Monday, September 29, 2008

Carson For The Bailout Bill Before He Voted Against It

Just last week, Andre Carson was interviewed on National Public Radio's "Politics & Society" as the newest member of the congressional black caucus and a member of the House Financial Services Committee. He was asked, "Do you plan to support the President's bailout plan?" Carson responded, "Well, you know, the short answer, yes. Not happy with everything that's in the language right now in the proposal, but we have to do it to help fellow Americans." Today, Carson voted against the bailout bill, which went down to defeat 228-205 and sent the stock market plummeting to its biggest single day loss in history. Now, to be fair to Carson, he went on to add some conditions he wanted in the bill, such as going after golden parachute contracts for CEOs, home foreclosure protections and guaranteed participation in the asset management by minority and women-owned asset managers. The first two were clearly addressed in the proposal voted down today. I'm not sure about the MBE/WBE participation part. According to the Star, Carson was joined by Democrats Pete Visclosky, Baron Hill and Republicans Dan Burton, Steve Buyer and Mike Pence in voting against the bailout bill. Republican Mark Souder and Democrats Joe Donnelly and Brad Ellsworth voted for the bailout. Souder is facing a tough re-election fight. He clearly put the country's best interest ahead of political expediency. As for Carson, so much for that "bold leadership" he promised when he ran for his grandmother's seat. You can bet he and his family won't be anywhere near his Fall Creek neighborhood if all hell breaks loose as a result of a catastrophic collapse of our financial system.


Wilson46201 said...

Why? André Carson has lived almost his entire life in that one Fall Creek neighborhood...

Gary R. Welsh said...

Check out how many foreclosures are taking place in that neighborhood right now. Those are some of the first people who will feel the pain of a financial collapse.

Downtown Indy said...

Congress has to stop packaging legislation as 'what is needed + the load of pork I want to add on'

Stick to writing a straightforward piece of legislation that addresses and resolves one issue well and leaves off all the BS 'do me a favor and I'll vote for your bill' crap.

Anonymous said...

I can't believe Advance Indiana is nothing more than a neo-"conservative" (ie: Socialist) blog. Here I always had this pegged as a true conservative blog. You harp on and on about the 750,000,000 bailout for the Colts, yet you are a cheerleader for the 750,000,000,000.00 bailout which may not even work!! If this doesn't work, do you plan on letting them run the printing presses for another trillion? Our dollar will be worth zero, zilch, nada. I hope if this bailout comes, you all sell your mutual fund shares that day or the next, because the crash is coming regardless of how much money they print. This bailout turns us into the United Socialist States of America overnight. This is why the socialists like Pelosi are so for it. It has nothing to do with putting country first. It has _everything_ to do with making sure the elites get taken care of. They can't imagine a US where there isn't a new blockbuster movie out every weekend making tens of millions of dollars. Where families eat out only two or three times a month. Voting for the bailout is voting for the status quo. There is _nothing_ in the law as written that will prevent this from happening again. There is nothing that bans ARM loans. There is nothing that caps the interest rate on a 30 year fixed loan at an affordable 4-5%. There is nothing about mandatory down payments for all residential home loans. All we are doing is taking on bad debt, so these companies can go right back writing more bad debt.

If the bailout comes, this country is socialist. If we are going to be socialist, I will vote for those who give me _my_ cut of the bailout. Considering I am middle class (combined income of less than $70K), I will gladly support rabid left wing folks who will raise taxes on people making $150K+ at least 10-20% to offer me a slew of benefits: Fancy high school sport stadiums, sidewalks, health care, cheaper college education, etc.. Now that I think it through, bring on the socialism, full throttle!! Obama in 2008!!

Sean Shepard said...

Although I don't agree with his reasons, I am most pleased that Rep. Carson voted no on the bailout package and as a constituent had contacted his office to voice disapproval with it.

There is no guarantee the bailout would work and it in fact risks devaluing the dollar even further. Part of the problem is government intervention in the market and nationalizing the bad debt and associated risks is just wrong.

With the $150 billion stimulus, $85 billion for AIG, hundreds of billions in increased liquidity already infjected into the market, hundreds of billions in debt financed government deficits and now a proposed $750 billion revolving credit line to buy up questionable assets we risk destroying the value of our currency across the globe.

A real plan to put us on a proper course would involve suspending the "mark to market" rule, immediate cuts in government spending, ditching the income tax for a consumption tax, addressing the pending social security/medicare/medicaid deficits, and a few other things.

We need to retool the system but special interest and class warfare politics is likely to destroy us first.

A lot of economic wisdom here:

Mike Kole said...

So what? Carson got it right when it mattered- at the vote.

Bailing out bad decision making is bad policy. These lenders should fail, along with borrowers who knowingly accepted loans they could never hope to pay back. This is actual economic and social justice.

Propping up prices only forestalls the inevitable crash that must come, as the market works to mirror actual value. These loans have little or no value, and we must get to the point where this is reflected in reality. If you want a depression, back a new bailout package.

Concerned Taxpayer said...

Is Andre Carson really that ignorant, or is he just an outright liar? In the Indy Red Star Rag, he is quoted as saying, "...economic malpractice of the Bush administration is why... This administration's fiscal negligence... ", etc.

These are the reasons given for voting no on the "bailout" bill.

In reality, the problems began clear back in 2004 when the liberal, leftist democrats refused to address the problems that led to this failure.

Carson is again pandering to the left.

UPDATE!: Now the online version of the Red Star Rag quotes Carson as saying, "The American people rejected this corporate bailout, and today the people's House did likewise. It is now imperative that Congress come together and develop a response to the crisis facing our financial markets that reflects the American people's belief in personal responsibility and fiscal discipline."

In true liberal style, Carson has learned to change his story to fit the direction of the wind.

thundermutt said...

What do you folks plan to do when the credit markets freeze and you can't buy an airplane ticket, refrigerator, or new washer using your Visa or MC? Or if you can't get a new car loan from your bank? Or a new mortgage?

What will you say to your parents who saved prudently, but whose "safe" bond funds and money market funds no longer support their retirement needs?

It's nice to pontificate about the morals of living within one's own means and responsible use of credit, but what we're talking about here is a complete freeze-up of credit for EVERYONE. That's too big a shock to the system to contemplate.

Sean Shepard said...

mutt -

How are we going to address the $490,000 of debt per American household in current and future government obligations?

If we destroy the value of our currency, the foreign entities that currently buy up our Treasuries and otherwise provide liquidity in our markets will be less likely to do so and/or will require such a tremendous risk premium that the effect on credit could be freezing of credit markets.

Instead of more debt, why not just make it economically practical for the trillions of dollars in offshore funds to be repatriated back the United States? That would add tremendous liquidity to our economy, instead we have the 2nd highest corporate tax rate in the developed world and it keeps that money out of the country when it could be put to use here.

Your point is well taken, but the Paulson plan is the wrong approach. There are other things that can be done and our representatives shouldn't be strong-armed into "the sky will fall tomorrow" (it didn't) decisions.

"Suppose you were an idiot and suppose you were a member of Congress. But I repeat myself." - Mark Twain

Gary R. Welsh said...

Yeah, Carson accuses Bush of ineptitude when his own grandmother sat on the House Banking Committee and joined her fellow House Democrats in opposing the Bush adminstration's efforts to regulate the GSE. Typical hypocrite whose spent his entire adult life on the public payroll.

Chris Worden said...


Out of curiosity, how much money do you currently have invested in the stock market and how much did you lose yesterday? I have found almost uniformly that one's support for the bailout is directly proportional to how much they have to lose. If I have a car I own free and clear, credit cards with PLENTY of available credit (which I don't need to use because I don't splurge on what I can't afford without going into debt) and retirement assets that have NO connection to any mortgage-based security. I didn't lose anything yesterday. So tell me again why I should support a bailout?