Full Text of the Bailout

[Valerie]

[DISCUSSION DRAFT]
110TH CONGRESS
2D SESSION H. R. ll
To provide authority for the Federal Government to purchase and insure
certain types of troubled assets for the purposes of providing stability
to and preventing disruption in the economy and financial system and
protecting taxpayers, and for other purposes.
IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES
Ml. llllll introduced the following bill; which was referred to the
Committee on llllllllllllll
A BILL
To provide authority for the Federal Government to purchase
and insure certain types of troubled assets for the purposes
of providing stability to and preventing disruption
in the economy and financial system and protecting taxpayers,
and for other purposes.
1 Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representa2
tives of the United States of America in Congress assembled,
3 SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE AND TABLE OF CONTENTS.
4 (a) SHORT TITLE.—This Act may be cited as the
5 ‘‘Emergency Economic Stabilization Act of 2008’’.


http://graphics8.nytimes.com/packages/pdf/business/20080928bailout_text.pdf

 

[Valerie]

It's 110 pages long and can be found at the New York Times website.

Happy reading!

 

[Valerie]

It's 110 pages long and can be found at the New York Times website.

Happy reading!

Lol!!! They're calling it the "Rescue Bill" now!
Our heroes in congress!

Rescue Bill Unveiled
Lawmakers release plan to enact historic bailout of nation's financial system.
Congress unveils rescue bill - Sep. 28, 2008

 

[editec]

Thank you Valarie!

Today, after I help my neighbor put in some insulation, I'll take the time to read this document closely.

It will be interesting to see the actual mechanics of this rip off of the American people.

 

[Ravi]

Anybody read it?

 

[Silence]

I've skimmed it...I'm not smart enough to understand the entire thing but there did seem to be some good stuff in there..

Lots of oversight (reports every 30 - 60 days).... assistance for home owners, no golden parachutes for executives if any bad debt is purchased and held by the Fed, a Panel comprised of members picked by both parties, no pork barrel projects stuffed in, no mention of ACORN anywhere in sight that I could see...if after 5 years there is a shortfall the financial industry will have to repay the Fed so that shortfall isn't added to the deficit....

It seems that everything Obama was saying would be required has been done...

It's not perfect because we'll still be shelling out 700 Billion dollars but it does appear to me, and like I said I didn't understand all of it, that they've done everything they can to protect the taxpayer.

 

[Valerie]

I've skimmed it...I'm not smart enough to understand the entire thing but there did seem to be some good stuff in there..

Lots of oversight (reports every 30 - 60 days).... assistance for home owners, no golden parachutes for executives if any bad debt is purchased and held by the Fed, a Panel comprised of members picked by both parties, no pork barrel projects stuffed in, no mention of ACORN anywhere in sight that I could see...if after 5 years there is a shortfall the financial industry will have to repay the Fed so that shortfall isn't added to the deficit....

It seems that everything Obama was saying would be required has been done...

It's not perfect because we'll still be shelling out 700 Billion dollars but it does appear to me, and like I said I didn't understand all of it, that they've done everything they can to protect the taxpayer.

I'm at work and I haven't had time to read the proposal yet, but I wonder why we should wait five years to see IF there is a shortfall before we require the money to be paid back???

I heard on the radio that there is no provision written in there to prevent the same things from happening again???

I applaud those members of congress who are pushing back and fighting for better terms for the tax payers. I don't know, I just wonder whether congress is being given more "faulty intelligence" and being pressured into accepting a bad agreement.

 

[Silence]

I'm at work and I haven't had time to read the proposal yet, but I wonder why we should wait five years to see IF there is a shortfall before we require the money to be paid back???

I heard on the radio that there is no provision written in there to prevent the same things from happening again???

I applaud those members of congress who are pushing back and fighting for better terms for the tax payers. I don't know, I just wonder whether congress is being given more "faulty intelligence" and being pressured into accepting a bad agreement.

perhaps it's a lot to expect that the economy will right itself within 2 or 3 years? I mean it did take us 8 to get to this point didn't it?

I didn't see provisions to prevent a future situation but one would assume that reactivating the regulations and/or at least enforcing the ones we've got might prevent this situation from happening again.

From what I've seen BOTH the house and senate have been working together on this bill, both parties are involved so it would appear, at least on it's face, that no one is being lead around by the nose and forced into this...well except insomuch as really NONE of them like it but they all know it's absolutely necessary.

 

[Valerie]

Thank you Valarie!

Today, after I help my neighbor put in some insulation, I'll take the time to read this document closely.

It will be interesting to see the actual mechanics of this rip off of the American people.

I wonder why, If the real cause of the problem is people suddenly defaulting on their mortgages because they didn't understand the terms of the adjustable interest rate agreement, why doesn't the Fed just freeze the rates and allow people to continue making their monthly payments and then add the cost difference to the tail end of the loan term? At least people would remain in their homes and continue making monthly payments.

 

[Valerie]

perhaps it's a lot to expect that the economy will right itself within 2 or 3 years? I mean it did take us 8 to get to this point didn't it?

I didn't see provisions to prevent a future situation but one would assume that reactivating the regulations and/or at least enforcing the ones we've got might prevent this situation from happening again.

From what I've seen BOTH the house and senate have been working together on this bill, both parties are involved so it would appear, at least on it's face, that no one is being lead around by the nose and forced into this...well except insomuch as really NONE of them like it but they all know it's absolutely necessary.

I know, it seems there is bi-partisan agreement that something HAS to be done or the sky will fall, but the same thing happened with going into Iraq. I fear our leaders are spineless and clueless and more concerned about being re-elected. They look to each other for political cover and then down the line there is no accountability.

 

[Care4all]

send a note to your senators to filibuster, make them need the 60 votes to pass it, if there ever was a time for 60 votes, it is on this...

hate to be a spammer on this....but it is important, really important....

care

 

[busara]

I wonder why, If the real cause of the problem is people suddenly defaulting on their mortgages because they didn't understand the terms of the adjustable interest rate agreement, why doesn't the Fed just freeze the rates and allow people to continue making their monthly payments and then add the cost difference to the tail end of the loan term? At least people would remain in their homes and continue making monthly payments.

because then the banks would lose $.

seriously though, people could have refinanced their mortgage to lower their payment, right? (never had a mortgage, but i see all these ads about refinancing)

 

[Silence]

because then the banks would lose $.

seriously though, people could have refinanced their mortgage to lower their payment, right? (never had a mortgage, but i see all these ads about refinancing)

my sister refinanced her mortgage in an attempt to lower her payment and guess what...she got an adjustable rate and now her mortgage is $300 more a month than before she refinanced... my sister is a dumbfuck though so I'm not sure she's a good example

Care, so you actually think Congress should filibuster? what happens if this situation really is as dire as economist say it is? what happens if credit does dry up?

I don't disagree that there should be complete bi-partisan support but to purposefully filibuster? the Republicans have been doing that since 2007...

 

[Care4all]

because then the banks would lose $.

seriously though, people could have refinanced their mortgage to lower their payment, right? (never had a mortgage, but i see all these ads about refinancing)

no, they couldn't, even though they were TOLD that they would be able to before their interest rates hit the variable stage.

As long as prices continued going up. The idea would have been that these homeowners beginning in a subprime adustable loan, where they were given interest rates of around 4%-7% for 3-5 years before hitting their adjustable rate....(ones beginning at 4% went up as high as 12% ....now tripling the monthly amount due on their mortgages while gas prices doubled, heating prices doubled, healthcare costs of their share near doubled in the same 3-5 year period), would have accumilated equity in to their homes, giving them the 20% needed to secure a conventional 30 year fixed mortgage, without PMI insurance needed.

Something happened, the normal ups and downs of a business cycle slowed slightly, panic took hold, all financial institutions started denying the conventional mortgages to those trying to refinance because their home prices had not gone up 20% in value as was predicted, soooo they did not have enough equity to get in to the conventional fixed rates which were running around 6% as their interest rate.

Well then, because some people were falling in to foreclosure because they could not refinance, then more homes flooded the market, something worse for those in adjustable mortgages....their homes were now worth, much, much less than what they paid for them, (they are strapped with an UPSIDE down mortgage, one that is higher than the house is worth) making it impossible to ever get in to a conventional fixed rate mortgage and stuck with having to pay the loanshark mortgage rates in an adjustable loan.

NOTE that this is ONLY a very very small segment of what is really going on here and what this collapse is all about....

care

 

[DiamondDave]

2,322 pet project earmarks... ridiculous

 

[Care4all]

my sister refinanced her mortgage in an attempt to lower her payment and guess what...she got an adjustable rate and now her mortgage is $300 more a month than before she refinanced... my sister is a dumbfuck though so I'm not sure she's a good example

Care, so you actually think Congress should filibuster? what happens if this situation really is as dire as economist say it is? what happens if credit does dry up?

I don't disagree that there should be complete bi-partisan support but to purposefully filibuster? the Republicans have been doing that since 2007...

yes, i think it should be filibustered, this allows time for more debate if they can not get 60 senators to sign on to it right away....if they can get the 60 immediately then it is a lost cause for those of us against it and it will show that more than the majority in the senate agree with it, which would also be a good thing if this bailout is really needed, it would show solid bipartisan support to the world that is watching.

If they do not have the 60 votes to bring it to cloture immediately, it allows Congress to debate the issue and maybe even amend it to make it better and it will give us, those who are suppose to be represented, more time to read the deal and analyze it and as said, maybe improve it....before it gets to the 60 to move it forward....

looking at the markets, it can sustain a few more days without falling apart and personally i think it can stand forever without falling completely apart...this $700 billion is but a mere bandaid and we have already previous to this dished out $400 billion...it will be a never ending draw on our money...the industry can support their own mess is what i am reading, let the dead fall where they may....
the strong will survive....without our money....imo.

But of course none of us, not even congress, is privvy to the real deal or the real mess that is going on behind the scenes...it will only come out later and they all can claim that they were duped, again....is what i think, when they come to us for another trillion...

care

 

[Care4all]

ALSO, I don't trust Paulson, heard on the financial news that he knew about this bail out over 6 weeks ago, but waited till the last minute, before congress goes home on recess to campaign for their seats and election in november...THIS IS what they did with the Iraqi resolution vote...put congress in a position right before an election...

if it was treuly so URGENT he would have presented it the 6 weeks ago...

I believe it is a scam....

 

[Valerie]

ALSO, I don't trust Paulson, heard on the financial news that he knew about this bail out over 6 weeks ago, but waited till the last minute, before congress goes home on recess to campaign for their seats and election in november...THIS IS what they did with the Iraqi resolution vote...put congress in a position right before an election...

if it was treuly so URGENT he would have presented it the 6 weeks ago...

I believe it is a scam....

Yes, I fear they're trying to pull the same type of thing here. We can all agree that something needs to be done, but do we need to do it with a shotgun to our heads, now, now, NOW? I haven't even had time to read the proposal yet, have you? I'm scrambling to type this in between tasks at work. I hope to have time to do more reading tonight. Most people are too busy to learn all of the details, never mind understand them. The politicians are so worried about who gets credit and who gets blame, who do we trust?

Why isn't there at least a provision to prevent the same thing from happening again? Are we essentially throwing a trillion dollars of good money after bad?

 

[Valerie]

H.R.3997
Title: An Act to amend the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 to provide tax relief and protections for military personnel, and for other purposes.
Sponsor: Rep Rangel, Charles B. [NY-15] (introduced 10/30/2007) Cosponsors (None)
Related Bills: H.RES.884, H.RES.1517
Latest Major Action: 9/29/2008 Resolving differences -- House actions. Status: Pursuant to the provisions of H. Res. 1517, the House moved to agree to the Senate amendment to the House amendment to the Senate amendment with an amendment.
House Reports: 110-426

Note: According to the House Majority Leader, H.R.3997 will be used as the vehicle for the Emergency Economic Stabilization Act of 2008. See documents on the House Financial Services Committee website and H.Res.1517 on the House Rules Committee website.
http://clerk.house.gov/evs/2008/roll674.xml

 

[Valerie]

^DJA Dow Jones Composite Average 3,707.38 4:14pm ET Down 236.36 (5.99%)

^DJI Dow Jones Industrial Average 10,365.45 4:14pm ET Down 777.68 (6.98%)

^DJT Dow Jones Transportation Averag 4,503.89 4:12pm ET Down 246.97 (5.20%)

^DJU Dow Jones Utility Average 423.63 4:10pm ET Down 21.48 (4.83%)

Treasury vows to protect financial markets: Financial News - Yahoo! Finance

AP
Treasury vows to protect financial markets
Monday September 29, 3:23 pm ET
By Martin Crutsinger, AP Economics Writer
Treasury: Paulson will do all he can to protect financial markets following House vote

WASHINGTON (AP) -- Treasury Secretary Henry Paulson will do all he can to protect the financial markets and the economy after the House rejected a proposed $700 billion rescue bill for the financial system, a Treasury department spokesman said Monday.