Remember when the Bushies gave us the "WE MUST DO SOMETHING RIGHT NOW OR ALL HELL WILL BREAK LOOSE" message and quite a few of the DEmocrats lapped it up like it was the right thing to do? There were dissenting people of both parties that tried to talk some sense into waiting an extra week or month if necessary to hammer out a more meaningful bailout that would attach some meaningful conditions. Guess what. They treasury still doesn't have a plan on how to spend all 700B. Wait, ,hasn't it been a couple of months? So isn't armageddon upon us according to their predictions? And if what they said was indeed true, and we will be paying for this delay, why aren't both party members showing more urgency on this?
From the Washington Post:
Along the way, the Bush administration has committed $290 billion of the $700 billion rescue package.
Yet for all this activity, no formal action has been taken to fill the independent oversight posts established by Congress when it approved the bailout to prevent corruption and government waste. Nor has the first monitoring report required by lawmakers been completed, though the initial deadline has passed.
"It's a mess," said Eric M. Thorson, the Treasury Department's inspector general, who has been working to oversee the bailout program until the newly created position of special inspector general is filled. "I don't think anyone understands right now how we're going to do proper oversight of this thing."
In approving the rescue package, lawmakers trumpeted provisions in the legislation that established layers of independent scrutiny, including a special inspector general to be nominated by the White House and a congressional oversight panel to be named by lawmakers themselves.
Some lawmakers and their aides fear that political squabbling on Capitol Hill and bureaucratic logjams could delay their work for months. Meanwhile, the Congressional Budget Office, which also has some oversight responsibilities, is worried about the difficulty of hiring people who can understand the intensely complicated financial work involved.
The Government Accountability Office, the investigative arm of Congress, is also required by the legislation to conduct oversight of the program. The agency's mission is to look at the overall performance of the initiative and its effect on the financial system.
The GAO has dedicated about 20 people to look at the bailout and has office space at the Treasury Department. Agency officials said they expect to issue a brief report on the program, as mandated by the legislation, within the next month.
The legislation also created a body called the Financial Stability Oversight Board, whose five members include Paulson and Federal Reserve Chairman Ben S. Bernanke. But it has no staff of its own, and few expect that policymakers can conduct oversight of themselves. "It's sort of a joke in terms of oversight," a congressional aide said.
Granted, the major fault lies with the Bush administration on the 700B bailout. But the point is that the Democrats said they had to compromise quickly because we needed a bailout immediately and what has happened since then? No immediate bailout anyway. Democrats should have just called bluff on the Bushies and taken their time to come up with a better proposal.
It is politics as usual. Neither party has what it takes to do the dirty work to get something done all the way.
Now you got Democrats pandering over the auto bailout. Pelosi's body language doesnt indicate a smidgen of outrage in how the auto industry messed up on its own. She wants to help it because it is the "right thing" to do. Obama indicates the same stuff. Where is the outrage over management of the big Three? There seems to be a desperation to save the auto industry because the unions form a huge voting bloc for our party. Why aren't the DEmocrats thinking of putting some money into retraining some of our autoworkers? There are skills that are transferable. What is the point of an auto bailout if there is no long term fix? Didn't we have a bailout for them just months ago? What were the conditions back then and have they been satisfied? I don't think they have been, if any were imposed.
There are provisions for some government ownership of auto stock in exchange for the loans. Who the hell wants to own worthless stock anyway because that stock will be worthless in the future when they need one more bailout. I did not see one mention in that article about more accountability from management and some need for changing management. The Ford family can sell off the Lions and use that money to fund the Ford motor company. The GM execs who make millions can take massive paycuts and still earn more than a senior engineer and some of that money could help be pooled into keeping whatever unemployment or pension fund healthy.
Oh here's the beauty. Theere are some suggestions for the government to share in the profits before it benefits the shareholders. All those execs will do is steal some of those profits with some undeserved bonuses before it gets termed as a profit.
No accountability. Before the Democrats talk about increasing taxes for anyone, or restoring taxes to some pre Bush levels, they freaking need to learn how to spend OUR money like it is their personal income.
P.S.: I don't think I have to say that I have no confidence in the Republicans either. It is just that I expect more from the DEmocrats.