Despite the US Senate voting in favor of the financial bailout plan which would include provisions for the credit crunch facing middle class taxpayers, the Louisiana Senators were not on board with the majority.The Senate plan prevailed by a substantial vote. Only 25 Senators voted no.
Sen. Landrieu said in connection with the bailout:
“Unfortunately, it appears that an influx of taxpayer money will ultimately need to be a part of any attempt to stabilize and restore faith in our financial sector. However, if the people of Louisiana have learned anything in the last several years, it is that simply throwing money at a disaster doesn’t fix the problem unless paired with wise reforms to the practices that failed us.
“Significant improvements have certainly been made since the audacious first draft of the bailout plan. But in its current form, it falls too short of having the safeguards needed to ensure American taxpayers aren’t left shouldering the burden of problems left uncorrected.”
David Vitter, R-Metairie said, “"We need to stabilize the market and increase liquidity, not replace the market with unprecedented government intervention at taxpayer risk and expense," Vitter said before the vote.
"We need to minimize the pain on average Americans who did nothing wrong, not wipe it away from politicians, lenders and, yes, some borrowers who did plenty wrong, who were plenty irresponsible."
Neither US Senator has come up with their own plan or has addressed the credit crunch that is hurting the middle class.
I appreciate the link there Jacob…. I sort of wanted to see the 420 page report though…. I have to admit, I am not too crazy about CNN, and not really sure of their analysis procedures…. Lou Dobbs and Anderson Cooper are actually sort of superficial in a patronizing way, not at all unlike the anchors on WAFB, and for the most part, an awful lot like our Governor for sure…. But the bill does seem to have more ‘fluff’ than ‘pork’ if the condensed analysis offered up is on the mark……… Yeah, like I said, Landrieu probably didn’t get enough in it for ‘her own’ so no wonder she didn’t jump on board…… I think the whole thing needs to be dumped, and/or re done… I will have to side with KPF on this one, and rising interest along with a shrinkage in available money for the short term is a better position than the potential long term effects…… Now if the taxpayer were a leveraged interest instead of a vested interest, this would be a horse of a different color……. Instead, the taxpayer is being held hostage, again………………………… Written by
on 10/3/2008
REPORT SPAM OR ABUSE
Guess it must be an election year for Miss Mary, because she voted with the conservatives. Written by Sid
on 10/3/2008
REPORT SPAM OR ABUSE
You will find details of the bill -- see the bottom of the page -- at: http://money.cnn.com/2008/10/02/news/economy/what_is_in_bill/?postversion=2008100216 -- and I don't like it one bit. We need to let the "vultures" (i.e. those who buy in "short sell" trades) come in and clean this mess up for us. Yes; there will be real pain, but when the screaming is over we will all know what those assets are really worth, which is something I do not see resulting from the bailout bill. And I do not buy into the argument that failure to pass the bill will result in a complete economic collapse. That is Wall Street code for "it's the end of the world as we know it," which only means their traditional ways of doing business will come to an end. Written by Jacob Sulzbach, Lafayette, La.
on 10/2/2008
REPORT SPAM OR ABUSE
But then again, perhaps she isn't on board because there is some equity stake being demanded as a result of taxpayer contributions... Anyone on the Bayou Buzz Staff want to present what is in the bill???? Written by
on 10/2/2008
REPORT SPAM OR ABUSE
Of course Landrieu isn't on board with the majority...... It might mean less money for promises she made to her upper tier level constituents....... And she says; "However, if the people of Louisiana have learned anything in the last several years, it is that simply throwing money at a disaster doesn’t fix the problem unless paired with wise reforms to the practices that failed us." Well, that sounds good Mary, but that sounds sort of wishy washy to me.... Now if you had of based your decision upon the lack of an aparetn 2.5:1 coupled with an additonal 1.5:1 or 1.75:1 return in equitable assets or value to the taxpayer, that might have sounded a bit more reasonable....... Yayyyyyyyyyy Mary!!!!!! Or is it a 'Hail Mary?'
Written by
on 10/2/2008
REPORT SPAM OR ABUSE
