# House of Representatives Rejects Bailout Bill **URL:** \ **Category:** Great Debates\ **Created:** [September 29, 2008, 6:21pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/house-of-representatives-rejects-bailout-bill/465746 "2008-09-29T18:21:41Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 20\ **Page:** 11
**Author:** ![gonzomax](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/g/e8c25b/32.png) [@gonzomax](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/gonzomax)\ **Post date:** [September 30, 2008, 12:28am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/house-of-representatives-rejects-bailout-bill/465746/201 "2008-09-30T00:28:03Z")
Congressmen have been besieged with emails, letters and phone calls. They are overwhelmingly against the bill. Most Americans see it as bailing out the fat cats again. Part of the problem was the original bill that Paulson wanted. To get a trillion dollars as the admin was going out was a scary thought. Then to say he should have the right to give the money to any financial institution as he thought fit was a problem. Then to insist that he would not have to answer to the courts or any agency was the last straw. Then it came out that they had worked on the bill for a few months while telling America that the economy was on a good foundation and safe. Then suddenly he needed extraordinary powers to save the economy. The people did not buy it. I do not buy it. Many congressmen say the antis are ahead by 1000 to 1. Vote for it and lose your cushy job. Perhaps the people have finally had enough of Paulson and his thieving cohorts. ---
**Author:** ![GIGObuster](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/gigobuster/32/421_2.png) [@GIGObuster](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/GIGObuster)\ **Post date:** [September 30, 2008, 12:30am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/house-of-representatives-rejects-bailout-bill/465746/202 "2008-09-30T00:30:46Z")
> [@Scylla](#): > > But, there were some Republicans making noise. Bush was one of them. He was one of the loudest. We had hearings in 2004 to attempt reform, and it was vehemently opposed by most Democrats. > > Market and Capitalistic excesses have a lot to blame for the current debacle. The Democrats **Really** fucked up resisting reform, and a lot of this can be laid at their feet. > > They know this. Talk is cheap. Being the loudest does not avoid having responsibility, And still there is the silly fact that the republicans had the majority, not excusing the Democrats, but it is really silly to ignore who had the more power to change things. ---
**Author:** ![brickbacon](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/898d66/32.png) [@brickbacon](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/brickbacon)\ **Post date:** [September 30, 2008, 12:31am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/house-of-representatives-rejects-bailout-bill/465746/203 "2008-09-30T00:31:23Z")
> [@Oy](#): > > First time home buyers aren’t the ones defaulting, for the most part. These are, as I understand it, higher end people buying (and refinancing) higher end properties and then the bottoms dropping out both of the property and the income. But the influx of many buyers who are under-qualified, and have little personally invested as a down payment certainly contributed to the climate we are in. People are walking away from their homes because they lose far less since they didn’t have to put anything down. [This](http://mpra.ub.uni-muenchen.de/5370/) paper states that equity is a prime determinant of mortgage default propensities, thus a no-down payment owner would likely to default, right? [This](http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/story/2008/06/19/ST2008061901591.html) article also states the following about housing in my area: > [@](#): > > The region’s crisis ballooned in part, McClain said, \*\*because a large stock of new homes was sold to many first-time home buyers, some of them immigrants, under loans with adjustable rates. When their monthly payments increased, many home buyers were unable to keep up, which led to foreclosures. > \*\* > “Where you’ve had more immigrants, they are after the American dream, and as soon as they can buy a house, that’s what they’re doing,” McClain said. “In many cases, they’re overreaching.” > > His research suggests that foreclosures will increase until at least early next year, largely because of decreasing home values. **“When the price of housing drops to an extent that the amount you owe is more than the house is worth, if you don’t have a lot of equity, there is a tendency to walk away from it and just have it foreclosed,”** McClain said. So, at least in my area, many of the home buyers were first timers. The types of mortgages Bush championed have certainly had an impact on the crisis we are in now. I don’t know if they have been more detrimental than the scenario you laid out, but you can’t discount them. > [@Oy](#): > > A lot of people buying properties to flip them, and finding the value going down instead of up, and so forth. I’m not one to defend Bush - as far as I’m concerned, he’s the worst president I’ve lived through, and I was born during Eisenhower. But the policies addressed in this post are not things that caused this crisis, except for the astronomical budgets, the wars, and the lack of fiscal discipline, which may or may not have had impact, but were certainly indirect. I disagree. ---
**Author:** ![Squink](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/b5e925/32.png) [@Squink](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Squink)\ **Post date:** [September 30, 2008, 12:31am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/house-of-representatives-rejects-bailout-bill/465746/204 "2008-09-30T00:31:50Z")
> [@eleanorigby](#): > > Let’s not take McCain’s statements out of context, ok? > > Earlier today, he took credit for the passage of this bill. [here](http://dyn.politico.com/printstory.cfm?uuid=AF9F10EC-18FE-70B2-A82949C5A24271A8) I linked to that story earlier today, in this thread, post #118. You’re right, it’s part of the context, which is why I linked to it. Depending on events, I expect either McCain’s or Obama’s statements of today to be a source of some controversy, which is why I linked to the best source for each. It’d be a shame to see either of them disappear down the rathole, as so many things on the internet do. ---
**Author:** ![Fear\_Itself](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/fear_itself/32/19637_2.png) [@Fear\_Itself](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Fear_Itself)\ **Post date:** [September 30, 2008, 12:34am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/house-of-representatives-rejects-bailout-bill/465746/205 "2008-09-30T00:34:16Z")
> [@ArizonaTeach](#): > > I’m trying to figure out why people are blaming the Republicans while refusing to acknowledge the failures of the Democrats here. > > Like I’ve said, if the Democrats wanted to pass this, they could have done so without a single Republican vote. I just don’t see any logic in your argument at all. 2/3rds of Democrats voted for it, 2/3rds of Republicans voted against it, and somehow it is the Democrats fault because they couldn’t get 100% of their members on board? By that logic, it is the Republicans fault, because less than 100% of them voted for it. Why is it not the Republicans fault for not supporting a bill written by a president from their own party? ---
**Author:** ![Scylla](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/a5b964/32.png) [@Scylla](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Scylla)\ **Post date:** [September 30, 2008, 12:37am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/house-of-representatives-rejects-bailout-bill/465746/206 "2008-09-30T00:37:03Z")
> [@GIGObuster](#): > > Talk is cheap. Being the loudest does not avoid having responsibility, And still there is the silly fact that the republicans had the majority, not excusing the Democrats, but it is really silly to ignore who had the more power to change things. I suppose that if that were true then we could just blame the Democrats for not passing the Bill today. After all, they have the majority now. The fact is, that like everything else, it just ain’t that simple. Not every Democrat votes exactly the same as every other Democrat on every issue. That’s true now of Democrats. It was true then of Republicans. Essentially now we are dealing with a problem that was created because of partisanship, and that is getting worse because of partisanship. ---
**Author:** ![Scylla](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/a5b964/32.png) [@Scylla](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Scylla)\ **Post date:** [September 30, 2008, 12:47am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/house-of-representatives-rejects-bailout-bill/465746/207 "2008-09-30T00:47:00Z")
Frankly, I put a lot of blame on today’s failure to Pelosi and Reid trying to characterize this as a “Wall Street” problem, as if this was something that big business created all by itself. In fact, there’s plenty of blame to go around, and their attempts to redirect show poor leadership and putting partisan politics before the needs of their country. Two more days until we reconvene. Their playing games cost us Wachovia, and WaMu. Tomorrow there will likely be more. Those that think this is going to “trickle down” to the little guy are in for a rude awakening. People are going to lose their jobs, their houses, and it will take years for the economy to recover. It’s worse than if they had done nothing. Bush did not play politics with this one. He got a proposal to the table. We needed fast intelligent intervention. What we got was Pelosi and Reid. ---
**Author:** ![GIGObuster](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/gigobuster/32/421_2.png) [@GIGObuster](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/GIGObuster)\ **Post date:** [September 30, 2008, 12:47am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/house-of-representatives-rejects-bailout-bill/465746/208 "2008-09-30T00:47:36Z")
> [@Scylla](#): > > I suppose that if that were true then we could just blame the Democrats for not passing the Bill today. After all, they have the majority now. And what makes you thing I agree with the current plan? > [@](#): > > The fact is, that like everything else, it just ain’t that simple. Not every Democrat votes exactly the same as every other Democrat on every issue. That’s true now of Democrats. It was true then of Republicans. > > Essentially now we are dealing with a problem that was created because of partisanship, and that is getting worse because of partisanship. When I remember all the good and bad faith efforts of the administration to convince congress to go with Iraq, FISA and other sorry legislation, what the fearless leader did for this subject was only the equivalent of just talk to reign on this, this was the worse partisanship. Bush in the end (based on action not talk) just considered the coming problems as something he should not bother to risk anything for. ---
**Author:** ![Scylla](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/a5b964/32.png) [@Scylla](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Scylla)\ **Post date:** [September 30, 2008, 12:54am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/house-of-representatives-rejects-bailout-bill/465746/209 "2008-09-30T00:54:00Z")
> [@GIGObuster](#): > > And what makes you thing I agree with the current plan? That’s exactly my point. > [@](#): > > When I remember all the good and bad faith efforts of the administration to convince congress to go with Iraq, FISA and other sorry legislation, what the fearless leader did for this subject was only the equivalent of just talk to reign on this, this was the worse partisanship. Bush in the end (based on action not talk) just considered the coming problems as something he should not bother to risk anything for. The market hit bottom a week ago Thursday. He had a proposal by Monday. ---
**Author:** ![GIGObuster](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/gigobuster/32/421_2.png) [@GIGObuster](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/GIGObuster)\ **Post date:** [September 30, 2008, 12:55am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/house-of-representatives-rejects-bailout-bill/465746/210 "2008-09-30T00:55:38Z")
> [@Scylla](#): > > Their playing games cost us Wachovia, and WaMu. Tomorrow there will likely be more. Those that think this is going to “trickle down” to the little guy are in for a rude awakening. People are going to lose their jobs, their houses, and it will take years for the economy to recover. It’s worse than if they had done nothing. Bush did not play politics with this one. He got a proposal to the table. We needed fast intelligent intervention. What we got was Pelosi and Reid. While I do not like the current plan, I do agree something needed to be done, but now it is silly to ignore that more Democrats voted in favor than the Republicans. ---
**Author:** ![Lamar\_Mundane](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/l/85f322/32.png) [@Lamar\_Mundane](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Lamar_Mundane)\ **Post date:** [September 30, 2008, 12:58am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/house-of-representatives-rejects-bailout-bill/465746/211 "2008-09-30T00:58:54Z")
> [@Scylla](#): > > Essentially now we are dealing with a problem that was created because of partisanship, and that is getting worse because of partisanship. This is nonsense. What is partisan is the people trying to blame one or both parties for this problem. This is not the government’s fault. The Community Reinvestment Act worked just swimmingly for 25 years. It did not suddenly become a huge problem in the last few years. > [@Scylla](#): > > Over time, the response from the markets was “You want us to do shitty loans. No problem. Watch!” The Government wasn’t pushing the banks to make bad loans. The banks needed no pushing. They realized that they could wad up a bunch of loans and sell them as securities. They loved this because it got the loans off their books and they got cash up front. Their buddies in the ratings agencies didn’t seem to care if they included crap loans in the bundles, so they dreamed up ways of making loans appear cheaper - adjustable rates, interest only, etc. and sold them like hell to anyone who would buy. Why wouldn’t you buy a nice big house when the (temporary) mortgage payment was less than you rent on a crappy apartment? This had the effect of inflating the housing market and oversupplying the market. It was a classic bubble and the people who knew about it didn’t want to do anything because the money was flowing. This was entirely the fault of the banking and housing industries and the ratings agencies, not Government policies. There may be some small merit in claiming the Government didn’t do enough to stop things, but it is unlikely that they could have done much in time, and it wasn’t their fault in the first place. ---
**Author:** ![GIGObuster](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/gigobuster/32/421_2.png) [@GIGObuster](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/GIGObuster)\ **Post date:** [September 30, 2008, 1:05am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/house-of-representatives-rejects-bailout-bill/465746/212 "2008-09-30T01:05:12Z")
> [@Scylla](#): > > That’s exactly my point. And still I would understand (if this had passed) that it was because it had some merits. > [@](#): > > The market hit bottom a week ago Thursday. He had a proposal by Monday. :rolleyes: You seem to miss the meaning of what a “lame duck” is, there is very little to risk now, from the time he made noises in 2003 he could have risked his presidency even more with Iraq like efforts in convincing the public or congress of what it needed to be done; he could not put country before party regarding this. To be cynical, I do think Bush expected this to explode on the face of the next president and to avoid any blame from even posterity. ---
**Author:** ![gonzomax](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/g/e8c25b/32.png) [@gonzomax](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/gonzomax)\ **Post date:** [September 30, 2008, 1:13am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/house-of-representatives-rejects-bailout-bill/465746/213 "2008-09-30T01:13:03Z")
> [@Scylla](#): > > I suppose that if that were true then we could just blame the Democrats for not passing the Bill today. After all, they have the majority now. > The fact is, that like everything else, it just ain’t that simple. Not every Democrat votes exactly the same as every other Democrat on every issue. That’s true now of Democrats. It was true then of Republicans. > > Essentially now we are dealing with a problem that was created because of partisanship, and that is getting worse because of partisanship. How about a bill that deals directly with the mortgages. If we redo them and get people to stay in their homes and make payments the problem is alleviated. If you give billions to the financial institutions ,the foreclosures will not go away. That is only a delaying action. It solves nothing. Maybe you trust the financial companies. Somehow most of America has had enough of them. Put a trillion dollar pot in front of them and they will drain it. ---
**Author:** ![Marley23](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/45deac/32.png) [@Marley23](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Marley23)\ **Post date:** [September 30, 2008, 1:15am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/house-of-representatives-rejects-bailout-bill/465746/214 "2008-09-30T01:15:02Z")
> [@Scylla](#): > > Frankly, I put a lot of blame on today’s failure to Pelosi and Reid trying to characterize this as a “Wall Street” problem, as if this was something that big business created all by itself. I’ll feign surprise at this comment, if it helps. I don’t see much blame to be laid on Pelosi and Reid. It’s the same as with the rest of this calamity: a lot of people share the responsibility. > [@](#): > > In fact, there’s plenty of blame to go around, and their attempts to redirect show poor leadership and putting partisan politics before the needs of their country. Of course. “Everybody shares the blame, but mostly it’s their fault!” That’s a less than productive attitude. The bottom line is, people hate this deal and I don’t think the case has been sufficiently made to the public. Democrats don’t like it, Republicans don’t like it. That’s pretty bipartisan, really. And nobody wants to be stuck with it. The administration keeps saying this had to be done yesterday, but considering the bailout might be larger than the annual budget for the Department of Defense, I’m not up in arms. I’m actually hoping they do something better with the additional time, and I don’t usually bother hoping for that kind of thing. The administration asked for total discretion in dispersing these funds, AND came up with a figure that seems unsupported - the $700 billion is still a ballpark number, last I heard, and there had better be some effort to make sure this money isn’t spent stupidly. > [@](#): > > Their playing games cost us Wachovia, and WaMu. “Cost _us_?” How do you figure? > [@](#): > > People are going to lose their jobs, their houses, and it will take years for the economy to recover. It’s worse than if they had done nothing. A two or three day delay is worse than doing nothing? Run that one by me again, please. > [@](#): > > Bush did not play politics with this one. He got a proposal to the table. We needed fast intelligent intervention. What we got was Pelosi and Reid. For once, Congress did its job and asked for details when the administration asked for haste. I’m very sorry for the people who have been hurt so badly by this crisis and will continue to be hurt as it continues, but this needs to be done right. ---
**Author:** ![Scylla](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/a5b964/32.png) [@Scylla](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Scylla)\ **Post date:** [September 30, 2008, 1:21am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/house-of-representatives-rejects-bailout-bill/465746/215 "2008-09-30T01:21:01Z")
> [@Lamar\_Mundane](#): > > This is nonsense. What is partisan is the people trying to blame one or both parties for this problem. This is not the government’s fault. The Community Reinvestment Act worked just swimmingly for 25 years. It did not suddenly become a huge problem in the last few years. Yeah, it did actually. > [@](#): > > The Government wasn’t pushing the banks to make bad loans. The banks needed no pushing. Totally false. Compliance with CRA needed to be demonstrated prior to approval for expansion or merger. One of the biggest difficulties the banks faced was getting enough in LMI geographies are census tracts to pass CRA standards for fulfilling community lending needs. > [@](#): > > They realized that they could wad up a bunch of loans and sell them as securities. Actually that’s Ginnie Mae, Fannie Mae, and Freddie Mac that started that party. > [@](#): > > Their buddies in the ratings agencies didn’t seem to care if they included crap loans in the bundles, No. In fact, you’ve completely dropped off the reality meter here and in the rest of your post. ---
**Author:** ![Richard\_Parker](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/r/35a633/32.png) [@Richard\_Parker](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Richard_Parker)\ **Post date:** [September 30, 2008, 1:27am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/house-of-representatives-rejects-bailout-bill/465746/216 "2008-09-30T01:27:53Z")
> [@Scylla](#): > > No. In fact, you’ve completely dropped off the reality meter here and in the rest of your post. Actually, you’re the one at odds with the facts. > [@](#): > > Rating agencies are paid by the Wall Street firms that bundle mortgages into securities for sale. The rating agencies coached Wall Street on just how many risky mortgages they could pack in, said finance professor Joseph Mason of Drexel University. > > “The builders of the securities wanted to push the envelope. And I would say that the credit rating agencies, in order to maintain business in this highly lucrative and fast-growing area, went along with the game,” Mason said. > > Those credit ratings turned out to be overly optimistic. And when more and more homeowners started defaulting on their mortgages, investors were caught off guard, setting the stage for the current credit backlash. [Cite.](http://www.npr.org/templates/story/story.php?storyId=13854858) ---
**Author:** ![Scylla](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/a5b964/32.png) [@Scylla](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Scylla)\ **Post date:** [September 30, 2008, 1:30am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/house-of-representatives-rejects-bailout-bill/465746/217 "2008-09-30T01:30:37Z")
> [@gonzomax](#): > > How about a bill that deals directly with the mortgages. If we redo them and get people to stay in their homes and make payments the problem is alleviated. If you give billions to the financial institutions ,the foreclosures will not go away. That is only a delaying action. It solves nothing. Maybe you trust the financial companies. Somehow most of America has had enough of them. Put a trillion dollar pot in front of them and they will drain it. That’s a good question. The answer is that the current crisis is not a direct function of the current default rate of current mortgages outstanding. It has to do with what was built upon those mortgages through securitization. The mortgages can still be good and the securities “bad.” There is a lot of confusion out there about what is mean by these “bad” mortgage backed securities. For the most part, they are not bad in the sense that they are not paying their interest. They are bad in the sense that they are not liquid, or tradeable, or even valued. Since these are leveraged and collateralized, a loss of confidence in them means marking them to market creates an immediate credit crunch (think margin call.) This essentially dries up all liquidity in the markets and means nobody can borrow. If nobody can borrow they are forced to sell things to meet liquidity needs which leads to a lower mark to market and the cycle perpetuates. ---
**Author:** ![Lamar\_Mundane](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/l/85f322/32.png) [@Lamar\_Mundane](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Lamar_Mundane)\ **Post date:** [September 30, 2008, 1:35am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/house-of-representatives-rejects-bailout-bill/465746/218 "2008-09-30T01:35:59Z")
> [@Scylla](#): > > Yeah, it did actually. False. The agencies shares of mortgage-backed securities fell from 76% to 43% from 2003-2006. Wall Street’s share rose from 24% to 57% in the same period. ---
**Author:** ![ArizonaTeach](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/a/45deac/32.png) [@ArizonaTeach](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/ArizonaTeach)\ **Post date:** [September 30, 2008, 1:36am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/house-of-representatives-rejects-bailout-bill/465746/219 "2008-09-30T01:36:41Z")
> [@Fear\_Itself](#): > > I just don’t see any logic in your argument at all. 2/3rds of Democrats voted for it, 2/3rds of Republicans voted against it, and somehow it is the Democrats fault because they couldn’t get 100% of their members on board? By that logic, it is the Republicans fault, because less than 100% of them voted for it. Why is it not the Republicans fault for not supporting a bill written by a president from their own party? Jesus Christ, how many times do I have to say that I never said “it’s the Democrat’s fault.” I never said the Republican’s don’t share the blame (or credit, depending on your POV) for the bill’s passing. I’ve explained this twice now. Please read before responding next time. I have said, however, I don’t understand the “It’s all the Republicans’ fault” attitude. On the other hand, if you don’t understand the logic that the Democrats don’t need a single Republican vote to get legislation passed then I’m flummoxed. ---
**Author:** ![Scylla](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/a5b964/32.png) [@Scylla](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Scylla)\ **Post date:** [September 30, 2008, 1:52am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/house-of-representatives-rejects-bailout-bill/465746/220 "2008-09-30T01:52:10Z")
> [@Marley23](#): > > I’ll feign surprise at this comment, if it helps. I don’t see much blame to be laid on Pelosi and Reid. It’s the same as with the rest of this calamity: a lot of people share the responsibility. Today, we lost over a trillion dollars in market cap. That’s retirement funds, people’s savings, college funds, IRAs. The bill was promised, and it wasn’t delivered due to partisan manuevering. > [@](#): > > The bottom line is, people hate this deal and I don’t think the case has been sufficiently made to the public. Democrats don’t like it, Republicans don’t like it. That’s pretty bipartisan, really. And nobody wants to be stuck with it. I don’t like it either. Who’s supposed to like it? > [@](#): > > The administration keeps saying this had to be done yesterday, but considering the bailout might be larger than the annual budget for the Department of Defense, I’m not up in arms. You should be. I don’t know that we had to do it. I do know that once we said we would we needed to follow through. If you don’t see the urgency, you’re not really getting the meaning of the term “rescue.” If somebody is drowning, you can’t tell everybody that you are going to rescue them, and then think about it for a couple of weeks. That’s not a rescue. You do real harm by promising a rescue and not following through in a timely fashion because other alternatives are not explored. > [@](#): > > I’m actually hoping they do something better with the additional time, and I don’t usually bother hoping for that kind of thing. The administration asked for total discretion in dispersing these funds, AND came up with a figure that seems unsupported - the $700 billion is still a ballpark number, last I heard, and there had better be some effort to make sure this money isn’t spent stupidly. It may be too late to 'rescue" anything. > [@](#): > > “Cost _us_?” How do you figure? A credit crunch is a liquidity strangulation. They succumbed. A relief package could have provided that liquidity before dollar one was paid out. > [@](#): > > A two or three day delay is worse than doing nothing? Run that one by me again, please. Sure. Try this: A guy swims in the ocean and gets a cramp. He calls out for help. As the lifeguard you tell everybody you will save him. You tell him to remain calm. He waits. Now you decide to take a nap. The guy drowns. See the problem? If you hadn’t have said anything maybe he would have taken steps to save himself. Maybe somebody else would have tried. > [@](#): > > For once, Congress did its job and asked for details when the administration asked for haste. I’m very sorry for the people who have been hurt so badly by this crisis and will continue to be hurt as it continues, but this needs to be done right. I suppose that after Katrina what we should have done is all sat back and assessed the situation for a few weeks to make sure we had all the details and didn’t waste money. We should have taken our time, and studied thing to do it right, right? This can do as much or more damage than a hurricane. [Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/house-of-representatives-rejects-bailout-bill/465746.md?page=10) [Next page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/house-of-representatives-rejects-bailout-bill/465746.md?page=12)