Lobbyists Regroup After Public Beats Bailout Bill

[Purveyor]

Source: Associated Press

(09-30) 14:33 PDT WASHINGTON (AP) --

Lobbyists regrouped Tuesday after the House defeated the $700 billion bailout, a loss that had the business sector trying to recast the terms of the debate.

--
Business groups pointed to Monday's sickening drop in the stock market, which wiped out more than $1 trillion in value as soon as word spread that the House rejected the $700 billion package.

"Part of the problem here is that Congress has two ears," said Scott Talbott, senior vice president of government affairs at the Financial Services Roundtable, a trade organization that represents 100 of the largest financial services companies in the country.

"In one they have constituents asking, 'Why are we helping industry with this self-inflicted wound? This bill doesn't affect me.' In the other ear, they were hearing doom and gloom" from the administration and Federal Reserve Chairman Ben Bernanke, said Talbott.

--
"I wonder if the 40-to-1 crowd felt in a celebratory mood at dinner Monday night when they realized the stock market had just cost more than a trillion-dollar loss in wealth affecting their equity investments, their pensions, 401(k)s, IRAs and college savings plans?" said Josten.

Read more: http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?f=/n/a/2008/09/30/national/w134919D37.DTL

[lostnotforgotten]

1. Market Up 500 Points - What Happened To Armageddon

eom

[Tallison]

3. Because it's about credit liquidity, not stock value

like I've been saying all along.

[polpilot]

4. Tuesday the market spoke. 'No!' to the 'Handout Bill'.

[lostnotforgotten]

5. Yes I Would Agree - The Sky Did Not Fall - Commerce Continued Unabated

The market shook off the bad news and continued doing what markets do - trade!

[DCKit]

2. They were willing to lose $1.2 trillion in OPM to prove a point?

Financial blackmail, plain and simple.

[KoKo]

8. They were willing to Sacrifice Millions of Innocents in Iraq to "prove a point."

How could you not expect them to "push further" to achieve their goals. :shrug:

[SemperEadem]

10. to prove a $700 billion point.

The next month should be interesting.

[fascisthunter]

6. The Pigs Get Together to Conspire on RIpping Off Americans

[Bluestar]

7. If the lobbyists are for this bailout, why should we be??? Something stinks.

[KoKo]

9. Well....you sort of answered your question on that one...and Why is Media push this Bailout?

Makes one wonder, doesn't it? :eyes:

[brentspeak]

11. Precisely (n/t)

[54anickel]

12. Alternative plans calling for $0 in bailout money are being introduced

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_topic&forum=114&topic_id=44805

DeFazio Introduces the No BAILOUTS Act
The following is a Dear Colleague sent by Representative DeFazio introducing his No BAILOUTS Act, which would Address the current financial crisis without putting the American taxpayer on the hook for billions of dollars.

Dear Democratic Colleague:

The House of Representatives rejected the $700 bailout yesterday. Distinguished economists across the world have stated it would not have solved the problem at hand.

However, we can potentially solve this liquidity problem at little cost to the taxpayer. I am proposing that Congress drop the Paulson Plan, and instead pass the No BAILOUTS Act.

The No BAILOUTS Act provides an alternative to the Paulson Proposal to address the current credit crunch. Once Congress addresses the liquidity shortfalls in our financial markets, a Democratic Congress can turn to Democratic solutions to address the broader economic crises we face today. Specifically, Congress can work to resolve the housing crisis across the country and pass effective job stimulus, which is the response Main Street America expects and deserves.

While Democrats and Republicans may disagree on the underlying solutions to solve the economic crises we face, the No BAILOUTS Act - a regulatory based proposal - has the potential for significant bipartisan support.

The Paulson Premise Flawed

Simon Johnson, a former chief economist as the International Monetary Fund, stated today in the New York Times of Paulson’s plan:

It’s our view that this package, in a fundamental sense, will not solve the problem.

Other economic analysts noted yesterday that the credit markets around the world were almost entirely dysfunctional even when political leaders and investors assumed that Congress had reached a deal and would easily approve the bailout. There is no reason to believe Paulson’s plan will work.

more...