10-03-2008, 12:27 PM
By saul relative, published Oct 02, 2008
The Senate finally got around to voting on the $700 billion Wall Street bailout (euphemistically rechristened "rescue package") at 9 p.m. EST in Washington after an entire day of wrangling and speeches.
When all was said and done, the bill passed by a 74-25 vote (Senator Edward Kennedy did not vote). And when all the dust had settled, the bill had gained $150 billion in pork additions, so the actual burden on the taxpayer became an $850 billion bailout ("rescue package"). It had also gone from a 3-page proposal to a 450-page tome. And changed names. Instead of a "Wall Street Bailout Plan," it had become a "Taxpayers Rescue Package."
How did the bill grow from an obese $700 billion bailout to a more obese $850 billion? Simple. In order for the bailout legislation to win the vote in both the Senate and the House, concessions had to be made to sway some of the Congressman in both Chambers. Those concessions came in millions of dollars worth of earmarks.
Analyst after economic expert after pundit shook their heads and voiced incredulity at a Senate that talked about placing the American taxpayer in further debt - on top of the debt incurred by the $700 billion bailout - when the government is operating at a fiscal deficit and already loaded with a 9 trillion national debt.
So What Kind Of Earmarks Made It Onto The Wall Street Bailout Rescue Plan?
Tax breaks became the leverage being used by lawmakers to get the necessary votes to pass the bailout plan both the Senate and the House. In fact, $150 billion of them.
Louise Schiavone reported on CNN's "Lou Dobbs Tonight" that the tax breaks included forestalling of the alternative minimum tax for 20 million Americans, tax breaks for film and television producers, and victims of natural disasters. There was tax relief thrown onto the bill for renewable energy producers and investors, motor sports, and race track property. Then there was the Wool Trust Fund, a program set up to enable wool producers to do research and improve wool quality, as well as promote wool as a product. There was even a tax break for the manufacturers of wooden practice arrows for children.
These tax breaks may not have been too much of a problem for the Senate to embrace, but representatives have smaller constituencies that, although they may enjoy a particular earmark directed toward their district, might find all those other billions of dollars directed elsewhere superfluous and wasteful. This incarnation of the $700 billion bailout ("rescue package") might have an even more difficult time passing through the House.
Senator John McCain, in an interview with Kiran Chetky on CNN's "American Morning," admitted that the vote would be close, but he was confident that it would pass.
But even with the "sweeteners," as the pork barrel additions are being called, there are still some adamantly opposed to the newer bill. Joe Barton (R-TX) will still vote against the legislation because the Senate version was just the "fraternal twin" of the bill he voted against Monday. Brad Sherman, a liberal Democrat representing California says he opposes the plan because taxpayers are "highly unlikely" to regain the $700 billion doled out to save the failing lending industry.
But many representatives, no matter how they voted Monday, when the less obese version of the measure failed to pass a House vote, see the coming vote as a call to action. Inaction, as many of them are saying, is not an option.
And with the increasing sense of urgency being promoted by the Bush administration and Treasury Secretary Henry Paulson, many Congressmen may be afraid not to pass the bill this time around.
On To The House For Another Vote
The pressure is now on the House of Representatives. But being up for reelection can prove to be a great indicator of what a politician will do. What most thought was certain passage ended in failure Monday afternoon (September 29). Thousands of phone calls, faxes, names on petitions, and e-mails convinced many Congressmen that voting for the Wall Street bailout plan was to entertain possibly not returning to the House in January.
Even Senator John McCain's suspension of his campaign and "rushing" off to Washington to help pass the bill failed to produce the desired results of the economic doomsayers.
But many believe that to do nothing in this instance - or simply vote against the Wall Street bailout measure ("rescue package") - would be worse than passing the bill and having it not produce its intended effects.
It is believed that the House of Representatives will vote on the $700 (no $850) billion bailout ("rescue package") Friday, October 3.
Sources:
CNN Television
CNN.comDallasnews.com
http://www.associatedcontent.com/article...html?cat=3
The Senate finally got around to voting on the $700 billion Wall Street bailout (euphemistically rechristened "rescue package") at 9 p.m. EST in Washington after an entire day of wrangling and speeches.
When all was said and done, the bill passed by a 74-25 vote (Senator Edward Kennedy did not vote). And when all the dust had settled, the bill had gained $150 billion in pork additions, so the actual burden on the taxpayer became an $850 billion bailout ("rescue package"). It had also gone from a 3-page proposal to a 450-page tome. And changed names. Instead of a "Wall Street Bailout Plan," it had become a "Taxpayers Rescue Package."
How did the bill grow from an obese $700 billion bailout to a more obese $850 billion? Simple. In order for the bailout legislation to win the vote in both the Senate and the House, concessions had to be made to sway some of the Congressman in both Chambers. Those concessions came in millions of dollars worth of earmarks.
Analyst after economic expert after pundit shook their heads and voiced incredulity at a Senate that talked about placing the American taxpayer in further debt - on top of the debt incurred by the $700 billion bailout - when the government is operating at a fiscal deficit and already loaded with a 9 trillion national debt.
So What Kind Of Earmarks Made It Onto The Wall Street Bailout Rescue Plan?
Tax breaks became the leverage being used by lawmakers to get the necessary votes to pass the bailout plan both the Senate and the House. In fact, $150 billion of them.
Louise Schiavone reported on CNN's "Lou Dobbs Tonight" that the tax breaks included forestalling of the alternative minimum tax for 20 million Americans, tax breaks for film and television producers, and victims of natural disasters. There was tax relief thrown onto the bill for renewable energy producers and investors, motor sports, and race track property. Then there was the Wool Trust Fund, a program set up to enable wool producers to do research and improve wool quality, as well as promote wool as a product. There was even a tax break for the manufacturers of wooden practice arrows for children.
These tax breaks may not have been too much of a problem for the Senate to embrace, but representatives have smaller constituencies that, although they may enjoy a particular earmark directed toward their district, might find all those other billions of dollars directed elsewhere superfluous and wasteful. This incarnation of the $700 billion bailout ("rescue package") might have an even more difficult time passing through the House.
Senator John McCain, in an interview with Kiran Chetky on CNN's "American Morning," admitted that the vote would be close, but he was confident that it would pass.
But even with the "sweeteners," as the pork barrel additions are being called, there are still some adamantly opposed to the newer bill. Joe Barton (R-TX) will still vote against the legislation because the Senate version was just the "fraternal twin" of the bill he voted against Monday. Brad Sherman, a liberal Democrat representing California says he opposes the plan because taxpayers are "highly unlikely" to regain the $700 billion doled out to save the failing lending industry.
But many representatives, no matter how they voted Monday, when the less obese version of the measure failed to pass a House vote, see the coming vote as a call to action. Inaction, as many of them are saying, is not an option.
And with the increasing sense of urgency being promoted by the Bush administration and Treasury Secretary Henry Paulson, many Congressmen may be afraid not to pass the bill this time around.
On To The House For Another Vote
The pressure is now on the House of Representatives. But being up for reelection can prove to be a great indicator of what a politician will do. What most thought was certain passage ended in failure Monday afternoon (September 29). Thousands of phone calls, faxes, names on petitions, and e-mails convinced many Congressmen that voting for the Wall Street bailout plan was to entertain possibly not returning to the House in January.
Even Senator John McCain's suspension of his campaign and "rushing" off to Washington to help pass the bill failed to produce the desired results of the economic doomsayers.
But many believe that to do nothing in this instance - or simply vote against the Wall Street bailout measure ("rescue package") - would be worse than passing the bill and having it not produce its intended effects.
It is believed that the House of Representatives will vote on the $700 (no $850) billion bailout ("rescue package") Friday, October 3.
Sources:
CNN Television
CNN.comDallasnews.com
http://www.associatedcontent.com/article...html?cat=3