Obama team looks to revamp financial bailout

advertisement

WASHINGTON — President-elect Barack Obama's economic team is broadening the mission of the $700 billion bailout for the financial sector, aiming to unfreeze credit for homeowners, consumers, small businesses and local governments.

The overhaul is aimed at the $350 billion remaining in the Troubled Asset Relief Program and comes amid mounting criticism from lawmakers and watchdogs that the Bush administration has administered the money in an inconsistent way and has not made banks accountable for the money.

The head of a congressional panel overseeing the $700 billion bailout program said Friday that lawmakers need to "take a very hard look" at how banks have used the money and she welcomed Obama's attempts to better define the program's mission.

Obama's selection for Treasury secretary, Timothy Geithner, is developing a "comprehensive set of investment principles," an Obama transition official said Friday. The official, speaking on the condition of anonymity because the plan has not yet been fleshed out, said the economic team will include measures to mitigate rising foreclosures and will place tougher conditions on financial institutions that receive the money, including limits on executive compensation.

With 11 days left before Obama is sworn in as the nation's 44th president, the task of requesting Congress for access to the remaining funds will now likely fall on the new Obama administration.

Geithner is expected to face a confirmation hearing before the Senate next Thursday and he can count on being quizzed vigorously on his TARP proposals.

Though the Obama team is not offering any specifics, the mere fact that it is setting goals for the money won support from the head of a congressional panel that is charged with overseeing how the money is being spent.

"These are powerfully important initiatives," said Harvard law professor Elizabeth Warren. "I'm very pleased that the incoming administration is focused on these issues."

She offered no specific advice on how to free up more credit. "It's going to take a variety of tools," she said. "They may have to move through multiple approaches."

The Congressional Oversight Panel she heads released a report Friday featuring questions about how banks are spending taxpayer money, how the money will combat the rising tide of home foreclosures and Treasury's overall strategy for the rescue.

But Treasury's Dec. 30 response "did not provide complete answers to several of the questions and failed to address a number of the questions at all," said the panel's second report.

The new document cited an Associated Press investigation that found none of the banks was willing to disclose what they were doing with hundreds of billions of dollars distributed through direct injections of federal money.

"For Treasury to advance funds to these institutions without requiring more transparency further erodes the very confidence Treasury seeks to restore," it said.

Appearing Friday on ABC's "Good Morning America," Warren said that Treasury "didn't put any tracking mechanisms on it."

"They didn't tell the banks what they had to do in order to get the money. It might be used for lending, it might be used to buy other banks ... Or it might just be stuffed in vaults and left there," she said.

"I think that Congress may want to take a very hard look at that question," Warren added. "Ultimately, we don't have a badge, don't have a gun. It's up to Congress."

"In my view, the heart of this problem started with the housing bubble and the mortgage foreclosure mess and in my view, that's where the solution should start as well," Warren said.

Most of the panel's report argues that better responses to unanswered questions are "essential" and explains why it believes Treasury's earlier responses were insufficient.

"Treasury has still not explained precisely what it sees as the problem," reads one assessment of a response deemed inadequate.

At several points, the report tartly explains the meanings of simple terms such as "strategy" and "oversight."

Referring to a question of why Treasury has required Citigroup, but not other firms that got money, to modify mortgages, the report says: "Treasury's refusal to answer this question is one of the most troubling aspects of their letter. The panel intends to do more fact finding on this matter."

Line after line of the column marked "Treasury Response" says simply, "No response."

The panel repeatedly states its reluctance to take Treasury's reassurances at face value.

"Treasury may be 'confident' that it is 'pursuing the right strategy to stabilize the financial system and support the flow of credit to our economy,' but once again, the function of oversight is to evaluate that claim," the report reads. "The question remains unanswered."

The panel's next official action will be a public hearing next Wednesday.

  • 8 Votes
  • 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.
4.8
1.6
{"commentId":4726483,"authorDomain":"William834"}

Now the only question is.......................Deal or No Deal?!?

{"commentId":4726483,"threadId":"464945","contentId":"2290824","authorDomain":"William834"}
  • 2 votes
Reply#1 - Fri Jan 9, 2009 12:33 AM EST
{"commentId":4726561,"authorDomain":"spookybf"}

No, there are no "only questions" anymore. Paper or plastic? Cash 'n' Carry?

{"commentId":4726561,"threadId":"464945","contentId":"2290824","authorDomain":"spookybf"}
  • 1 vote
#1.1 - Fri Jan 9, 2009 12:42 AM EST
{"commentId":4726612,"authorDomain":"William834"}

Yes, true.....I think.  But I was mainly referring to the assistant treasury secretary's creepy resemblance to Howie Mandel....

{"commentId":4726612,"threadId":"464945","contentId":"2290824","authorDomain":"William834"}
  • 2 votes
#1.2 - Fri Jan 9, 2009 12:48 AM EST
{"commentId":4727108,"authorDomain":"alkimija"}

That's a picture he's wishing never was taken, lol.

{"commentId":4727108,"threadId":"464945","contentId":"2290824","authorDomain":"alkimija"}
  • 2 votes
#1.3 - Fri Jan 9, 2009 2:22 AM EST
Reply
{"commentId":4726495,"authorDomain":"corperateties"}

um it's too late man. That money has been blown on cheap or expensive hookers and booze.

{"commentId":4726495,"threadId":"464945","contentId":"2290824","authorDomain":"corperateties"}
  • 2 votes
Reply#2 - Fri Jan 9, 2009 12:35 AM EST
{"commentId":4726781,"authorDomain":"spookybf"}

Spitzer? I hardly even knew her....

{"commentId":4726781,"threadId":"464945","contentId":"2290824","authorDomain":"spookybf"}
    #2.1 - Fri Jan 9, 2009 1:15 AM EST
    Reply
    {"commentId":4726752,"authorDomain":"askari-ali"}

    What do we as taxpayers/citizens do to get OUR money back from these damn crooks?  I watched an interview with Elizabeth Warren and she was frustrated as a member of the oversight board with the lack of information coming from the Treasury Dept.  I watched a congressional hearing about the Bernie Madoff case where members of congress were asking the SEC's inspector general about the complaint made against Madoff.  The inspector general said that the agency was so big that the enforcement department may have received it but that it never made it to his office.  Aren't inspector generals supposed to INSPECT complaints?

    Regulation in this country is going to be a VERY hard thing because there are too many corrupt people in every sector of our government.  The most reprehensible thing about these bailouts is that congress is giving away our money to these companies in hopes that they will lend it back to us at substantial interest and profit via loans/credit lines.  I don't know about the rest of you, but I think it's high time we have a LOT more control over how our taxes are spent.

    {"commentId":4726752,"threadId":"464945","contentId":"2290824","authorDomain":"askari-ali"}
    • 2 votes
    Reply#3 - Fri Jan 9, 2009 1:11 AM EST
    {"commentId":4726871,"authorDomain":"askari-ali"}

    Referring to a question of why Treasury has required Citigroup, but not other firms that got money, to modify mortgages, the report says: "Treasury's refusal to answer this question is one of the most troubling aspects of their letter. The panel intends to do more fact finding on this matter."

    Line after line of the column marked "Treasury Response" says simply, "No response."

    I'm sorry but this 5th amendment/refusal to answer questions BS has to stop RIGHT NOW.  Has this country become a place where incompentence, insubordination, and embezzlement are rewarded?  Apparently, when the crooks can steal our money and congress passes a law allowing them steal it against our wishes.  SURREAL!

    {"commentId":4726871,"threadId":"464945","contentId":"2290824","authorDomain":"askari-ali"}
    • 2 votes
    Reply#4 - Fri Jan 9, 2009 1:31 AM EST
    {"commentId":4728122,"authorDomain":"corperateties"}

    Bizzaro!

    {"commentId":4728122,"threadId":"464945","contentId":"2290824","authorDomain":"corperateties"}
      #4.1 - Fri Jan 9, 2009 7:26 AM EST
      Reply
      {"commentId":4727338,"authorDomain":"gkpva"}

      Why wasnt there a checks and balance system put in place here. The gov. goes after its taxpayers if they dont pay there taxes, but gives up money to companies that have no account ability. You cant blame the banks, our gov. should have taken these precautions in the first place. Now I understand why were in this mess.  The gov. doesnt take account ability either. Do what big brother says, not what b.b does. Pay ur taxes b.....

      {"commentId":4727338,"threadId":"464945","contentId":"2290824","authorDomain":"gkpva"}
      • 1 vote
      Reply#5 - Fri Jan 9, 2009 3:26 AM EST
      {"commentId":4728646,"authorDomain":"cheshireak"}

      Bottom line... How does this sort of crap keep happening? 

      Answer:  Our elected representatives allow it to happen.  They voted for the laws that allowed this atmosphere of overwhelming greed to override any, and all, ethics and integrity that might have been present, at one time.

      This whole mess should show the American people that those in the House and Senate do not work for us.  75% of the American public was against the bailout bill, yet they approved it, didn't they?  And, what will happen to those who voted for it?  Nothing.

      Why will nothing happen to them?  Because, when it comes to re-election time they inevitably pull out the button issues (gay marriage, abortion, war on 'terror').  Their constituents will vote on those issues and give them a pass on just about anything else.  Why else would Congress after Congress have such deplorable approval ratings, yet a majority of its members still keep their posts?

      A perfect example of this is Ted Stevens (R) of Alaska.  Recently convicted on seven felony counts, and he came very close to retaining his office.  Many people writing into the local paper actually stated that it didn't matter how many felonies he might have committed because of all the good he had done for the state.

      Any wonder why I'm so cynical about the political state of our country?

      {"commentId":4728646,"threadId":"464945","contentId":"2290824","authorDomain":"cheshireak"}
      • 2 votes
      Reply#6 - Fri Jan 9, 2009 8:37 AM EST
      {"commentId":4729724,"authorDomain":"pilot22a"}

      We, my wife and I, have gone to a "cash only" budget. We paid off our credit cards and now go to the ATM and get the money we need, need not want, and buy the essentials.

      Anyone who is not doing this will just fall deeper and deeper into the financial mess the mortgage brokers have generated.

      Like someone said in an earlier post, "cash and carry."

      {"commentId":4729724,"threadId":"464945","contentId":"2290824","authorDomain":"pilot22a"}
        Reply#7 - Fri Jan 9, 2009 9:55 AM EST
        {"commentId":4730799,"authorDomain":"nhpawildfire"}

        From what I have read - the infamous "bailout bill" was very poorly (if at all) checked out before being voted on..   It was also very poorly written and considering how it was rammed through congress the appropriate checks and balances were deliberatly left out so that later on politicians could point fingers and blame each other when it failed to produce positive results..   Also the vast majority of people contacting thier elected officials were against it - yet it was passed..  And the post above about the voters reelecting thse congresscritters because they trot out the "hot button" issues is dead on..    As some one wrote a few weeks back..  "The sounds of the voters were drowned out by the cha-ching cha-ching of the cash registers giving money to politicians"...  (or words to that effect).. 

        {"commentId":4730799,"threadId":"464945","contentId":"2290824","authorDomain":"nhpawildfire"}
          Reply#8 - Fri Jan 9, 2009 10:54 AM EST
          {"commentId":4731247,"authorDomain":"c4andmore"}
          Ashamed of peoples stupidityDeleted
          {"canLink":false,"threadId":"464945","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":"464945","contentId":"2290824"}
          Start TrackingStart Tracking
          Stop TrackingStop Tracking