Bailout bill passes by wide margin

The revised Wall Street bailout bill passed by a wide margin this morning, 263 to 171.   That’s a pretty big flip, considering a stripped down version of the bill failed last week, 205 to 228.  Who knew the pirate vote was that big?

As for the partisan divide, Democrats voted for the bill 172 to 63, while Republicans slightly opposed it, 91 to 108… you know, the bill that both President Bush and John McCain begged them to pass.

No word yet on how the WA delegation voted, and whether any of our reps flipped.

UPDATE:
Inslee flips, joins rest of the Democratic delegation in voting yes. Our Republicans, Reichert and McMorris-Rodgers voted no.  (Oh yeah, and Hastings.  I always seem to forget Hastings for some reason.)

UPDATE, UPDATE:
I was looking at the wrong roll call vote (the motion to reconsider), and the House Clerk’s office website was slowwww to respond.  Inslee did vote no.  In fact, it was McDermott who flipped, from yes to no.  I’m waiting for a statement.

Comments

  1. 1

    me spews:

    So instead of getting something that might be worth something, equity in these companies, we get a bunch of bad debt. What a deal.

    We are rushed to pass something by fear, if you don’t pass this right now, the whole country goes down the toilet. No reasoned debate for a month about spending AT LEAST 700 billion, nope just 2 weeks of get it passed now.

    I applaud all the Ds and the Rs who voted NO.

  2. 2

    Spit in the Ocean spews:

    The Bi-Partisan support to sustain a bunch of corrupt bankers .
    Let’s see , last week 500 billion or so for bailouts for banks etc..
    Then 25 billion for the Auto Industry .
    Then 600 billion more for the War in Iraq and now 700 billion for fraudulent loans .

    No wonder they got to take a break .

  3. 5

    YellowPup spews:

    I have to admit that, like John McCain, I don’t know much about the economy. At what point has the US borrowed as much money as it possibly can?

  4. 6

    ArtFart spews:

    McCain is out on the stump today, chanting “Change is coming! Change is coming!”

    That’s about right. Out of $700 billion, the average American, who’s struggling to make ends meet, might expect to see a few pennies. Meanwhile, they’re partying on in the Hamptons.

  5. 9

    ArtFart spews:

    7 It’s more a matter of no (or a lot less) money coming from China. Chinese banks, skeptical of the solvency of American institutions and seeing dwindling sales of Chinese-made goods to Americans, started tightening up on their lending some time ago.

    This may have contributed as much to the present crisis as the rising rate of mortgage defaults.

  6. 10

    ArtFart spews:

    Most likely, the decision by Congress today sets our course into the next few years. Instead of a tailspin into a 1930’s-style depression, we’re going to see inflation go absolutely bizerk. That’s happened in other countries, and they’ve somehow survived. It’s why in Italy you pay for things at the store in millions in lire, and why Mexico issued “new pesos” a while back because the old ones had essentially become nickels.

    On the other hand, we could be headed for an eventual collapse similar to the Weimar Republic or post-Soviet Russia.

  7. 11

    rhp6033 spews:

    I basically quit drinking by the time I was 19 (except for an occassional glass of wine at business dinners, etc.).

    But today I’ve got a very strong urge to buy a bottle of Jack Daniels and lock myself in a room somewhere.

    I keep feeling like the guy who just got a visit from the local mafioso:

    “Look here, we’re holding your job, your bank accounts, and your retirement accounts hostage. Manny’s at your house with a Zippo, and you know how careless he can be. If you want to save any of these, you need to agree to pay us ‘protection money’ for the rest of your life, and the life of your children. No, you can’t think about it – you really have no choice, after all. Think about your poor, starving, homeless children if you don’t agree fast….”

  8. 12

    rhp6033 spews:

    In the meantime, the Republican “Guvenator” of California, who had pledged to put California on a strong fiscal path when he was elected, has sent a letter to Treasury Secty Paulson, saying that California will need a 7 billion dollar bailout loan within weeks to avoid a default.

    I feel so sorry for those in Hollywood and Orange County, who are so distressed that they can’t be bothered with extra taxes to pay their own bills, so that they need to be saved by taxpayer money from the (apparantly uber-wealthy) farmers of Iowa.

  9. 13

    SeattleJew spews:

    McDermitt is the left equivalent of Palin.

    Assuming we win this one, the new Dems will have two challenges in addition to governing itslef.

    The first will be dealing with a viper. The R^4 (Radical Religious Republican Remnant) is as dangerous as a poisonous eel in a cave. Assuming “they” come together under some sort of leadership tied together by Ralph Reed, Dobson, and Palin the Republic will be in real danger. For starters .. do you feel comfortable with these nuts having security clearances?

    The second will be holding the dems themselves together. Bill Clinton’s greatest achievement may have been moving the party to the center. Other than a few real kooks, the Dems are largely free of any equivalent to the radical remnant.

    On the other hand, depending on how weak and how irrelevant the R^4 is, history teaches us that single party systems, esp in the US, always evolve into what Washington called “fractions.”

    The recent debate on the rescue plan has certainly demonstrated that the Dems have the potential of themselves splitting of a fraction or even a second party more meaningful than the R^4.

    My guess is that such a splinter would not survive because it would be too far to the left, but there is another more worrisome scenario. If the Obama leadership is not careful, McDermitt and his ilk could alienate enough blue dogs to create a fraction in common cause with rational republicans.

    While the numbers initially in such a fraction would not be large enough to comprise a party, consider the attractiveness of the following list:

    Lugar, Lieberman, Spector, Webb, Baird, Snegger, Lindsay, McCain, Hagel, Hutchinson, Snow, Powell, Rice, Inslee, Cantwell, Patrick ….

    then maybe add Petraeus, Meg Whitman and the idea of a third party or a party able to replace the R^4 seems .. to me ..plausible.

    How could McD and his ilk cause this? They need to forfend making too much of issues they will disagree with Obama on, The US needs rational leadership and some of what is rational is not “progressive.” Protectionism form either wing is a bad idea, alliances wit fascist entities like Malaysia, China, and Russia are probably necessary, all children are not equal, black schools fail for many reasons not do to bad honkeys, we probably will need to bribe Boeing to stay in Seattle, illegal immigrants at some point will loose their jobs, etc.

    The biggest dangers for a split come from the “peace” wing. Obama has, from the beginning, advocated a rational end to Iraq. I suppose he might even agree to declare victory to keep the right happy. He has also bought fully into the need to exterminate the virus of islamacism and the need for an aggressive policy toward Pakistan and Iran. Thes positions likely mean more war-war. Can the peace movement adapt to a pragmatic foreign policy?

  10. 15

    dutch spews:

    Art: It’s always great to have a expert in economics who has not clue about world curriences. Italy is using the Euro since 1999 (2002 respectively when coins were introduced). Lire is dead for many years….

  11. 16

    SeattleJew spews:

    9. ArtFart spews:

    7 It’s more a matter of no (or a lot less) money coming from China. Chinese banks, skeptical of the solvency of American institutions and seeing dwindling sales of Chinese-made goods to Americans, started tightening up on their lending some time ago.

    Close, BUT .. China’s banks, unlike ours, are soverign parts of the government and under Patry control.

    The Politbureau is now in an awesome position to run the US!

    I suspect that within two years we too will have to fully nationalize our banks or at least ast create a strong central bank to prevent excess power in the hands of President Hu.

    W/O trying to be funny, the real question on Nov 4 could end up being:

    “Hu is the President?”

    with kind regards to the great economist, Groucho Marx.

    I

  12. 17

    ArtFart spews:

    15 You’re right…I guess I had a bit of a “McCain moment” there.

    The reorganization of Europe may have buried the evidence of a multitude of sins. I can’t help but wonder if the Italians have modified one of their popular curses into something like (pardon the no-doubt incorrect spelling): “Marrone mia, donne mi cento Euros!”

  13. 18

    Roger Rabbit spews:

    This will lead to higher inflation. Inflation is a tax. The bailout was Bush’s idea. Therefore, Bush has raised taxes.

  14. 19

    rhp6033 spews:

    RR @ 18: Speaking of hidden Republican taxes:

    My 401(k) plan is at the same level it was in early 2005. Despite the fact that I have contributed 15% of my earnings, and my employer has contributed another 3%, each year.

    My employer’s plan gives me very limited investment options, so playing the stock market isn’t much of an option. I can only choose to invest from a handful of mutual funds, most of which are very similar to one another. If the stock market generally does well, they do well. If the stock market tanks, they tank also.

    So that means that for the last three years the Republican economic plan has had the affect of an 100% tax on my retirement savings each year (which are supposed to be tax-deferred).

    Way to go, Republicans! That’s why Palin was smirking so much when she was talking about McCain cutting taxes – she could barely keep from laughing at the own words coming out of her mouth.