What if a significant part of the urgency, scope and provisions of the "Paulson Plan" bailout were due to and a result of pressure by China to have the US cover and make China whole for its US based losses?
Monday, October 6, 2008
Thursday, October 2, 2008
A Political Nitwit (3)...
In Congress, it must just be that Audacity comes along with the office furniture, carpet, lamps and wall decorations, too.
FOX news reported that Speaker of the House Nancy Pelosi has spent almost $100,000 of the contributions made to her own political action committee, "PAC To The Future"; paying the money to her husband's real estate and investment firm over the past 10 years.
Curiously, Pelosi supported legislation banning the practice of paying a spouse with political contributions last year. At the time, in a press release, Pelosi said, "Democrats are committed to reforming the way Washington does business...and preventing the misuse of funds."
According to the Times Network, since Pelosi's husband took over as treasurer for his wife's committee in 2007 federal records show that his firm will receive 8 times the payments in this year alone that his company got annually from the PAC from 2000 to 2005 when the treasurer's position was held by someone else.
Last week, Pelosi's office said the payments were perfectly legal, insisting that they were for work performed for the PAC. The payments were described as "business expenses".
PAC's are designed to help politicians build political influence when they use them to contribute to other politician's campaigns. It is illegal for members of Congress to hire family members to work on their Congressional staff, but not illegal to hire relatives to work on campaigns or a PAC.
The Times Network also reports, "Meredith McGehee, policy director at the nonpartisan Campaign Legal Center, said putting family members on a PAC payroll is bound to raise questions and, in some cases, allow for abuse. The reality is that under the current system, PACs are rife with self-dealing transactions. The laws and regulations could and should be strengthened...any self-dealing transaction by a member of Congress is going to get scutiny, particularly with large amounts of money and prominent members."
In 2004 one of Pelosi's PACs, "Team Majority" was fined $21,000 by the Federal Election Commisssion for accepting political donations over federal limits. She closed the PAC shortly after the fine was levied.
FOX news reported that Speaker of the House Nancy Pelosi has spent almost $100,000 of the contributions made to her own political action committee, "PAC To The Future"; paying the money to her husband's real estate and investment firm over the past 10 years.
Curiously, Pelosi supported legislation banning the practice of paying a spouse with political contributions last year. At the time, in a press release, Pelosi said, "Democrats are committed to reforming the way Washington does business...and preventing the misuse of funds."
According to the Times Network, since Pelosi's husband took over as treasurer for his wife's committee in 2007 federal records show that his firm will receive 8 times the payments in this year alone that his company got annually from the PAC from 2000 to 2005 when the treasurer's position was held by someone else.
Last week, Pelosi's office said the payments were perfectly legal, insisting that they were for work performed for the PAC. The payments were described as "business expenses".
PAC's are designed to help politicians build political influence when they use them to contribute to other politician's campaigns. It is illegal for members of Congress to hire family members to work on their Congressional staff, but not illegal to hire relatives to work on campaigns or a PAC.
The Times Network also reports, "Meredith McGehee, policy director at the nonpartisan Campaign Legal Center, said putting family members on a PAC payroll is bound to raise questions and, in some cases, allow for abuse. The reality is that under the current system, PACs are rife with self-dealing transactions. The laws and regulations could and should be strengthened...any self-dealing transaction by a member of Congress is going to get scutiny, particularly with large amounts of money and prominent members."
In 2004 one of Pelosi's PACs, "Team Majority" was fined $21,000 by the Federal Election Commisssion for accepting political donations over federal limits. She closed the PAC shortly after the fine was levied.
A Political Nitwit (2)...
More lip service to creating an environment conducive for a true bipartisan effort and solution:
"The legislation has failed. The crisis has not gone away," House Speaker Nancy Pelosi (D-Calif.) said. "We must work in a bipartisan way..."
Sep 30, 2008 istockAnalyst.com (press release)
"... not our bill, President's bill," Rep. Nancy Pelosi, (d) Speaker of the House, said.
Sep 30, 2008 WFIE-TV
"What happened today cannot stand. We must move forward," House Speaker Nancy Pelosi told reporters. "We are here to protect the taxpayer as we work to stabilize the markets."
Sep 29, 2008 International Herald Tribune
Sept 29th...90 seconds of ill-judged, ill-timed bile that helped to kill off any hope of consensus on Capitol Hill. Ms Pelosi said: "Seven hundred billion dollars: a staggering number, but only a part of the cost of the failed Bush economic policies to our country, policies that were built on budget recklessness...the foundation of that fiscal irresponsibility, combined with an anything-goes economic policy, has taken us to where we are today.
Sep 30, 2008 Times Online
"This is the Administration's problem," House Speaker Nancy Pelosi told reporters. "They sent us their bill. We did the best we can to improve it."
Sep 29, 2008 TIME
"When the White House and the administration described a problem, we worked in a bipartisan way in legislation to help stabilize the markets." Pelosi said.
Sep 29, 2008 News 10 Now
"It isn't us, Democrats, who are the problem.", said Nancy.
Sep 29, 2008 ITInews - Insurance Times and Investments News
"People have to know this is not a bailout of Wall Street, it's a buy-in," said Pelosi in a Sunday afternoon news conference
Sep 28, 2008 The Miami Herald
"The markets need a message from us ...we understand time is important," Pelosi told reporters.
Sep 26, 2008 guardian.co.uk
"It's not me blowing this up, it's the Republicans," Pelosi said.
Sep 26, 2008 Slate
"It's their problem. It's their bill. And they're going to have to figure out if they can support it," House Speaker Nancy Pelosi, D-Calif., said of Republicans.
Sep 23, 2008 The Associated Press
House Speaker Nancy Pelosi said Friday lawmakers are, quote, "committed to quick, bipartisan action" to rescue Wall Street.
Sep 22, 2008 KARK
"It's about defining a difference between Democrats and Republicans," said House Speaker Nancy Pelosi, D-Calif.
Sep 22, 2008 The Miami Herald
"The worsening economy demands another bipartisan economic recovery effort," Pelosi wrote in a letter delivered to President Bush Thursday evening.
Sep 18, 2008 The Associated Press
"This is their problem. This is their solution," said House Speaker Nancy Pelosi, D-Calif.
Sep 17, 2008 The Associated Press
"The red tape, which every time you seem to cut some of it, it seems to still be someplace else, and there's just no way to explain that to people."
Sep 15, 2008 IowaPolitics.com
"Americans believe there is a compact with their government to help them in times of disaster," Pelosi said. "People want results, they don't want red tape."
Sep 9, 2008 Gazette Online
"The legislation has failed. The crisis has not gone away," House Speaker Nancy Pelosi (D-Calif.) said. "We must work in a bipartisan way..."
Sep 30, 2008 istockAnalyst.com (press release)
"... not our bill, President's bill," Rep. Nancy Pelosi, (d) Speaker of the House, said.
Sep 30, 2008 WFIE-TV
"What happened today cannot stand. We must move forward," House Speaker Nancy Pelosi told reporters. "We are here to protect the taxpayer as we work to stabilize the markets."
Sep 29, 2008 International Herald Tribune
Sept 29th...90 seconds of ill-judged, ill-timed bile that helped to kill off any hope of consensus on Capitol Hill. Ms Pelosi said: "Seven hundred billion dollars: a staggering number, but only a part of the cost of the failed Bush economic policies to our country, policies that were built on budget recklessness...the foundation of that fiscal irresponsibility, combined with an anything-goes economic policy, has taken us to where we are today.
Sep 30, 2008 Times Online
"This is the Administration's problem," House Speaker Nancy Pelosi told reporters. "They sent us their bill. We did the best we can to improve it."
Sep 29, 2008 TIME
"When the White House and the administration described a problem, we worked in a bipartisan way in legislation to help stabilize the markets." Pelosi said.
Sep 29, 2008 News 10 Now
"It isn't us, Democrats, who are the problem.", said Nancy.
Sep 29, 2008 ITInews - Insurance Times and Investments News
"People have to know this is not a bailout of Wall Street, it's a buy-in," said Pelosi in a Sunday afternoon news conference
Sep 28, 2008 The Miami Herald
"The markets need a message from us ...we understand time is important," Pelosi told reporters.
Sep 26, 2008 guardian.co.uk
"It's not me blowing this up, it's the Republicans," Pelosi said.
Sep 26, 2008 Slate
"It's their problem. It's their bill. And they're going to have to figure out if they can support it," House Speaker Nancy Pelosi, D-Calif., said of Republicans.
Sep 23, 2008 The Associated Press
House Speaker Nancy Pelosi said Friday lawmakers are, quote, "committed to quick, bipartisan action" to rescue Wall Street.
Sep 22, 2008 KARK
"It's about defining a difference between Democrats and Republicans," said House Speaker Nancy Pelosi, D-Calif.
Sep 22, 2008 The Miami Herald
"The worsening economy demands another bipartisan economic recovery effort," Pelosi wrote in a letter delivered to President Bush Thursday evening.
Sep 18, 2008 The Associated Press
"This is their problem. This is their solution," said House Speaker Nancy Pelosi, D-Calif.
Sep 17, 2008 The Associated Press
"The red tape, which every time you seem to cut some of it, it seems to still be someplace else, and there's just no way to explain that to people."
Sep 15, 2008 IowaPolitics.com
"Americans believe there is a compact with their government to help them in times of disaster," Pelosi said. "People want results, they don't want red tape."
Sep 9, 2008 Gazette Online
Stepping Up...
In a CNBC interview this morning, billionaire Wilbur Ross of Atlanta, Ga said that passage of the Senate amendment last evening for the "Paulson Plan" with all of its "Christmas tree ornaments" to induce House members to vote for it only shows why the American public is so frustrated with lobbyist influence on Congress in that the members can not resolve serious issues without resorting to political gimmickry.
Ross, who believes that a better solution for the financial markets and the taxpayer is an insurance fund program, and if structured properly his company is willing to invest up to $1 billion in it - further, he believes that many others are willing to put private capital into the program as well because "the math works" for all parties.
Ross, who believes that a better solution for the financial markets and the taxpayer is an insurance fund program, and if structured properly his company is willing to invest up to $1 billion in it - further, he believes that many others are willing to put private capital into the program as well because "the math works" for all parties.
Wednesday, October 1, 2008
An Open Letter to Congress...
Dear Legislator,
Please do not support passage of any Bill or Amendment that would make the 700 Billion "Paulson Plan" bailout become law.
You already know how enraged your constituency is with the prospect of having to shoulder the debt from yet another bailout plan for the misdeeds and failures of others.
More importantly the Administration is trying to railroad you into support of a bad plan with a sense of urgency that does not exist - this is a "you have to shake 'em up before you shake 'em down" alarmist approach by the Administration to get you and other Legislators to act quickly in favor of this plan without taking the time to fairly debate, and consider ALL of the alternatives.
Knowledgeable economists have said there is at least one month before action is needed to address Wallstreet's issues.
The "Paulson Plan" is a bailout that will, contrary to the Administration's assertions, hurt far more Americans and the American economy than it will help.
It will hurt all of us in these ways: First and foremost, 700 billion is an unprecedented amount of money in scope and timing that will add significantly to an already unsupportable national debt level. No doubt you've already heard that this alone will pose more than a $6,000 debt on every American man, woman, and child - or - more than $24,000 in new national debt for the average American family of 4 people. The impact of the existing national debt has already seriously eroded the value and strength of the American dollar - at the beginning of this year it had already lost more than 25% of its value since 2004 - cutting into savings and increasing the cost of nearly every commodity, service or product used by American consumers and commerce. This plan is a serious threat to our future financial security, especially if it is followed by further taxation.
Can you or any other Legislator seriously believe that the sponsors of this plan, who only arrived at a determination that $700 billion would be sufficient because it was " a really big number", will effectively counter the threat of trillions of dollars of exposure with this amount? There are sophisticated and expert financiers and economists, including former Federal Reserve Secretary Greenspan who don't!
Do you not suspect that as a consequence and once committed that you will be asked, just like the funding for the war in Iraq, for more money in the future - because failure to do so would jeopardize $700 billion already spent or because the Administration had vastly underestimated the extent of the "crisis" just as they were equally blindsided by it as recently as August?
Washington, unlike American business and commerce, does not have a culture of cost savings and cost containment. Can you imagine how vast the structure will be needed by Washington to administer, manage, maintain and market these "investments" , or the magnitude of the cost if it's outsourced, and for how long ? What will it take - 3 years, 5 years ??? Bill Gross of Pimco has bandied about the possibility of a 7% return - even if it was possible that's not net profit but gross profit. When all of the costs for the plan's administration are added up, there will be a loss not a profit. Even Secretary Paulson qualifies this outcome.
Pricing of these "toxic" (Wallstreet's own description for them) assets and instruments is paramount; yet this plan has no clear mechanism to assure the determination of a real and fair value that won't subsequently injure taxpayers. It's been pitched as "trust us to do the right thing". Well, poll after recent poll shows that overwhelmingly Americans do not trust the Government to do the "right" thing in this crisis.
I urge you to "step back" and recognize all of the Congressional Leadership's and Administration's posturing and arm twisting on this bailout plan and recognize it, just as the American public does, for what it is.
Please consider some of the other viable alternatives already put forth for discussion that do not harm the American taxpayer to the extent this plan does - Senator Schumer's notion of an FDIC-style insurance program to backstop these instruments and mortgages and make them marketable; the use of preferred stock for some classes of assets to give the taxpayer an equity position for their tax dollars; repeal of the "mark to market" accounting rules to establish an equitable value and market for the assets; and, lastly a substantial reduction and, or, elimination of the capital gains tax to instantly pump massive amounts of liquidity from private capital back into the housing and equity markets.
There is time to do this right - Christmas ornaments, political posturing and the notion that "a bad bill now is better than the perfect bill later" is absolutely asinine - no one believes that Congress will reform it's legislation later to make the perfect bill.
Americans recognize that this is a bailout for Wallstreet being packaged and "sold" to them as a "Mainstreet" issue .... if the "Paulson Plan" is passed into law, they will not accept any Legislator's plea afterward for having been misled by those who promoted its adoption. Gullibility will not cut it as a defense against a voter backlash. Constituents want representation and that's clear from the volume of mail, calls, faxes and emails that Congress has received over this - they don't want to hear that the American public just doesn't understand the issues and how it affects them - they're also smart enough to know that is just more Washington arrogance, suggesting the public is "too stupid to get it".
Moreover, Congress should fully expect in the wake of any passage of this $700 billion bailout, a wide sweeping voter effort to reform the "legalized bribery" of lobbyists and PAC's. The American public understands the extent legalized bribery has enabled and played an part in leading us into this financial crisis.
Nancy Pelosi has said, but unwittingly hasn't understood the implication, not only is the party over for high flying Wallstreet Ceo's, so too, will it be for the Congressional beneficiaries of influence peddling and legalized bribery if this plan passes.
* if you care to, feel free to use the above letter
Congressional Emails, Addresses, Phone and Fax Numbers
http://www.webslingerz.com/jhoffman/congress-email.html
http://www.conservativeusa.org/mega-cong.htm
http://www.visi.com/juan/congress/
http://www.congressmerge.com/
https://forms.house.gov/wyr/welcome.shtml
http://www.usa.gov/Contact/Elected.shtml
Please do not support passage of any Bill or Amendment that would make the 700 Billion "Paulson Plan" bailout become law.
You already know how enraged your constituency is with the prospect of having to shoulder the debt from yet another bailout plan for the misdeeds and failures of others.
More importantly the Administration is trying to railroad you into support of a bad plan with a sense of urgency that does not exist - this is a "you have to shake 'em up before you shake 'em down" alarmist approach by the Administration to get you and other Legislators to act quickly in favor of this plan without taking the time to fairly debate, and consider ALL of the alternatives.
Knowledgeable economists have said there is at least one month before action is needed to address Wallstreet's issues.
The "Paulson Plan" is a bailout that will, contrary to the Administration's assertions, hurt far more Americans and the American economy than it will help.
It will hurt all of us in these ways: First and foremost, 700 billion is an unprecedented amount of money in scope and timing that will add significantly to an already unsupportable national debt level. No doubt you've already heard that this alone will pose more than a $6,000 debt on every American man, woman, and child - or - more than $24,000 in new national debt for the average American family of 4 people. The impact of the existing national debt has already seriously eroded the value and strength of the American dollar - at the beginning of this year it had already lost more than 25% of its value since 2004 - cutting into savings and increasing the cost of nearly every commodity, service or product used by American consumers and commerce. This plan is a serious threat to our future financial security, especially if it is followed by further taxation.
Can you or any other Legislator seriously believe that the sponsors of this plan, who only arrived at a determination that $700 billion would be sufficient because it was " a really big number", will effectively counter the threat of trillions of dollars of exposure with this amount? There are sophisticated and expert financiers and economists, including former Federal Reserve Secretary Greenspan who don't!
Do you not suspect that as a consequence and once committed that you will be asked, just like the funding for the war in Iraq, for more money in the future - because failure to do so would jeopardize $700 billion already spent or because the Administration had vastly underestimated the extent of the "crisis" just as they were equally blindsided by it as recently as August?
Washington, unlike American business and commerce, does not have a culture of cost savings and cost containment. Can you imagine how vast the structure will be needed by Washington to administer, manage, maintain and market these "investments" , or the magnitude of the cost if it's outsourced, and for how long ? What will it take - 3 years, 5 years ??? Bill Gross of Pimco has bandied about the possibility of a 7% return - even if it was possible that's not net profit but gross profit. When all of the costs for the plan's administration are added up, there will be a loss not a profit. Even Secretary Paulson qualifies this outcome.
Pricing of these "toxic" (Wallstreet's own description for them) assets and instruments is paramount; yet this plan has no clear mechanism to assure the determination of a real and fair value that won't subsequently injure taxpayers. It's been pitched as "trust us to do the right thing". Well, poll after recent poll shows that overwhelmingly Americans do not trust the Government to do the "right" thing in this crisis.
I urge you to "step back" and recognize all of the Congressional Leadership's and Administration's posturing and arm twisting on this bailout plan and recognize it, just as the American public does, for what it is.
Please consider some of the other viable alternatives already put forth for discussion that do not harm the American taxpayer to the extent this plan does - Senator Schumer's notion of an FDIC-style insurance program to backstop these instruments and mortgages and make them marketable; the use of preferred stock for some classes of assets to give the taxpayer an equity position for their tax dollars; repeal of the "mark to market" accounting rules to establish an equitable value and market for the assets; and, lastly a substantial reduction and, or, elimination of the capital gains tax to instantly pump massive amounts of liquidity from private capital back into the housing and equity markets.
There is time to do this right - Christmas ornaments, political posturing and the notion that "a bad bill now is better than the perfect bill later" is absolutely asinine - no one believes that Congress will reform it's legislation later to make the perfect bill.
Americans recognize that this is a bailout for Wallstreet being packaged and "sold" to them as a "Mainstreet" issue .... if the "Paulson Plan" is passed into law, they will not accept any Legislator's plea afterward for having been misled by those who promoted its adoption. Gullibility will not cut it as a defense against a voter backlash. Constituents want representation and that's clear from the volume of mail, calls, faxes and emails that Congress has received over this - they don't want to hear that the American public just doesn't understand the issues and how it affects them - they're also smart enough to know that is just more Washington arrogance, suggesting the public is "too stupid to get it".
Moreover, Congress should fully expect in the wake of any passage of this $700 billion bailout, a wide sweeping voter effort to reform the "legalized bribery" of lobbyists and PAC's. The American public understands the extent legalized bribery has enabled and played an part in leading us into this financial crisis.
Nancy Pelosi has said, but unwittingly hasn't understood the implication, not only is the party over for high flying Wallstreet Ceo's, so too, will it be for the Congressional beneficiaries of influence peddling and legalized bribery if this plan passes.
* if you care to, feel free to use the above letter
Congressional Emails, Addresses, Phone and Fax Numbers
http://www.webslingerz.com/jhoffman/congress-email.html
http://www.conservativeusa.org/mega-cong.htm
http://www.visi.com/juan/congress/
http://www.congressmerge.com/
https://forms.house.gov/wyr/welcome.shtml
http://www.usa.gov/Contact/Elected.shtml
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
