Hyperlink Legend · E-mail story · Comments · iPod friendly version · Print friendly version

Graves, Boyda vote against $700B bailout in the U.S. House
by Ken Newton
Tuesday, September 30, 2008

Congressman Sam Graves couldn’t get past the blank-check mentality that he said persuaded him to vote against a federal bailout bill in the U.S. House on Monday.

The Northwest Missouri lawmaker joined 132 other Republicans and 95 Democrats in defeating the $700 billion measure 228 to 205.

Mr. Graves, a fourth-term representative, said the bill neither “punished the wrongdoers nor adequately protected the innocent taxpayers, investors and retirees” caught in the Wall Street banking crisis.

He said the bill, crafted by the Republican White House, administration Treasury Department officials and a bipartisan group of legislators, offered a federal blank check to save financiers who ignored accounting fundamentals and displayed poor moral leadership.

“I fear (the bailout) would have had the unintended consequence of rewarding the criminal and morally reprehensible behavior that created this disaster with little or no guarantee for millions of Americans that have already suffered from their irresponsibility,” the Republican lawmaker said.

His opponent in the 6th District congressional race, Democrat Kay Barnes, said she would have voted against the bill had she been in office, pointing out the failure of Congress to work together in even dire circumstances.

“The fact that Congress is unable to come together to pass a package that calms the financial markets, while protecting the interests of middle-class families here in the 6th District, demonstrates just how fundamentally broken things are in Washington,” she said.

Nancy Boyda, the Democratic lawmaker who represents Northeast Kansas, also voted “no” on the bailout, saying economists offered no reassurance the measure would work.

“If we spent $700 billion on this option and it doesn’t work,” she said, “then we don’t have that money to spend on doing what really needs to be done to strengthen our economy for the short and the long term.”

She called the punitive steps put in place to limit executive compensation at rescued companies “window dressing” and said the bill offered little to “curb the excesses of Wall Street.”

Ken Newton can be reached

at kenn@npgco.com.

Comments
This story has 47 comments. Click here to join in on the discussion.
Story Tools
Hyperlink Legend
E-mail story
Print friendly version
iPod friendly version

Today's Top Headlines
Not in Kansas
Shearin unites holiday events
Two charged in shooting incidents
Alliance considers highway system’s future
‘Mommy had not an easy life’
Posted by TheDean06 on September 30, 2008 at 5:07 a.m. (Suggest removal)

Members of Congress voting against this package should be ashamed. Their failure to have the courage to put their political aspirations aside and vote for a program necessary to maintain the financial liquidity of this nation is a sad day in our history.

A frozen credit system creates a domino effect harming every man, woman, and child in this country.

This legislation is necessary for the BENEFIT of every ordinary citizen. A collapsed credit system will limit the ability of every employer to make payroll, purchase necessary supplies and parts, and generate the revenue necessary to pay their bills. Our nation stands on the verge of a major financial meltdown.

We need representatives with courage. Failure to act responsibly will put a tombstone on the financial future of every man, woman, and child in this nation.

Posted by Wright_Winger on September 30, 2008 at 5:55 a.m. (Suggest removal)

Rightly or wrongly, the bill from day one became known only as a "bailout" and nothing much was done to dispel that characterization in the eyes of the public, either by the media or the politicos. So, the public perception was that of more special treatment for the "fat cats" which of late they have been well trained to loath, often with good reason. The mail and phone calls to Congress must have been overwhelmingly negative. If there had been a little more time to "sell" the virtues and if the election wasn't just a month away it might have turned out differently. I hope the above prediction by 'TheDean' doesn't turn out to be quite so dire as he sees it. At least some of the hyper-inflation in the commodity markets may be wrung out.

Posted by ShirleeK on September 30, 2008 at 6:31 a.m. (Suggest removal)

Wouldn't it be lovely if politicians could do what they knew to be the right thing rather than what would be most popular? Wouldn't it be lovely if voters trusted politicians to the point that, if they did something unpopular, people assumed that they had better information?

Representative Graves does not understand that a 7+ percent drop in the equity markets does not exactly help "the innocent taxpayers, investors and retirees" (who can all be the same person!).

Hey Sam, the congress who voted against the legislation is the guilty party. You guys were the ones who backed away from adequate regulation in the name of Holy Free Market. Remember, you are legislator not a judge.

Oh well, another buying opportunity.

Posted by MichaelH on September 30, 2008 at 7:05 a.m. (Suggest removal)

I say let Wall Street crumble.

It's been said for a long time,

"Middle America can survive without Wall Street. Wall Street can't survive without middle America."

If we're really so outraged with the current state of the economy, let's prove it. I no longer have any cash in banks, not for fear of losing it, but as a result of finally deciding enough is enough.

Let 'em crumble, we could use a good dose of reality that is living a more humble life. We don't need everything but we have it. We consume far too much, and demand more in the name of higher living.

I think that's something EVERY American is guilty of. Every American with a job, that is.

Bye bye, Wall Street. Just think, we could reopen the doors to the LiveStock Exchange again! Only call it something else...

Posted by joetowner on September 30, 2008 at 7:34 a.m. (Suggest removal)

this bill was a disaster, there are ways to safeguard the taxpayer and their financial savings, but this bill wasn't the answer. Hopefully they can come back with something a little more responsible.

Posted by howarddecker on September 30, 2008 at 8:33 a.m. (Suggest removal)

TheDean06 - you're all wet and you're wrong!

These representatives who voted against this legislation that they are trying to ram down the American Publics throats are very brave people and have no cause to be ashamed.

They were elected to represent their the people of their districts and their votes reflected the will of their constituents. They're doing their job.

I heard it said the Sec. Paulson is approaching this as a "Day Trader" rather than a banker. Considering his bacground as an investment banker, partner and chairman or Goldman Sachs, that's probably right.

Thanks to Rep. Graves for truly being representative of "the people."

Posted by meow on September 30, 2008 at 8:53 a.m. (Suggest removal)

MichaelH, I agree. Maybe if we get a dose of harsh reality, the American people won't think they need to live so high above their means. Sometimes doing without the things you want makes you truly appreciate what you have.

Posted by comment on September 30, 2008 at 9:49 a.m. (Suggest removal)

Good for Sam! I agree with you Wright_Winger.I'm still not sure whats going on and they almost shoved this thing down our throats. The failure of this bill is the people speaking. People want and deserve to know more. Someone needs to tie Nancy Pulosi up on the back porch and give her a dog biscut to chew on!

Posted by horhay on September 30, 2008 at 9:51 a.m. (Suggest removal)

I am sure the thousands if not millions that lose their 401k's will tell them they did the right thing too. Give me a break.

Posted by howarddecker on September 30, 2008 at 10:14 a.m. (Suggest removal)

horhay- If Obama, Biden, Ried and Pelosi get their way, it won't matter if we lose our 401k's. These folks are working on turning the the USA into a socialist state anyway.

Posted by MichaelH on September 30, 2008 at 11:01 a.m. (Suggest removal)

Cash out your 401K's! I did, not to say I lead any sort of an example.

I'm buying gold.

And I'll say one thing, right here, right now...

The last time the government stole the American peoples gold, I wasn't alive.

They try to do it to me and they're gonna have to pry it out of my fully armed, dead hands.

If there was ever a time to question your investors and the cash you've given them, now is it. I don't know why on Earth anyone would leave their cash just sitting there, personally. Especially if you're afraid of losing it.

Yeah, yeah, scare mongering. Call it what you want, I call it distrust. I do NOT have faith in banks or the government that, "oversees" them.

Come try to take my gold, I dare ya.

Posted by devinbroncs123 on September 30, 2008 at 11:07 a.m. (Suggest removal)

Well I don;t want it to fail. My IRA is looking nice and at my age (25) I'm leaving it alone. i can buy up all these stocks for cheap and sell them when they are high. I am in a stealthy submarine right now. I'm sorry to those in paddle rafts.

This is crazy. Yes we could do without the stock market. But imagine how our country would slow. I agree, Americans are driven by greed. Whether it be for money, stuff, etc it powers our country. I really don't know what to think of all this. It's really hairy right now.

Posted by MichaelH on September 30, 2008 at 11:09 a.m. (Suggest removal)

If free health care implies socialism, I consider myself a socialist.

Why should people become bankrupt because they get sick? It simply doesn't make sense. And yes, it has, is and will continue to happen under our current "health care" system.

They can't guarantee we'll have homes, jobs, credit or cash - but if we all had our health we could focus on those issues. As it stands health care is, pardon me, WAS, such a huge topic that nothing else got much attention... which is part of the reason we've been back-doored as citizens in the first place.

We've been told what our concerns our - not the other way around! They have been effective in diverting our attention (which is commonplace when someone wants to force an agenda).

The art of misdirection. It would appear our government are a bunch of well-dressed, shoddy magicians...

"follow my hand! Not THAT one, the other one!"

Posted by ksrogers2000 on September 30, 2008 at 11:11 a.m. (Suggest removal)

One thing nobody seems to understand that is if we don't get the bail out, everyone suffers. If your neighbor can't pay for their home and it goes into forclosure, then your home value goes way down. If you want to send your child to college, you can't get students loans, if you want to buy a house, no bank will lend to you. Credit card companies will raise the interest rates, and lower credt limits. it will trickle down and effect everyone.

It is not only Wallstreets problem, and they were not the only people who "caused" this. Americans, by nature, are greedy. We want more and more, and bigger is always better. How do they pay for it all? They take out equity loans or rack up their credit cards just to buy the newest phone or x-box.
Also, who wants to retire someday? Who has been contributing to their 401k? have you seen the value lately? It is not pretty and will only get worse if this bailout does not happen

Posted by Wright_Winger on September 30, 2008 at 11:40 a.m. (Suggest removal)

I understand Bush is going to invoke Executive Order 51, declare a national emergency and delay the election.

Posted by MichaelH on September 30, 2008 at 11:50 a.m. (Suggest removal)

KSROGERS, homes and property will never be worthless. It may lower for a period, but it WILL always go back up. Real estate 101.

No one will be able to get a student loan means that we, effectively, have seen the last of American college students? Hardly.

No one will be able to buy those dirt cheap homes you mentioned? Come on man, you can't be serious. You already admitted prices will plummet, essentially putting them within reach of people who have been responsible with their spending and saving (money in a bank accumulating interest is hardly responsible in my book, I consider it funding the bulls*%&.

Credit card companies can raise their interest rates and lower limits all they want. Have fun! That means people will only be able to afford... wait for it... WHAT THEY CAN AFFORD!

You're right, it is a trickle-down. A well-deserved one.

I got news for ya - people haven't been able to retire for some time now. Do you live in a bubble or do you just not know anyone over 60?

What it all amounts to is that we will be forced to re-evaluate our priorities.

We will be forced to re-evaluate everyones salary, starting with our government and corporate participants.

If you haven't reviewed the benefits of starting a corporation, you should look into it. If your name is on the CEO list, it looks fail-proof (and is). For someone on the outside looking in you're like, "are you serious? You can make crappy decisions and get to walk away without debtors being able to come after your personal assets?"

That's bulls*&%.

CEO's should make tons of cash AFTER making sound financial decisions - not before and/or during, which is how it currently is. They should also be liable for debts - I mean, they created the company and you're telling me they can't be held responsible?

Ahhh, capitalism. Gotta love it... while it lasts.

Posted by Wright_Winger on September 30, 2008 at 11:55 a.m. (Suggest removal)

I think you are right and will advise George not to proceed with that plan.

Posted by MichaelH on September 30, 2008 at 11:55 a.m. (Suggest removal)

Wright_Winger, please man...

Where do you get this information??? Share? Please?

Posted by Wright_Winger on September 30, 2008 at 11:57 a.m. (Suggest removal)

Michael I will try to get a note off to you later today. One thing you need to know, I am a consummate liar.

Posted by MichaelH on September 30, 2008 at 12:04 p.m. (Suggest removal)

Grrrrr ;)

Posted by Wright_Winger on September 30, 2008 at 12:27 p.m.

This comment was removed by the site staff.

Posted by tigersfan on September 30, 2008 at 12:54 p.m. (Suggest removal)

No kidding! I think Winger might get his first comment removed. Maybe you used to go by ninja_man or spy_hunter_007_5, oh wait we think we know ninja or a backwards sort of way but maybe you are spy?????? I hear the silent helicopters now...

Posted by Mr_America on September 30, 2008 at 1:11 p.m. (Suggest removal)

I'm glad they voted it down. acorn and la raza don't need any of our hard earned money money.

Posted by devinbroncs123 on September 30, 2008 at 1:29 p.m. (Suggest removal)

So I would lke to throw this poll out there... Who's at work right now???

I am

Posted by Rockchalk on September 30, 2008 at 1:52 p.m. (Suggest removal)

What did people think of the bill?

"Madam Speaker, this is a huge cowpatty with a piece of marshmallow stuck in the middle of it" ... "I'm not going to eat that cowpatty." Rep. Paul Broun, R-Ga.

Posted by Wright_Winger on September 30, 2008 at 1:59 p.m. (Suggest removal)

Jim Stafford had a song, Cow Patti, it makes more sense than Nancy Pelosi

Posted by Wright_Winger on September 30, 2008 at 2:41 p.m.

This comment was removed by the site staff.

Posted by joetowner on September 30, 2008 at 2:49 p.m.

This comment was removed by the site staff.

Posted by ksrogers2000 on September 30, 2008 at 3:04 p.m. (Suggest removal)

michaelH
I work for a bank. I get to see alot of peoples spending habits. When I make suggestions for people to save or open a retirement account, that think I am crazy.
When I see that they own a $400,000 house and they only make $50,000 per yr and own a BMW, yet keep overdrafting their account becaue they can't manage money...when I make suggestions, they think I am crazy.
I see alot more of the real world than you do. It is a scary place right now and it will only get worse

Posted by apmastrangelo on September 30, 2008 at 3:08 p.m. (Suggest removal)

Every single congressperson, and I do mean every single one, should now be asked what they will propose to stabilize our economy.
The conduct of both houses has become irresponsible to the extent that the country should begin the recall process on a significant number of those currently holding office.
There is no amount of sugar that is going to make the now necessary bitter pill palatable. So all those looking to protect their political back-sides best get in gear before the electorate actually realizes how inept their leadership has become.

Posted by Wright_Winger on September 30, 2008 at 3:34 p.m. (Suggest removal)

Can I bring Lucille to the white House?

Posted by Wright_Winger on September 30, 2008 at 4:16 p.m.

This comment was removed by the site staff.

Posted by devinbroncs123 on September 30, 2008 at 4:22 p.m. (Suggest removal)

Well at least we still have football and beer throughout this mess. I might be dead if we didn't. GO BRONCOS!!! Oh wait we lost to an inferior team... Shucks...........

Posted by rickygipson on September 30, 2008 at 4:27 p.m. (Suggest removal)

the topic is the bailout...stay on it

Posted by joetowner on September 30, 2008 at 4:56 p.m. (Suggest removal)

give me a break

Posted by Wright_Winger on September 30, 2008 at 5:49 p.m. (Suggest removal)

This IS about the bailout and is a question for ksrogers. Under discussion is raising the FDIC insured deposit level from $100,000 to $250,000. A couple can already insure $200,000 in jointly owned accounts and can add additional insured POD accounts. How many depositors can this possibly affect and how is going to help alleviate the credit crunch? Hope you are still posting to this and can shed some light on the scheme.

Posted by MichaelH on October 1, 2008 at 6:28 p.m. (Suggest removal)

Humorous it is that someone working in a bank claims to have some superior concept of the community or financial industry since you're a nicely-dressed check-casher.

Gimmie a break.

Lemme guess, your bank offers overdraft protection? So you're admittedly taking an active role in the perpetuation of poor financial habits? Nice - and before you say it, yes, there are other banks that don't offer play that game...

Lemme guess, they don't pay that well? So you're all about the money? As far as I'm concerned that's the friggin' problem right there; money and the love people have for it.

No one is content anymore. Wall Street has rubbed off on Main Street and we're just now figuring that out.

I'm not worried if banks collapse at all. That may sound pretentious but it's just the facts. I've driven used cars that are paid for since I don't know when (only bought 2 new cars in my life), the only high-dollar item I've bought in the last 2 years is my laptop = cash (no, I'm not saying I'm mister money, I'm saying I wanted it and saved for it.

The people out there who don't even know what it's like to pay for a $1100 item in cash are the people who should be worried and more than likely are.

I wonder how many Americans have ever seen $1000 in cash (no, tax season doesn't count)?


Post a comment

Comments are the sole responsibility of the person posting them.

Rules: We don't allow comments that degrade others on the basis of gender, race, class, ethnicity, national origin, religion, sexual orientation or disability. Epithets, abusive language and obscene comments will not be tolerated... nor will defamation. Brief quotes are okay as long as the source is given. Blatent cutting and pasting is not acceptable.

Robust, even heated debate we like. Straying off-topic or flaming, we don't. Please read our user agreement.

Requires free stjoenews.net registration
.

Username:
Password: (Forgotten your password?)

Comment:


Business
Location


Iframe Content
  • More Headlines
  • Recently Discussed
It takes two Friday, Dec. 5, 2008

Show-biz heavy metal Friday, Dec. 5, 2008

A thread of hope Friday, Dec. 5, 2008

The Shuffle: Baby, one more time? Friday, Dec. 5, 2008