View Full Version : U.S. Senator John Ensign (R-NV) response voting YEA on H.R. 1424 $850 BILLION BAILOUT

10-26-2008, 04:49 PM
This is the RESPONSE and justification for U.S. Senator John Ensign, (R-NV) on his BullShyt for voting YES on the $850 BILLION BAILOUT BILL.

One Point, Oh you won't have to pay AMT... UNBELIEVEABLE!

These Traitors with their Continued Treasonous control over the people they DO NOT represent and repetative Violations of the U.S. CONSTITUTION.

Here's the HORSESHYT, but look at the Opening LINE... that pretty much somes up, what these Corporate Whores/Sellouts in Washington DC are all about. To their MASTERS, the BANKS/WEALTH/ZIONISTS... Canned email response propaganda.

"This is an official communication from the Office of Senator John Ensign. Any tampering or alteration of this communication is prohibited and may result in criminal investigation or prosecution.

October 20, 2008

Dear Mr. Blah Blah:

Thank you for contacting me about our current financial crisis and the financial stabilization bill that Congress recently passed, H.R. 1424. I value the opinions of every Nevadan and am always grateful for those who take the time to inform me of their views.

Our nation is currently dealing with extraordinarily challenging economic circumstances. The stock markets have experienced some of the most dramatic swings in American history. The credit markets have seized up, making it difficult for even those with good credit to borrow money for important things such as buying a car, making payroll, getting student loans, or purchasing a home. Individual retirement accounts, pension funds, and 401k plans have lost tremendous value, delaying the retirement plans for millions of Americans. The financial conditions in this country are dire and we could be facing a deep downturn in our economy.

In October, Congress passed a bill, H.R.1424, intended to stabilize the financial industry and the economy as a whole. Like many Nevadans, I find it distasteful that hard-working taxpayers will be bailing out individuals who bought homes they could not afford and financial companies that invested recklessly in assets they did not understand. Even so, the cost of doing nothing would be far worse. After considering the legislation at great length, I ultimately voted for the financial rescue bill because I firmly believe the government had to do something to stave off potential economic disaster. Under some of the worst case scenarios, the financial crisis could cause millions of Americans to lose their jobs and significant amounts of their savings.

I loathe having to support a bill that intervenes so heavily with private enterprise and the free market. However, it would be irresponsible for the government to sit idly by while millions of Americans suffer the consequences of a crisis that the government helped create. The problems we are facing today are mostly the result of poor government policies going back to the early 1990's. Congress, the Clinton Administration, and the Bush Administration have made home-ownership a top priority and thus sometimes pursued policies that led to increasingly lax underwriting standards and encouraged companies to issue risky home loans. These bad home loans were then packaged into investment vehicles. Now that many borrowers are unable to meet their mortgage payments or refinance their loans, investors are losing hundreds of billions of dollars on these mortgage-backed assets. These massive losses have paralyzed the financial industry, thus threatening the ability of otherwise healthy companies to continue doing business and jeopardizing millions of Americans' savings.

The key component of this legislation is a $700 billion program to stabilize the financial sector. These funds can be used to purchase distressed assets, to provide insurance for those assets, or to inject capital directly into the banking system. I am currently working with my colleagues, economists, and outside experts to urge the Treasury Department to adopt a final plan that will protect taxpayers while increasing financial stability.

I would like to see taxpayer money go toward recapitalizing the banking system in return for senior preferred stock positions, rather than buying toxic assets from financial companies. During a systemic banking crisis, history has shown that the financial system must be recapitalized to avoid a dangerous credit contraction. With more capital in the system, banks should be more willing to lend to each other, to companies, and to individuals. By placing the taxpayers in a senior equity position, they will share in any profits that a company may realize after receiving federal assistance. The executives of participating companies should also have limits placed on their compensation packages, because these corporate officers should not receive huge bonuses or "golden parachutes" after receiving millions or billions of dollars of government assistance. Such limits combined with the equity stake make it more likely that companies will act responsibly to restore themselves to financial health so that they may quickly rid themselves of government involvement.

By injecting capital directly into firms, we can also avoid the potential problem of having the government buy and hold toxic assets at above market value, which would provide the greatest benefit to the worst offenders. A capital injection plan is more transparent and will distort the marketplace less than purchasing bad assets. If handled correctly, the government can ultimately spend far less than the bill's $700 billion price tag while still bringing stability to our economy.

I would have voted against the original plan offered by Treasury Secretary Henry Paulson and the Bush Administration. The final bill I voted for, while far from perfect, protected the American taxpayer. While this is certainly not the bill I would have written and even though I have many concerns about it, I believe this bill is better than doing nothing at all.

In addition, H.R.1424 included a large package of critical tax relief. In these trying economic times, it is more important than ever for Congress to pursue pro-growth policies. Lower taxes will help our economy recover faster from its current malaise. Nevadans will directly benefit from a number of the bill's tax provisions, including extension of the state and local sales tax deduction and ensuring that over 88,000 Nevadans will not be unfairly targeted by the Alternative Minimum Tax. Because of the renewable energy tax credits included in this bill, Nevada also stands to gain tens of thousands of new, high-paying "green" jobs in the coming years.

It is my hope that this financial rescue package that Congress passed will put more confidence back in the financial markets. Please know that as Congress continues to deal with the financial crisis, I will be sure to keep your thoughts in mind as I closely monitor our financial markets and the economy. Thank you again for sharing your thoughts with me. Feel free to contact me in the future on matters of importance to you. Should you have any other questions or comments or would like to sign up for my newsletter, please do not hesitate to either write or e-mail me via my website at http://ensign.senate.gov.



United States Senator

Your thoughts and opinions are important. Unfortunately, any replies to this e-mail will not be received and processed. If you want to contact Senator Ensign electronically again please visit:


We respect your online time and privacy. If you have any questions about our online privacy statement, please visit Senator Ensign's website http://ensign.senate.gov/ and read our privacy policy at the bottom of the page.