Bailout plan fails in the House

Seriously.  205-228.  They can still revote, by the way.  Maybe this is one of those "field experiments" I have read about…


I enjoyed watching the mob of votes switch to the winning side once the Nays crossed the 218 count. Election year, indeed!

We're going have to raise import tariffs in order to protect American jobs and manufacturing.

To the above poster: Is that a joke? Because it was pretty stale when Smoot and Hawley told it.

I'm a 23-year old checking my Scottrade account and trying desperately to remember that I'm investing for the long run.

How to Screw Up a critical bipartisan vote in 4 minutes.
Listen to Pelosi's speech just before the vote:

you don't harm your country just because you don't like the speaker of the House. It's childish.


Nancy Pelosi made us do it!

"Yeah, apparently the speech was so partisan it even turned off 40% of the Democrats!"

Yeah. To be honest I'm not sure who should dislike the plan the most: the republicans because it's socialism or the democrats because it's a bail out for irresponsible rich people. The fact that neither side seemed very impressed suggests it was a reasonable compromise.

It's a classic problem of collusion/cheating. They had an agreement beforehand of who would vote for and against it. "At-risk" members would vote against it, "secure" members would vote for it. But everyone has a political incentive to vote against it. Thus, so many people cheated that the collusion came apart.

Sigh. Nancy Pelosi is Speaker of the House and was supposed to support a bi-partisan coalition. Yes, a bunch of backbenching Republicans were childish. But ask yourself, if you were in her $400 shoes, is that the speech you would give just before the vote?

There is still hope for America. Lenin cried today.. Old Hickory, smiled.

So the dow drops 600 pts.. oh noes!!

Buy low.. sell high.. profit!

You can talk about House Dems and GOP'er's all you like, but one thing's for sure:

Pelosi's speech was irresponsible.

"Are you seriously arguing that the Republicans voted 2:1 against as a last minute reaction to Pelosi's speech? I agree it was an idiotic speech given the gravity of the situation but you don't harm your country just because you don't like the speaker of the House. It's childish."

Pelosi set up the vote so that it would be very close, house Dems and Repubs in tight races were allowed not to vote for the bill so they would not have to run on the issue. They thought they had the votes secured.

So all it took was few votes to tip the scales. And if you were already against it, but willing to hold your nose and vote yes because Paulson told you we had to yeah, a speach like that could easily tip you in the other direction.

Very stupid of Pelosi given the way she had orchestrated the vote.

Mayhew and Olson 1
Cox and McCubbins 0

Please - I am hearing middle school excuses here. It seems to me the Republicans just want the Democrats to be the grown ups. Meanwhile, the House GOP is playing chicken with the economy. No excuses. This independent is not buying the GOP spin.

Interesting. Thank you, Sam.

Actually the recession 08 contract is up, but considering GDP was stongly positive last quarter, the only way we get a recession is with more downward revisions of past data. Doesn't make sense for it to move up. If it did indeed go down, that would be intersting though.


That's not Pelosi's speech.

This is her speech:

She blames Bush for blowing Clinton's surpluses. Talks about the failed Bush economic policies. Calls him reckless, irresponsible. etc. etc.

Pelosi's fault?!

The drop in your portfolio is the fault of those who voted against the plan. They are the ones who decided to take out their petty rage on the American people. Don't worry, though, we're only going to pay an ENORMOUS price for that.

The price the Republicamns will pay will be measured on election day. At this rate, they will lose the Presidency, teh Hosue, and the Senate.

"I get the impression that some of the commenters were FOR the bailout and are disappointed that it didn't pass. Do they read this blog?"

Yes, but that's because we think the proprietors are facile and amusing writers, not because we trust a bunch of professors over the CEO of Goldman Sachs.

She blames Bush for blowing Clinton's surpluses.

Excuse me. Has the deficit not increased dramatically under Bush?

Are you saying Republican reps can't stand to hear the truth, and stick their fingers in their ears and kick and scream?

Apparently Democrats were pulling the strings in the Bush administration.

Do we know if Pelosi gave that speech because she knew what was coming next? It may "surprise" us outsiders, but did the congress already know amongst themselves how it was going to break?

American math skills have clearly gone to heck. Can our leaders no longer count votes?

And blaming Pelosi? Is this third grade? "Teacher, Nancy's being mean."

That said, this was a stupid plan. Maybe now they will come up with one less stupid.

That's not Pelosi's speech.

This is her speech:

She blames Bush for blowing Clinton's surpluses. Talks about the failed Bush economic policies. Calls him reckless, irresponsible. etc. etc.

No. That's not her speech either. She spoke for about sixteen minutes, not five, as your link has it. She never criticized Republicans after the opening couple of digs. The idea that this was some sort of hyperpartisan rant that inflamed Republicans and made them change their votes is ludicrous. Even Bohner appeared to admit this morning that he just didn't have the votes.

This business about Pelosi's speech just proves they will say anything, and that there are plenty of people ready to swallow anything, to blame Democrats. This even includes admitting that the Republicans acted like kindergarteners, or irresponsible jerks, changing their votes on a hugely important bill because that mean Nancy Pelosi hurt their feelings.

From what I understand... Pelosi deviated from her prepared speech. So, if you have it in writing... that isn't what she said.

I saw the video and she squarely blames the Bush administration for the entire thing. Despite the fact that the entire situation with Fanny Mae and Freddie Mac began in 1999.

The following are snipets from an article called "Fannie Mae eases Credit to Aid Mortgage Lending" September 30, 1999

Fannie Mae, the nation's biggest underwriter of home mortgages, has been under increasing pressure from the Clinton Administration to expand mortgage loans among low and moderate income people and felt pressure from stock holders to maintain its phenomenal growth in profits.

''Fannie Mae has expanded home ownership for millions of families in the 1990's by reducing down payment requirements,'' said Franklin D. Raines, Fannie Mae's chairman and chief executive officer (and current Obama advisor). ''Yet there remain too many borrowers whose credit is just a notch below what our underwriting has required who have been relegated to paying significantly higher mortgage rates in the so-called subprime market.''

I think it's clear much of the populace hates this. I haven't spoke to a single person conservative, liberal, or other that was even remotely for this. The answer most give is simple. We have to pay for this mess one way or the other. Why should people who were smart with their money be the ones pickin up the tab?

Comments for this post are closed