Print
E-mail
Comment
Rate
Carney votes ‘no’ to bailout
| Share This Story: |
  
|
BY BORYS KRAWCZENIUK
STAFF WRITER
The Senate sweetened the financial bailout bill, but it still left a sour taste with U.S. Rep. Chris Carney, who voted against a bailout for a second time Friday.
U.S. Rep. Paul E. Kanjorski, D-11, voted in favor again. Both voted the same way on a bill rejected Monday by the House.
The Pennsylvania House delegation voted 12-7 in favor, with three Republicans who voted no the first time voting yes now.
Carney, D-10, said the bill’s increased insurance of bank deposits — from $100,000 to $250,000 — was a positive step, but not enough to change his mind.
“It was only slightly better,” Carney said. “But overall, structurally, it was the same bill except they rolled in $150 billion worth of sweeteners ... They are (sweet), but they don’t belong in this bill.”
The Senate sweeteners include several tax breaks for use of renewable energy by individuals and businesses and extended many other tax breaks, including relief from the alternative minimum tax.
“If this bill was strong enough, it should have been able to stand on its own merits without these sweeteners,” Carney said.
He said the bill continues to lack strong enforcement power for the congressional panel that will oversee the bailout and doesn’t do enough to limit the salaries of executives at failed financial institutions that will seek federal help.
Congress also moved too quickly and failed to look into other viable alternatives, Carney said.
“We had time actually to do a bill to consider other alternatives. What we ended up with was basically (Treasury Secretary Henry) Paulson and (Federal Reserve Board chairman Ben) Bernanke’s bill with tinkering at the margins,” Carney said. “We can do better.”
Economists don’t even know if $700 billion for the bailout “is the right number,” he said.
“The Fed just said we had to put a big number on there (to make investors believe the bailout is serious),” he said. “The other thing that was scarier for me was even if it passes, we don’t know if it will work.”
Efforts to reach Kanjorski after the vote were unsuccessful.
In a conference call with local businessmen before the vote, Kanjorski defended the bill. He said it isn’t perfect, and called the Senate sweeteners “ridiculous,” saying they could lead to inflation.
“In normal times, normal circumstances, it would have been sufficient to cause me to vote no,” he said.
But without the bailout the country faced “an overwhelming chance” of a financial “meltdown of proportions that we have never seen in our modern economic society.”
Waiting even a week could cost the economy “hundreds of billions if not trillions of dollars,” he said.
“This is an important vote today because it’s probably our last opportunity to send a message around the world that the United States is going to stand behind our banking system and free up the credit that’s necessary to carry on our operations,” Kanjorski said.
Kanjorski said the Bush administration and Congress had done a poor job selling the package to the public, which had overwhelmed congressmen with opposition to the bill.
“The American people have no idea if we fail to take remedial legislation now,” said Kanjorski, the chairman of the House Capital Markets, Insurance and Government-Sponsored Enterprises Subcommittee.
Without the bill, people and businesses would soon find it even harder to obtain loans to expand, to send students to college or obtain credit for other day-to-day life choices, he said.
“I’m a Democrat and I’m in a very, very serious campaign. The easiest thing in the world for me to do today or a week ago is to vote no ... But this is not the time to protect one’s tail, as we’d say in the game. This is the time for good men to stand up and be counted ... This is something that our society absolutely needs.”
U.S. Rep. Paul E. Kanjorski, D-11, voted in favor again. Both voted the same way on a bill rejected Monday by the House.
The Pennsylvania House delegation voted 12-7 in favor, with three Republicans who voted no the first time voting yes now.
Carney, D-10, said the bill’s increased insurance of bank deposits — from $100,000 to $250,000 — was a positive step, but not enough to change his mind.
“It was only slightly better,” Carney said. “But overall, structurally, it was the same bill except they rolled in $150 billion worth of sweeteners ... They are (sweet), but they don’t belong in this bill.”
The Senate sweeteners include several tax breaks for use of renewable energy by individuals and businesses and extended many other tax breaks, including relief from the alternative minimum tax.
“If this bill was strong enough, it should have been able to stand on its own merits without these sweeteners,” Carney said.
He said the bill continues to lack strong enforcement power for the congressional panel that will oversee the bailout and doesn’t do enough to limit the salaries of executives at failed financial institutions that will seek federal help.
Congress also moved too quickly and failed to look into other viable alternatives, Carney said.
“We had time actually to do a bill to consider other alternatives. What we ended up with was basically (Treasury Secretary Henry) Paulson and (Federal Reserve Board chairman Ben) Bernanke’s bill with tinkering at the margins,” Carney said. “We can do better.”
Economists don’t even know if $700 billion for the bailout “is the right number,” he said.
“The Fed just said we had to put a big number on there (to make investors believe the bailout is serious),” he said. “The other thing that was scarier for me was even if it passes, we don’t know if it will work.”
Efforts to reach Kanjorski after the vote were unsuccessful.
In a conference call with local businessmen before the vote, Kanjorski defended the bill. He said it isn’t perfect, and called the Senate sweeteners “ridiculous,” saying they could lead to inflation.
“In normal times, normal circumstances, it would have been sufficient to cause me to vote no,” he said.
But without the bailout the country faced “an overwhelming chance” of a financial “meltdown of proportions that we have never seen in our modern economic society.”
Waiting even a week could cost the economy “hundreds of billions if not trillions of dollars,” he said.
“This is an important vote today because it’s probably our last opportunity to send a message around the world that the United States is going to stand behind our banking system and free up the credit that’s necessary to carry on our operations,” Kanjorski said.
Kanjorski said the Bush administration and Congress had done a poor job selling the package to the public, which had overwhelmed congressmen with opposition to the bill.
“The American people have no idea if we fail to take remedial legislation now,” said Kanjorski, the chairman of the House Capital Markets, Insurance and Government-Sponsored Enterprises Subcommittee.
Without the bill, people and businesses would soon find it even harder to obtain loans to expand, to send students to college or obtain credit for other day-to-day life choices, he said.
“I’m a Democrat and I’m in a very, very serious campaign. The easiest thing in the world for me to do today or a week ago is to vote no ... But this is not the time to protect one’s tail, as we’d say in the game. This is the time for good men to stand up and be counted ... This is something that our society absolutely needs.”
 |
 |
|
| Kids enjoy Farm Fresh in Canton | Strickland sentenced to jail for arson |
Article Rating
Reader Comments
The following are comments from the readers. In no way do they represent the view of thedailyreview.com.
Submit a Comment
We encourage your feedback and dialog, all comments will be reviewed by our Web staff before appearing on the Web site.
