oparea
10-01-2008, 09:52 PM
I e-mailed my congressman and thanked him for voting aginst the bailout and this is the reponse I have gotten. I'm please with the level of communication between me and my congressman.
"Thank you for contacting me regarding the Bailout Bill, which as
you know, failed on the House floor on September 29, 2008. I
voted against this bill - not because I believe we should do
nothing, but because I do not think we should hastily pass a $700
billion bill which designates unprecedented powers to one man.
I strongly disagree with recent news reports that peg this bill's
failure on House Republicans. Even though there were 65
Republican YES votes (along with 95 Democrat NO votes), the
Majority party always has the votes to pass any legislation without
minority support. When Republicans were in the Majority and I
was in Leadership, we never let a bill come to the floor without
counting our votes ahead of time. It's standard procedure IF you
want something to pass - the majority party has the duty to govern,
not just to posture. The truth is that the Bailout Bill failed because
most Representatives - Republicans and Democrats - felt that this
was the wrong solution to our financial crisis.
Wall Street, and the other businesses involved, cannot skirt any
share of the blame. It is true that Washington allowed and
encouraged risky sub prime, no document and low document
lending, but the financial world made lots of money on the deal
even when sound business judgment was thrown out the door.
That's why the thousands of calls to Congressional offices -
Democrat and Republican - ran 10 to 1 against "bailing out Wall
Street." I do not fully share this perspective as I know the ripple
effect of losing trust in the market is extremely serious - even to
the constituent not directly involved in the market. But let's admit,
before recent developments, no one on Wall Street was calling for
reform. In fact in 2003, when President Bush called for Fannie
Mae and Freddie Mac reform, the opposition from finance, home
builders, and realtors decisively crushed the proposal. For more
information, visit www.opensecrets.org/news/2008/09/update-
fannie-mae-and-freddie.htm.
For more than a week, I have sat in a variety of meetings with the
brightest minds in the financial and economic industry. Every
economist has a different prediction and solution. There are some
Members of Congress with finance back grounds - but only a
handful. In a mere eight days we have all attempted to reach a
graduate level of understanding.
The Bill that failed on Monday has been problematic from the
beginning. Secretary Paulson and the Treasury have said they
knew about this fiscal meltdown over a year ago. Why didn't they
warn us or introduce corrective measures any time in the last year?
Instead, in a conference call on September 19th, Secretary Paulson
first announced this impending crisis. He told Members that in
addition to the meltdown, the market was going to tailspin on
Monday, September 22nd, and that only a $700 billion infusion
would stop it. Paulson drafted a three page bill that gave him - in
the 4 months he has left in the Administration - unprecedented
powers to influence and alter the credit markets.
Confidence in Secretary Paulson is fading. This past year Paulson
told us the $29 billion Bear Sterns, the $85 billion AIG, and the
$200 billion Fannie/Freddie bailouts would stop the market
downturn. But along with the $131 billion stimulus package, he
was wrong. We now have little confidence in him.
Further, Secretary Paulson's package did not address many of the
issues Democrats and Republicans felt strongly about - mark to
market reform, net worth certificates, reform of Credit Rating
Agencies, Fannie/Freddie and Community Reinvestment Act
reform along with other proposals bankers large and small were
telling us needed to be addressed.
As I said, Members of Congress are not financial experts. We have
to shift from Agriculture to Military to Education to Health Care
every day. To ask Congress to pass a $700 billion bill without
substantive and informative committee hearings, without
amendments or substitutes, generally ends in a hasty hap-hazard
mess. This happened not too long ago, with $120 billion in
Hurricane Katrina aid.
Finally, I remain gravely concerned for the next generation. As a
father of four, I believe that the excesses of today's government
should not be shouldered in the form of debt by our children. We
are already facing a massive financial crisis with Social Security,
Medicare, Medicaid and many of other unfunded liabilities which
they will be inheriting. America's financial house is out of order
and this vote is one part of a big picture of difficulties.
There is a grave misperception that our financial crisis doesn't
extend beyond Wall Street. In fact, it extends beyond Wall Street,
past Main Street, and eventually to every American. The failure of
these large investment banks will impact our smaller, community
banks and severely restrict their ability to issue loans to average
citizens. It will become extremely difficult to secure a loan for a
new car, a home or a college education. Credit card interest rates
will increase while credit limits will decrease, slowing consumer
spending and jeopardizing jobs. Throwing more money at this
problem will only work for a short time, and then we'll find
ourselves in even worse shape than before.
The Bailout vote was not saying "NO" to doing anything, but
rather a resounding refusal to spend our way out of a crisis. What
we need is a Work-Out, not a Bail-Out. We must look further and
weigh alternative options to rescuing the financial markets. This
fiscal crisis is not going to just affect Wall Street; it will eventually
affect all Americans. For the economic security and financial
strength of every citizen, Congress will look at other bailout
proposals this week and continue to seek a Work-Out instead of a
Bail-Out.
Thank you again for contacting me. For additional information on
the bill, updates and ideas for a Work-Out, please visit my website
at http://kingston.house.gov/bailout.
Sincerely.
Jack Kingston
Member of Congress
"Thank you for contacting me regarding the Bailout Bill, which as
you know, failed on the House floor on September 29, 2008. I
voted against this bill - not because I believe we should do
nothing, but because I do not think we should hastily pass a $700
billion bill which designates unprecedented powers to one man.
I strongly disagree with recent news reports that peg this bill's
failure on House Republicans. Even though there were 65
Republican YES votes (along with 95 Democrat NO votes), the
Majority party always has the votes to pass any legislation without
minority support. When Republicans were in the Majority and I
was in Leadership, we never let a bill come to the floor without
counting our votes ahead of time. It's standard procedure IF you
want something to pass - the majority party has the duty to govern,
not just to posture. The truth is that the Bailout Bill failed because
most Representatives - Republicans and Democrats - felt that this
was the wrong solution to our financial crisis.
Wall Street, and the other businesses involved, cannot skirt any
share of the blame. It is true that Washington allowed and
encouraged risky sub prime, no document and low document
lending, but the financial world made lots of money on the deal
even when sound business judgment was thrown out the door.
That's why the thousands of calls to Congressional offices -
Democrat and Republican - ran 10 to 1 against "bailing out Wall
Street." I do not fully share this perspective as I know the ripple
effect of losing trust in the market is extremely serious - even to
the constituent not directly involved in the market. But let's admit,
before recent developments, no one on Wall Street was calling for
reform. In fact in 2003, when President Bush called for Fannie
Mae and Freddie Mac reform, the opposition from finance, home
builders, and realtors decisively crushed the proposal. For more
information, visit www.opensecrets.org/news/2008/09/update-
fannie-mae-and-freddie.htm.
For more than a week, I have sat in a variety of meetings with the
brightest minds in the financial and economic industry. Every
economist has a different prediction and solution. There are some
Members of Congress with finance back grounds - but only a
handful. In a mere eight days we have all attempted to reach a
graduate level of understanding.
The Bill that failed on Monday has been problematic from the
beginning. Secretary Paulson and the Treasury have said they
knew about this fiscal meltdown over a year ago. Why didn't they
warn us or introduce corrective measures any time in the last year?
Instead, in a conference call on September 19th, Secretary Paulson
first announced this impending crisis. He told Members that in
addition to the meltdown, the market was going to tailspin on
Monday, September 22nd, and that only a $700 billion infusion
would stop it. Paulson drafted a three page bill that gave him - in
the 4 months he has left in the Administration - unprecedented
powers to influence and alter the credit markets.
Confidence in Secretary Paulson is fading. This past year Paulson
told us the $29 billion Bear Sterns, the $85 billion AIG, and the
$200 billion Fannie/Freddie bailouts would stop the market
downturn. But along with the $131 billion stimulus package, he
was wrong. We now have little confidence in him.
Further, Secretary Paulson's package did not address many of the
issues Democrats and Republicans felt strongly about - mark to
market reform, net worth certificates, reform of Credit Rating
Agencies, Fannie/Freddie and Community Reinvestment Act
reform along with other proposals bankers large and small were
telling us needed to be addressed.
As I said, Members of Congress are not financial experts. We have
to shift from Agriculture to Military to Education to Health Care
every day. To ask Congress to pass a $700 billion bill without
substantive and informative committee hearings, without
amendments or substitutes, generally ends in a hasty hap-hazard
mess. This happened not too long ago, with $120 billion in
Hurricane Katrina aid.
Finally, I remain gravely concerned for the next generation. As a
father of four, I believe that the excesses of today's government
should not be shouldered in the form of debt by our children. We
are already facing a massive financial crisis with Social Security,
Medicare, Medicaid and many of other unfunded liabilities which
they will be inheriting. America's financial house is out of order
and this vote is one part of a big picture of difficulties.
There is a grave misperception that our financial crisis doesn't
extend beyond Wall Street. In fact, it extends beyond Wall Street,
past Main Street, and eventually to every American. The failure of
these large investment banks will impact our smaller, community
banks and severely restrict their ability to issue loans to average
citizens. It will become extremely difficult to secure a loan for a
new car, a home or a college education. Credit card interest rates
will increase while credit limits will decrease, slowing consumer
spending and jeopardizing jobs. Throwing more money at this
problem will only work for a short time, and then we'll find
ourselves in even worse shape than before.
The Bailout vote was not saying "NO" to doing anything, but
rather a resounding refusal to spend our way out of a crisis. What
we need is a Work-Out, not a Bail-Out. We must look further and
weigh alternative options to rescuing the financial markets. This
fiscal crisis is not going to just affect Wall Street; it will eventually
affect all Americans. For the economic security and financial
strength of every citizen, Congress will look at other bailout
proposals this week and continue to seek a Work-Out instead of a
Bail-Out.
Thank you again for contacting me. For additional information on
the bill, updates and ideas for a Work-Out, please visit my website
at http://kingston.house.gov/bailout.
Sincerely.
Jack Kingston
Member of Congress