• Posted on Monday, September 22, 2008
  • Bookmark and Share
  • email
  • |
  • print
  • |
  • rss

tool name

close
tool goes here

Democrats battling to add restrictions to $700 billion bailout

Sign up for email newsletters now!

Sign up for email newsletters now!

Never miss a McClatchy story

More on this Story

WASHINGTON — Congressional Democrats inched close to agreement Monday on the terms of a $700 billion rescue package to stabilize shaky financial markets, but continued to encounter White House resistance to key points.

"The Bush administration has called on Congress to rubber-stamp its bailout legislation without serious debate or efforts to improve it. That will not happen," said Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid, D-Nev.

People close to the negotiations said that at least three areas of disagreement remained: limits on executive compensation at troubled firms, the terms of oversight of the Treasury's management of the bailout and whether taxpayers would gain an equity stake in companies that benefit from the bailout so that taxpayers could share in the firms' later profits.

President Bush said in a statement that "Everyone recognizes that it's not easy to write a bill of this magnitude in a timely manner," and added he was confident that an agreement could be reached.

Another wrinkle may be developing, however: Some lawmakers are concerned that the plan is too complex and hard to explain to constituents, making them wary of quick approval.

Sen. Richard Shelby, R-Ala., the top Banking Committee Republican, was skeptical. "I am concerned that Treasury's proposal is neither workable nor comprehensive," he said in a statement.

"In my judgment, it would be foolish to waste massive sums of taxpayer funds testing an idea that has been hastily crafted, and may actually cause the government to revert to an inadequate strategy of ad hoc bailouts."

Sen. Bob Corker, R-Tenn., spent more than an hour with Federal Reserve Board Chairman Ben Bernanke and Treasury Secretary Henry Paulson, and wasn't satisfied.

"It troubled me that they had some problems answering specific questions," he said.

Negotiators spent most of the day behind closed doors and publicly declared themselves cautiously optimistic. Senate Banking Committee Chairman Christopher Dodd, D-Conn., and House Financial Services Committee Chairman Barney Frank, D-Mass., still were aiming to enact a plan by the end of the week.

Several Republicans on the Senate Banking Committee joined Dodd for an afternoon news conference and said they also thought that a deal was possible by week's end.

The faster that Congress and Bush agree on a plan, they said, the better they can minimize the damage to the U.S. economy in the wake of a financial crisis that's had a massive ripple effect on Wall Street in recent weeks. Stocks were down sharply Monday — the Dow-Jones Industrial Average dropped 372.75 points — while oil prices soared by $16.37 a barrel to $120, heightening the urgency on Capitol Hill.

"I want to get something done here," Frank said. "This is not a time for point-scoring and chest-beating."

Dodd declined to discuss the fine points of the legislation but said, "We understand the sense of urgency. We don't have a lot of time. We want to act, but we also want to act responsibly."

Democrats appeared to agree on the broad parameters of a rescue plan. Among the key points:

  • A rescue package. The Treasury could purchase up to $700 billion in mortgage-backed assets from troubled firms. While the source of the funding isn't yet clear, the Treasury wants the U.S. debt limit, now about $9.7 trillion, to increase to $11.3 trillion. Any profits from later sales of troubled assets would be returned to the Treasury.
  • Tougher supervision. The administration's proposal says that the Treasury secretary's decisions "may not be reviewed by any court of law or any administrative agency."

    Dodd wants the bailout operation supervised by a five-member board consisting of the Fed chairman, the chairman of the Federal Deposit Insurance Corp., the Securities and Exchange Commission chairman and two public members, one appointed by leaders of each major political party.

    Frank said any oversight board would be independent and would have investigative power but not operational authority. He said the Bush administration had agreed in concept, but the administration was said to be balking at the board's broad authority.

  • Foreclosure assistance. The federal government would gain more power to keep people in their homes; one way would be to let bankruptcy judges lower homeowners' monthly payments. "We'll now own a lot of these mortgages," Frank said.

    Reid explained that wealthier homeowners often find it easy to seek mortgage assistance from bankruptcy judges, but that those who aren't wealthy cannot.

    "That makes no sense, and we should change it," he said, by giving bankruptcy courts the authority to "reach mutually beneficial arrangements to allow families to keep their homes and prevent more foreclosures."

    The administration's initial opposition on this point was said to be lessening.

  • Executive compensation. Democrats want the federal government to restrict big salaries and severance packages for executives at troubled firms helped by the federal bailout. "If we have bought your assets," Frank said, "no golden parachutes while we own your paper."

    While the administration has resisted this, some Republicans appeared willing to compromise. Sen. Mel Martinez, R-Fla., said he thought some constraints on executive compensation were appropriate and that it would be difficult to explain opposing such limits to voters.

  • Paying for the plan. "Democrats believe that in exchange for shouldering the enormous burden of the Bush plan, the taxpayers should keep any future economic rewards," Reid said. Democrats are pushing for an equity ownership stake for taxpayers in any firm that gets bailout help, so that taxpayers would share in any future firm profits.
  • That means, Reid added, that "this plan should not permit taxpayer money to purchase an asset at an inflated price exclusively for the benefit of private shareholders." The Bush administration was resisting the equity-stake proposition.

McClatchy Newspapers 2008
JOIN THE DISCUSSION

We welcome comments. To post one, you must sign in using either your McClatchyDC login or your login for Facebook, Twitter or Disqus. Just click the appropriate box below.

Please keep your comment civil, short and to the point. Obscene, profane, abusive and off topic comments will be deleted. Repeat offenders will be blocked. If you find a comment abusive or inappropriate, please flag it for the moderator by placing your cursor on the comment, then clicking the "flag" link that appears. Thanks for your participation.

ECONOMY IN TURMOIL

economy in turmoil

Read McClatchy coverage of the economic pain Americans around the country are feeling, from Florida to California to Alaska.

ECONOMY QUESTIONS & ANSWERS

 hall & pugh

McClatchy correspondents Kevin G. Hall (left) and Tony Pugh are available to answer your questions about the economic meltdown at home and abroad, and what's in store for ordinary Americans.

Q&A: THE HOUSING CRISIS

Mark Zandi, the chief economist for Moody's Economy.com, is took questions from McClatchy readers about the nation's deep housing crisis. His book, "Financial Shock," offers a 360-degree look at what caused the crisis, what mistakes were made and who made them. It offers a way forward to prevent future crises.

Q&A: TERMINAL CHAOS

U.S. air travel these days is about as fun as a trip to the dentist. Departure delays are rampant, bags often miss the flight you've caught and rising jet fuel prices have major airlines charging to check a bag. In his new book "Terminal Chaos," George Donohue, a professor and former high-level Federal Aviation Administration official, explains why our system of air travel is broken and what can be done to fix it. Read the responses.

Q&A: THE THREE TRILLION DOLLAR WAR

For two weeks, Nobel Prize-winning economist Joseph Stiglitz and Harvard professor Linda Bilmes, authors of "The Three Trillion Dollar War," fielded questions about the cost of the Iraq war and its impact on the U.S. economy. They're not taking new questions, but they're still posting answers to ones they've already received. Read their responses.

_