Published: October 04, 2008 07:05 pm            

Bailout blues

Prophecies, positioning, and politics as usual all week long

As much as I’d like to think our nation’s lawmakers had nothing but the best interests of the United States of America on their minds this week, I can’t bring myself to do so.

If that were true, it wouldn’t have taken as long as it did to get the job done — passing the “bailout” plan that, in the end, only ended up costing more.

The plan enacted Friday was essentially the same one presented Monday, with a few things tacked on that should probably have been in there from the “get go” — higher F.D.I.C.. insurance rates for one — and at least one “add-on” that makes absolutely no sense to me in an economic bailout package.

Then again, I guess Congress doesn’t have a lot of experience in passing an economic bailout package of this proportion. I could be wrong.

Still, I find several things somewhat interesting in reading all the news reports, analysis, commentary and blogging on the week in Washington.

For example, I believe John McCain promised to “out” anyone guilty of adding “pork” to a piece of legislation. The addition of a rider about mental health benefits for those covered by health insurance — while admittedly pretty important — was probably nothing more than an attempt to sway a few House members from the “Nay” column to the “Yea” column.

That’s how “bidness” is done in D.C., isn’t it?

And, since McCain isn’t president, perhaps that pledge to “out” those who tacked on that little tidbit hasn’t taken effect yet. What is that saying? The devil is in the details ...

Another thing that is a little puzzling to me — if the banks and the markets are in such “dire” condition and “on the brink” of collapse, how did a couple of those mega-banks manage to find the resources to buy two other mega-banks that either failed or were headed that way?

Wasn’t the cause of the whole problem banks and investors buying “damaged” goods to begin with?

I’m sure there is someone out there who will set me straight on that one.

I don’t pretend to know all there is to know about the package. In fact, I don’t claim to know much about it at all. But it does sound like it is meant to get things “back to normal” — whatever that is — for the nation’s economy.

I still don’t understand why partisan politics had to play such a role in this supposed “bi-partisan” solution to the nation’s financial crisis. The time spent in “debate” before the C-SPAN camera and microphone (they just have the one, you know) accomplished little, if anything. It was merely political grandstanding for the purpose of trying to win a re-election race for all House members and some of the Senate.

The real work — as I guess it always is — was brokering behind closed doors by the powerful and mighty leadership, sending their field generals out to spread the word (translation — voting instructions) to those on the “field of battle” (that would be the House of Representatives chamber), again for that C-SPAN camera to catch.

They should have been able to accomplish that in a weekend instead of a week.

To be sure, there were a few “mavericks” in the bunch (Sarah Palin liked that word a lot in Thursday’s debate) such as our own Joe Barton who stuck to his “Nay” vote through the two votes taken last week, just as there were those who would not be swayed from “Yea” vote regardless of the dispatch from the leadership.

I guess the best we can hope to come out of this whole “bailout” thing is that a lesson is learned, that lesson being it’s better to “tap the brakes” than to wait for a head-on collision to bring the vehicle that is our economy back into control.

We can hope, anyway.

—————

Bob Belcher is Managing Editor of the Daily Sun. His column appears on Sundays. He may be reached by e-mail at belcher@corsicanadailysun.com.

        

• Click to discuss this story with other readers on our forums.