New Draft Bailout - From 3 pages to 102 pages Edit: 106 Now

We still don't have a final draft yet, but at least now we have something to show us exactly what is going on to an extent.

Due to the length of this montstous document that needs to be dissected, any member who finds a section(s) of concern and posts it with a discussion of the why and wherefore, shall receive applause for the effort, as we need a collaborative effort here, and it will take effort and time.

Discussion Draft



[edit on 9/28/2008 by Relentless]

reply to post by Relentless



1st, see the latest report from Bloomberg;
Lawmakers Say They Have Breakthrough on Rescue Plan (update 2) dtd 28 Sept '08
www.bloomberg.com...


they bring upthe normal issues: no golden parachutes for execuitives,
accountability, yadda-yadda

What none of these drafts of a complete contract for the rescue of 'troubled assets' brings up is the case of the banks or financial houses having and estimated many Trillion$ of Level 3 assets that are have not been on the firms balance sheets all along.

to explain... if the balance sheet items (RMBS =residential mortgage based securities, and the packaged 'complex securities' such as CDOs & CDS) are creating the clogged up/frozen credit & mortgage markets.
Then those items should be included in the purchase agreements in the
rescue plan.
But ... since the off-balance-sheet (Level 3) funny paper, had nothing to do with the credit making crunch & freeze up of the markets...
then the companies or firms should not be allowed to sneak all that debt on the taxpayer relief program-> at any price!

I'm going to read it now and then come back and post about what I think ( it might take a while because I have a 10 mon. old lol). Before I do, I just want to say thanks for posting it and that I hope the powers that be actually READ THE WHOLE THING this time BEFORE they pass it.. Unlike the Patriot Act.. We all know what happened there..

Great post OP Star and Flag

Sounds like something that the banker's lobby wanted in this bill (and is now on the books as law) here...

Financial Services Regulatory Relief Act of 2006

SEC. 202. INCREASED FLEXIBILITY FOR THE FEDERAL RESERVE BOARD TO ESTABLISH RESERVE REQUIREMENTS. Section 19(b)(2)(A) of the Federal Reserve Act (12 U.S.C. 461(b)(2)(A)) is amended-- (1) in clause (i), by striking `the ratio of 3 per centum' and inserting `a ratio of not greater than 3 percent (and which may be zero)'; and (2) in clause (ii), by striking `and not less than 8 per centum,' and inserting `(and which may be zero),'. SEC. 203. EFFECTIVE DATE. The amendments made by this title shall take effect October 1, 2011.

Is getting enacted with this bailout trash

Draft Bailout Bill

SEC. 127. ACCELERATION OF EFFECTIVE DATE. Section 203 of the Financial Services Regulatory Relief Act of 2006 (12 U.S.C. 461 note) is amended by striking ‘‘October 1, 2011’’ and inserting ‘‘October 1, 2008’’.

I am not sure, but if the requirements for bank reserves are lowered to 0%, does that just leave the FDIC to ensure bank deposits are valid?

Most of the time, when the Federal government fast tracks legislation in a "bi-partisan" manner, its the details of the bill itself and what laws the bill connects to that also need checking.

Someone help me here

reply to post by Lurkerzrule


That's a part of the bill I'm wondering about too. If reserve requirements are lowered to zero what are the implications. This crisis is as much about excessive leverage as anything else. If reserve requirements are dropped to zero does that not allow infinite leverage? And why in the hell would you even put money in a bank that had no reserve requirements at all?

Anyway I'm against this on principle. Watch what comes out of any agreement because this is probably the most important economic issue in our lifetimes. Don't get caught up in partisan BS either there are plenty of reasons for Democrats and Republicans to be against this.

Democrats should be against it because that $700Billion (almost everyone admits that this will cost much more than $700billion) will make it impossible to fund any new programs like national healthcare, infrastructure project, or a middle class tax break, and it rewards the rich at the expense of us all.

Republicans should be against it on principle. Part of a free market is freedom to fail. Say goodbye to any promised taxcuts. It puts government in the banking business and to quote the bill, makes certain financial entities "agents of the government".

If you're an American, Democrat, Republican, or Independent and you care about the future of your country call you Rep and Senator tommorrow and tell not just no but HELL NO!!! Then follow up in November by voting against anyone who votes for this bill.

FLASH

Watching CNN right now and they said that the legislation would not be posted online till 12pmEST. So what we are reading now is probably not the most current form of what they are working on.

reply to post by jefwane


Goldman,Morgan Stanley Bring Down Curtain on an Era

It also raises some interesting questions as to why Morgan Stanley and Goldman Sacks left the investment banking business and went into traditional banking. Now, which seems will be regulated by the Fed.

And now, if (when) this bill passes, the banking industry doesn't have to have any reserves to insure its deposits?!?

Originally posted by jefwane
FLASH

Watching CNN right now and they said that the legislation would not be posted online till 12pmEST. So what we are reading now is probably not the most current form of what they are working on.

That's why I called it a DRAFT

So has anyone found the final yet?Is it 300 pages yet?

Well, apparently they don't want us to actually know what they are going to be voting on before they do it.

Breakthrough Reached?

Aides described a tense meeting on Saturday afternoon that included Senator Max Baucus, Democrat of Montana, shouting at Mr. Paulson about executive pay caps.

Outside, stunned tourists visiting the Capitol watched as camera operators shoved one another to get footage of lawmakers talking outside of the meeting room.

At one point, when too much information was leaking out, staff members’ BlackBerrys were confiscated and collected in a trash bin.

Pffffftttttt! Guess we will have to wait till it passes to find out what they have done to us.

Sorry - I just don't buy that this issue shouldn't be in full view of the public eye each step of the way. IT'S OUR MONEY AND OUR FUTURES they are messing with.

I have quickly read through this trash...

The provisions for the appointment/hiring of the top dogs to oversee this mess does not provide for qualifications of each to include that

NO person with prior history of any financial involvement with any of the participating organizations is DISQUALIFIED from holding any of the aforementioned positions.

We do not need these folks working in oversight positions-no how-no way.

House is in session on C-SPAN now. Seems like they are in the dark as well.

CSPAN Video feeds



Appears that Pelosi has "promised" that the taxpayers will be granted a look at the Bill at least 24 hours before a house vote. That according to CSPAN.

This is just bunk anyway you look at this thing. Does anyone of our politicians even read the the US Constitution anymore?

[edit on 28-9-2008 by Lurkerzrule]

reply to post by Relentless


I agree 100%. If the need is this dire, we should be allowed complete transparency, as these men and women have worked so long behind doors, we are now at this stage. Let the American people decide by popular demand. Let democracy do it's bidding! No more secrets!

reply to post by Lurkerzrule



24 hours to read it and call our representatives with any concerns? Not to mention I'd literally have to take the day off to read it and compile the repercussions on a document this size.

I'm still voting them all out of office no matter how they vote on it. No one is handling this properly and someone of them should be screaming bloody murder about it. Especially the two that are vying for the Oval office. Neither one of them have shown true leadership on this, the most important issue of our lives.

House back in session, on CSPAN. Grab some Excedrin, or something to keep you awake.

CSPAN feed (flash)

Its getting blasted!!

Live on Bloomberg as well

Bloomberg Coverage

[edit on 28-9-2008 by Lurkerzrule]

from what i seen, at 5:13 pm est....only 9 voted Nay...
i reckon the bill goes to the Senate now.

c-span.org claims to have the entire bill for your reading pleasure
~only i can't find it on their site~




add:
Hold On...
Nancy Pelosi said @ 5:32 EST, that the bill will be on the Web within 48 hrs.

[edit on 28-9-2008 by St Udio]

I enjoyed the one minute speeches very much.....thats was nice to see.

My computer wont let me load the pdf.

[edit on 28-9-2008 by theRiverGoddess]

According to Pelosi, the new bill is up.

speaker.house.gov...

and here

financialservices.house.gov...

The site is being slammed, so I don't have a clue what has changed. However, hearing the rhetoric being given now at the press conference, It the Bush administration's fault they had to draft such a ludicrous bill.

These crooks, both Dem and Rep need to go. Their ignorance knows no limits.

Opps - there's a little rumble about to start - this is not a done deal!

Tickerforum.org has a MI Rep that has already gone on air to shake it up. They have armed him with the KD solution and the papers of over 100 economists that explain why this is being done wrong, and so far, he seems to be taking it seriously.

Check out this thread, things could get interesting


Status of Bill

Hold your breaths.......

EDIT: OOPS WARNING - the language permissable on that thread may be offensive to some viewers.

[edit on 9/28/2008 by Relentless]

reply to post by Relentless


Holy dung...the McCotter interview on pg 1 of that thread is HARSH. I like this guy - or, at least, I like his stance on the bailout!

Yep, and since we were expecting to see this final drat within 24 hours of the vote, I assume since it's out there, they thought it was a done deal for tomorrow.

Let the games begin!

P.S. I'm thinking of actually sending him a campaign contribution if he really follows through on this even though he's not my Rep.