 |
Comments |
|
 | Monday, September 29, 2008 at 14:21:29 mst
Comment ID: #1
Name: Sascha Settegast
E-mail: sascha.settegast(at)gmx.de
congress.org does work with me; I just accessed it this very moment. So perhaps its only a temporary thing. |
|
| Monday, September 29, 2008 at 14:26:32 mst
Comment ID: #2
Name: J Head
E-mail: patronsaintofarchitects(at)gmail.com
I believe I have seen some negative sentiment towards Mises.org on this blog, but I must declare that Mises.org has been truly indispensable to me in understanding the economic crises. This link provides very good analyses and books regarding the causes and proposed solutions to the economic crisis: http://mises.org/story/3128 |
|
| Monday, September 29, 2008 at 14:42:01 mst
Comment ID: #3
Name: William H. Stoddard
E-mail: whswhs(at)mindspring.com
URL: http://whswhs.livejournal.com/
Where are you going to find out how your representative voted? I have a guess about mine, but given that both Democrats and Republicans are split, I'm not at all confident that it's right. And I'd like to know for sure, if I'm looking at writing to her to join the "Hell, no!" count. |
|
| Monday, September 29, 2008 at 14:42:46 mst
Comment ID: #4
Name: j.d.na
E-mail: j.d(at)aol.com
i've been against this bill from day one, but I do believe that we are bound to the future of wall street. this is going to be a very bumpy ride now all the way down to 8000. at least the bailout bought us time and market confidence...i'm not sure it's going to be a good day tomorrow. makes me wonder if they'll freeze trading. |
|
| Monday, September 29, 2008 at 14:43:06 mst
Comment ID: #5
Name: Diana Hsieh
E-mail: diana(at)dianahsieh.com
URL: http://www.dianahsieh.com/blog
William -- I'd recommend calling your representative, asking how he/she voted, then expressing your opinion accordingly. That's what I did. |
|
| Monday, September 29, 2008 at 14:46:22 mst
Comment ID: #6
Name: John Stark
E-mail: raistlan(at)atheist.com
URL: http://starkrelief.blogspot.com
On the NY Times article's page, click "Go to the Full Vote" or:
http://www.nytimes.com/ref/washington/ROLLCALL.html?currentChamber= ... |
|
| Monday, September 29, 2008 at 14:48:36 mst
Comment ID: #7
Name: Diana Hsieh
E-mail: diana(at)dianahsieh.com
URL: http://www.dianahsieh.com/blog
Thanks John. I've added that link to the post. |
|
| Monday, September 29, 2008 at 14:51:43 mst
Comment ID: #8
Name: Lemuel
E-mail: synthesist(at)ymail.com
http://www.votesmart.org/ has a search function by zip code, & lists all representatives Congressional, Gubernatorial, State-Wide, State-legislative, as well as current Presidential, Congressional, and State-Legislative candidates. |
|
| Monday, September 29, 2008 at 14:57:13 mst
Comment ID: #9
Name: John Stark
E-mail: raistlan(at)atheist.com
URL: http://starkrelief.blogspot.com
A couple things just added to the NY Times article:
"On the other hand, the former official, who spoke on condition of anonymity, said he was not sure what adjustments would satisfy the Republican lawmakers who voted against the package, given that the Republicans had already succeeded in tacking government insurance on to the bill, and that other items on their list of proposals, like a suspension of the capital gains tax, are non-starters."
The suspension of the capital gains tax would have been helpful, and it tells you something about the Democrat leadership's vile hatred of business that it's a non-starter. Of course, if you watched their press conference yesterday afternoon, you would have seen the same thing.
"Secretary Paulson, in promising to continue working with Congressional leaders to win passage of a rescue plan, alluded to remedial steps that the Treasury and Federal Reserve could take on their own, like lowering short-term interest rates. “Our tool kit is substantial,” he said, “but insufficient.”"
Awesome. More easy credit. Exactly what we needed. |
|
| Monday, September 29, 2008 at 14:57:40 mst
Comment ID: #10
Name: Jared Seehafer
E-mail: jared(at)seehafer.net
"Representative Maxine Waters, a Democrat, said the measure was vital to help financial institutions survive and keep people in their homes. "There's plenty of blame to go around," she said, and attaching blame should come later."
Example #4,350 in the "Didn't I read this in Atlas Shrugged?" file |
|
| Monday, September 29, 2008 at 15:07:36 mst
Comment ID: #11
Name: Sidney Cammeresi
E-mail: sac(at)cheesecake.org
Here is the roll call for the vote:
http://clerk.house.gov/evs/2008/roll674.xml |
|
| Monday, September 29, 2008 at 15:19:59 mst
Comment ID: #12
Name: Michael Spitler
E-mail: spitlermike(at)gmail.com
URL: http://www.mikespitler.net
I called and left a message at my Rep's office. I basically told him if he didn't start acting like a Republican supposedly is supposed to act, he lost my vote, and that I would tell all my friends not to vote for him either.
I didn't call earlier before the bill went to a vote the first time. I thought that it wouldn't do any good anyways, but this newspaper story gave me some hope, so I decided I would try and help out. |
|
| Monday, September 29, 2008 at 15:26:27 mst
Comment ID: #13
Name: brian0918
E-mail: my handle, through gmail
Sadly, it appears that the only thing protecting us from destruction is partisan bickering. Both sides want more regulation - they just can decide on what should be done, and neither side wants the other side's changes to succeed. I received this reply from my Senator about the failed vote:
"Thank you for expressing your concerns with the problems in the financial sector and proposals to address them. With the House’s rejection of the legislation on Monday, the situation is unsettled.
"A lot of Ohioans, including me, are angry at the thought of bailing out people who made a lot of money making bad business decisions that created problems in neighborhoods across Ohio. I agree that we need to avoid rewarding excessive risk taking. These institutions made unwise decisions, and taxpayers should not be expected to simply cover their losses.
"On September 20th, Treasury Secretary Paulson sent a proposal to Congress that would have given him almost unfettered authority to spend $700 billion purchasing troubled assets from financial institutions. A few days later, my colleagues on the Banking Committee and I held a hearing at which Secretary Paulson, Federal Reserve Chairman Bernanke, and others testified.
"They made a strong case for the need to act quickly to prevent further damage to our economy. The turmoil in the credit markets has the potential to do great damage to a lot of innocent bystanders. I am afraid that if we do not act, the economic instability could affect thousands of American jobs and the savings of countless middle class families.
"But Secretary Paulson’s proposal is not the right answer. No Secretary should be given a $700 billion blank check. Taxpayers must be given an opportunity to recover their money, and assurances their tax dollars will not fund lavish pay and golden parachutes. We need strong rules to guard against abuse and we need ensure that Ohio is helped and not just Wall Street.
"In the days ahead, we need to focus on containing the damage to middle class families and local businesses as much as possible. In the months ahead, we need to take a hard look at how financial markets are regulated so we never find ourselves in this situation again.
"Thank you again for contacting me. I will certainly keep your views in mind as Congress debates how to restore strength to our economy.
Sincerely,
Sherrod Brown" |
|
| Monday, September 29, 2008 at 18:14:42 mst
Comment ID: #14
Name: William H. Stoddard
E-mail: whswhs(at)mindspring.com
URL: http://whswhs.livejournal.com/
Here's what I wrote to my representative, Congresswoman Susan Davis (D):
I was astonished and delighted earlier today when the House voted down the Bush administration's bailout proposals. Your colleague Mark Udall said that his constituents' views were divided between "No" and "Hell, no"; I would like you to count me as a vote for "Hell, no." The proposed bailout is neither just nor prudent.
I'm a renter, not a homeowner; I've never been able to afford California real estate, and likely I never will. The housing bubble was in no way to my benefit; rather, it inspired a wave of condo conversions that further diminished the supply of rental housing. Now it's proposed that the people who created the bubble"the homeowners who took advantage of easy credit, or the firms that provided that easy credit"should be allowed to pass on their losses to me, through a bailout that I'll have to pay for in higher taxes or massive inflation. How can that possibly be fair?
We've heard a lot about the unregulated financial industry, and it's true that the industry was not regulated. But it was the Federal Reserve, the SEC, and other governmental and quasi-governmental agencies that shielded them. And now it's the market that's forcing stricter discipline on them, through diminished access to credit, declining net worth and takeovers, and the chance of outright failure. The bailout would be the government stepping in, not to regulate them more strictly, but to prevent the market from doing so. How can helping badly run organizations evade the consequences of their errors produce a sounder financial sector?
For both these reasons, please vote against further government intervention in the financial sector.
Thank you for your attention. |
|
| Monday, September 29, 2008 at 21:09:01 mst
Comment ID: #15
Name: Jeff Montgomery
URL: http://funwithgravity.blogspot.com
Re: the Times article, I suppose it's possible we are giving them a shot of courage to do the right thing.
Or, it may be that they are only principled when we let them off the hook by filling their email inbox and voice mail with calls for "NO BAILOUT!".
Either way, the bill failed, and frankly I was surprised. I'm glad, and I will continue to give them feedback. |
|
| Monday, September 29, 2008 at 21:53:15 mst
Comment ID: #16
Name: Wayne
I emailed my Democratic Congressman Adam Schiff and he voted against the bailout. Thanks for the suggestion on the blog. |
|
| Monday, September 29, 2008 at 22:37:52 mst
Comment ID: #17
Name: Diana Hsieh
E-mail: diana(at)dianahsieh.com
URL: http://www.dianahsieh.com/blog
Via Rational Passion: http://rationalpassion.livejournal.com/69039.html
"A colleague here at the Hoover Institution spoke recently with a senior, and Democratic, member of the California congressional delegation. In the last week, she said, her office had received roughly 15,000 telephone calls, letters, and emails. How many favored the bailout?
"Ten."
That's from The Corner: http://corner.nationalreview.com/post/?q=NmRmNGJlZjgyNmZhMjc3NGY2Mj ...= |
|
| Tuesday, September 30, 2008 at 1:56:13 mst
Comment ID: #18
Name: Mike
E-mail: atlas51184(at)comcast.net
From CNN: http://www.cnn.com/2008/POLITICS/09/29/miron.bailout/index.html
Harvard economist says, "Bankruptcy, not bailout, is the right answer." He doesn't just oppose the bailout, he put the blame for the mess on government intervention. |
|
| Tuesday, September 30, 2008 at 7:05:43 mst
Comment ID: #19
Name: brian0918
E-mail: my handle, through gmail
DIGG IT: http://digg.com/business_finance/Economist_Why_Bankruptcy_is_Better ... |
|
| Tuesday, September 30, 2008 at 12:31:58 mst
Comment ID: #20
Name: William H. Stoddard
E-mail: whswhs(at)mindspring.com
URL: http://whswhs.livejournal.com/
Here's another bit of correspondence, though I doubt this one will do any good:
Dear Senator Obama:
Why are you supporting the Bush administration's proposal for government aid to the financial sector?
Over the past few years, our country has been going through a major real estate bubble, which has made homeownership increasingly difficult to afford, and stimulated a wave of condo conversions that threatened the supply of rental housing for people like me who can't afford homeownership. Now the bubble is collapsing, and real estate prices are moving back toward a sane level, without the stimuli of easy credit and people fantasizing that prices can spiral upward forever. And now I find you backing legislation to keep the bubble inflated, to protect people who bought overpriced houses they couldn't pay for, and financial firms whose irresponsible policies enable them to do so.
This sort of inflationary policy has been "business as usual" in Washington for a long time, supported by money from financial industry lobbyists. And we've finally seen a step toward real change, from the Democrats and Republicans who joined to defeat this latest proposal, and require people who made bad investments to take the consequences, rather than shoving them onto the taxpayers. If you're actually serious about change, why aren't you backing them up? |
|
| Wednesday, October 1, 2008 at 16:18:53 mst
Comment ID: #21
Name: Caroline
Best bottom line assessment of the bailout bill comes from Representative Paul Broun (R-Georgia): "This is a huge cow patty with a piece of marshmallow stuck in the middle of it and I am not going to eat that cow patty."
(source: "Defiant House Rejects Huge Bailout," New York Times, 9/30/08)
http://www.nytimes.com/2008/09/30/business/30cong.html?_r=1&scp ... |
|
| Friday, October 3, 2008 at 10:38:17 mst
Comment ID: #22
Name: Joe Maurone
E-mail: spaceplayer2112(at)hotmail.com
URL: http://superherobabylong.blogspot.com
I wrote to the senators, president, etc. and recieved two responses, one from Bob Casey and one from Arlen Spector. I'm guessing they were form letters, though lengthy, explaining "why" the voted, expressing much reluctance to have to vote for it, but stressing the necessity. Casey's letter claimed that he, "like me," is "not happy with the current crisis, and I'm angry about the climate of deregulation and deference to Wall Street over the last eight years that got us into this mess. However, failing to act will not simply punish those who brought us to this situation; it will punish everyone."
Specter writes: "I reluctantly supported this package because the failure of Congress to act would run the risk of dire consequences, including an economic downturn which could cause more foreclosures, jeopardize retirement accounts, and further restrict credit which is necessary for small businesses to operate. I am philosophically opposed to bailouts. I think that when you have Wall Street entrepreneurs who take big risks to make big profits and they go sour, they ought to sustain the loss themselves and not look to the government for a bailout which ends up in the laps of the taxpayers. However, I supported the plan to avoid economic disaster that would extend well beyond Wall Street." |
|
|
Post Your Comment |
|
|
|
E-mail Diana Hsieh
Comments
