Why Can't We Put Volcker In Charge?

Image via Wikipedia

Evidently the powers are be are willing to think and act out of the box.

90% tax passing in the House? Unheard of!

AIG bonus payments? Madness!

Requiring the same WRONG credit rating agencies to rate the Government Bonds for the relief effort? Insane!

So, if you all are willing to consider and do all these off the wall, and destructive things, let me suggest an off the wall, and may I say constructive solution.

Can we put Paul Volcker in charge? No more advice. Put him in an "order giving" capacity. He has more common sense, experience and more focus on the big picture that the entire Fed and the entire Treasury put together. He's already done every thing. He understands Wall Street. He understands the power of the Fed (he was the Chairman of the Fed). Who else can get us out of this mess? Geithner has all Wall Street solutions. Hear the new one? Subsidizing the purchase of toxic assets. From the Wall Street Journal, Tim Geithner's Op Ed: My Plan for Bad Bank Assets. Hello - they are "toxic". More waste of taxpayers funds!

Why can't we put Volcker in charge? I am now so thoroughly disappointed with Bernanke's confidence in the ratings agencies. After all those speeches about regulatory reform. Evidently, they are hollow. You cannot be serious about regulatory reform and have an iota of confidence in the ratings agencies. I am so thoroughly disappointed with Geithner's plan to allow the private sector to set the prices and then get huge subsidies to buy them - all with taxpayer's money.

Can we put Volcker in charge of the Fed and the Treasury at the same time? Where are the constitutional lawyers?

Watch Paul Volcker here - doesn't he give you confidence? He gives me confidence. At least I feel like he's telling the truth. And most importantly after today's testimony, I don't feel like he's being condescending. Roughing up from Congress comes with the territory, and without Congress there is no new law, so I'd really like it if Geithner and Bernanke would nicely answer some simple questions about how taxpayers money is being spent. That is Congress' job after all - the people sent them there and the people can make sure they do not go back.

So What Now AIG?

Image via Wikipedia

• Yes, I did hear most of Liddy's testimony, and I did hear the insistence that these were contracts. So, I ask: if AIG was left to go completely bust, what money would have paid the policyholders? Are those not contracts? Or is it because those contracts are with mere mortals they are somehow less important that those of the financial wizards? Because, taxpayers buy into protecting policyholders - that was the point of the bailout, or so we thought because so we were told. Taxpayers do not buy into big salaries, and cannot comprehend "bonuses" in this context.
  

• Yes, I did hear Senator Dodd say he was the one to allow the bonuses because it was a compromise with the Treasury Department. So I ask, who in the Treasury Department? And did that "who" act alone? Specifically, where was Tim Geithner? Don't these meetings have minutes? I hear the Fed knew? Which Fed? Tim Geithner's New York Fed that he was president of at the time?

• Yes, I did hear Congress up in arms. But I ask: Don't you read every line before you vote on it? I imagine given the public outcry surrounded this legislation, and Paulson's attempt to have no review, no oversight and unlimited power in the first draft that it might, just might, have been a good idea to read every word before you voted on it?

• Yes, I did hear the Republican members of Congress try to blame this Administration. So I ask: Which Administration presided over the free for all that created this mess? Wasn't the last President a Republican? Now I agree: please use conditions to try to do what you can. But when the horse is out of the gate, and the Republicans opened the gate and egged on the horse to move as fast as he can, can the Republicans really complain about the gate and the horse now?

• Yes, I did hear President Obama. And without being biased, he's really the one who's the most correct. He didn't sign those contracts, but he takes responsibility. Translation - ok, now that we know, prepare for strict rules and regulations. And then at his Town Hall at Costa Mesa he did a fantastic job of explaining this mess in plain english - you know, the language that us mere mortals speak - and why it has to be fixed. When I find the video, I will be sure to post it.

So where are we?

Well, Liddy has said he has asked for a portion of the bonuses to be returned, and we hear that some people are returning all of the bonus. I commend them for that.

For those who do not want to return any portion of the bonuses, and are really content with Congress taking up time tomorrow for the House to try to tax 90% of these bonuses, and the Senate to try to tax 70% of these bonuses, I humbly submit that you are making matters worse for yourselves, your professional future, and your own profession. Frankly, Congress has lots of work to do to fix the economy that all these exotic products destroyed. It doesn't really have the time to do something it really does not want to do ideologically - and that is impose taxes of this magnitude. Shockingly, neither party wants to do this ideologically. But they will.

Respectfully, you bonus recipients are missing the entire forest for the trees. When the Government gets "tax happy" - watch out!

If this wasn't so important, and so sad, this would be a real soap opera.

Hip Hip Hooray for Democracy!

Image by ethanlindsey via Flickr

Tonight, thanks to all the Senate Democrats - especially Ted Kennedy who returned specifically for this vote - and Republicans Senators Olympia Snowe (Maine), Susan Collins (Maine) and Arlen Specter (Pennsylvania), the US and the world is one gigantic step closer to stability, closer to recovery, closer to job creation, and closer to the return of "normalcy".

Yes, tonight was the indicative vote on the Stimulus Bill but it was indicative that it would pass with 61 votes. Tomorrow is the real vote.

Whatever the motivations of the Republicans, they found something they could live with. They were willing to keep talking until they did, but did so quickly recognizing the urgency of the problem. Democracy did well tonight. And in all of US history, this period will be one of the most pivotal and the names Snowe, Collins and Specter will be recorded for having placed their priorities in the right place - at least trying to do something for the people.

After tomorrow, it will be up to the House to reconcile their differences. Let's hope for even more people who want to be on the right side of history. And let's hope for another good day for Democracy.

Is America no longer at war? Did I miss the announcement?

Image by CS Muncy via Flickr

No, really? Is America still fighting a war in two countries, and fighting terror and facing international threats? That must be all over because I can see no other reason for this incessant delay in passing the stimulus bill.

Look, I get politics and politicians. I had the privilege of serving in the Senate. I understand the need, and the responsibility more importantly to be heard and to speak up. Making law is an extremely serious responsibility that can make or break a person's life, and an entire society. I understand the need to represent your constituents. But what is going on? Is this really what you are all doing?

Honestly, I am lost. Last I heard, America was at war. Economic instability cannot be helping your military strength. You need money to fight, and economic power to negotiate. If you have economic stability in a global interconnected world, there is more incentive to find peaceful solutions since all countries have a vested interest in find opportunities for their own economies to grow - i.e., markets and people who can afford to consume their goods and services. Maybe you don't remember when the world was more polarized and we were not so interconnected - when people did not see advantages of trade. Do you remember what they did? They just preferred to conquer.

I thought the internal bickering stops at the water's edge. I thought the country was united in the face of a foreign threat. Does no one make the connection between economic stability and ability to defend themselves?

You know what the problem is? Job security. Yes, the people with the power to pass the stimulus bill have job security. Unless there is a revolution, or they are found to be corrupt, they cannot be removed. They have to be voted out on a certain date in the future by law. And that's democracy and democracy is good. But somehow, there is a major disconnect between the people who are guaranteed monthly cheques for a number of years to come and those who have lost their jobs and others who fear every moment of every day if they are going to lose their jobs tomorrow or the next day. Somehow, Congress seems to be missing the day to day reality of the rest of the population they serve who do not have job security, and are becoming paralyzed with fear of the unknown. Every day that the Congress does not act, they are making the situation worse.

Congress needs to find something that it can live with and do it quickly. Bad law is worse than no law. But no law is worse than inaction. As long as you are not behaving in an unconstitutional manner and affecting the rights of your citizens, you can find middle ground. Law is never perfect, but it can be sufficiently effective. If you don't ever get pass round 1, how will you get to round 2? When will anything else get done if the economy becomes frozen?

Here's a video of President Obama explaining what is in the stimulus and what it is intended to achieve.

You have to be independent to have a Congress. Perhaps Congress should give some thought to whether its own job security is on the line.

What are they thinking?

Image via Wikipedia

The House Republicans are at it again. And I'm totally lost.

The whole world says there has to be a stimulus, and it has to be big. This is really non-debatable. Experts have looked at the global economy and the trends. A stimulus is not a "nice to have", it is a "need to have"

Now here's where the House Republicans have completely lost me. They have ALL, yes ALL voted against it. So, I don't know what point they are trying to make, but here is the point they have made:

1) It was under a Republican government and a Republican majority in Congress that this economic collapse took place in the first place.

2) It is Republican principles of deregulation, self regulation, "all hail to the market", that caused the economic meltdown - no moderation, almost no or inadequate regulation. Now they say that the market isn't perfect. Really? Who knew?

2) It was under a Republican government and a Republican majority in Congress that a surplus became a massive deficit to fund a war in a foreign sovereign state, so now Americans - their own people who vote for them to sit in Congress to represent their own interests - are in danger of facing a prolonged recession and depression. Every American is hurting.

And what have the House Republicans done? Well, first they stalled. Then they said they had a better way. Well, excuse me but if they had a better way why is it taking so long for us all to see it.

I don't know about you, but I wonder if the House Republicans understand that people put their own lives before politics. And people generally think that they vote for people to be Representatives to "represent" them - that's what a "Representative" does.

I made a suggestion earlier that since there is a documentary on the Depression of the 1930s, it should be played on every television station repeatedly until people start making decisions based in reality. Sometimes I think people really do not understand the gravity of the situation.

To want bragging rights if the stimulus does not work is not only petty, frankly it shows little concern for the people who elected them to sit in Congress. Who cares whose fault it is if one cannot eat, one does not have a job or cannot find a job, get loans or get back their savings? Please, fix those problems, and then let's talk about whose fault it is or who could have done it better.

Right now, there is one President and he's going to do something about it one way or another.