Phillies!!!!! 5 to 0 with the Phillies leading!!! That’s…err..rrr criminal!!!
And yep BRUNO, that health insurance thing was
criminal. The content was wrong. The voting process was crooked. And to hear Democrats now acting snobbily BRAVE with Republicans after all the propaganda garbage they dumped on Bush & Republicans continually is downright comic material. If only it were not so sad. What a mess!!
JOSEF, if you keep talking cats you may get more “Harley” poems! Need I say more? Are you still “light headed”, famous author? I can tell your neighbors are impressed. “Famous author is taking care of my cat!” Ahhh….the joys of success!!
Bruno
April 22nd, 2010
8:24 pm
“The penalties will be collected by the Internal Revenue Service through tax returns. However, the IRS will not have the authority to bring criminal charges or file liens against those who don’t pay.”
Alright, Keep up, I have to cut you a break if this is what you are referring to. I’m not sure what this is supposed to mean–a “non-enforceable penalty”?!?!?! But I’m not buying that. There’s no such thing as a non-enforceable penalty, or it isn’t a penalty.
Keep up the good fight!
April 22nd, 2010
8:27 pm
Bruno…here’s a news flash….you dont have to read the bills…you can read the law. I understand that may be hard to fathom. Its called the Patient Protection Act.
I should have been clearer about one portion…since you referenced “criminal”. There are no criminal penalties, criminal fines or jail terms. There is a formula which only increases in year 2016 to 2.5% but that is civil amount imposed for not having healthcare…but lower income individuals as well as some middle class families would receive credits or vouchers for insurance. SO the ones subject to the civil (not criminal) penalty would be those who can afford insurance but chose to put the risk on the health care system.
Apparently all you know is what Fox tells you!
Dusty
April 22nd, 2010
8:29 pm
AJ Calhoun 8:22
Your post brings to mind the Battle of the Bulge WWII and the reply the general gave to the German’s request for his surrender. . The general said “NUTS!”. It is also a suitable response to your post.
Bruno
April 22nd, 2010
8:30 pm
“In order to represent the special interests that own them, they have to pretend the bill is bad for the American people and good for the thieves they bailed out before Obama took office.”
Al–Do you understand what this health care bill does? It turns total control of health care delivery to the insurance and drug companies carte blanche. It’s the Dems who sold out, not the Republicans. The thieves won, and you don’t seem to realize it.
The primary reason health care is so inefficient and expensive is over-reliance on third-party billing. The only way to fix this is to reduce the role of the insurance companies either by going with socialistic medicine or facilitate free-market solutions. This bill does neither, so yes, the American people are the losers.
Keep up the good fight!
April 22nd, 2010
8:30 pm
Bruno… the sad reality is that there are many laws that do not have penalties for violations….and many penalties that have no enforcement mechanism.
TGT
April 22nd, 2010
8:31 pm
What’s truly ironic AmVet is that Obama is as much a “War President” as Bush: continuing the Patriot Act, wiretapping, and Iraq policy; expanding the Afghan War; keeping Gitmo open, etc.
Keep up the good fight!
April 22nd, 2010
8:31 pm
Bruno….so you have no problem with the single payer system because it will cut out the insurance and drug companies.
md
April 22nd, 2010
8:34 pm
“md — more absurdity from you too? How many conferences did Bush invite Dems too? The whining about no bi-partisanship from the party who would negotiate and then say “well yes that was my idea and it is in there, but I can’t support it” is just pure bull.”
First, I’m not a Bush defender, he did plenty wrong.
Second, I believe it was Barry that campaigned on bi-partisanship and cleaning up how things were done in DC. I didn’t see it.
And third, when Barry says this in the Senate:
“What I worry would be that you essentially still have two chambers, the House and the Senate, but that you simply have majoritarian absolute power on either side. And that’s just not what the founders intended.”
I would expect him to follow his principles, and he did not. Funny how things change when the shoe is on the other foot.
Dusty
April 22nd, 2010
8:35 pm
Good fight,
If that health insurance bill was as great as you describe, why did the Dems use bribery, intimidation and other such tactics to get it passed? The majority of American citizens did not like or want the bill passed. Why then did Dems pass something then even Democratic citisens did not like? Would you not call that dictatorial?
Bruno
April 22nd, 2010
8:37 pm
“There are no criminal penalties, criminal fines or jail terms. There is a formula which only increases in year 2016 to 2.5% but that is civil amount imposed for not having healthcare…”
There is a mixing of terms here–civil penalties are typically assessed for actual damages caused by an individual against the state, such as illegal dumping. Not purchasing insurance does not create actual damages against the state, so I don’t think the classification as such is valid. In addition, when a person doesn’t pay a civil penalty, there are usually criminal charges to follow. Even if there is some type of exemption for now, it’s not going to stay that way or no one would ever pay the penalty.
Dave
April 22nd, 2010
8:38 pm
Wall St. Bailouts Would Be Invited, Not Prevented, Under Dodd’s Bill
By NICOLE GELINAS
Posted 04/16/2010 05:21 PM ET
President Obama castigated Senate Republicans last week for opposing Sen. Chris Dodd’s Wall Street “reform bill.” Democrats say Republicans’ main argument — that the bill won’t prevent future bailouts — is false. The bill itself, though, is irrefutable evidence that the Republicans are dead on.
[snip]
In the 1,336-page text, though, Dodd left room for regulators to be generous with citizens’ money. For example, the bill would direct the FDIC, which would wind down too-big-to-fail financial firms, to operate under only “a strong presumption that creditors and shareholders will bear the losses.”
As for whether the bill puts taxpayers at risk: failed firms must repay “any amounts owed to the United States, unless the United States agrees or consents otherwise”.
Why would the financial firm owe Uncle Sam money in the first place? Partly because of something else in the bill: an “orderly liquidation fund.” Big or complex financial firms would have to pay upfront into a Treasury-controlled $50 billion pot of money that would bear the cost of liquidating a future AIG.
The FDIC would have the authority to use this money as it sees fit, including guaranteeing bondholders, uninsured lenders, counterparties and other creditors to a failed company just as the government did with AIG and Citigroup in 2008.
The idea that the financial industry can pre-fund its next arbitrary bailout with $50 billion is a pleasant fiction. How much would an “orderly liquidation fund” have needed to stem investor panic starting in 2008? Try $20 trillion.”
AmVet
April 22nd, 2010
8:39 pm
The Penguins have the Dunkin Donuts and McDonalds logos visible through the playing surface?!
How nauseating has the NHL become?
TGT, true dat.
But I thought he was the most liberal US Senator ever!!!”
How clueless for a buck are these talking heads? And the people who actually believe them?
Somebody here recently came up with the best nickname for BHO I have heard yet, (and I’ve come up with a few doozies myself) “A young black George Bush”.
That very much appealed to my sense of humor…
Bruno
April 22nd, 2010
8:39 pm
“Bruno….so you have no problem with the single payer system because it will cut out the insurance and drug companies.”
I wouldn’t say I have no problem with it, but it would be a vast improvement over putting our health care 100% in the control of insurance companies, which is what just happened. Do you comprehend that? What are you celebrating. your guys just sold all of us out to the drug and insurance companies and you’re cheering for some reason.
DoggoneGA
April 22nd, 2010
8:40 pm
“Second, I believe it was Barry that campaigned on bi-partisanship and cleaning up how things were done in DC. I didn’t see it”
You do realize that “bi-partisanship requires someone from the other side to join in, don’t you? It isn’t possible for one side to be BI-partisan. All that side can do is open the door and invite “the other side” in. They can’t force them to walk through the door.
Keep up the good fight!
April 22nd, 2010
8:41 pm
dusty, dusty, dusty…. its not a dictatorship if we elected them in an legitimate election and if they leave office at the end of their terms…. popularity is not a determinate of the validity of the law. We have a republic….. But again what you describe as “bribery, intimidation and other such tactics” is really just a spin on what politics involves and has always involved on all sides. It also involves pejorative terminology from Fox…to distort the truth.
Dave
April 22nd, 2010
8:43 pm
Senator Dodd’s Regulation Plan: 14 Fatal Flaws
Published on April 22, 2010 by James Gattuso
Creates a protected class of “too big to fail” firms. Section 113 of the bill establishes a “Financial Stability Oversight Council,” charged with identifying firms that would “pose a threat to the financial security of the United States if they encounter “material financial distress.” These firms would be subject to enhanced regulation. However, such a designation would also signal to the marketplace that these firms are too important to be allowed to fail and, perversely, allow them to take on undue risk. As American Enterprise Institute scholar Peter Wallison wrote, “Designating large non-bank financial companies as too big to fail will be like creating Fannies and Freddies in every area of the economy.”
Dave
April 22nd, 2010
8:45 pm
Provides for seizure of private property without meaningful judicial review. The bill, in Section 203(b), authorizes the Secretary of the Treasury to order the seizure of any financial firm that he finds is “in danger of default” and whose failure would have “serious adverse effects on financial stability.” This determination is subject to review in the courts only on a “substantial evidence” standard of review, meaning that the seizure must be upheld if the government produces any evidence in favor of its action. This makes reversal extremely difficult.
Bruno
April 22nd, 2010
8:46 pm
“How nauseating has the NHL become?”
Actually, I’m kind of liking the NHL tonight, having picked the Flyers. They’re up 3-0 with no stop in sight, even without two of their top players out (Gagne, Carter).
Dave
April 22nd, 2010
8:46 pm
Creates permanent bailout authority. Section 204 of the bill authorizes the Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation (FDIC) to “make available … funds for the orderly liquidation of [a] covered financial institution.” Although no funds could be provided to compensate a firm’s shareholders, the firm’s other creditors would be eligible for a cash bailout. The situation is much like the scheme implemented for AIG in 2008, in which the largest beneficiaries were not stockholders but rather other creditors, such as Deutsche Bank and Goldman Sachs—hardly a model to be emulated.
Dave
April 22nd, 2010
8:47 pm
Establishes a $50 billion fund to pay for bailouts. Funding for bailouts is to come from a $50 billion “Orderly Resolution Fund” created within the U.S. Treasury in Section 210(n)(1), funded by taxes on financial firms. According to the Congressional Budget Office, the ultimate cost of bank taxes will fall on the customers, employees, and investors of each firm.
Dave
April 22nd, 2010
8:48 pm
Opens a “line of credit” to the Treasury for additional government funding. Under Section 210(n)(9), the FDIC is effectively granted a line of credit to the Treasury Department that is secured by the value of failing firms in its control, providing another taxpayer financial support.
Dave
April 22nd, 2010
8:49 pm
Authorizes regulators to guarantee the debt of solvent banks. Bailout authority is not limited to debt of failing institutions. Under Section 1155, the FDIC is authorized to guarantee the debt of “solvent depository institutions” if regulators declare that a liquidity crisis (“event”) exists.
DoggoneGA
April 22nd, 2010
8:49 pm
“Establishes a $50 billion fund to pay for bailouts”
Keep those lies coming. We need the laugh. It’s obvious you haven’t bothered to read the entire blog. That one was debunked hours ago.
AmVet
April 22nd, 2010
8:50 pm
Bipartisanship?
How about tripartisanship? Or multipartisanship?
These two parties are polarizing because they know less choice helps makes them irremovable.
The duopoly is (out)dated. It is CLEARLY failing us. It is time to move our republic forward. And they and their monied masters should not be able to stop us.
Dave
April 22nd, 2010
8:50 pm
Limits financial choices of American consumers. The bill contains a new “Bureau of Consumer Financial Protection” with broad powers to limit what financial products and services can be offered to consumers. The intended purpose is to protect consumers from unfair practices. But the effect would be to reduce available choices, even in cases where a consumer fully understands and accepts the costs and risks. For many consumers, this will make credit more expensive and harder to get.
josef nix
April 22nd, 2010
8:50 pm
TGT
And let’s not forget, habeas corpus, quo vadis?
DUSTY
Light headed, but from a different source (and no, not the vino!) Had a good day with the little ones today…After sitting through three hours of bubble-in, they got the afternoon off to go and play in the sunshine, called it review for the three hours of science tomorrow…”Mr. Nix Pepe threw a rock at me!” “Was it an igneous rock?” “No sir, it was sedimentary.” “Well, go find an igneous rock and see if Pepe know what it is…”
Dave
April 22nd, 2010
8:51 pm
Undermines safety and soundness regulation. The proposed Bureau of Consumer Financial Protection would nominally be part of the Federal Reserve System, but it would have substantial autonomy. Decisions of the new bureau would not be subject to approval by the Fed. New rules could be stopped only through a cumbersome, after-the-fact review process involving a council of all the major regulatory agencies. This could impede efforts of economic (or “safety and soundness”) regulators to ensure the financial stability of regulated firms, as the new, independent “consumer” regulator would establish rules that conflict with that goal.
Bruno
April 22nd, 2010
8:54 pm
josef–Tell your better half I put out a dedication his way:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fGtlXzsg59U
@@
April 22nd, 2010
8:56 pm
Al Franken was on video explaining that there is no taxpayer money in the “Orderly Resolution Fund”. Does Al read CBO reports?
Frog in the kettle.
Dave
April 22nd, 2010
8:56 pm
Does nothing to address problems at Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac. These two government-sponsored housing giants helped fuel the housing bubble. When it popped, taxpayers—because of an implicit guarantee by the U.S. Treasury—found themselves on the hook for some $125 billion in bailout money. Not only has little of this amount been paid back, but the Treasury Department recently eliminated the cap on how much more Fannie and Freddie can receive. Yet the bill does nothing to resolve the problem or reform these government-run enterprises.
Bruno
April 22nd, 2010
8:58 pm
Dave–Please stop spamming the board with your cut-n-paste excerpts.
Dave
April 22nd, 2010
8:59 pm
It all seems to be symantics over the term “bailout”…. ok, I’ll call it what it really is: another slush fund for the gov’t to use to pick winners and losers and reward donors.
Bruno
April 22nd, 2010
9:00 pm
You could have saved time and just put the link up, Dave:
http://www.heritage.org/Research/Reports/2010/04/Senator-Dodds-Regulation-Plan-14-Fatal-Flaws
Dave
April 22nd, 2010
9:01 pm
“Dave–Please stop spamming the board with your cut-n-paste excerpts”
Just trying to inform all the uninformed. A lot better than having to read people’s banter about hockey, etc. on a board that has nothing to do with that subject.
Federalist Patriotic Conservative
April 22nd, 2010
9:01 pm
Maybe I’m the only one who sees the irony in a Senator who’s about to get tossed out on his rump in November attempting to snidely chastise Republicans by saying ‘get on board or else!’
Maybe I’m also the only one to ask: why the hell do we have the SEC if they can’t stop financial fraud? Aren’t there laws already in place to prevent fraud? Why did Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac fail when Republicans warned of the failure in 2004?
I must be, because I’ve never heard those questions asked by the New York Times or CNN or the AJC editorial board.
So what’s next in the Obama Fascist Machine takeover? Retirement pensions? Our 401Ks? Life insurance? Home owner insurance? VISA, Master Card, American Express, and Discover? Big oil? Airlines? Private schools and colleges (so the “fairness” of those who want to attend one happens)? Small businesses? Medium businesses? Large businesses? And finally, every freaking SINGLE corporation in America?
Where does this destruction and takeover of America’s economic infrastructure end with these people running the show right now?
Oh I know: let’s just add a VAT next. That will teach those rich people a lesson on being greedy with their own money.
Jay
April 22nd, 2010
9:05 pm
Dave, two points:
1.) You can’t just post somebody else’s work here. There are copyright issues involved.
2.) If you want discuss or post your opinion, do so. Posting a long dissertation is neither.
Dave
April 22nd, 2010
9:08 pm
This one explains the “bailout” better
http://article.nationalreview.com/432208/corker-vs-the-real-bailouts/stephen-spruiell
The complication is that Republicans have been focusing on the wrong provision in the bill — a $50 billion fund, raised from assessments on large financial institutions, that would be used to wind them down if they fail. This fund looks like what Republicans have called it — a bailout fund — but it’s not. The real bailouts are hiding in the details.
But read the fine print: Under the Dodd bill, regulators retain the power to bail out firms that aren’t technically insolvent yet. The FDIC can guarantee loans, and the Fed can make loans accepting the shadiest of assets (such as subprime-mortgage-backed securities) as collateral. So the “bailout fund” isn’t the problem: The Dodd bill would give regulators all the power they need to keep wobbly but not insolvent firms from ever tapping into it.
TGT
April 22nd, 2010
9:09 pm
More irony:
Speaking of financial reform, Wall Street, etc. According to this from Open Secrets, the big money from large corporations OVERWHELMINGLY goes to Democrats over Republicans. And notice who is #65 on the list, tilting “Strongly Democratic.”
josef nix
April 22nd, 2010
9:09 pm
Bruno–
He sent this one to all us last Friday
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qMXy09pVEQY&feature=related
DoggoneGA
April 22nd, 2010
9:10 pm
“Just trying to inform all the uninformed”
It doesn’t work that way. When you post a known, debunked lie…it calls everything you post into question. Which, basically, means no one bothers to read it anyway.
@@
April 22nd, 2010
9:10 pm
OMG! The LA Times used the word “crosshairs” in their headline. “Goldman Sachs may not be the only firm in SEC cross hairs”. What….are they planning on killing ‘em?
Snipers Exchange Commission.
AmVet
April 22nd, 2010
9:13 pm
Dave, this board is subject to discussions of many topics.
For the most part, the moderator fully supports this. Ain’t no big thang.
On topic! I heard a program on NPR recently about how credit card companies became totally shady in the past decade. Much deception, much fleecing of consumers.
Government heavy handedness, if that is what Obama’s “socialism” can be called, is attributable to one fact only.
One that some of you will not acknowledge. Yet.
Had these giant companies not morphed into malfeasance machines, fraught with fraud and often criminally negligent, this legislation would not even be a gleam in someone’s eye.
Uncle Sam tried his damned best to play stupid and look the other way (there is great money in doing so) but come Sept. 2008 even he could no longer do it. (Yet he still does business with corporations that have stolen from him. Though I believe there is a new “law” (HA!) forbidding this.)
Then when the Dick Cheney nobody saw it coming implosion went down, King George and his back room, closed door boys used socialism to bail out capitalism.
We the people didn’t even have any real input. Truly taxation without representation.
But this became such a disaster so quickly, who the hell really knew what was going to happen? Lots of armchair quarterbacks and economists to be sure, but even the supposed experts seem to have no clue.
Until people finally admit there has been, and still exists, a massive corporate crime wave in this country, 3 decades mature and to the tune of unknown but ungodly amounts of money, they will never be willing to look at what really happened.
DoggoneGA
April 22nd, 2010
9:15 pm
“What….are they planning on killing ‘em?”
Hate to tell you this, but gun scopes aren’t the only equipment with crosshaird. Surveying equipment has them too.
Bruno
April 22nd, 2010
9:16 pm
“Dave, two points:”
I had you covered at 8:58, Jay. I appreciate your appointment as deputy blog editor when you’re not here. I was born to be a Cosmic Cop. So when do I get the technology to highlight my posts like yours?
“He sent this one to all us last Friday”
That would be “Geronimo’s Messy Cadillac” in his case though
TaxPayer
April 22nd, 2010
9:16 pm
Thankfully, the Democrats came through and gave us a start on good healthcare legislation. It will get better with time as long as the Republicans don’t have their way with it. Now, the Democrats will focus on the financial reform legislation and deliver on that issue as well. It sure is nice to have some people in Congress, Democrats, working on legislation instead of working 24/7/365 on trying to get back in power.
@@
April 22nd, 2010
9:21 pm
Surveying equipment has them too.
Do tell! Would that be like when a political party is “surveying” the terrain for potential wins?
Thanks, Gnat.
Dave
April 22nd, 2010
9:23 pm
“Dave, two points:
1.) You can’t just post somebody else’s work here. There are copyright issues involved.”
Whoops, my bad. Thought this was Cynthia’s blog. Sorry.
DoggoneGA
April 22nd, 2010
9:23 pm
“Thanks, Gnat.”
yeah, yeah…we’ve heard it before. It does get funnier every time you say it though, so keep it up.
josef nix
April 22nd, 2010
9:24 pm
Bruno
I had a Choctaw-Syrian Jew friend back in high school who had the hand me down car she called Geronimo’s Cadillac…many a fond memory of rolling about the Mississippi countryside in that land yacht!
Hillbilly Deluxe
April 22nd, 2010
9:25 pm
Is it just me or did Alan Greenspan’s keeping the interest rates low, in effect, hit us with a double whammy. It contributed, along with a lot of shady Wall Street activity, in the Great Meltdown. In my view, it also forced people out of more secure investments. A person who would normally invest in a bank CD, found them paying under 2%. A lot of them felt they had to get into that market, sometimes against their better judgement, and a lot of them got burned in the process.
As you might of guessed, my opinion of the self-important Mr. Greenspan, isn’t very high.
Dave
April 22nd, 2010
9:25 pm
“It doesn’t work that way. When you post a known, debunked lie…it calls everything you post into question. Which, basically, means no one bothers to read it anyway.”
Except when the lie is “debunked” by more lies. See my post at 9:08
DoggoneGA
April 22nd, 2010
9:29 pm
“See my post at 9:08″
No thanks. First of all, with any luck Jay will remove your plagiarized posts…and second, I’ve already read one lie from you. I don’t need to read any more.
@@
April 22nd, 2010
9:32 pm
yeah, yeah…we’ve heard it before.
Just my special way of putting a bug in your ear.
TGT
April 22nd, 2010
9:34 pm
And when it comes to the “party of the rich” (tying in with my 9:09), again according to Open Secrets, of the top 50 individual donors, 34 were “Strongly” to “Solidly” Democratic (one “Leaned” Democratic).
DoggoneGA
April 22nd, 2010
9:35 pm
“Just my special way of putting a bug in your ear”
I guess you’ll have to try again. No bug yet. But LOTS of amusement. I can always use a good laugh.
Bruno
April 22nd, 2010
9:35 pm
josef–In case you missed my 9:03 last night:
http://blogs.ajc.com/jay-bookman-blog/2010/04/21/do-jobless-checks-subsidize-laziness-research-shows/comment-page-3/#comment-285896
josef nix
April 22nd, 2010
9:40 pm
BRUNO
I caught that, but snob in reference to? Fill me in…
Bruno
April 22nd, 2010
9:43 pm
Just poking at you in reference to HD’s earlier comment: “In my area, median household income is approximately $45K. We have some pretty well-off retirees here, so that figure is probably skewed a bit. Per capita income is about 18K. 15% live below the poverty level and the average owner occupied housing value is $110,000.”
From what you’ve indicated, the per capita in your neighborhood is a wee bit higher.
Dusty
April 22nd, 2010
9:44 pm
Good Fight, 8:41
Someone needs to tell you the difference in dictatorial and dictatorship. The way the Democrats are behaving at this time is dictatorial. That does not make a dictatorship because they don’t have the power to enforce their dictatorial ways. “Get on board or get run over” is a dictatorial statement from Reid. He values his position too highly. Will make the dose even more bitter when he loses his posititon at the next election.
And YES, there was bribery and intimidation in the healthcare free-for-all. If that is ordinary politics, it is time for a change. That is what is wrong with Congress which has the lowest approval in history I believe. Americans do not like this push and shove even as Democrats try to tell us how much we love it. No way, Jose. The polls prove it every day even if Bookman only shows up the left leaning polls when he can find one.
Down in Albany
April 22nd, 2010
9:45 pm
You lost me with the first sentence. How disingenuous to say that the Dems tried for months and months to negotiate with the Republicans (?) I guess if you say it or hear it often enough, you eventually believe yourself.
IC Atlanta
April 22nd, 2010
9:49 pm
So Obama is hanging out with the CEO of Goldman Sachs – wonder what they both get out of the “financial reform”. Somehow Jay I don’t believe you would give W a pass as you have Obama. You do realize that part of the bill will put a stop to most angel investing – good bye bio-tech and tech.
The Regime moves on in steamroller fashion. November can’t get here fast enough.
TaxPayer
April 22nd, 2010
9:49 pm
The Democrats have wasted enough time trying to deal with Republicans. The Democrats should have quit trying to work with the Republicans sooner. They could have accomplished even more by now. Better late than never.
DoggoneGA
April 22nd, 2010
9:50 pm
““Get on board or get run over” is a dictatorial statement from Reid”
Guess again. Jay is smart, if it had been a quote he would have put…tada QUOTE marks around it. Those are Jay’s words giving his assessment of what Reid said.
Try building your argument on something that is true.
josef nix
April 22nd, 2010
9:51 pm
Bruno
Our per capita income may be a bit higher, but let me assure you, our credit lines are just as maxed as any other! As one of my neighbors put it to one of the uppity interlopers, “Suguh, I lived in Buckhead when it was an urban renewal project.”
AmVet
April 22nd, 2010
9:52 pm
josef, Choctaw-Syrian Jew friend? Niice.
B, your Flyers move on.
HD, funny that. The BIG banks get much bad press, but the hometown banker ain’t exactly the friend he used to be either.
TGT, at 9:34 and before,
A brand new occurrence. The Republican domination/stranglehold/unbeaten streak of out gaining their opponent in corporate “contributions” has finally ended.
So what? Is the goal 50 – 50?
Bruno
April 22nd, 2010
9:52 pm
Here’s a Washington Post article regarding how and why the health care legislation passed:
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2010/03/26/AR2010032602225.html
From the link:
“According to published reports, when President Obama was contemplating a compromise with Republicans, and White House Chief of Staff Rahm Emanuel and Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid (D-Nev.) were advocating a less-ambitious measure (which Pelosi derided as “kiddie-care,”) she persuaded them to stick with an omnibus bill.”