If it smells like sh*t; If it looks like sh*t: If it feels like sh*t; If it tastes like sh*t, well then, it must be sh*t.
What I’m trying to say is, Mary Fallin, Jim Inhofe and Andrew Rice all agree, It’s sh*t. Because when Andrew Rice agrees with Inhofe, it must be a fact one cannot deny.
What I’m talking about is the bail out plan, now being called the rescue plan. Just who are we rescuing? THE RICH from taking a loss, actually giving back the money they took from us charging us interest on money they never had to begin with.
Inhofe voted no and this is what Andrew Rice has to say:
http://andrewforoklahoma.com/newsroom_details.asp?id=1233
FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE
Rice: ‘Bill not strong enough’
Rice says “Emergency Economic Stabilization Act of 2008″ does not go far enough in limiting executive compensation for corporations receiving a taxpayer bailout, and does nothing to fix the broken system that led to the crisis in the first place.
OKLAHOMA CITY — State Sen. Andrew Rice, Democratic nominee for U.S. Senate, said today that Congress should continue working to strengthen the financial bailout plan to ensure that Wall Street faces consequences for reckless investments and taxpayers reap rewards for bailing them out.
Rice said that, as U.S. Senator, he would only support a plan that includes: Meaningful oversight; a Stake for Taxpayers; and Hard Limits on Executive Compensation. Unfortunately, the final version of the bill that was released to the public Sunday does little to limit executive compensation for firms accepting a taxpayer bailout. In fact, the primary effect may be merely to decrease the amount such companies can deduct from their taxes for executive pay from $1 million to $500,000. Furthermore, the bill does nothing to fix the broken system that allowed abusive and reckless loans, an explosion of risky investments and poorly understood financial instruments, and other excesses.
“This bill gives too much away to the people who created these problems without guaranteeing that it won’t happen again,” Rice said. “Any bill would need to require much tougher consequences for Wall Street in order to earn my support.”
Rice believes that if the Bush Administration and Congress are going to ask American taxpayers to foot a $700 billion bill to bail out financial institutions and the privileged few, the least our leaders in Washington can do is ensure executives are not rewarded for their failures.
“Taxpayer dollars should not be used to line the pockets of the corporate executives who helped create these problems,” Rice said. “A message must be sent to Wall Street that reckless speculation and greed will no longer be rewarded.”
According to Bloomberg News, the top five firms on Wall Street paid out more than $3 billion to top executives in the past five years. All of those executives worked at firms that were involved in selling the mortgage-backed securities at the heart of the current crisis.
Much of this economic crisis is the result of policies supported by Jim Inhofe during his 22 years in Washington. Inhofe repeatedly blocked legislation and measures that would have provided oversight of our financial markets and stopped predatory lenders and institutions from recklessly gambling Oklahoma’s economic future.
An example of one such policy that has been particularly devastating was a 1999 bill, which Jim Inhofe supported, called the Financial Modernization Act. The act repealed the New Deal era law that kept commercial and investment banks separate.
And Mary Fallin:
September 30, 2008
Dear Mr. Harkness:
Thank you for contacting me about ongoing efforts to confront the crisis in our financial system. I share your deep concerns over this crisis. First, rest assured that Congress and the administration are continuing to work to develop legislation that will be both effective and prudent - and I am working with my colleagues in the House to that end. Our goal is to craft a bill that addresses both the immediate crisis and assures stability and responsibility in the out years. It is also absolutely vital that this legislation protects the taxpayers.
After much deliberation, I voted against the initial bill presented to the House on Monday, September 29. I felt - as did 227 other representatives from both parties - that the bill contained serious flaws and that it failed to shield taxpayers from being placed in a position of underwriting a massive bailout of organizations that had acted unwisely and irresponsibly. Our goal should not be a bailout; it needs to focus on a productive workout, plus reforms that will prevent such a crisis from happening again. As your representative, I cannot in good conscience sign a blank check without appropriate safeguards and assurances that those funds will return to the treasury once the crisis has passed.
In the end I agreed with the overwhelming majority of Fifth District residents who contacted me to express their views. They believe that government has a duty to act, but not at the expense of basic principles like common-sense financial discipline and individual responsibility. Our work is not yet done here in Washington, but I am confident we will be able to craft a bill that protects taxpayer interests and preserves the fiscal integrity and continued freedom of our financial markets.
Sincerely,
Mary Fallin
Member of Congress
I’m very disappointed that Obama voted for this bill and I don’t know now if I can now with a good conscience vote for him for president, it is VERY DISAPPOINTING.
