Jackson Free Press

The U.S. House of Representatives today passed the Senate's bailout plan on the second try. Mississippi congressmen voted the same as they did Monday—with the three Democrats opposing the bailout and the lone Republican, Rep. Chip Pickering, voting for it. Roll call vote here.

CNBC is reporting that the House has now passed the Senate bailout plan, which had several new protections built in for taxpayers and Main Street:

The House approved a revised $700 billion financial rescue package, ending a weeklong battle over a controversial measure after lawmakers came under pressure to head off a growing financial crisis. The plan, which was already approved by the Senate, would allow the government to spend billions of dollars to buy bad mortgage-related securities and other devalued assets from troubled financial institutions.

If it works, advocates say, that would allow frozen credit to begin flowing again and prevent a serious recession. After the House rejected the initial measure on Monday, the Senate revised the bill, adding billions of dollars ot tax breaks to sweeten the package, and approved it Wednesday night.

In efforts to appease GOP opponents, the revised measure includes raising the limit on federal insurance for bank deposits from $100,000 to $250,000. The bill also extends several tax breaks popular with businesses, provisions that are favorites for most Republicans.

It would keep the alternative minimum tax from hitting 20 million middle-income Americans, which appeals to lawmakers in both parties. And it would provide $8 billion in tax relief for those hit by natural disasters in the Midwest, Texas and Louisiana.

Update: Notice on our new stock ticker that soon after the news broke about the House passing the bailout plan, the stock market started dropping, with the Dow ending down 157 points.

Previous Commentsshow

McCain voted for earmarks (again) this week. Washington Post: Sen. John McCain claims to be an absolutist on earmarks. He repeatedly vows to veto every bill -- every one! -- that comes to his desk with a pork-barrel project attached. Under repeated questioning by this reporter over the last 19 months, McCain has said he would never, ever sign a bill that had an earmark. "I will veto every bill with earmarks, until the Congress stops sending bills with earmarks," he said in a speech in April. At the Republican National Convention, he put it this way: 'The first big-spending, pork-barrel earmark bill that comes across my desk, I will veto it. I will make them famous, and you will know their names. You will know their names." It got huge applause. But on Wednesday -- in his first vote in months -- McCain voted for earmarks. In an attempt to woo recalcitrant House Republicans to vote for the $700 billion economic bailout bill, Senators loaded it up with earmarks, including $2 million in tax breaks for companies which make wooden arrows for children and millions for the Virgin Islands rum industry, U.S. wool producers and auto racetrack owners. McCain had warned against such a thing happening. In a speech in Michigan before the vote, he said: "It is completely unacceptable for any kind of earmarks to be included in this bill. It would be outrageous for legislators and lobbyists to pack this rescue plan with taxpayer money for favored companies. This simply cannot happen." It did. And he voted for it anyway. McCain officials defend the vote, saying the overall purpose of the bill was worth it despite the earmarks, which they said he still opposes. [...] But the decision to vote for the earmark-laden package undermines one of McCain's attacks against Sen. Barack Obama. McCain has repeatedly criticized Obama's vote on behalf of an earmark-laden energy bill that included tax breaks for oil companies at the same time it provided record investment for alternative energy. Obama said that on balance, the bill was good. McCain -- who voted against the bill -- has hammered him for this compromise.

DonnaLadd

Oct 3 2008

These two articles explain what I was trying to a few days ago. There are difficult days ahead: The End of Prosperity? By Niall Ferguson http://www.time.com/time/business/article/0,8599,1846450,00.html The World On Edge http://www.economist.com/opinion/PrinterFriendly.cfm?story_id=12341996

FreeClif

Oct 3 2008

The real danger that no one is talking about a lot is if China and Middle Eastern holders of dollar denominated investments decide to dump them. The greatest threat to this country is not necessarily terrorism or dependence on foreign oil it is a failure to save and invest in our own infrastructure with the money we have borrowed. Instead we have borrowed money to spend in Iraq on a war that was based on LIES. All that Wicker wanted to talk about in the debate last night was abortion. If the wingnuts who hate abortion so much are so pious, then why do they give a pass to the people who lied us into an unnecessary war (bearing false witness) that resulted in over one hundred thousand unnecessary deaths of soldiers and civilians. Why aren't the wingnuts pro-life when it comes to opposing unprovoked wars?

FreeClif

Oct 4 2008

In "What would Jesus do, about the bailout?" Andrew Leonard points out the anti-Christian essence of some of the wingnut positions: http://www.salon.com/tech/htww/2008/10/03/illegal_immigrant_foreclosure/index.html?source=newsletter

FreeClif

Oct 4 2008

Whitley, there are certainly some elements of the American political world that bear a much closer resemblance to the nine satanic statements (particularly 4-6, and almost any other statement provided that "for the rich" is appended at a key place) than anything Jesus Christ ever taught. Whenever a politician says of a group of people "let's get rid of them/lock them up/ignore their rights," s/he (but usually he) is just behaving like another centurion, minus the honor code. Whatever they say about their religiosity, their real faith is eugenic--survival of the fittest, culling the herd, the first shall be first and the last shall be last. Whatever Christianity means, I'm pretty sure it isn't supposed to be that.

Tom Head

Oct 5 2008

Obama's bailout is not looking like such a great solution after all.

QB

Oct 6 2008

What happened to "country first"? Fat Harry, why do call it Obama's bailout when McCain and 75% of the U.S. Senate voted for that plan to try to rescue our country from the ditch that the current administration spent 8 years driving us into? A person who is knowledgeable would know the rescue plan will not produce instant results. The effects will not be felt for several months most likely. A knowledgeable person also would realize that this is a worldwide crisis. What effect does Obama have on banks failing in Europe which is a part of what is happening today? There is a rising cry for a bailout for European banks also. Only an incurable nutter and deeply provincial person could try to blame a worldwide crisis on Obama supporting a rescue plan to try to limit the severity of the fall.

FreeClif

Oct 6 2008

From today's Times:

FreeClif

Oct 6 2008

If Obama could influnece so many people to vote for the bailout why can't he influence like-minded people to vote for him almost unanimously for the presidency? Gas was under a dollar 8 years ago. Now it $4.00 a gallon with the sorry a__ republicans yet Harry can't find it within his heart and mind to blame anyone for anything but Democrats. Lawd have mercy! I bet Obama started the war too. I wish Palin instead of her son could go to war and taste some of that firepower.

Walt

Oct 6 2008

The times also reported: The dollar strengthening against the Euro tells you the anxiety is not so much about conditions here, but in Europe where they CHOSE TO DO NOTHING TO HELP THEIR BANKS. It is unfortunate that wingnuts are so uninformed about the global economy. We do not need four more years of their policies based the Jethro Bodine School of Economic Theory.

FreeClif

Oct 6 2008

I called it Obama's bailout because that is what Ladd called it when it passed.

QB

Oct 6 2008

This is the story I posted when it passed, and right above I call it the "Senate's bailout plan." Obama did suggest some needed changes to the plan, which helped it pass. And what I'm reading says that Wall Streeters may reject the plan because it doesn't allow enough balloons for CEOs. Schmoes. This is what happens when an industry gets everything it wants for so many years. They're just not ready to give up the culture of greed.

DonnaLadd

Oct 6 2008

Also, yesterday on "This Week," they talked about the stock market falling immediately after the bill passed Friday. Apparently as soon as the news about the 160,000 jobs being lost in September hit the airwaves, stocks started tanking. Then there's Europe.

DonnaLadd

Oct 6 2008

Y'all may want to jump in on this discussion too.

LatashaWillis

Oct 6 2008

All of this PORK, earmarks, whatever you want to call it has got to end. How do we get our message to Congress? http://VoteNoConfidence.orgfree.com Please check out the site and join the forum for discussion on this. Digg it, Stumble it, Buzz it... whatever you can do.

BobbyKearan

Oct 8 2008

We could start by convincing Gov. Palin, the earmark queen, to stop asking for so many. ;-) This shouldn't be about earmarks per se. That's a political catchphrase for McCain, which he has used so broadly that it has no meaning. It should be about overall fiscal responsibility. And here in MIssissippi, "pork" is very popular among our Republicans. Barbour's claim to fame is his connections in Washington that get us so much; same with Thad Cochran. I doubt seriously that McCain would actually follow through on eliminating earmarks any more than he will admit that his running mate is a huge fan of them, and that he has voted for them

DonnaLadd

Oct 8 2008

We're hoping that http://votenoconfidence.orgfree.com takes off and we can see something that will hit congress hard - not getting re-elected. Nobody getting elected to congress. Then we may shock them into paying attention to We, The People again. ... of course you could always write in "Bobby Kearan" in that write-in line. I am ten thousand times more honorable and above corruption than any politician today.

BobbyKearan

Oct 8 2008

Me Thinks I Smell A Rat 1) According to the US Census Bureau, as of 2004, 80% of the value of the NY Stock Market is owned by 400(yes that's four hundred), tax filing individuals. 2)The values of all stocks are determined on a daily basis according to the prices of stocks bought and sold that day. On any given day only 3% of the total shares on the entire stock market are bought and sold. As a casual observer, if I add #1 above to #2 above I get an environment ripe for manipulation. Kinda like when Enron was manipulating the cost of energy in California by manipulating the shut down of electric generating plants to create an artificial "shortage" of energy. Kinda like when WorldCom manipulated other communications companies to slash costs to match WorldCom's record returns, and to later find our that WorldCom's returns were pure fabrication. Kinda like when the Texas Hunt Brothers manipulated the price of silver by buying up all the silver futures in the 70's. Kinda like when Ivan Bosky manipulated the value of the entire US Stock market by creating a new form of security..the junk bond, in the 80's. He made over $900 million for his efforts. Ivan served two years in a Federal "country club" prison, paid a record $300 million dollar fine for his antics and was barred from participating in the stock market for life. He served his time and with the $500 million he had left over, he began teaching in presitigeous US business schools. Hmmmmm..I wonder what Ivan and his strudents are doing with their time these days?

FrankMickens

Oct 10 2008

I wonder why the entire rest of the free world does not seem to buy the Republican wingnut idea that the world financial crisis was caused by POOR BLACKS AND MEXICANS? See what they are saying: http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2008/10/09/AR2008100903425.html?hpid=topnews

FreeClif

Oct 10 2008