Analysis: A bailout plan too big to fail

advertisement

President Bush and the two men running to succeed him raised the political stakes dramatically Wednesday in the great bailout debate of 2008, effectively stamping a "too big to fail" sign on congressional efforts to pass a pre-election economic rescue plan.

With the outcome all but assured, details and a timetable for passage of an unprecedented federal intervention in the capital markets remain to be settled. And both John McCain and Barack Obama will be able to claim credit for winning changes in the administration's original plan — some of which the White House has already accepted.

"The whole world is watching to see if we can act quickly," President Bush said early in the week, before his proposal ran into criticism from Democrats and Republicans alike.

So, too, the American electorate, six weeks before choosing between two presidential candidates, now staging side-by-side auditions for the job of national crisis manager-in-chief.

Bush arranged a prime-time address Wednesday night to warn Americans that the nation faces the possibility of "a long and painful recession" if Congress doesn't act.

Building on dire warnings daily from Treasury Secretary Henry Paulson and Federal Reserve Chairman Ben Bernanke, the president's remarks were designed to revive the rescue plan that he sent to lawmakers less than a week ago.

With less than four months remaining in office and approval ratings in the 30 percent range, Bush's persuasive powers are as uncertain in Congress as they are with the public.

It was a point some Republicans were willing to make, uncharitably at times.

"It's a tough sell to most of our members," said Rep. Tom Davis, R-Va., after a closed-door meeting with Paulson and Bernanke. "It's a terrible plan, but I haven't heard anything better."

"They sold the war, they sold the stimulus package and some other things. It's the 'wolf at the door'" argument, said Davis, who is retiring at the end of the year.

If Republicans weren't exactly clamoring for Bush to show them the way, Democrats insisted the president step up, for reasons of their own.

"It is time for him to explain why his administration sat on its hands for months and only now has come to realize the need for immediate and unprecedented government action," said Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid of Nevada.

"It is time for him to explain how he could tell our country for months that our economy was fine, yet overnight declare that if American taxpayers don't accept his bailout bill, our country will face an economic disaster."

Translation: Neither Reid nor House Speaker Nancy Pelosi intended to put their rank and file in the position of voting for legislation that Republicans could oppose and then use as a campaign issue against them. But if many Republicans were planning to vote for the measure eventually, they were quiet about it on Wednesday.

While Bush was exercising his presidential powers, would-be successors McCain, the Republican, and Obama, the Democrat, were trying out for his job.

McCain, trailing once more in the race for the White House, announced he would return to Washington to help work on legislation. He suggested he and Obama hold around-the-clock meetings with congressional leaders and administration officials until they had reached an agreement, and he said this Friday's presidential debate should be rescheduled in deference to the crisis.

"All we must do to achieve this is temporarily set politics aside, and I'm committed to doing so," McCain said in New York.

It was an echo of the acceptance speech he delivered in St. Paul, Minn., less than a month ago: "After we've won, we're going to reach out our hand to any willing patriot, make this government start working for you again," he said then.

But there was more to it.

McCain's statement marked the second time in a matter of weeks that he used a dramatic gesture to shake up the race for the White House.

The first was his selection of Alaska Gov. Sarah Palin as vice presidential running mate, a pick that energized conservatives and helped fuel a post-convention surge in public support.

But the gains in public opinion surveys have now dissipated, and most polls show Obama with the same relatively modest lead he held before the summer. One, the Washington Post-ABC survey, gave the Democrat a nine-point advantage, with a commanding lead among voters who said the economy was the top issue.

And while McCain has insisted Palin is ready to take over as president, he made no mention of including her in the crisis meetings he wants in Washington. One aide said he did not intend for her to be present.

Obama was next to step before the cameras, telling reporters that he had initially called McCain to suggest a joint statement that would make clear both presidential hopefuls supported legislation to stem the economic slide.

Where McCain talked about bipartisanship, Obama provided specifics across party lines.

"I also need to give credit to Republican Sen. Tom Coburn, who had called me suggesting that a joint statement might be useful," he said.

He also said he had urged Democratic congressional leaders not to pursue efforts to add an economic stimulus package to the bailout. Similarly, he said the attempt to give bankruptcy judges the power to rewrite mortgage terms, another Democratic priority, "is probably something that we shouldn't try to do in this piece of legislation."

Then came the jab at his rival.

"My hope is, is that Sen. McCain is going to be talking to Republicans and sending them the same message, that there are some issues that they may be concerned about or things that are priorities for them, but what we shouldn't do is try to get everything done in this package."

Nor was Obama taken with McCain's call to defer the debate until agreement had been reached on legislation.

"You know, presidents are going to have to deal with more than one thing at a time," he said. "It's not necessary for us to think that we can only do one thing and suspend everything else."

___

EDITOR'S NOTE — David Espo covers presidential politics for The Associated Press.

  • 1 Vote
  • Enjoy this article? Help vote it up the 'Vine.

Back To Top

Published to:

What's this?
Who's leading the conversation?
This visualization below allows you to see the impact that each user has on the current conversation. The top row contains the group of users who have had the most impact, the 2nd row the group of users who have had the 2nd most impact (et cetera). Users with similar impact are grouped together, and the average score of the group is shown to the left of the group. The author of the article is also shown on the left, in their corresponding group. Each user's score is based on the number of comments the user has made plus the number of votes their comments have received. The scores are calculated relative one another, so while their absolute value is not particularly important, their relative difference does indicate a larger difference in impact on the conversation.
0.5
{"commentId":3104998,"authorDomain":"craiginffx"}

Definition of a "Politician" - Someone who spends a lot of your money on phony programs trying to make themselves look good and who spends a lot more of it trying to convince you it wasn't their idea when it creates a major problem.

{"commentId":3104998,"threadId":"367393","contentId":"1907444","authorDomain":"craiginffx"}
    Reply#1 - Thu Sep 25, 2008 2:08 AM EDT
    {"commentId":3107278,"authorDomain":"wdsoulplane"}

    McCain too Distraught and Overwhelmed by economic crisis to debate and explain to the American people what clear ideas and solutions he has to handle this crisis. May be McCain is unable to handle the stress and is having a senior moment, because when you are President of the United States, there is no rest for the weary, and you are always on Call!

    Or, is McCain really being dirty and underhanded, trying to pull the wool out from under Barack's feet, when he reached out to him early Wedensday morning in a bi-partisan moment, so together they could show solidarity and release a Joint Statement, however, McCain did not like that idea and decidied to bring politics into an already unsteady situation in an attempt to aid his political career, pretending that it was he who reached out to Barack and not the otherway around! However, that was not good enough, he must one-up him and cancel the campaign all together, the crisis is so great, a sudden change of heart that makes McCain look phony and untrustworthy. That is not putting Country first, but we already know that by his Pallin pick!

    And, of course, the debates should not be cancelled. A President has to be able to multi-task, big time! McCain's cancelling looks more like a senior moment or that he is too overwhelmed and distraught to be albe to explain to the country just what he would do to address this problem. Maybe McCain will not be able to answer that 3:00 a.m. phone call as a President is always on call.

    McCain the Wizard of Oz now pretends he has a heart, brain and courage! If so, its not working very well. His wall of lies and deceipt are closing in on him and soon there will be no place to hide, not even in the Senate. McCain you can run, you can lie, but you cannot hide and Humpty Dumpty couldnot be put together again!

    {"commentId":3107278,"threadId":"367393","contentId":"1907444","authorDomain":"wdsoulplane"}
      Reply#2 - Thu Sep 25, 2008 8:31 AM EDT
      {"commentId":3111121,"authorDomain":"mikecinfla"}

      I was an undecieded voter. Repubican or Democrat? Capital hills reaction to this bailout has got me off the fence. Both those parties are out of touch. I'm voting Libertarian in November and I would encourage anyone else who feels they have been ignored to do the same

      {"commentId":3111121,"threadId":"367393","contentId":"1907444","authorDomain":"mikecinfla"}
        Reply#3 - Thu Sep 25, 2008 11:00 AM EDT
        {"commentId":3131194,"authorDomain":"charleesjimd"}

        The "We Deserve It Dividend" I'm against the $85,000,000,000.00 bailout of AIG. Instead, I'm in favor of giving $85,000,000,000 to America in a We Deserve It Dividend!
        I'm no math genius, so to make the math simple, let's assume there are 200,000,000 bonafide U.S. Citizens that are 18+ years of age. Our population is about 301,000,000 counting every man, woman and child. So 200,000,000 might be a fair estimate of adults 18 and up. So divide 200,000,000 adults that are 18+ into $85 billon. That equals $425,000.00. Here's where we all get excited.
        My plan is to give $425,000 to every person that is 18+ years of age as a "We Deserve It Dividend". Of course, it would NOT be tax free. So let's assume a tax rate of 30%. So...... Every US Citizen that is 18+ years of age would have to pay $127,500.00 in taxes. That sends $25,500,000,000.00 right back to Uncle Sam. It also means that every adult 18+ years of age has $297,500.00 in their pocket.
        A husband and wife have $595,000.00 free and clear.!! What would you do with $297,500.00 to $595,000.00 in your family? Again, back to basics here; Pay off your mortgage - housing crisis solved Repay20college loans - what a great boost to new grads Put away money for college - it'll be there Save in a bank - create money to loan to entrepreneurs Buy a new car - create jobs Invest in the market - capital drives growth Pay for your parent's medical insurance - health care improves Enable Deadbeat Dads to come clean - or else Remember this is for every adult U S Citizen 18+ years of age including the folks who lost their jobs at Lehman Brothers and every other company that is cutting back. Most importantly, really paying those serving in our Armed Forces! If we're going to re-distribute wealth let's really do it...instead of trickling out a puny $1000.00 economic incentive that is being proposed by one of our candidates for President.
        If we're going to do an $85 billion dollar bailout, let's bail out every adult U S Citizen 18+!

        As for the problem companies; AIG - liquidate it. Sell off its parts Let American General go back to being American General. Sell off the real estate and let the private sector bargain hunters cut it up and clean it up. Here's my rationale, we deserve it and AIG doesn't.

        Sure it's a crazy idea that of course can "never work", but can you imagine the Coast-To-Coast Block Party! How do you spell Economic Boom? I trust my fellow adult Americans to know how to use the $85 Billion "We Deserve It Dividend" more than I do the geniuses at AIG or in Washington DC. And remember, The Family plan only really costs $59.5 Billion because $25.5 Billion is returned instantly in taxes to Uncle Sam.

        {"commentId":3131194,"threadId":"367393","contentId":"1907444","authorDomain":"charleesjimd"}
          Reply#4 - Thu Sep 25, 2008 9:11 PM EDT
          {"canLink":false,"threadId":"367393","isPrivate":false}
          Leave a Comment:
          You're in Easy Mode. If you prefer, you can use XHTML Mode instead.
          As a new user, you may notice a few temporary content restrictions. Click here for more info.
          {"threadId":"367393","contentId":"1907444"}
          Start TrackingStart Tracking
          Stop TrackingStop Tracking