Stock Market Crash Expected In 2008 To Be Worse Than 1929

[Soldier4Christ]

I posted news the other day on how Congress plans to allow the drilling ban law expire. Apparently that is not totally true according to this bit of news:


Steny Hoyer: Psst: We’ll Get A Ban On Drilling Next Year

Update: While searching Thomas for what Congress did yesterday, I ran across this gem

H.R.7051 : To prohibit issuance of any lease or other authorization by the Federal Government that authorizes exploration, development, or production of oil or natural gas in any marine national monument or national marine sanctuary or in the fishing grounds known as Georges Bank in the waters of the United States. Sponsor: Rep Markey, Edward J. [MA-7] (introduced 9/24/2008) Status: Referred to the House Committee on Natural Resources.

It’s not the first time he has done something like this (H.R. 5588), but, it shows some little stealth actions to make sure there is no drilling.

Yet another example of how much the Democrats really care about the prices American’s pay at the pump

    House Majority Leader Steny Hoyer (D-Md.) told CNSNews.com on Wednesday that restoring the ban on new offshore oil drilling leases “will be a top priority for discussion next year” if the Democrats retain control of Congress.

    “I am sure it will be a top priority for discussion next year,” Hoyer said when CNSNews.com asked him if Democrats would fight to restore the ban.

Hey, $5 gas that is increasingly hard to find is no big deal to elected Democrats. I wonder how the average Democrat voter looks at this, as they attempt to even find gas at high prices.

    If the ban does expire on Tuesday, as expected, most U.S. waters 3 miles or more off the beach will be legally eligible for federal offshore oil drilling leases.

    Officials from the U.S. Interior Department, which oversees federal offshore leases, told CNSNews.com on Monday that even without the ban other existing laws and regulations mean it will take at least 5 years before new leases are actually issued.

Doesn’t nationalized healthcare sound wonderful in light of that time frame? Government at its finest.

[Soldier4Christ]

Lawmakers: Wall Street rescue accord reached
Dodd, Frank: Agreement in principle, expect passage of bill within days

Key Republicans and Democrats reported agreement Thursday on an outline for a historic $700 billion bailout of the financial industry, but there was still resistance from rank-and-file House Republicans despite warnings of an impending panic.

“I now expect we will, indeed, have a plan that can pass the House, pass the Senate, be signed by the president and bring a sense of certainty to this crisis that is sill roiling in the market,” Sen. Bob Bennett, R-Utah, said as members of both parties emerged from a two-hour negotiating session.

Negotiators planned to present the outline at a White House meeting later Thursday with President Bush and the rivals to replace him, Republican John McCain and Democrat Barrack Obama.
Story continues below ↓advertisement

“We’re very confident that we can act expeditiously,” said Sen. Chris Dodd, D-Conn., the Banking Committee chairman.

Not everyone in the closed-door talks was as optimistic. Rep. Spencer Bachus of Alabama, the only House Republican in the bargaining meeting, stopped short of saying he agreed with the other lawmakers on an imminent deal.

“There was progress today,” said Bachus, the senior Republican on the House Financial Services panel.

Later, he issued a statement saying he was not empowered to strike any deals and there was “no agreement other than to continue discussions.”

Both houses’ Republican leaders, Rep. John Boehner and Sen. Mitch McConnell, also issued statements saying there was no agreement.

Still, the White House called the announcement “a good sign that progress is being made.”

“We’ll want to hear from (Treasury) Secretary (Henry) Paulson and take a look at the details. We look forward to a good discussion at the meeting this afternoon,” said Tony Fratto, the deputy White House press secretary.

A Treasury spokeswoman said the proposal was being reviewed there.

On Wall Street, stock prices were up late in the trading day, but not by as much as earlier in the day.

The core of the plan proposed by the administration just a few days ago envisions the government buying up sour assets of shaky financial firms in a bid to keep them from going under and to stave off a potentially severe recession.

Obama and McCain called for a bipartisan effort to deal with the crisis, little more than five weeks before national elections in which the economy has emerged as the dominant theme.

McCain on Wednesday asked Obama to agree to delay their first debate, scheduled for Friday, to deal with the meltdown. Obama said the debate should go ahead.

Congressional negotiators said Thursday there were few obstacles to a final agreement, although no details of an accord were immediately available.

“There really isn’t much of a deadlock to break,” said Rep. Barney Frank, D-Mass, chairman of the House Financial Services Committee.

But there were fresh signs of trouble in the House Republican Caucus. A group of GOP lawmakers circulated an alternative designed to attract private money back into the credit markets with less government intrusion.

Under that proposal, the government would provide insurance to companies that agree to hold frozen assets, rather than purchase them directly as envisioned under the administration’s plan. The firms would have to pay insurance premiums to the Treasury Department for the coverage.

“The taxpayers haven’t done anything wrong,” said Rep Eric Cantor, R-Va., adding that rather than require them to bear the cost of the bailout, the alternative “pretty much puts the burden on Wall Street over time.”

Boehner, R-Ohio, the minority leader, was huddling with McCain on the rescue. When asked whether the GOP presidential nominee could corral restive Republicans to support the plan, Boehner said, “Who knows?”

Bush told the nation in a televised address Wednesday night that passage of the package his administration has proposed was urgently needed to calm the markets and restore confidence in the reeling financial system.

House Speaker Nancy Pelosi, D-Calif., said Bush’s agreement with Democrats on limiting pay for executives of bailed-out financial institutions and giving taxpayers an equity stake in the companies cleared a significant hurdle.

It was not immediately clear how lawmakers had resolved differences over how to phase in the unprecedented cost — a step demanded by Democrats and some Republicans who want stronger congressional control over the bailout — without spooking markets. The idea of letting the government take an ownership stake in troubled companies as part of the rescue, rather than just buying bad debt, also has been a topic of intense negotiation.

Frank told The Associated Press Thursday both elements would be included in the legislation.

Bush acknowledged Wednesday night that the bailout would be a “tough vote” for lawmakers. But he said failing to approve it would risk dire consequences for the economy and most Americans.

“Our entire economy is in danger,” he said.

[Soldier4Christ]

165 economists rip bailout plan
Contend administration proposal has 3 pitfalls

At least 165 economists have signed a letter to Congress members warning of three pitfalls in the Bush administration's $700 billion proposal to deal with the Wall Street crisis.

The economists say they are well aware of the current financial situation and agree there's a need for bold action but ask Congress "not to rush."

They urge lawmakers to hold appropriate hearings and "to carefully consider the right course of action."

The three problems with the plan proposed by Treasury Secretary Henry Paulson, the economists say, are its fairness, ambiguity and long-term effects.

President Bush was joined today by presidential candidates John McCain and Barack Obama at an emergency White House meeting on the plan. Key members of Congress said this morning they had struck a deal in principle, but the outcome of the proposal is unclear. Participants in the White House meeting called it extremely contentious.

The proposal allows the government to buy the faulty mortgage-based assets of severely weakened financial institutions to prevent them from collapsing and setting off a chain of events that would affect citizens, including depletion of retirement accounts, rising home foreclosures, bankrupt businesses and lost jobs.

The economists contend the plan is unfair, because it's a "subsidy to investors at taxpayers' expense."

"Investors who took risks to earn profits must also bear the losses," the economists say in their letter. "Not every business failure carries systemic risk. The government can ensure a well-functioning financial industry, able to make new loans to creditworthy borrowers, without bailing out particular investors and institutions whose choices proved unwise."

The plan is ambiguous, they contend, as neither "the mission of the new agency nor its oversight are clear."

"If taxpayers are to buy illiquid and opaque assets from troubled sellers, the terms, occasions, and methods of such purchases must be crystal clear ahead of time and carefully monitored afterwards," the letter states.

If the plan is enacted, the economists argue further, "its effects will be with us for a generation."

"For all their recent troubles, America's dynamic and innovative private capital markets have brought the nation unparalleled prosperity," they say. "Fundamentally weakening those markets in order to calm short-run disruptions is desperately short-sighted."

The signatories as of this morning were:

Acemoglu Daron (Massachussets Institute of Technology)
Adler Michael (Columbia University)
Admati Anat R. (Stanford University)
Alvarez Fernando (University of Chicago)
Andersen Torben (Northwestern University)
Barankay Iwan (University of Pennsylvania)
Barry Brian (University of Chicago)
Beim David (Columbia University)
Berk Jonathan (Stanford University)
Bisin Alberto (New York University)
Bittlingmayer George (University of Kansas)
Boldrin Michele (Washington University)
Brooks Taggert J. (University of Wisconsin)
Brynjolfsson Erik (Massachusetts Institute of Technology)
Buera Francisco J.(UCLA)
Carroll Christopher (Johns Hopkins University)
Cassar Gavin (University of Pennsylvania)
Chaney Thomas (University of Chicago)
Chari Varadarajan V. (University of Minnesota)
Chauvin Keith W. (University of Kansas)
Chintagunta Pradeep K. (University of Chicago)
Christiano Lawrence J. (Northwestern University)
Cochrane John (University of Chicago)
Coleman John (Duke University)
Constantinides George M. (University of Chicago)
Crain Robert (UC Berkeley)
Culp Christopher (University of Chicago)
De Marzo Peter (Stanford University)
Dubé Jean-Pierre H. (University of Chicago)
Edlin Aaron (UC Berkeley)
Eichenbaum Martin (Northwestern University)
Ely Jeffrey (Northwestern University)
Eraslan Hülya K. K.(Johns Hopkins University)
Faulhaber Gerald (University of Pennsylvania)
Feldmann Sven (University of Melbourne)
Fernandez-Villaverde Jesus (University of Pennsylvania)
Fox Jeremy T. (University of Chicago)
Frank Murray Z.(University of Minnesota)
Fuchs William (University of Chicago)
Fudenberg Drew (Harvard University)
Gabaix Xavier (New York University)
Gao Paul (Notre Dame University)
Garicano Luis (University of Chicago)
Gerakos Joseph J. (University of Chicago)
Gibbs Michael (University of Chicago)
Goettler Ron (University of Chicago)
Goldin Claudia (Harvard University)
Gordon Robert J. (Northwestern University)
Guadalupe Maria (Columbia University)
Hagerty Kathleen (Northwestern University)
Hamada Robert S. (University of Chicago)
Hansen Lars (University of Chicago)
Harris Milton (University of Chicago)
Hart Oliver (Harvard University)
Hazlett Thomas W. (George Mason University)
Heaton John (University of Chicago)
Heckman James (University of Chicago - Nobel Laureate)
Henderson David R. (Hoover Institution)
Henisz, Witold (University of Pennsylvania)
Hertzberg Andrew (Columbia University)
Hite Gailen (Columbia University)
Hitsch Günter J. (University of Chicago)
Hodrick Robert J. (Columbia University)
Hopenhayn Hugo (UCLA)
Hurst Erik (University of Chicago)
Imrohoroglu Ayse (University of Southern California)
Israel Ronen (London Business School)
Jaffee Dwight M. (UC Berkeley)
Jagannathan Ravi (Northwestern University)
Jenter Dirk (Stanford University)
Jones Charles M. (Columbia Business School)
Kaboski Joseph P. (Ohio State University)
Kaplan Ethan (Stockholm University)
Karolyi, Andrew (Ohio State University)
Kashyap Anil (University of Chicago)
Keim Donald B (University of Pennsylvania)
Ketkar Suhas L (Vanderbilt University)
Kiesling Lynne (Northwestern University)
Klenow Pete (Stanford University)
Koch Paul (University of Kansas)
Kocherlakota Narayana (University of Minnesota)
Koijen Ralph S.J. (University of Chicago)
Kondo Jiro (Northwestern University)
Korteweg Arthur (Stanford University)
Kortum Samuel (University of Chicago)
Krueger Dirk (University of Pennsylvania)
Ledesma Patricia (Northwestern University)
Lee Lung-fei (Ohio State University)
Leuz Christian (University of Chicago)
Levine David I.(UC Berkeley)
Levine David K.(Washington University)
Linnainmaa Juhani (University of Chicago)
Lucas Robert (University of Chicago - Nobel Laureate)
Luttmer Erzo G.J. (University of Minnesota)
Manski Charles F. (Northwestern University)
Martin Ian (Stanford University)
Mayer Christopher (Columbia University)
Mazzeo Michael (Northwestern University)
McDonald Robert (Northwestern University)
Meadow Scott F. (University of Chicago)
Mehra Rajnish (UC Santa Barbara)
Mian Atif (University of Chicago)
Middlebrook Art (University of Chicago)
Miguel Edward (UC Berkeley)
Miravete Eugenio J. (University of Texas at Austin)
Miron Jeffrey (Harvard University)
Moretti Enrico (UC Berkeley)
Moriguchi Chiaki (Northwestern University)
Moro Andrea (Vanderbilt University)
Morse Adair (University of Chicago)
Mortensen Dale T. (Northwestern University)
Mortimer Julie Holland (Harvard University)
Muralidharan Karthik (UC San Diego)
Nevo Aviv (Northwestern University)
Ohanian Lee (UCLA)
Pagliari Joseph (University of Chicago)
Papanikolaou Dimitris (Northwestern University)
Paul Evans (Ohio State University)
Peltzman Sam (University of Chicago)
Perri Fabrizio (University of Minnesota)
Phelan Christopher (University of Minnesota)
Piazzesi Monika (Stanford University)
Piskorski Tomasz (Columbia University)
Rampini Adriano (Duke University)
Reagan Patricia (Ohio State University)
Reich Michael (UC Berkeley)
Reuben Ernesto (Northwestern University)
Roberts Michael (University of Pennsylvania)
Rogers Michele (Northwestern University)
Rotella Elyce (Indiana University)
Ruud Paul (Vassar College)
Safford Sean (University of Chicago)
Sandbu Martin E. (University of Pennsylvania)
Sapienza Paola (Northwestern University)
Savor Pavel (University of Pennsylvania)
Scharfstein David (Harvard University)
Seim Katja (University of Pennsylvania)
Shang-Jin Wei (Columbia University)
Shimer Robert (University of Chicago)
Shore Stephen H. (Johns Hopkins University)
Siegel Ron (Northwestern University)
Smith David C. (University of Virginia)
Smith Vernon L.(Chapman University- Nobel Laureate)
Sorensen Morten (Columbia University)
Spiegel Matthew (Yale University)
Stevenson Betsey (University of Pennsylvania)
Stokey Nancy (University of Chicago)
Strahan Philip (Boston College)
Strebulaev Ilya (Stanford University)
Sufi Amir (University of Chicago)
Tabarrok Alex (George Mason University)
Taylor Alan M. (UC Davis)
Thompson Tim (Northwestern University)
Tschoegl Adrian E. (University of Pennsylvania)
Uhlig Harald (University of Chicago)
Ulrich, Maxim (Columbia University)
Van Buskirk Andrew (University of Chicago)
Veronesi Pietro (University of Chicago)
Vissing-Jorgensen Annette (Northwestern University)
Wacziarg Romain (UCLA)
Weill Pierre-Olivier (UCLA)
Williamson Samuel H. (Miami University)
Witte Mark (Northwestern University)
Wolfers Justin (University of Pennsylvania)
Woutersen Tiemen (Johns Hopkins University)
Zingales Luigi (University of Chicago)

[Soldier4Christ]

Critics of U.S. gloating over 'crumbling capitalism'
U.N. denounces 'unbridled greed and irresponsibility of the powerful

As the US sought to find a way out of the financial crisis, its critics at the United Nations were gloating over what they described as the crumbling of US capitalism.

Miguel D’Escoto Brockmann, the former Sandinista revolutionary in Nicaragua who is now serving as president of the UN 192-nation General Assembly, broke with protocol in his opening speech to denounce the “unbridled greed and irresponsibility of the powerful.”

“More than half the world’s people languish in hunger and poverty while more and more money is spent on weapons, war, luxuries and totally superfluous and unnecessary things,” he said.

Cristina Kirchner, Argentina’s Pernonist president, said the world could no longer talk of the “Tequila Effect” or “Caipirinha Effect” emanating from developing nations such as Mexico or Brazil. “Now we should talk about the ’Jazz Effect’ coming from the centre of the world’s leading economy,” she said.

President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad of Iran, meanwhile, baldly proclaimed: “The American Empire is reaching the end of the road.”

Even friends of the United States took aim at greed on Wall Street. “We must not allow the burden of the boundless greed of a few to be shouldered by all,” President Luiz Inacio Lula da Silva of Brazil told the assembly.

President Barrat Jagdeo of Guyana complained: “There is clear evidence that many of the standards and much of the scrutiny that are applied routinely to smaller countries were not applied to some larger countries which actually pose much greater systemic risk.”

Philippines President Gloria Macapagal Arroyo said “economic uncertainty has moved like a terrible tsunami around the globe, wiping away gains, erasing progress - not just here in Manhattan island, but also in the many islands of the Philippines.” “Just when we thought the worst had passed, the light at the end of the tunnel became an oncoming train, hurtling forward with new shocks to the global financial system.”

Ban Ki-moon, the UN secretary-general, told the visiting leaders: “We need a new understanding on business ethics and governance, with more compassion and less uncritical faith in the ‘magic’ of markets. President Nicholas Sarkozy of France called for a wholesale overhaul of the “crazy” financial system. “Let us rebuild together a regulated capitalism in which whole swathes of financial activity are not left to the sole judgment of market operators,” Mr Sarkozy said.

The financial crisis put actor Michael Douglas, who proclaimed “Greed is Good” the film “Wall Street”, in an awkward spot. Appearing at a press conference on nuclear disarmament, Douglas was asked about his role as Gordon Gekko. “Are you saying, Gordon, that greed is not good?” a reporter asked. “I’m not saying that,” Douglas replied. “And my name is not Gordon. He’s a character I played 20 years ago.”

[Soldier4Christ]

As I have said before I really do question as to whether this situation was purposefully brought on by the democrats knowing that it would move them closer to the socialistic/communistic government that they so desire to have. The conditions that have brought on this situation have been known since Bill Clinton's Presidency. Even Bill Clinton has made comments on this blaming the democrats for the meltdown:

Going very much against the media meme that the current financial crisis is all George W. Bush and the Republicans’ fault, Bill Clinton on Thursday told ABC’s Chris Cuomo that Democrats for years have been “resisting any efforts by Republicans in the Congress or by me when I was President to put some standards and tighten up a little on Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac”

True. President Bush warned about reforming Freddie Mac and Fannie Mae 17 times this year alone. John McCain’s reform bill was blocked by dems in 2005.

The call for a non-partisan answer to this problem is just that it is nothing more than just a call and it is something that is not happening. It is being turned into a major partisan fiasco with the democrats screaming and crying because they are not getting their way completely. This is a moment that Pelosi and Reid have been waiting for. After all it is they that have been wanting to take complete government control of all businesses as certain democrat clearly stated when questioning major oil company representatives not long ago.

Ranting? Yes, I am. Even I have been posting on this problem for well over a year now and contacting my congressional reps over it with no one wanting to take any action. Yes, I will be ranting some more especially to my government reps. It is past time for us to get some people in office that will work for the people instead of just their own personal selfish reasons.

[Soldier4Christ]

Statement By McCain Campaign On Negotiations

John McCain’s decision to suspend his campaign was made in the hopes that politics could be set aside to address our economic crisis.

In response, Americans saw a familiar spectacle in Washington. At a moment of crisis that threatened the economic security of American families, Washington played the blame game rather than work together to find a solution that would avert a collapse of financial markets without squandering hundreds of billions of taxpayers’ money to bailout bankers and brokers who bet their fortunes on unsafe lending practices.

Both parties in both houses of Congress and the administration needed to come together to find a solution that would deserve the trust of the American people. And while there were attempts to do that, much of yesterday was spent fighting over who would get the credit for a deal and who would get the blame for failure. There was no deal or offer yesterday that had a majority of support in Congress. There was no deal yesterday that included adequate protections for the taxpayers. It is not enough to cut deals behind closed doors and then try to force it on the rest of Congress — especially when it amounts to thousands of dollars for every American family.

The difference between Barack Obama and John McCain was apparent during the White House meeting yesterday where Barack Obama’s priority was political posturing in his opening monologue defending the package as it stands. John McCain listened to all sides so he could help focus the debate on finding a bipartisan resolution that is in the interest of taxpayers and homeowners. The Democratic interests stood together in opposition to an agreement that would accommodate additional taxpayer protections.

Senator McCain has spent the morning talking to members of the Administration, members of the Senate, and members of the House. He is optimistic that there has been significant progress toward a bipartisan agreement now that there is a framework for all parties to be represented in negotiations, including Representative Blunt as a designated negotiator for House Republicans. The McCain campaign is resuming all activities and the Senator will travel to the debate this afternoon. Following the debate, he will return to Washington to ensure that all voices and interests are represented in the final agreement, especially those of taxpayers and homeowners.

____________

John McCain made an urgent appeal to House Republicans at their 9:30 leadership meeting Friday morning.

A senior House GOP leadership aide involved in the negotiations described McCain’s message this way, “We need a deal. We need a deal. We need a deal.”…

House Republicans seem poised to cave on this (says one House Republican, “We don’t want to be seen as obstructionists”), although they have been assured that some of their ideas can be incorporated into the final deal.

Specifically, House GOP leaders want the bill to include federal mortgage insurance as an alternative to the wholesale buying of mortgage securities.

[Soldier4Christ]

The largest bank failure in US history

WaMu failure raises the stakes even higher

Both major-party presidential candidates, in Washington on the proposed Wall Street bailout and perhaps headed to Mississippi for their first debate tonight, have weighed in on the latest sign of how bad the financial crisis is -- the federal takeover Thursday night of Washington Mutual, the largest bank failure in US history.

"The government-brokered sale of Washington Mutual is the latest sign of the perilous situation facing our financial system and our economy. Although Americans with deposits at Washington Mutual should rest assured that they are safe under this arrangement, the failures of our financial institutions threaten economic instability, jobs, and the incomes of American families. This is a time to rise above politics for the good of the country. We cannot risk an economic catastrophe. This is not a Democratic problem or a Republican problem – this is an American problem. Now, we must find an American solution," Democrat Barack Obama said in his statement.

Republican John McCain issued this statement: "Today's financial crisis threatens all Americans and the sale of Washington Mutual is just the latest indicator of the stresses in our financial markets that threaten to cut off the credit needed by our families, businesses, and state and local governments. I am committed to working with all parties of good faith in both houses of Congress, the Administration, and among Democrats and Republicans to reach an agreement to stabilize our financial markets. We can do so in a timely and effective fashion while protecting the taxpayer from excessive demands on their strained checkbooks. It is our obligation to restore the confidence of Americans in these valuable institutions, and demonstrate to taxpayers that Washington will be capable of addressing great national problems."

McCain's camp also issued a memo Thursday night disputing reports -- and accusations from Democrats -- that McCain torpedoed a tentative bailout deal on Thursday:

"Despite today's news reports, there never existed a 'deal,' but merely a proposal offered by a small, select group of Members of Congress. As of right now, there exists only a series of principles, including greater oversight and measures to address CEO pay. However, these principles do not enjoy a consensus in Congress.

"At today's cabinet meeting, John McCain did not attack any proposal or endorse any plan. John McCain simply urged that for any proposal to enjoy the confidence of the American people, stressing that all sides would have to cooperate and build a bipartisan consensus for a solution that protects taxpayers.

"However, the Democrats allowed Senator Obama to run their side of the meeting. That did not work as the meeting quickly devolved into a contentious shouting match that did not seek to craft a bipartisan solution.

"At this moment, the plan that has been put forth by the Administration does not enjoy the confidence of the American people as it will not protect that taxpayers and will sacrifice Main Street in favor of Wall Street.

"The bottom line is that as of tonight, there are not enough Republican or Democrat votes for the current plan. However, we are still optimistic that a bipartisan solution will be found. Republicans and Democrats want a deal that will protect the taxpayers."

[Soldier4Christ]

[Soldier4Christ]

DEMS TRY TO SNEAK SHALE OIL BAN PAST VOTERS


In a well-publicized retreat, the Democrats in Congress gave in to pressure from Republicans and the public and agreed to let the statutory ban on drilling for oil in the Outer Continental Shelf and developing shale oil in the Rocky Mountains lapse. Today, however, Senator Jim DeMint warned that Harry Reid is surreptitiously trying to resurrect the ban on shale oil:

    We've just been alerted that despite House Democrats relenting on extending bans on offshore drilling and oil shale in the continuing resolution (CR) appropriations bill, Democrat Senate Leader Harry Reid has decided to sneak an extension of the oil shale ban through as Congress fights over the financial bailout. ...

    Here is the text of Reid's proposed new ban on oil shale, that he is trying to add as an amendment to the CR or move seperately as a "stimulus" package, or we should say an anti-stimulus package if this is included.

    Sec 1602 continues ban on oil shale. The language follows:

        SEC. 1602. Notwithstanding any other provision of law, including section 152 of division A of H.R. 2638 (110th Congress), the Consolidated Security, Disaster Assistance, and Continuing Appropriations Act, 2009, the terms and conditions contained in section 433 of division F of Public Law 110–161 shall remain in effect for the 19 fiscal year ending September 30, 2009.

The U.S. has more shale oil, by far, than Saudi Arabia has petroleum. If the Democrats succeed in blocking development of this resource, the long-term damage to our economy may dwarf anything now being debated in connection with the mortgage bailout.

[Soldier4Christ]

Deal reached on financial markets bailout
$700-billion deal aimed at saving the nation's shaky economy from collapse

Congressional negotiators and the Bush administration's top Treasury officials go to work Sunday on settling the final details of a historic $700 billion Wall Street bailout aimed at keeping credit flowing and saving the nation's shaky economy from collapsing into a crippling recession.

"We've made great progress. We have to get it committed to paper so that we can formally agree," House Speaker Nancy Pelosi, D-Calif., told reporters in announcing the tentative deal shortly after midnight Sunday.

Congressional leaders hope to have a House vote on the measure Monday, with a vote in the Senate coming later.
Story continues below ↓advertisement

All sides expressed optimism and Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid, D-Nev., said he expected an announcement soon.

"We've still got more to do to finalize it, but I think we're there," said Treasury Secretary Henry Paulson, who participated in the negotiations in the Capitol.

'Worked out everything'
"We worked out everything," said Sen. Judd Gregg, R-N.H., the chief Senate Republican in the talks.

Under the plan, the federal government would purchase mortgage-backed securities and other bad debts held by banks and other investors. The money should help troubled lenders make new loans and keep credit lines open. The government would later try to sell the discounted loan packages at the best possible price.

At the insistence of House Republicans, some of the program's $700 billion would be devoted to a program that would encourage holders of distressed mortgage-backed securities to keep them and buy government insurance to cover defaults.

The legislation would place "reasonable" limits on severance packages for executives of companies that benefit from the rescue plan, said a senior administration official who was authorized to speak only on background.

It also calls for the financial sector to help make up the difference if the government does not recoup its investment in five years, the official said, but details remained unclear.

Also, the government would receive stock warrants in return for the bailout relief, giving taxpayers a chance to share in financial companies' future profits.

Help for homeowners

To help struggling homeowners, the plan would require the government to try renegotiating the bad mortgages it acquires with the aim of lowering borrowers' monthly payments so they can keep their homes.

Despite the changes made during an intense week of negotiations, the heart of the program remains President Bush's original idea: spend billions of taxpayer dollars to buy mortgage-backed securities whose value has plummeted.

It was not immediately clear how many House Republicans might vote for the measure. With the election five weeks away, Democrats have said they would not push a plan that appeared sharply partisan in nature.

Obama responds
Democratic presidential candidate Barack Obama supported the agreement but lay the blame for the crisis on irresponsibility in the financial industry as well as poor government oversight.

"The breakthrough between Congress and the Administration is the culmination of a sorry period in our history, in which reckless speculation and greed on Wall Street and lax oversight from Washington led to a meltdown of our financial markets," he said in a statement.

The agreement was necessary, however, Obama said.

"But regardless of how we got here, a failure to deal with the current crisis would have devastating consequences for our economy, costing millions of Americans their jobs and retirement security," he added.

[HisDaughter]

By JULIE HIRSCHFELD DAVIS, Associated Press Writer
2 minutes ago
 
WASHINGTON - Key lawmakers who struck a post-midnight deal on a $700 billion bailout for the financial industry predicted Sunday it would pass Congress, putting in place the largest government intervention in markets since the Great Depression.
 
Negotiators sought to iron out the final shape of the legislation and it still had to be reviewed by House Republicans, whose fierce opposition to a federal rescue nearly torpedoed an emerging bipartisan pact late in the week.

But officials in both parties were hopeful for a House vote Monday, and the two presidential candidates said they probably would support it.

Under the rescue plan, the government would pump as much as $700 billion into beleaguered financial firms that are starving for cash, taking over huge amounts of devalued assets from the companies in the hopes of unlocking frozen credit.

The proposal is designed to end a vicious downward spiral that has battered all levels of the economy, in which hundreds of billions of dollars in investments based on mortgages gone bad have cramped banks' willingness to lend.

"This is the bottom line: If we do not do this, the trauma, the chaos and the disruption to everyday Americans' lives will be overwhelming, and that's a price we can't afford to risk paying," Sen. Judd Gregg, the chief Senate Republican in the talks, told The Associated Press on Sunday. "I do think we'll be able to pass it, and it will be a bipartisan vote."

A breakthrough came when Democrats agreed to incorporate a GOP demand — letting the government insure some bad home loans rather than buy them — designed to limit the amount of federal money used in the rescue.

Another important bargain, vital to attracting support from centrist Democrats and Republicans who are fiscal hawks, would require that the government, after five years, submit a plan to Congress on how to recoup any losses.

The presidential nominees came behind the outlines of the bailout.

"This is something that all of us will swallow hard and go forward with," said Republican Sen. John McCain of Arizona. "The option of doing nothing is simply not an acceptable option."

His Democratic rival, Illinois Sen. Barack Obama, sought credit for taxpayer safeguards added to the initial proposal from the Bush administration. "I was pushing very hard and involved in shaping those provisions," he said.

House Republicans said they're still reviewing the plan.

"We are not ready to say that a deal is done," Rep. Eric Cantor, R-Va.

Congressional leaders announced a tentative deal in the early hours of Sunday morning after marathon negotiations at the Capitol.

"We've still got more to do to finalize it, but I think we're there," said Treasury Secretary Henry Paulson, who also participated in the negotiations in the Capitol.

Executives whose companies benefit from the rescue could not get "golden parachutes" and would see their pay packages limited.

The government would receive stock warrants in return for the bailout relief, giving taxpayers a chance to share in financial companies' future profits.

To help struggling homeowners, the plan requires the government to try renegotiating the bad mortgages it acquires with the aim of lowering borrowers' monthly payments so they can keep their homes.

"Nobody got everything they wanted," said Democratic Rep. Barney Frank of Massachusetts, chairman of the House Financial Services Committee. He predicted it would pass, though not by a large majority.

Gregg, R-N.H., said he thinks taxpayers will come out as financial winners. "I don't think we're going to lose money, myself. We may, it's possible, but I doubt it in the long run," he said.

Frank appeared on C-SPAN, Obama was on CBS' "Face the Nation," McCain spoke on "This Week" on ABC and Cantor was on "Late Edition" on CNN.

[HisDaughter]

Day of Reckoning
by  Patrick J. Buchanan
 
How did the United States of America, the richest nation on earth, whose economy represents 30 percent of the Global Economy, arrive at the precipice of a financial panic and collapse?

The answer lies in the abject failure of both America's financial elite and the political elite of both parties -- the same elites now working together to determine how much of our wealth will be needed to bail the nation out of the crisis of their own creation.

Big Government is riding to the rescue -- saddlebags full of our tax dollars -- to save us from the consequences of the stupidity and folly of Big Government. New York and Washington, the twin cities responsible for the crisis, are now being hailed by the media as the 7th Cavalry, coming to rescue a beleaguered nation. Continued

Had there not been a steady and constant infusion of easy money and credit into the U.S. economy by the Fed, for years on end, a housing bubble of the magnitude of the one that has just exploded could never have been created.

Had the politicians of both parties not coerced and pressured banks, S&Ls, Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac to make all those sub-prime mortgages, then to tie this rotten paper to good paper, convert it into securities and sell to banks all over the world, there would have been no global financial crisis.

Had they seen this coming and acted sooner, the Federal Reserve and U.S. Treasury would not today, like Henny Penny, be crying, "The sky is falling!" and the end times are at hand, unless we give them 5 percent of our gross domestic product to buy up suspect securities backed by sub-prime mortgages.

Consider what the "Paulson Plan" of Treasury Secretary Hank Paulson, against which Sen. Richard Shelby and the House Republicans rebelled, entails.

Since Americans save nothing and have to borrow from abroad to finance our trade and budget deficits, wars and foreign aid, what the secretary proposes is this: that Congress authorize the Treasury to spend $700 billion to buy up the toxic paper on the books not only of U.S. banks, but of foreign banks operating in the United States. According to The Washington Times, the Treasury would also be authorized to buy up securities backed by rotten auto loans, student loans and credit card debts.

Thus America would be borrowing from China, Japan and the Middle East to tidy up the balance sheets of the banks of China, Japan and the Middle East. And all the rotten paper will be offloaded onto U.S. taxpayers, who hopefully will be able to recoup some of their losses, because some of the paper will be good.

Why should we do this? Because otherwise there will be a financial panic, followed by a market collapse, wiping out pensions, 401Ks, portfolios and defined benefit plans of Middle America, forcing millions into bankruptcy and millions more to put off retirement and continue working until they drop.

In a democracy, it is said, you get the kind of government you deserve. But what did the American people do to deserve this? What did they do to deserve the quality of financial, corporate and political leadership that marched them into this mess -- and that today postures as their rescuers?

Consider what this mess has already cost taxpayers: $29 billion to buy the rotten paper of Bear Stearns so J.P. Morgan would buy the investment bank; $85 billion for 80 percent of AIG to nationalize it; $150 billion in a stimulus package to flood the nation with cash; perhaps $300 billion to bail out Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac; and now $700 billion to begin taking the toxic paper off the hands of America's big banks.

And even if this is passed, say Paulson and Fed Chairman Ben Bernanke, there is no guarantee this will resolve the crisis. If the $700 billion is not provided and the toxic paper is not pulled off the books of the world's banks by U.S. taxpayers, however, we face an almost certain collapse, surging bankruptcies, rising unemployment, a shrinkage of GDP and a recession, if not worse.

Yet, the fellows who tell us we face a financial mushroom cloud over every American city if we do not act at once to provide the $700 billion did not see this coming and can make no guarantee that this will succeed and end the crisis.

Nevertheless, it must be done, and done now, as collapse is imminent.

Looking at all the money being ladled out by the U.S. government to prevent a collapse, and the diminished revenue coming in, it is hard to see how America avoids future deficits that reach $1 trillion a year. These will imperil both the dollar itself and the ability of the United States, which saves nothing, to borrow from the rest of the world. The downsizing of America is at hand.

Yes, indeed, we have arrived at the Day of Reckoning for Uncle Sam.

[Soldier4Christ]

How did the United States of America, the richest nation on earth, whose economy represents 30 percent of the Global Economy, arrive at the precipice of a financial panic and collapse?

THE ENEMY WITHIN

“A nation can survive its fools, and even the ambitious. But it cannot survive treason from within. An enemy at the gates is less formidable, for he is known and carries his banner openly. But the traitor moves amongst those within the gate freely, his sly whispers rustling through all the alleys, heard in the very halls of government itself.

For the traitor appears not a traitor; he speaks in accents familiar to his victims, and he wears their face and their arguments, he appeals to the baseness that lies deep in the hearts of all men. He rots the soul of a nation, he works secretly and unknown in the night to undermine the pillars of the city, he infects the body politic so that it can no longer resist. A murder is less to fear.” — Cicero (106-43 BC)

[Soldier4Christ]

A summary of the tentative agreement released by Ms. Pelosi’s office said the plan “gives taxpayers an ownership stake and profit-making opportunities with participating companies; puts taxpayers first in line to recover assets if a participating company fails; (and) guarantees taxpayers are repaid in full — if other protections have not actually produced a profit.” (See Ms. Pelosi’s summary.)
Additionally, the summary said the legislation will expand the range of firms that can sell troubled assets to the government to include pension plans, local governments and community banks serving “low- and middle-income families.” …

The summary issued by Ms. Pelosi’s office said the legislation will include provisions giving Treasury the ability to work with cash-strapped homeowners whose mortgages are purchased by the federal government to refinance into a more affordable mortgage. Other foreclosure-prevention measures included in the agreement are an extension of the tax holiday for homeowners who face foreclosure, as well as a tax break for community banks who held shares of Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac. The rescue plan will allow affected banks to take an immediate tax deduction on losses from investments in the two firms, which were taken over by the federal government earlier this month.

Lawmakers also included provisions allowing them to keep a close eye on the Treasury program, including a bipartisan oversight board appointed by members of both parties in Congress, an inspector general to monitor Treasury decisions, and regular audits from the Government Accountability Office. Additionally, Treasury will be required to make transactions made through the troubled asset program available publicly online. Unlike the original Treasury proposal, which would have given the department legal immunity in the program, the tentative agreement reached late Saturday allows for judicial review of Treasury decisions.

Most of the pork got stripped from it too, so thats good.

    The funding of the Housing Trust Fund, the slush fund that feeds ACORN and La Raza, is out. You can thank House Republicans for enough obstructionism to get that result. Other changes made to the final version of the bailout, according to a source on the Hill, were the removal of several provisions:

    Provision to provide unions and other activist groups with proxy access for corporate boards
    Provision to mandate shareholder votes on compensation issues (union priority)
    Diversion of funds into a housing fund to support left-wing activist groups like ACORN
    A provision to allow trial judges to arbitrarily adjust mortgages, creating bonanza for trial lawyers
    A provision to require the government to sell to state and local governments at a discount homes the government acquires as a result of foreclosure

So far it looks like like a decent proposal. The bill is still being reviewed though and isn't finalized yet.

[HisDaughter]

[quote author=Pastor Roger
THE ENEMY WITHIN

“A nation can survive its fools, and even the ambitious. But it cannot survive treason from within. An enemy at the gates is less formidable, for he is known and carries his banner openly. But the traitor moves amongst those within the gate freely, his sly whispers rustling through all the alleys, heard in the very halls of government itself.

For the traitor appears not a traitor; he speaks in accents familiar to his victims, and he wears their face and their arguments, he appeals to the baseness that lies deep in the hearts of all men. He rots the soul of a nation, he works secretly and unknown in the night to undermine the pillars of the city, he infects the body politic so that it can no longer resist. A murder is less to fear.” — Cicero (106-43 BC)


[/quote]

Wow.  Nothing new under the sun, eh?