Senate to vote on rescue plan with added tax cut

MC.no.spin · 09-30-08, 10:24 PM

Quote:

WASHINGTON (AP) - In a surprise move to resurrect President Bush's $700 billion Wall Street rescue plan, Senate leaders slated a vote on the measure for Wednesday - but added a tax cut plan already rejected by the House. Majority Leader Harry Reid, D-Nev., and GOP Leader Mitch McConnell of Kentucky unveiled the plan Tuesday.

The Senate plan would also raise federal deposit insurance limits to $250,000 from $100,000, as called for by the two presidential nominees only hours earlier.

The move to add a tax legislation - including a set of popular business tax breaks - risked a backlash from House Democrats insisting they be paid for with tax increases elsewhere.

My Way News - Senate to vote on rescue plan with added tax cut

This is a bad bill - it's now throwing in all the Democratic and Republican chestnuts that can't pass on their own accord. It will further increase the deficit and increase Medicare spending, unemployment benefits, etc. Tax cuts will not be accounted for with responsible pay-go procedures (cutting spending or raising revenue somewhere else to pay for the tax revenue decrease.)

The Senate is trying to get these pushed through on their bill with the idea they can get enough of the House on board with all their pet projects on there. Interest groups and their lobbyists will shower them with $$$$$$.

Washington is broken.

Iriemon · 09-30-08, 10:29 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by MC.no.spin

My Way News - Senate to vote on rescue plan with added tax cut

This is a bad bill - it's now throwing in all the Democratic and Republican chestnuts that can't pass on their own accord. It will further increase the deficit and increase entitlement spending, unemployment benefits, etc.

The Senate is trying to get these pushed through on their bill with the idea they can get enough of the House on board with all their pet projects on there. Interest groups and their lobbyists will shower them with $$$$$$.

Washington is broken.

I agree. The Govt has had to borrow almost a trillion dollars this year, in one single freaking year.

Why anyone is talking about tax cuts at all and not spending cuts is beyond me.

jamesrage · 09-30-08, 10:29 PM

It looks like they are going to try to bring this back each from the grave until it either passes or they vote to stop bring it up like they did with their amnesty for illegals plan. I guess we are going to have to phone,fax or email our elected officials again.

donsutherland1 · 09-30-08, 10:33 PM

MC.no.spin,

IMO, the expanded FDIC limits make sense. They can only help increase confidence in the banking system and limit the risk of bank runs. The tax provisions--even the AMT relief--has nothing to do with avoiding systemic financial risk. Those provisions should not be part of the legislation.

And, on a separate note, CNBC reported tonight:

A group of House Republicans is cobbling together a proposal to stabilize financial markets that can serve as an alternative to the plan proposed by Treasury Secretary Henry Paulson, legislative sources have told CNBC.

The failure of Monday's vote on the $700 billion bailout package—which these Republicans doubt is likely to cause an economic "doomsday" scenario—emboldened the group to press forward with its own plan, sources said.

danarhea · 09-30-08, 10:44 PM

Welcome to the bailout.

MC.no.spin · 09-30-08, 10:48 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by donsutherland1

MC.no.spin,

IMO, the expanded FDIC limits make sense. They can only help increase confidence in the banking system and limit the risk of bank runs. The tax provisions--even the AMT relief--has nothing to do with avoiding systemic financial risk. Those provisions should not be part of the legislation.

And, on a separate note, CNBC reported tonight:

A group of House Republicans is cobbling together a proposal to stabilize financial markets that can serve as an alternative to the plan proposed by Treasury Secretary Henry Paulson, legislative sources have told CNBC.

The failure of Monday's vote on the $700 billion bailout package—which these Republicans doubt is likely to cause an economic "doomsday" scenario—emboldened the group to press forward with its own plan, sources said.

I've got no problem with the FDIC issue. What bugs me is all of the inapplicable things on the bill that have nothing to do with the crisis. This is classic politics, classic Washington tricks.

IMO, bills should not be allowed to trail off onto other legislative issues. They should be composed of similar points of legislation and voted on as itself. These are a bunch of bargaining points that have nothing to do with this.

Regarding the Republican proposal, let's discuss it. Here is the key point:

Quote:

Require the Treasury Department to guarantee, at up to 100 percent, bank losses resulting from failed mortgage-backed securities originated prior to the plan's enactment. Such insurance, supporters say, would provide immediate value to the securities and a foundation for which they could then be sold. The Treasury Department would finance that insurance by assessing a premium on outstanding mortgage-backed securities.

In my opinion, don't we only have to look at AIG to know this insurance program would cost hundreds of billions of dollars and have no hope of return on investment? At least with the Paulson plan, the tax payers are making an investment that could eventually turn a profit.

DeeJayH · 09-30-08, 10:48 PM

raise FDIC limits
**** the rest of this bill

Doc Howl · 09-30-08, 11:03 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by MC.no.spin

My Way News - Senate to vote on rescue plan with added tax cut

This is a bad bill - it's now throwing in all the Democratic and Republican chestnuts that can't pass on their own accord. It will further increase the deficit and increase Medicare spending, unemployment benefits, etc. Tax cuts will not be accounted for with responsible pay-go procedures (cutting spending or raising revenue somewhere else to pay for the tax revenue decrease.)

The Senate is trying to get these pushed through on their bill with the idea they can get enough of the House on board with all their pet projects on there. Interest groups and their lobbyists will shower them with $$$$$$.

Washington is broken.

Broken? More than at first glance.

This little thing we have, this constitution thing, insists that all spending bills start in the house, not the senate.

But WTF? It's just a piece of paper.

MC.no.spin · 09-30-08, 11:17 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Doc Howl

Broken? More than at first glance.

This little thing we have, this constitution thing, insists that all spending bills start in the house, not the senate.

But WTF? It's just a piece of paper.

It says bills for raising revenue, not spending.

Quote:

All bills for raising Revenue shall originate in the House of Representatives; but the Senate may propose or concur with Amendments as on other Bills.

The United States Constitution - The U.S. Constitution Online - USConstitution.net