ABOUT FIRST READ

First Read is an analysis of the day's political news, from the NBC News political unit. First Read is updated throughout the day, so check back often.

Chuck Todd, NBC Political Director

Mark Murray, NBC Deputy Political Director

Domenico Montanaro, NBC Political Researcher



The bailout: We have a deal

Posted: Monday, September 29, 2008 9:28 AM by Domenico Montanaro

Congressional leaders reached a deal on the $700 billion bailout package. The House will vote on the measure today, and the Senate will likely go on Wednesday. Both McCain and Obama suggested that the back the compromise legislation.

The New York Times on the deal: “All sides had to surrender something. The administration had to accept limits on executive pay and tougher oversight; Democrats had to sacrifice a push to allow bankruptcy judges to rewrite mortgages; and Republicans fell short in their effort to require that the federal government insure, rather than buy, the bad debt. Even so, lawmakers on all sides said the bill had been significantly improved from the Bush administration’s original proposal.”

“The final version of the bill included a deal-sealing plan for eventually recouping losses; if the Treasury program to purchase and resell troubled mortgage-backed securities has lost money after five years, the president must submit a plan to Congress to recover those losses from the financial industry. Presumably that plan would involve new fees or taxes, perhaps on securities transactions.”

Politico forecasts today’s vote in the House: “House Republicans are at the center of the storm, with conservatives in open rebellion. But Democrats have their own defections, and within hours of the agreement, the leadership was already highlighting the bill’s promise to crack down on Wall Street pay, mitigate foreclosures and even allow Congress to cut off funding at $350 billion.”

Newsweek's Meachum and Thomas write about how the two candidates reacted last week. "The temperaments of the two candidates both have virtues, both vices. History can belong to the bold—to the Churchills and the Reagans, to men who stand when others sit or surrender, to men who seem to move through the world to a soundtrack of trumpets. But history also belongs to the careful, and to the prudent. Churchill needed FDR's caution and his competing intellectual understanding of the war and of the world that was coming into being; Reagan required George H.W. Bush's grasp of diplomacy and sense of balance to complete the end of the cold war and create a new (and, for Bush 41 and for Clinton, successful) model for American military action in a post-Soviet world.”

The New York Times also does the temperament story, saying that both candidates were themselves. “Mr. McCain, who came of age in a chain-of-command culture, showed once again that he believes that individual leaders can play a catalytic role and should use the bully pulpit to push politicians. Mr. Obama, who came of age as a community organizer, showed once again that he believes several minds are better than one, and that, for all of his oratorical skill, he is wary of too much showmanship.”

“For Republicans, Mr. McCain’s performance proved mixed, however. His quick call to fire the chairman of the Securities and Exchange Commission, then his decision to suspend his campaign and return to Washington even though he lacked an alternative to the bailout, risked making him look impetuous in a moment of crisis… For Democrats, the episode was one more reminder that Mr. Obama was more analyzer-in-chief than firebrand -- though in this case, they gave him high marks for his style. Still, given concerns among Americans about the economy, Mr. Obama risked seeming too cool and slow to exert leadership.” 

"This is something that all of us will swallow hard and go forward with. The option of doing nothing is simply not an acceptable option," McCain said. Obama said he was inclined to back it "because I think Main Street is now at stake." 

Neither nominee, per Politico, has committed to come back to DC to actually cast a vote on this plan.

MAIN PAGE

Email this EMAIL THIS

Comments

Just checked my wallet. There was a twenty in there earlier today. Now it's gone.
No thanks to the conservative lunatic fringe House republicans we have deal on the bailout.  They played petty partisan politics with their one page rag of idiotic ideas when their pal "Lobbyist Lover" McCain blew into town trying to grab credit for the Dems work.

While it would be nice to just let Wall Street pull itself up by it's own bootstraps we unfortunately need to get the banking industry sorted out so the whole economy can move forward.  The Dems made sure to protect Main Street and the taxpayers while the repugnant ones wanted to give away more tax cuts to the rich plus stick us with their idiotic insurance plan and even more deregulation.

Where was McCain's leadership?  He didn't bother to get the House repugnant ones in line behind the bill despite wasting a whole weekend hiding in Washington in order to steal credit for doing nothing.

Go Obama/Biden 08/12!
[[ Democrats had to sacrifice a push to allow bankruptcy judges to rewrite mortgages;]]

Oh, that would have been a wonderful idea. Contracts we eneter into then wouldn't be valid until a judge said they were? And the judge could change them any time he/she wanted to? Hard to find anything that could wrong with that kind of process.
I'm not sure how anyone can see McCain's temperament - punctuated as it is by kneejerk emotionalism and a childish need to always be the center of attention - as a virtue.

Eight years ago, McCain's Republican colleagues in the Senate told us they didn't want him in the Oval Office because of his temperament. If they hadn't, he may well have won the nomination in 2000. McCain was surging after New Hampshire, and the GOP was reeling from the realization its frontrunner had some serious chinks in the armor. But then the Senator Hothead stories started appearing in print, and it gave the more nefarious elements of the Bush supporters some mainstream media validity behind the less valid points about temperament being made in e-mails that were flooding South Carolina before that decisive primary.
Don't do it! It's a set up by Bush and crew. Why not give 700 mill. out of his oil fortune if Wall/Main street is in need?
This will go down as one of the greatest boondoggles ever of the American taxpayer, socializing the financial markets so some filthy rich cats don't loose a dime for their criminal activity, the next time I hear some ignorant republican spout off about the "free market" and the horrors of "socialism" I may punch them in the mouth.
The option of allowing the market to correct itself is the correct option.  The American Government is saving the bankers and will only harm the middle class American's harder.

How does restricting the American's right to petition this new agency help American's?

Section 16 Review
No Injuction or other form of equitable relief may be issued by any court of law or any administrative agency.

You can read the entire proposal at pennsylvaniarevolution.com.

REFUSE THE BAILOUT, SAVE AMERICA!
and how are we paying for all of this?
"BTW, how is it that, nationally, Obama's numbers are going up but he's struggling in big states like MI, PA and OH? Is this about Obama's inability to make the sale with older white voters?"

Let's start using some honesty here. The reason Obama is having problems in these states has to do with the fact that he is African American/ America is STILL not sure if they want to elect an African American for President.  I suspect that if Hillary Clinton had won the Democratic primaries we would be having the SAME problem in other states because America would be trying to figure out whether they wanted a woman President.
As the first presidential debate goes, Mr. Obama was presidential.  In a debate that is formatted for the public, he demonstrated a sense of decorum, ettiqute and respect for the moderator, subjects presented, and for Mr. Mccain.

Ironically, Mr. Obama used a surgeons' scapple on the topics, as well as Mr. Mccain. Obama performed the tasks as necessary, he seemed to leave the public and Mr. McCain without unneccesary scars that often occurs in surgical procedures.  

For now most voters agree Obama's polite - political style includes polite - political substance.  If this is an early indication of the electorate's moods and sentiments, Mr. Obama may be the  next president of the United States.
The one question I want answered on the bail-out bill is this:

Is acron still in line to get a minimum of 20% of any proceeds that flow into the Treasury in the future?

Yes, that was in the Democratic proposal, and one of the things that derailed the original bill.  I realize that the media want to keep this quiet, but you really do owe it to the American public to report on this.
Did anyone check out how marvelous David Shuster was with that marathon telecast about the horrible bail-out mess?  He was superb.  I love David.  Not irritating like Chris M.  Oh and BTW, bail-out = executive welfare.
Bailout plan is short term for long term it will not going to help US economy and Its effects will show after couple of years.

Reason for this economic crises in my opinon are as follows

1) Government failure in foriegn and domestic policies
2) No accountibility in private and banking sectors
3) No investment in Science and technology and education and research to meet the 21 century hurdles.

The dems were spouting how they didn't want the American taxpayer to suffer because of the bail out.  Then, how in the hell do they explain trying to sneak in that 20% of any profits realized would go to ACORN, the left wing group for whom Obama was once a trainer and defended them in voter fraud cases?  This group was also responsible for pushing banking into making the sub-prime loans which are at the root of this economic mess. Dems yell you can't reward Wall St execs. Why would they want to reward ACORN who has faced numerous lawsuits over voter fraud and have a $1 million embezzlement by the leader's brother going on???  It's simple. ACORN registers 95% democrat.  Those self-serving, dirty dem politicians were going to take OUR money to fund this filthy group.  Glad I left the Dem party.
Joe Scarborough remarked this morning that he was glad "adults" were handling these negotiations behind closed doors.  Apparently the American people cannot be trusted.  Excluding voters is a hallmark of facism, not democracy.  I am profoundly disappointed.  Taxpayer dollars should be invested by taxpayers, not the Treasury Secretary.  Simply paying down mortgages and buying CDs will do far more than forcing the taxpayers to assume ownership of bad debt.  MSNBC has already become more partisan than FOX News (albeit in the opposite direction) and this was the final straw.  CNN at least pretends to be balanced.
Please, please Washington, please raise my taxes! I just don't pay enough now.

This bailout would fund about 10 Iraq wars. So after the Democrats vote nearly unanimously for this bailout of the rich bankers, I don't want to hear anymore complaining about deficit spending from the liberals.
So after we spend the $700B, will the US be more like France or Norway with their 70% tax rates.
WE have a deal that will only last a few months
then it starts all over again. We the working class will be lucky to have a job in 6 to 8 months

marty
Hard working America middle class gets SCREWED again.  the $700 billion should be divided evenly amoung every taxpayer to spend and then we would see the economy rebound like never before.
Where's Monty Hall when you need him?!

     Most American's didn't like curtain No.1,  

             curtain No.2 or curtain No. 3.

       They just wanted to turn off their TVs!

             NEVER AGAIN, shouts MCBush!

That's why we're voting for Obama!!

Obama/Biden '08
I understand that the 'limits on executive pay' means that only the first $500,000 paid to an executive can be deducted by the the company for tax purposes.  They can pay whatever they want, without limit, but  they can only write off $500,000.  

I doubt that's what the people had in mind.
Really do you think we have a bail out, or just more money going to big business that gives a lot to these politicians who over the years saw this comming but thought it might disapear...as long as people remain gullable and blame the other party or represenative then we will continue down the same path....Washington as usual and the attitude of the politicians that the American people can handle crisis...we can but not yours......I look at the billions that go unaccounted for, mis management or no management, corruption, lobysist and more and you want ous to continue....I say no to the bail out, there is nothing there for the middle class who didnt get there bonous of millions of dollars.....Shame the same that are supporting the bill repub and democ are the same who got ous there......What a waste.....Maybe this is hell were on  and our  final crisis is heaven.....
This should not go forward untill there is a definate plan to stabilize the housing market, by taking care of the forclosure problem first!!
Owl
If this bailout was so necessary to shore up the markets, why is the DOW down more than 250 points on the news of the bailout agreement?
After 8 years of W's propensity for surrounding himself with people who think like he does and then shooting-from-the-hip mentality, Obama's "analyzer-in-chief" style will be welcome. And compared to McCain's erratic style, it is VERY welcome.
"...Neither nominee, per Politico, has committed to come back to DC to actually cast a vote on this plan."

not true, I heard Obama say he would come back if his vote were needed.

Although, it further underscores McCain's hypocrisy and politicizing the moment.  Why on earth would he break his non-voting streak now?  He can be there for the photo ops on the hill; but not for the doldrums of actual completion - he bothers me on so many levels; but insincerity is near the top of my list of things I can't stand about McCain!
There was no good option that happened.  If there was some decent level of oversite and regulation before hand, this wouldn't have happened.  Also, there needed to be (and still now) more money for regulators to over see the financial markets (as well as other areas such as FDA) to make sure all the rules are being lived up to and for spot inspections.
According to Chris Dodd and Barney Frank, they had a deal at 1:00 PM on Thursday.  Oh I forgot, they lied about that.  Why do they get to tell such a blatant lie and have nobody in the mainstream press call them on it?
Conservatives will not be on board with this because they still believe the problem is too much regulation, not too little.  Everyone correctly says this is all due to excessive risk taking caused by greed.  Guess what, that's what Laissez-Faire economics is all about.  Massive crashes caused by greed and access to other peoples money characterized the American economy right through the Great Depression.  At that point the people cried "enough" and put controls on the financial industry.  Deregulation dismantled those controls and it took less than 10 years to create a crisis of magnitude that almost no one alive remembers from their adult years.  Worship of the free market has failed, conservatives refuse to accept that.
There are approximately 2 million citizens over the age of 18. If each person received $100,000.00 for a total cost of 2 billion, the following would happen:

1. We would pay down our mortgages which would end the mortgage crisis
2. We would pay off our credit card debt which would end the credit crunch
3. We would invest in the stock market for retirement, end of the wall street problem
4. Our kids would be able to afford college and plan for their futures
5. Our seniors could afford the medications and housing they need
6. Those who do not own homes would have the means to place a nice down payment on a home which would end the real estate crisis.

We've paid our taxes, give us some of our money back and let us straighten our this mess the Bush administration and Republicans have created.

Thanks, Donna
Something had to be done to safeguard the economy.  This is not about saving wall street.  Its a 350 billion package with good oversights. The original bill was 3 pages long, now that was a "bailout", this bill is over 106 pages so alot of thought was applied. You can preview the bill @ www.speaker.gov
Doing nothing would have made a bad situation even worse.  Considering the situation and time line, I feel our congress did what was needed and above all have protected the tax payers with the oversights and constraints that have been included.  This is no longer a "blank check" for wall street.
here is my bottom line. i have to live on a budget. if i cannot pay my bills then i am just sol. no one is going to pay them for me.do not lend money to people who cannot pay you back .simple ?and if you do ,then be ready to eat the debt. but don't expect the middle class to shoulder yet another burden.i drive a 10 year old car.i dont hit the malls on weekends .i make do with what i have and put the max allowed into my 401-k.why should i bail out some rich guy who got greedy?


SEND A COMMENT

PLEASE READ: All comments must be approved before appearing in the thread; time and space constraints prevent all comments from appearing. We will only approve comments that are directly related to the blog, use appropriate language and are not attacking the comments of others.

Message (please, no HTML tags. Web addresses will be hyperlinked):

TRACKBACKS

Trackbacks are links to weblogs that reference this post. Like comments, trackbacks do not appear until approved by us. The trackback URL for this post is: http://firstread.msnbc.msn.com/trackback.aspx?PostID=1462810

First Read e-mail alerts


Sign up for First Read alerts
The first place for key political news and analysis

Syndicate This Site

Add First Read to your news reader:
live.com xml
myyahoo msn
bloglines newsgator
google