Bloodbath on Wall Street

September 29, 2008
Back to TopCommentsE-mailPrintBookmark and Share
Thereâ??s no time like an election to make politicians nervous about taking a stand on a controversial issue, and this afternoonâ??s House vote on the $700 billion bailout plan is no exception.

Many Republicans and some Democrats, leery about facing voters disgusted with Wall Street excesses, turned down the package â?? and the markets responded with a massive sell-off.

Whatâ??s your take? Are opponents doing the right thing? And to what extent do you believe their votes were driven by fear of an angry electorate or principled opposition to a plan they feel rewards people who took foolish risks?
  • Want to know who voted against stabilizing the financial markets today? Keep these names handy the next time they are up for reelection…Dan Burton, Mike Pence, Steve Buyer, Andre Carson, Baron Hill, and Pete Visclosky. Six out of nine Indiana US representatives voted no. Had the bill passed and gone to the Senate, Lugar and Bayh were ready to vote yes.

    Mike Pence screamed the loudest. He sent the following letter to his colleagues on Sunday after a deal was allegedly struck over the weekend:

    Dear Colleagues:

    Our nation has been confronted by a serious crisis in our financial markets. The President and this Congress were right to act with all deliberate speed in addressing this crisis.

    We now have a deal that promises to bring near-term stability to our financial turmoil, but at what price?

    Economic freedom means the freedom to succeed and the freedom to fail.

    The decision to give the federal government the ability to nationalize almost every bad mortgage in America interrupts this basic truth of our free market economy.

    Republicans improved this bill but it remains the largest corporate bailout in American history, forever changes the relationship between government and the financial sector, and passes the cost along to the American people. I cannot support it.

    Before you vote, ask yourself why you came here and vote with courage and integrity to those principles.

    If you came here because you believe in limited government and the freedom of the American marketplace, vote in accordance with those convictions.

    Duty is ours, outcomes belong to God.

    We have fought the good fight. Now we need to finish the race and make sure that posterity and the American people know there were conservatives who opposed the leviathan state in this dark hour.

    And if you do this I promise you, I will stand with you and, I believe with all my heart, the American people will stand with you as well.


    Will the American people stand by Mr. Pence when they go to their bank machine in a week or a month or in six months and can’t get any money out? Will they agree with him when they lose their job as part of mass unemployment sets in? Will they be supportive when their 401K value drops in half, can’t get a car loan or a home mortgage? Will they think Mike Pence and his buddies are heroes when depression is used to describe our current situation and we are all wishing it was only a recession? I doubt it.

    Maybe Mike Pence is shooting to have his name inscribed next to Herbert Hoover as Americans that did the most to harm the US economy?

    Isn’t it ironic that the Republicans, the party that championed deregulation and free market economy are the most responsible for where we are today? The lack of oversight is in their corner. Yet, they are the ones who are failing to do what needs to be done to bail out you and me. It is truly mind boggling.

    I disagree with Mr. Pence’s assertion that outcomes belong to God. The upcoming financial apocalypse belongs to Mike Pence and his followers.
  • It's not that I'm against a bailout, but I am against THIS bailout bill. $700 Billion? That's only a start as outlined by this legislation. It will eventually end up costing taxpayers far more than that because the truth is nobody knows how large this problem really is. The Treasury just pulled that number out of the air because they thought is was sufficiently large to scare everyone into quick action. The Street is just hoping for something to be done so stock prices will go back up and those at the top can get out with some cash.

    Our economy is screwed no matter what, so it's just a question of minimizing the damage.
  • Nothing like a media feeding frenzy to shock the public and the markets to create the buying opportunity of a lifetime.(See summer 2002)
  • So, the US government buys up the bad mortgages that threaten to destroy banks. Does that mean all mortgages are forgiven and everyone gets a free house? I don't think so. You still have to pay someone, maybe more slowly. The feds should be able to collect a good chunk of what's owed and offset the initial much of the cost of buying the mortgages.

Post a comment to this blog

We reserve the right to remove any post that we feel is obscene, profane, vulgar, racist, sexually explicit, abusive, or hateful.
You are legally responsible for what you post and your anonymity is not guaranteed.
Posts that insult, defame, threaten, harass or abuse other readers or people mentioned in IBJ editorial content are also subject to removal. Please respect the privacy of individuals and refrain from posting personal information.
No solicitations, spamming or advertisements are allowed. Readers may post links to other informational websites that are relevant to the topic at hand, but please do not link to objectionable material.
We may remove messages that are unrelated to the topic, encourage illegal activity, use all capital letters or are unreadable.

Messages that are flagged by readers as objectionable will be reviewed and may or may not be removed. Please do not flag a post simply because you disagree with it.

Sponsored by
  1. The $104K to CRC would go toward debts service on $486M of existing debt they already have from other things outside this project. Keystone buys the bonds for 3.8M from CRC, and CRC in turn pays for the parking and site work, and some time later CRC buys them back (with interest) from the projected annual property tax revenue from the entire TIF district (est. $415K / yr. from just this property, plus more from all the other property in the TIF district), which in theory would be about a 10-year term, give-or-take. CRC is basically betting on the future, that property values will increase, driving up the tax revenue to the limit of the annual increase cap on commercial property (I think that's 3%). It should be noted that Keystone can't print money (unlike the Federal Treasury) so commercial property tax can only come from consumers, in this case the apartment renters and consumers of the goods and services offered by the ground floor retailers, and employees in the form of lower non-mandatory compensation items, such as bonuses, benefits, 401K match, etc.

  2. $3B would hurt Lilly's bottom line if there were no insurance or Indemnity Agreement, but there is no way that large an award will be upheld on appeal. What's surprising is that the trial judge refused to reduce it. She must have thought there was evidence of a flagrant, unconscionable coverup and wanted to send a message.

  3. As a self-employed individual, I always saw outrageous price increases every year in a health insurance plan with preexisting condition costs -- something most employed groups never had to worry about. With spouse, I saw ALL Indiana "free market answer" plans' premiums raise 25%-45% each year.

  4. It's not who you chose to build it's how they build it. Architects and engineers decide how and what to use to build. builders just do the work. Architects & engineers still think the tarp over the escalators out at airport will hold for third time when it snows, ice storms.