« Poll: By Double-Digits, More Say Obama Is Best Able To Address Financial Meltdown | Home | A Night At The Congressional Races »

McCain Urges Action, But Insists On Improvements To Bailout Package

Both candidates held dualing press conferences today amid the meltdown, with McCain just wrapping up his first one in 40 days.

But the pressure on McCain to leave a bigger footprint today was arguably much higher. Dems have a built-in advantage on the economy. Polls are starting to show that more voters trust Obama to handle the current crisis. And McCain hasn't held a press conference in well over a month.

In his presser McCain insisted on five improvements he wants to see made to the bailout package.

"Let us be perfectly clear: a great burden is upon the American people," McCain said. "Seven hundred billion dollars is a staggering and unprecedented figure...Because what is being asked of the American people is unprecedented, great care must be taken to ensure their protection."

McCain insisted on greater accountability, a way for taxpayers to recoup the cash fed into the fund, total transparency in the review and implementation of the legislation, and no profits for Wall Street execs.

But McCain declined to say whether the absence of any of those features would be a dealbreaker, saying instead that current efforts should focus on securing them first. And McCain took only a few questions at the presser that followed. While Obama's question-and-answer session was also brief, McCain seemed like the one who needed to make real headway, and it's hard to argue that he accomplished this, though it's anybody's guess where this all ends up.

Full McCain remarks after the jump.

America today faces an historic national crisis. The global economy is directly threatened by the potential collapse of our financial system.

Two years ago, I warned the American people about the lack of oversight, transparency, backroom dealings and financial recklessness at Freddie Mac and Fannie Mae. Those warnings went unheeded, and more than anything directly contributed to the subprime mortgage crisis which has created the perfect economic storm.

Further inaction is simply not an option. We must pass legislation to address this crisis. If we do not, credit will dry up, with devastating consequences for our economy. People will no longer be able to buy homes and their life savings will be at stake. Businesses will not have enough money to pay their employees.

But let us be perfectly clear: a great burden is upon the American people. Seven hundred billion dollars is a staggering and unprecedented figure, and it is important that I speak plainly to the American people about the dimensions of this proposal. In essence, what this plan requires is a ten thousand dollar contribution per household. Seven hundred billion dollars, for example, could rebuild the crumbling infrastructure in every town, county, and state in this country.

Because what is being asked of the American people is unprecedented, great care must be taken to ensure their protection.

With the taxpayer in mind, I am seeking 5 basic improvements to this legislation:

First, there must be greater accountability included in the bill. I have suggested a bipartisan board to provide oversight for the rescue. We will not solve a problem caused by poor oversight with a plan that has no oversight. Never before in the history of our nation has so much power and money been concentrated in the hands of one person, and there must be protections and oversight in place.

Second, as a part of that oversight, there must be a path for taxpayers to recover the money that is put into this fund. One trillion dollars is an unprecedented sum. We are talking about ten thousand dollars per household, and that money cannot simply go into a black hole of bad debt with no means of recovering any of the funds.

Third, there must be complete transparency in the review of this legislation and in the implementation of any legislation. This cannot be cobbled together behind closed doors. The American people have the right to know which businesses will be helped, what that selection will be based on and how much that help will cost. All the details should all be made available online and elsewhere for open public scrutiny.

Fourth, no Wall Street executives should profit from taxpayer dollars. It is wrong to ask teachers and farmers and small business owners to fill the gas tanks of the helicopters of Wall Street tycoons. The senior leaders of any firm that is bailed out should not be making more than the highest paid government official.

Fifth and finally, it is completely unacceptable for any kind of earmarks to be included in this bill. It would be outrageous for legislators and lobbyists to pack this rescue plan with taxpayer money for favored companies. This simply cannot happen.

Let me restate that inaction is not an option. The American people are watching. History will be our judge, and it will judge us harshly if we do not put our country first in this crisis.



65 Comments

| Leave a comment
user-pic

I was just reading that Barney Frank has said that those CEOs who are refusing pay cuts are unpatriotic.

I love that so much I'm laughing really hard. Talk about making the Repugs eat their own failure - right down to the patriotism bullshit.

LMAO!

So basically, shorter John McCain:

I endorse the Obama plan as stated earlier today in its entirety.

As usual, Obama leads McCain follows.

McCain had the foresight two years ago. As usual, Obama is in reactionary mode. Never the leader but always ready to expain and react and explain and explain and explain.....

Right, when he was the champion of deregulation and shouting about privatizing social security?

McCain doesn't lead or have foresight on anything unless it lines his pockets and those of his buddies.

Only major differences: Obama wants homeowner protection and economic stimulus. McCain says thanks, but no thanks, to earmarks.

McCain's quote repeated for emphasis:

Two years ago, I warned the American people about the lack of oversight, transparency, backroom dealings and financial recklessness at Freddie Mac and Fannie Mae. Those warnings went unheeded, and more than anything directly contributed to the subprime mortgage crisis which has created the perfect economic storm.

Further inaction is simply not an option.

Where was Senator Obama in Jan of 2005 when the bill was introduced and on May 25, 2006 when McCain co-sponsored that bill that died in the Democratically controlled Congress.

And then there is this:

WASHINGTON (AFP) - Democratic presidential hopeful Barack Obama is ahead in four battleground states, according to a Quinnipiac University poll out Tuesday that suggested Obama could be benefiting from turmoil on Wall Street.

http://news.yahoo.com/s/afp/20080923/ts_alt_afp/usvotestates

So when Obama favors inertia it is easy to see why this tactic would benefit him. It may be cynical but only the naive would believe this is not being discussed in the Obama bunker.

If the bill was submitted in May, 2006, then it was a Republican congress that killed it.

But don't let facts get in your way, since you have such low regard for them anyway.

user-pic

The guys are looting the place.

They're ruining the country.

And they're running McSame's campaign.

fogu2-ude got some kind of in-you-face-stupid.

user-pic

Word straight motherfucking up.

Oooo. I just love it when you talk dirty. What are you wearing right now?

Your assertion that Obama favors "inertia" implies that it is for poll or election value. That is ridiculous. What about the Republicans who urge caution? Or economists who think this bailout has the odor of week-old fish?

user-pic
Two years ago, I warned the American people about the lack of oversight, transparency, backroom dealings and financial recklessness at Freddie Mac and Fannie Mae.

Yawn. Any one have actual proof of this? Given the outright lies that the McCain campaign is inclined to put out there, I'd like to see a link to this story.

Yes I posted the bill twice yesterday: 2005 s190.

Look it up.

Hagel sponsored, McCain cosponsored.

user-pic

You're so easy to provoke.

Sorta like your hero, you know?

Again, just for emphasis.

May 25, 2006

Sen. John McCain [R-AZ]: Mr. President, this week Fannie Mae's regulator reported that the company's quarterly reports of profit growth over the past few years were "illusions deliberately and systematically created" by the company's senior management, which resulted in a $10.6 billion accounting scandal.

The Office of Federal Housing Enterprise Oversight's report goes on to say that Fannie Mae employees deliberately and intentionally manipulated financial reports to hit earnings targets in order to trigger bonuses for senior executives. In the case of Franklin Raines, Fannie Mae's former chief executive officer, OFHEO's report shows that over half of Mr. Raines' compensation for the 6 years through 2003 was directly tied to meeting earnings targets. The report of financial misconduct at Fannie Mae echoes the deeply troubling $5 billion profit restatement at Freddie Mac.

The OFHEO report also states that Fannie Mae used its political power to lobby Congress in an effort to interfere with the regulator's examination of the company's accounting problems. This report comes some weeks after Freddie Mac paid a record $3.8 million fine in a settlement with the Federal Election Commission and restated lobbying disclosure reports from 2004 to 2005. These are entities that have demonstrated over and over again that they are deeply in need of reform.

For years I have been concerned about the regulatory structure that governs Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac--known as Government-sponsored entities or GSEs--and the sheer magnitude of these companies and the role they play in the housing market. OFHEO's report this week does nothing to ease these concerns. In fact, the report does quite the contrary. OFHEO's report solidifies my view that the GSEs need to be reformed without delay.

I join as a cosponsor of the Federal Housing Enterprise Regulatory Reform Act of 2005, S. 190, to underscore my support for quick passage of GSE regulatory reform legislation. If Congress does not act, American taxpayers will continue to be exposed to the enormous risk that Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac pose to the housing market, the overall financial system, and the economy as a whole.

I urge my colleagues to support swift action on this GSE reform legislation.

http://www.govtrack.us/congress/bill.xpd?bill=s109-190

user-pic

And again, for emphasis: you're easy.

According to Naomi Klein, conservatives are already applying the shock doctrine to force through repugnant additions to the plan: http://www.commondreams.org/view/2008/09/23-1

I say we say no bailout without attaching the Employee Free Choice Act, or something equally good that wingnuts would normally filibuster and veto.

Hey idiot! Get your facts right. The Democrats didn't control congress until the Fall of 2006.

Is this like McCain forgetting what happened in the war up until the Surge? What happened before this? Where was McCain when all the deregulation took place? Oh yeah, he was apart of it.

Good try on your troll points for the day and the racist picture you have.

Well aren't you an idiot.

The bill was alive in the Fall of 2006. The Democrats killed it as a year end inaction.

Here ya go:

Sen. John McCain [R-AZ]: Mr. President, this week Fannie Mae's regulator reported that the company's quarterly reports of profit growth over the past few years were "illusions deliberately and systematically created" by the company's senior management, which resulted in a $10.6 billion accounting scandal.

The Office of Federal Housing Enterprise Oversight's report goes on to say that Fannie Mae employees deliberately and intentionally manipulated financial reports to hit earnings targets in order to trigger bonuses for senior executives. In the case of Franklin Raines, Fannie Mae's former chief executive officer, OFHEO's report shows that over half of Mr. Raines' compensation for the 6 years through 2003 was directly tied to meeting earnings targets. The report of financial misconduct at Fannie Mae echoes the deeply troubling $5 billion profit restatement at Freddie Mac.

The OFHEO report also states that Fannie Mae used its political power to lobby Congress in an effort to interfere with the regulator's examination of the company's accounting problems. This report comes some weeks after Freddie Mac paid a record $3.8 million fine in a settlement with the Federal Election Commission and restated lobbying disclosure reports from 2004 to 2005. These are entities that have demonstrated over and over again that they are deeply in need of reform.

For years I have been concerned about the regulatory structure that governs Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac--known as Government-sponsored entities or GSEs--and the sheer magnitude of these companies and the role they play in the housing market. OFHEO's report this week does nothing to ease these concerns. In fact, the report does quite the contrary. OFHEO's report solidifies my view that the GSEs need to be reformed without delay.

I join as a cosponsor of the Federal Housing Enterprise Regulatory Reform Act of 2005, S. 190, to underscore my support for quick passage of GSE regulatory reform legislation. If Congress does not act, American taxpayers will continue to be exposed to the enormous risk that Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac pose to the housing market, the overall financial system, and the economy as a whole.

I urge my colleagues to support swift action on this GSE reform legislation.

http://www.govtrack.us/congress/bill.xpd?bill=s109-190

Ummm....you do realize that the new Congress elected in Nov of 2006 didn't take office until January of 2007. Facts are stubborn things.

user-pic

I thought it was "facts are stupid things". Wasn't the quote changed in a writing statement?

Right, and didn't McCain's buddy Bush promise a veto, which the Republicans just couldn't muster enough votes to override, even with the help of Congressional Democrats?

Oh, I get it, you're from an alternate reality! You're fighting against 14 years of a DEMOCRATICALLY controlled Congress and are the underdog! Perhaps if you click your heels three times, and spin around saying, "there's no President like Palin" you'll be taken home.

user-pic

LOL!

Can you provide a link where the Democrats killed it in 2006? Also, please provide us some information on the work McCain and Hagel did to get this bill passed, including any hearings by the Senate Banking Committee--Hagel was a member.

Also, can you point me to the part of this bill that regulates derivatives, such as credit default swaps and the other exotic financial products that are at the heart of this current financial mess? This bill seems to deal squarely with the financial accounting mess at Fannie and Freddie and not with imposing regulations on those financial products. Thanks.

Ah, yes, but what does Palin have to say about this whole crisis? Surely, since she is the non-blinky type, she must have a plan. After all, she had a plan for Wasilla, AK.

How much debt did the city have when she left office, again?

user-pic

700 billion dollars.

This is a Neo-Con plan to handcuff Obama. They realize that he's likely to win in Nov and don't want him spending money on social programs so they scheme this up where they give all this money to Wall St for safe keeping leaving Obama with no money to spend on his campaign promises.

Remember Neo-cons don't like McCain much either, meaning either way they handcuff a non-Neo con from doing anything "crazy" with their neo-con money.

user-pic

This is not a bailout - that's for damn sure.

This just puts money back into the hands of the people who fucking lost it in the first place and there's no guarantee against the bottom dropping out again.

The only way to fix this is to stop and put together some safeguards first -

user-pic

The questions that Chris Bowers has about this "bailout":

1. Why did the Bush administration suddenly declare a "crisis" during the final two weeks when Congress would be in session during his presidency? Is it maybe because, after the election, Congress would know it wasn't dealing with Bush anymore?


2. If this is such a sudden crisis, why is it that the Bush administration was drawing up the plan for this bill for months beforehand?


3. Why is it that Congress is supposed to bail out many banks and firms that are actually quite successful and profitable right now, and not just those that are failing?


4. Why is Paulson blatantly lying to Congress about oversight?

5. Where did the $700 billion figure come from?

6. Why is Paulson urging that debate on the matter be held after the legislation is passed?

I'd like the answers to 2 and 3, myself.

user-pic

I co-sign those questions.


I'll take #3 - because you'd be penalizing the good banks if you only bailed out the bad ones.

I'll answer your answer to #3.

The way to get around not punishing the good firms is to expressly punish the bad. This is why there needs to be some sort of adequate punitive measure for those banks and lending intuitions that need to accept the bailout. Right now, Paulson's fighting against this, but basically what he's fighting for is a taxpayer funded bailout of all firms, whether they need it or not. Actually, it's the banking lobby fighting for it, but it's all the same in this White House.

Punish the ones that come begging, whether it be equity or CEO tax. There should be some disincentive for a company to come asking for free money. It's not good enough to say, "bail them all out, there's plenty more where that came from".

7. Presumably they're not going to impose a 55% surtax to pay for this, which means that the $700B will have to be borrowed. So if the credit market is so tight, how are they going to borrow 700 billion dollars?

user-pic

Same place they always get it - China.

(Blockquote correction)

This bill was proposed, sponsored and killed as a year-end inaction in the Democratic congress. Where was Carmen Obama?

Sen. John McCain [R-AZ]: Mr. President, this week Fannie Mae's regulator reported that the company's quarterly reports of profit growth over the past few years were "illusions deliberately and systematically created" by the company's senior management, which resulted in a $10.6 billion accounting scandal.

The Office of Federal Housing Enterprise Oversight's report goes on to say that Fannie Mae employees deliberately and intentionally manipulated financial reports to hit earnings targets in order to trigger bonuses for senior executives. In the case of Franklin Raines, Fannie Mae's former chief executive officer, OFHEO's report shows that over half of Mr. Raines' compensation for the 6 years through 2003 was directly tied to meeting earnings targets. The report of financial misconduct at Fannie Mae echoes the deeply troubling $5 billion profit restatement at Freddie Mac.

The OFHEO report also states that Fannie Mae used its political power to lobby Congress in an effort to interfere with the regulator's examination of the company's accounting problems. This report comes some weeks after Freddie Mac paid a record $3.8 million fine in a settlement with the Federal Election Commission and restated lobbying disclosure reports from 2004 to 2005. These are entities that have demonstrated over and over again that they are deeply in need of reform.

For years I have been concerned about the regulatory structure that governs Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac--known as Government-sponsored entities or GSEs--and the sheer magnitude of these companies and the role they play in the housing market. OFHEO's report this week does nothing to ease these concerns. In fact, the report does quite the contrary. OFHEO's report solidifies my view that the GSEs need to be reformed without delay.

I join as a cosponsor of the Federal Housing Enterprise Regulatory Reform Act of 2005, S. 190, to underscore my support for quick passage of GSE regulatory reform legislation. If Congress does not act, American taxpayers will continue to be exposed to the enormous risk that Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac pose to the housing market, the overall financial system, and the economy as a whole.

I urge my colleagues to support swift action on this GSE reform legislation.

http://www.govtrack.us/congress/bill.xpd?bill=s109-190

user-pic

I take it back. You're not easy. You are stupid.

"I join as a cosponsor of the Federal Housing Enterprise...of 2005"...The bill was introduced in a Republican Congress, went nowhere during that Republican Congress, but you want to argue that it was the Democrats who took over in 2007 fault?

This is pathetic, even for you.

Leave it to you to focus on the irrelevant.

Please take two aspirin.

user-pic

There, there.

At least he didn't say it was Bill Clinton's fault.

So if we was concerned for so long, particularly about the lobbying activity of Fannie and Freddie, why are lobbyists and Fannie/Freddie front group functionaries running his campaign and planning his transition? Please explain.

Paulson said this morning that "McCain will not be a problem". Johnny Mac had already told his Wall Street contributors that he was on board for this plan, but needed to get a little political posturing in for the cameras. Bear in mind who John McCain's top twenty campaign contributors are: "top 20 contributors include this dozen: Merrill Lynch, Citigroup, Goldman Sachs, JPMorgan Chase, Credit Suisse, Lehman Brothers, Bank of New York Mellon, Morgan Stanley, Wachovia Group, Bridgewater Associates, Blackstone Group and Bear Stearns." Thank you George Will for letting us all know whose buttering John McCain's bread!http://www.newsweek.com/id/136308/page/2

user-pic

again, democrats didn't take control of january 2007. but don't let that stop you. ask rick davis where john mcCain was.

Davis will tell you McCain, like he was to the tune of $2 million in Fannie/Freddie cash, was promoting home ownership for oppressed peoples.
That is why McCain gobbled up six, seven, eight or nine himself (he forgets which but will get back to you.)

The equivalent of pointing out typos.

Bravo! You are my hero.

Bwahahaha.

user-pic

I do not care what McLame did or said in 2005 or 2006.

He co-sponsored campaign finance reform legislation that he is now trying to find holes in which he can crawl through.

Give me a fucking break! Shut up about what McLame said yesterday - he contradicts himself every 18 hours.

Of course you don't care. It would ruin the fictional narrative about your Potemkin candidate.

user-pic

Oy.

The Republican Party is the Potemkin Party.

It's really a shame you're such a miserable person you can't get that there is substance in Obama.

I guess you can't get past the "brutha" thing.

WEll y'all may get your wish. Anyone want to lay odds both parties try to play rope-a-dope until after the election?

"The financial markets are in quite fragile condition and I think absent a plan they will get worse," Bernanke said.

Ominously, he added, "I believe if the credit markets are not functioning, that jobs will be lost, that our credit rate will rise, more houses will be foreclosed upon, GDP will contract, that the economy will just not be able to recover in a normal, healthy way."

"You worry about taxpayers being on the hook?" he replied at one point. "Guess what - they're already on the hook." Paulson suggested that the fallout from the credit crisis would hit everyone's pocketbook unless forceful action was taken. Moreover, a flawed and outdated regulatory system, which didn't catch abuses, needed to be overhauled, he said.

"Nobody is happy" about the bailout request, said House Majority Leader Steny Hoyer, D-Md., although he spoke of possible passage of legislation by the weekend.

"Nobody wants to have to do this," agreed Rep. John Boehner of Ohio, the Republican leader. He said he was hopeful of a quick agreement.

"This massive bailout is not a solution. It is financial socialism and it's un-American," said Sen. Jim Bunning, R-Ky.

http://apnews.myway.com/article/20080923/D93CKBG01.html

I have to say, I love your icon. Isn't that ironic, a Republican Troll being concerned about a Democrat using the unconstitutional surveillance system implemented by Bush and the Republican Congress to monitor, what? The wrecked financial markets so touted by John McCain as 'fundamentally sound'?

Or will President Obama secretly spy on those who don't have health benefits and savagely swoop down and make them healthy and financially sound?

Dark days for the Republicans.

user-pic

You're very good.

LOL!

You must be dizzy from all that spinning.

Sit down and rest quietly for while and try to regain your sanity.

Thanks.

McCain details his economic recovery package:

-First, someone should be paying attention because my party, the Republicans, certainly haven't
-Second, I propose that taxpayers recover their money through my tax cuts, because the average American has no idea about the heavy liability that currently burdens the top 1% econimcally in this country. The rest of you losers don't pay taxes anyway, so why should you get something out of this?
-Third, there must be complete transparency, unlike my campaign, the Palin Gubinatorial Administration, or, well, anything else that applies to Republicans (this clause does not apply if I get elected)
-Fourth, no CEOs should profit from Taxpayer dollars, but what their Boards choose to grant them behind closed doors after the 'company' receives a bailout is their own business.
-Finally, there will be no 'pork' for favored companies, because we already own the companies my campaign managers lobbied for and Lehman Bros. was able to give out $2.5 billion in bonuses before declaring bankruptcy. Really, what more do they need?

Oh, have you seen the nice pictures with Sarah Palin conducting high-level diplomacy at the UN with heads of state? No, well, we have this really great press release to go along with the pictures!

user-pic

LOL!

And this:

No, well, we have this really great press release to go along with the pictures!

Apparently you can't get a lot of questions and answers in 29 seconds....

McCain details his economic recovery package:

-First, someone should be paying attention because my party, the Republicans, certainly haven't
-Second, I propose that taxpayers recover their money through my tax cuts, because the average American has no idea about the heavy liability that currently burdens the top 1% econimcally in this country. The rest of you losers don't pay taxes anyway, so why should you get something out of this?
-Third, there must be complete transparency, unlike my campaign, the Palin Gubinatorial Administration, or, well, anything else that applies to Republicans (this clause does not apply if I get elected)
-Fourth, no CEOs should profit from Taxpayer dollars, but what their Boards choose to grant them behind closed doors after the 'company' receives a bailout is their own business.
-Finally, there will be no 'pork' for favored companies, because we already own the companies my campaign managers lobbied for and Lehman Bros. was able to give out $2.5 billion in bonuses before declaring bankruptcy. Really, what more do they need?

Oh, have you seen the nice pictures with Sarah Palin conducting high-level diplomacy at the UN with heads of state? No, well, we have this really great press release to go along with the pictures!

Is it just coincidence or did McCain wait to get after Fannie and Freddie until 2005 because that is when the Fannie/Freddie spiggot for Rick Davis got shut down?

user-pic

LOL!


Well there's an interesting question.

dind't obama lay down these "principles" last week?

user-pic

Yes, roughly, I believe you are right. McLame is morphing into Obama again and trying to run as a Democrat.

He does this now on every issue. First he runs as a Repug and gets a bad reaction. So then he turns around and runs as a Democrat.

Change, regulation, no golden parachutes for CEOs, blah blah blah.


Change you can believe in:

Democrats to let offshore drilling ban expire

Appropriations Committee Chairman David Obey is telling reporters that language continuing the moratorium will be omitted this year from a spending bill to keep the government in operating funds after Congress recesses for the election.

http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20080923/ap_on_go_co/offshore_drilling

user-pic

Obama has made it clear that he's open to all kinds of energy options while concentrating on moving away from fossil fuels.

If he and the Democrats were dead set against letting it expire, you'd be bitching about that.


You're a very tiresome troll these days.

Obama has made it clear that he's open to all kinds of energy options while concentrating on moving away from fossil fuels.
Novel idea. Pretty much what McCain has been saying for a long time.

Point is...the Democrats are whoring themselves off as Republicans, DINOS. How comforting that must be for your cult.

You've been busy I can tell. Armed to the teeth with citation after citation like a good little soldier.

Keep marching. That's it. Just a little further.

Bye.

Kos is on a tear on the bailout. Everyone should go check him out. I've also been thinking to myself, "Now, EXACTLY what did Paulson say to the top of Congress that spooked them like that?"

It would tell us a lot not only about the situation, but about the real analytical faculties of our leadership to know how that meeting went and exactly what was said in high relief.

Leave a comment

Advertise Liberally
Share
Close Social Web Email

"To" Email Address

Your Name

Your Email Address