Please pass this along. You must email your senators and your congressman today. George Bush is trying to steal our money and our government. Do not let that happen. Read the following:

"Sec. 8 Review. Decisions by the Secretary pursuant to the acts of this act are non-reviewable and committed to agency discretion, and may not be reviewed by any court of law or any administratve agency."

They are trying to push this down the throats of Congress quickly...do you realize the implications?
The Treasury Sec acting for Bush will have sole authority over taxpayer's money without Congress or the courts to question. This defies our constitution. This is too important to fluff away. Here is the email addresses for your senators and congressman. Please write today.

http://www.senate.gov/general/contact_information/senators_cfm.cfm

https://forms.house.gov/wyr/welcome.shtml

Here's what I said.

"Sec. 8 Review. Decisions by the Secretary pursuant to the acts of this act are non-reviewable and committed to agency discretion, and may not be reviewed by any court of law or any administratve
agency. "

I call upon my elected officials to stop this from becoming law. This power shall not be given to the Secretary of Treasury. We are watching you defend our constituion not throw away our rights.
If our democracy is to survive you cannot cave to this measure. The Congress can continue to work with the executive branch to save our financial system but you must work together not give one person this power. It is against everything we stand for. ENOUGH IS ENOUGH. SAY NO TO SECTION 8.

Please send this to as many people as possible and tell them to send it to as many people as possible before it is too late.

Your ideas are sterling, simply enacted, easily enforced and going no where. If anything has become abundantly clear in the last 14 years is representative governance is dead. We are governed for plutocrats and corporations, and although the plutocrats and corporations got us in this financial mess (through deregulation), those are the entities we are bailing out.

NO BLANK CHECK!

That's a slogan that will work!

Call every Senator and Rep on Monday morning!

If only, Mr. Reich. If only.

This issue is a litmus test for Obama and the Democrats. If the Democrats can't write their own plan like the above and put someone other than Paulsen in charge they might as well call themselves 'Loyal Bushies'.

The Bush/Paulsen plan is nothing less than a game of extortion on the American taxpayer.

I suggest everyone sends a form of this article to their congressperson. I just did. I referenced this article, but stated the points explicitly. Feel free to copy and paste:

Hi Senator Boxer,

The public doesn't like a blank check. You are in a position to demand from Wall Street certain conditions in return for the blank check. How about:

1. The government (i.e. taxpayers) gets an equity stake in every Wall Street financial company proportional to the amount of bad debt that company shoves onto the public. So when and if Wall Street shares rise, taxpayers are rewarded for accepting so much risk.

2. Wall Street executives and directors of Wall Street firms relinquish their current stock options and this year's other forms of compensation, and agree to future compensation linked to a rolling five-year average of firm profitability. Why should taxpayers feather their already amply-feathered nests?

3. All Wall Street executives immediately cease making campaign contributions to any candidate for public office in this election cycle or next, all Wall Street PACs be closed, and Wall Street lobbyists curtail their activities unless specifically asked for information by policymakers. Why should taxpayers finance Wall Street's outsized political power - especially when that power is being exercised to get favorable terms from taxpayers?

4. Wall Street firms agree to comply with new regulations over disclosure, capital requirements, conflicts of interest, and market manipulation. The regulations will emerge in ninety days from a bi-partisan working group, to be convened immediately. After all, inadequate regulation and lack of oversight got us into this mess.

5. Wall Street agrees to give bankruptcy judges the authority to modify the terms of primary mortgages, so homeowners have a fighting chance to keep their homes. Why should distressed homeowners lose their homes when Wall Streeters receive taxpayer money that helps them keep their fancy ones?

Thanks!

P.S. Ideas borrowed liberally from Robert Reich's column:
http://tpmcafe.talkingpointsmemo.com/2008/09/21/what_wall_street_should_do_to/index.php

They have been watching this happen for years and probably assumed it would happen after they left office. Surprise! This blank check request is nonsense. This is typical "sky is falling" deadline bullshit - often used in difficult negotiations. I don't believe for a minute that we cannot wait a few days for cooler heads to prevail and for the people who will be accountable for this decision to be more comfortable in making said decision. While I think the worldwide economic situation is approaching "dire" I also think Bush and Cheney view this as one last opportunity to once again raid the treasury for their cronies. I urge our lawmakers to take a reasonable amount of time to be comfortable in deciding to put the taxpayers on the hook for this sum.

Mr. Reich: What about the idea that, since there appears to be urgency, instead of buying the bad debt, the fed services the bad debt on future favorable terms until reasonable deals can be worked out (or not)?

Also, what's wrong with bankruptcy? PG&E did it in California and has worked it out.

Finally, is Paulson the appropriate person for all of this? He has ties to Goldman Sachs and did nothing to head off this crisis despite years in his job. Should part of the bailout be the bipartisan naming of new head of the treasury?

Mr. Reich: What about the idea that, since there appears to be urgency, instead of buying the bad debt, the fed services the bad debt on future favorable terms until reasonable deals can be worked out (or not)?

Also, what's wrong with bankruptcy? PG&E did it in California and has worked it out.

Finally, is Paulson the appropriate person for all of this? He has ties to Goldman Sachs and did nothing to head off this crisis despite years in his job. Should part of the bailout be the bipartisan naming of new head of the treasury?

Without a doubt this move by Treasury, The Federal Reserve and our elected officials is going to be the largest transfer of wealth from the middle class to the richest 1% of the population who can well afford the hit considering the billions they have made in gaming the system for years.
When the politicians keep telling us that this must be done or the consequences would be even greater, they are using nothing other than scare tactics ( Schock Doctrine ) to get the American people to go along. There is another way out of this that won’t cost us a dime, but I’ll tell you why they won’t do it.
When our country was founded, the fonders very clearly stated in the Constitution that there was to be a US Tureasury with coin in both gold and silver. That held for nearly 170 years until in 1913 the Federal Reserve or central bank was created and we then went to a fiat system which we have today with trillions of paper dollars with nothing to back them floating around the world.
Presently Congress which controls weights and measures states that all of the US gold holdings are only worth $42.50 an ounce when the rest of the world says gold is worth $900 and ounce currently. All Congress would have to do is to re-value that gold to the current market price. The Federal Reserve has already used half of its reserves to bail out all of the banks that have failed to date, so why buy them out on the taxpayers back for 700 Billion? Because our wonderful politicians who have grown accustomed to sucking off the teet of the bakers can continue to keep all of us an endentured slaves to a system of continuous debt. Without the Federal Reserve which is nothing but a cartel of private banking concerns, the American people would no longer have to pay outrageous interest rates so that the bankers can get fatter on our hard work and sweat which is not what the founders envisioned. Cut off the head of the hydra known as the Federal Reserve and many of our current problems simply disappear.
The bailout in its current form doesn’t even allow Congress or a court of law to review the process and gives unlimtied power to one man. Paulson, who should have been kicked out of office along with Bernanke because they were well aware of this financial tsunami over a year ago and did nothing to stop it.
If any of you reading this have a free moment to contact your Congressmen and Senators, thell them that if we truely live in a society that is supposed to have free markets, then DON’T allow them to steamroll this through as the did the Patriot Act in the dark of night. Many in Congress never even read the bill.
Time is short everyone, but there is another way. Stop and think about it. Why is our gold only worth $42.50 an ounce when the rest of the world says it is worth far more. The revaluation of our gold, can buy out the Fed and send them back to hell where they belong. Jefferson knew this. The Republicans under Nixon closed the gold window in 1971, and since that time, the dollar has lost 95% of its value.
If you want to continue being a slave to the debt masters do nothing. If your in agreement, get on the phone, write a letter, send an e-mail or fax, but do it now as this proposal will be out of the house this week and then onto the Senate waiting for the signature of the ultimate crook in chief. George W. Bush.

Any bailout plan that does not have Wall Street screaming in pain, is not worthwhile.

We're right now in the domain that the Republicans have become expert at - the sky is falling and you must give us the "Authorization to use unchecked force!" There's no time for debate. A mushroom cloud of tsunami proportions is bearing down on us with Category 100 force. Action must happen now.

"Hank" Paulson was all over the Sunday blab shows like Dick Cheney before the 2002 elections pushing "protecting America."

The simple sound bite response should be. "OK." But instead of Paulson we demand that Paul Krugman be the independent czar of America's treasury.

For the Republicans it's about the free reign ("unfettered" "flexibility") to complete the looting of the treasury, not protecting America.

If we must have a dictator why not pick the dictator on the chance that we're more likely to select a benevolent one than the jackals that manufactured this stink pile?

Speed is of the essence. America hangs in the balance. Why are Republicans blocking the saving of America?

Reaganomics is in its last throes, and, right on schedule, here they are looking to get a handout right before they retire overseas.

Republicans hate America.

Republicans killed Capitalism.

Republicans ruin everything they touch.

Rockin', Robert. It's the politics that's really ugly here. No time to breathe for Congress & the candidates. "Give us what we want, NOW, or... we'll hold our breath."Meaning - markets need US financial players to pump, and if you don't give us the cash, as & when we want.... we don't pump & the system seizes. If Obama/Dems do anything to slow this, and the system crashes... they're to blame. But if they go ALONG, well... we got $700 Billion. What leverage is there for "conditions" in this circumstance? Not much.

Maybe we'll have more after November? Problem. The system will still be reeling, or at best, sludgy, come November. Worse, the slow bleed out of millions of American families will be months more advanced. Unemployment up, fuel prices still draining pockets... AND the Govt in worse fiscal straits... AND the financial industry will have the SAME power to seize the system up in November.

This is not pretty. This is not their first trip to the well. And NO way will it be their last.

Let me state, again, that I am blood-boiling angry about this whole situation. The thing that makes me even more angry is the fact that none of these perfectly reasonable suggestions, no help for homeowners who got screwed by brokers (and yes, that's what happened), no regulations to protect taxpayers, no limits on Treasury's authority, no judicial review of their actions, none of any of this is going to happen. They're going to get their check, and we're all going to bend over.

I've copied and pasted the key points, together with a link to this article, to both Senators Boxer and Feinstein as well as to Pete Stark and to the general Speaker of the House email at AmericanVoices@mail.house.gov.

I can only hope that our current Democratic majority does not allow itself to be steamrollered into a blank check for Wall Street with no conditional provisions to prevent a recurrence.

As the chosen leader of the party doesn’t Obama have a responsibility to lead Democratic members of Congress during this crisis? How about his stated willingness to reach across the aisle? I applaud his refusal to publicly challenge Paulson’s role—but his lack of personal involvement in working out this deal is profoundly disturbing. I have a high respect for Frank, Schumer, Dodd, Shelby, etc., but we have leaders of the nation for a reason—someone at the very least needs to coordinate the response to situations.

Are we going to elect a President who will not lead his own party much less the nation? Perhaps, unlike Bush and McCain, he does have the ability to comprehend issues and choose capable advisers, but does not believe that it is his role to take charge. I beg to differ.

"We demand a bail out financed by taxpayer money or we'll commit suicide!" That's the Wall Street bankers version of the Republican "Drill here. Drill now."

A few modest predictions

The Republicans already have such a toxic reputation that they will have no hesitation to obstruct passage of any bill that includes regulations on Wall Street or any of Bob Reich's proposals. They can't hurt their reputation any more, but they can lose power.

The Democrats, trying to pass as the rational governing party, will cave in order to get any bill passed. Count on it.

It's also going to happen late on the last day before adjournment for the Fall campaign season.

Next year the Blue Dog Democrats are going to be a very powerful bloc of votes. Progressives are going to have a long hard row to hoe.

Whatever happens to the Paulson bail out bill, it is not going to solve the problems. The problems are being at best patched, and by the looks of it, I don't count on the patches to work. Throwing money at a problem that isn't understood rarely does.

Besides - who can trust a Republican?

Wow, bravo...citizens!

Thanks to Robert Reich for empowering the peeples. One question, do your proposals have a snowball, or a snowflakes chance in hell?

We peeps can push, but I hope you'll use your influence for good here. Get on the phone.

Thanks.

Without a doubt this move by Treasury, The Federal Reserve and our elected officials is going to be the largest transfer of wealth from the middle class to the richest 1% of the population

That's the bottom line here. Wall Street is like a voracious, greedy parasite that bleeds and ultimately kills its host - the American economy. To the extent that this little scheme works, it will only succeed in widening the gap between rich and poor and setting the country up for a much deeper depression.

The real problem isn't the so-called 'sub-prime real estate disaster.' The problem is that millions of American households can no longer afford to buy their own homes. That's why wall street invented the sub-prime scam - to line their own pockets and maintain the illusion that everything was OK. All this latest scheme does is exacerbate the central problem by by transferring even more wealth to the wealthiest through the government.

The parasites on Wall Street wanted to gobble up Social Security, but this will work for them even better. And the most likely outcome for average Americans will be crippling inflation and a dramatically lower standard of living when the dollar crashes.

In addition to liberally plagiarizing some of the great arguments already posted, I'm sending all of my representatives some prepared soundbites:

1. Wall Street lobbyists are attempting to shove a sucker deal down the throats of American taxpayers.

2. This deal as currently structured requires these firms to do ABSOLUTELY NOTHING but cash the government checks.

3. This deal as currently structured will do nothing to slow or reduce foreclosures for average Americans, or increase retail or commercial lending.

4. None of these financial firms would ever let THEIR clients agree to deal like this or sign it themselves. Why should the American people agree to it?

5. If you want bail out money with no strings attached, go ask your mommy or daddy. Don’t come to the American taxpayer.

6. If this bill passes as currently written, absolutely nothing will stop the Wall Street firms from doing it again. Nothing.

7. Our children and THEIR children will be paying for this deal. We owe it to them to negotiate the best terms possible.

Thank you Mr. Reich, for your insight.

I’d be the first to state I don’t fully understand the financial markets, so I may be off based.

What happens if we don’t agree to be blackmailed by the BIG moneyed interests?

When the bottom drops out, those that has money on the sidelines, waiting to pick from the carcasses, will buy up the assets for dirt-cheap. So it is not in their interest to save the market

With no pressure on them, because they’ll reap the benefits of a collapsed market anyway, they cop an attitude let the economy falter, or if you want to bail out the markets we’ll let you, BUT no new safeguards, we want to continue as we have.

I would like to be in a position of being in the drivers seat, not sold out by an Administration, who would sell our assets to further it’s own interests such as the DUBAI port deal.

How do we break our dependence on them?

What would happen if the American people demanded, NO Bailout costing Billions, instead telling the government, to spend the billions, that they were going to create for the bailout, instead putting our resources, treasure, on safety net issues, healthcare for the unemployed, unemployment insurance.

Because of the free market attitude of some of these capitalist, send the message,

They RISK, killing the goose that laid their Golden egg.

If after closer scrutiny, we find that aspects of Democratic Socialism would not have had, such a heavy cost, as we find ourselves dealing with now. Maybe it’s time to reevaluate, WHY one form over another.

What was the promise, that prevented us from achieving a collective attitude, towards what form of Government WE THE PEOPLE, want or what form actually answers our most foundational needs, such as Healthcare, unemployment security, full employment.

Costs? It is apparent both ideas would cost me, and what do I have to show for my sacrifice to one form over the other ideology?

I am now being called upon to bail out the one who promised grandiose plans, but has continually failed to deliver.

Check out William Grieder's take at this link, Wall Street Licking Its Chops at Bush Team Giveaway
excerpt:

Financial-market wise guys, who had been seized with fear, are suddenly drunk with hope. They are rallying explosively because they think they have successfully stampeded Washington into accepting the Wall Street Journal solution to the crisis: Dump it all on the taxpayers. That is the meaning of the massive bailout Treasury Secretary Henry Paulson has shopped around Congress. It would relieve the major banks and investment firms of their mountainous rotten assets and make the public swallow their losses -- many hundreds of billions, maybe much more. What's not to like if you are a financial titan threatened with extinction?

CREDO Mobile is getting its customers and activism members to hit up Congressional leadership in support of Reich's five conditions.

http://act.credoaction.com/campaign/no_blank_check/

We're targeting Speaker Nancy Pelosi, House Majority Leader Steny Hoyer, Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid, House Finance Chair Barney Frank, Senate Banking Chair Chris Dodd, and the de facto leaders of the two parties: Senators Barack Obama and John McCain.

We'll start with a petition today, and then follow up tomorrow generating phone calls to congress.

My letter to my Senators and Representative today:

Dear ________

I hope you will vote against the irresponsible bailout bill proposed by Mr. Paulson. While some action may be needed to stabalize the markets, this bill is unacceptable for several reasons:

1. Taxpayers are being stuck with vast private-sector losses, but there is no mechanism in place to ensure that taxpayers will share in any private-sector profits that materialize as a result of this taxpayer-funded bailout. If we taxpayers are to bail out the financial industry, we must ensure that we have a chance of receiving a return commensurate with the great finacial risk we are taking on.

2. The bill gives far too much unilateral power to the unelected Secretary of the Treasury. There are no checks or balances and no effective oversight of Paulson's actions from congress, the administration, or the courts. The bill throws out the normal principles of our constitution and our democracy and essentially gives the unelected Secretary Paulson the power of a king when it comes to bailing out the financial industry.

3. The bill places no clear obligations on the institutions that receive taxpayer funds. There is no way to ensure that the taxpayers' money is managed responsibly or that the abuses that caused the crisis are not repeated or that new abuses are prevented or, if not prevented, severely punished.

4. The bill gives the government unprecedented presence in what has hitherto been a private financial industry. Essentially, we are socializing corporate losses while leaving corporate profits in private hands. This is a remarkable and remarkably unbalanced change to the capitalist system that has heretofore been praised as a bulwark of the American economy. To change this system so dramatically and so suddenly, with so little debate and with such high risk to the American taxpayer, is grossly irresponsible.

For all these reasons, I hope you will work to change the bill to add sufficient protections and oversight or to reject the bill altogether.

Thanks for your action on this important matter.

Sincerely,

Congress stopped listening to us a long time ago. They will do whatever their lobbyists financiers tell them to do. AT&T got their immunity and financed the DNC. Wall street will get their deal and compensate congress abundantly. The revolution that was about to occur in 1932 has been delayed for 75yrs.. This "Shock" was planned an is being used to get legislation passed that never would have been agreed to without being used as the means of dealing with this shock...The privatization of Social Security...getting rid of all social programs like SCHIP. Only the ems in congress can stop it by standing up to this take over...but they have shown they have no spine...so armed revolution will be all that is left to combat this fascist take over. Next we'll be hearing, "The Nazis weren't so bad...they unified a country and brought the people out of economic disaster". The people already on SS....well the treasury just can't handle the payments any longer...Paulson's plan must be defeated. Confiscate what these wall street elite profiteered while destroying our economy. How many houses do you own now McCain? People, this is it;...what Jeb Bush and his "royal economists" tried to accomplish with a coup in the thirties...Congress must refuse...not just place conditions on the check. Where do you think all the money went in the first place?

Do we have one financial expert with any horsepower on our side?

Reich's a lawyer. Baker's turned into a blogger. Morgenstern's a reporter, and excepting some petulance I can't figure out where she stands.

Aren't there any liberal economists that Congress could call on?

Robert:

There is an old saying in the entrepreneurial and equity game: Got to have skin in the game. When I was raising capital for a venture that was the big question the investors wanted to know. I think also that each of the directors, exec's of any firm that is receiving $$ put up their all their homes (including primary houses) as collateral.

That plus their options and their PAC's, influence and retirement plans....They want to come out whole and so should the US taxpayer.

washingtonpost.com > Business > Business Policy Your Comments On...

Paulson Urges Swift Approval of Bailout Legislation
Treasury Secretary Henry M. Paulson Jr. today defended the escalating price tag of his plan to rescue the financial markets, saying it is unlikely that taxpayers will end up paying the full $700 billion the Bush administration is requesting to buy the troubled mortgage assets of crippled financial...
- By Zachary A. Goldfarb

So... here's how I understand this very high- risk -low- details- buy- out that we have to accept as it is right away or things will be even worse and we'll lose more: we take these notes that were made as high-risk-low-details loans that aspiring homeowners had to accept as they were right away or the terms would get even worse and they'd lose everything, and...knowing this...we buy them again from many of the same folks that sold the original loans under terms that people had to buy them right away as they were or they'd lose everything...and without any further guarantees, many of us even knowing deep in our hearts that we're getting savagely screwed, we buy that worthless paper back and hope for the best...remembering that we have no time and we have to do it right away or things will get even worse. have i got it?

Here is how they will do the distribution.

If foreign investments dry up, can the Federal Government avoid bankruptcy, as China or other countries consider investments here to risky.

Will we have to default on our obligations?

Bush financed his war on borrowed money, he gave tax cuts on borrowed money, and now we have to step in an save him and his party from bankrupt logic.

I was up late last night emailing my other Senator - Dick Durbin, NY Times, Wash Post, americanvoices@mail.house.gov.

Most of you were much nicer than I was. I think, as Senator Bernie Sanders (Vermont, Independent) proposed, there should be a TAX INCREASE ON THE WEALTHIEST AMERICANS NOW. Here is his proposal:

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/rep-bernie-sanders/the-middle-class-must-not_b_128046.html

Dodd, Chairman of the Senate Banking Committee and Schumer, in my opinion, have been highly negligent and have failed to provide proper oversight in what many, including Obama, thought was going to be quite a meltdown. Obama was speaking about this over one year ago. I wrote that Dodd and Schumer should be replaced on the Banking Committee. Their constituencies include Wall Street execs and hedge fund managers and I just feel they were very lax. I have not read Dodd's comments today due to work, but he's had two years to get moving on this. He was off running for President and someone on the committee should have acted in his place. (Same goes for Biden, Kerry should take over Foreign Relations and have hearings on the Pakistan situation.)

Here's what else I said - Feel free to include it in your own comments:

"In addition, significantly stronger regulatory measures must be put into place this
year before Congress adjourns. There should be thorough public hearings in both
houses of Congress. There might even be a need for a special prosecutor to be appointed
before Congress adjourns this year to deal with any potential findings of possible
corruption and criminal negligence in the events bringing this nation to this catastrophe.

Congress should not adjourn until this matter is thoroughly investigated with lengthy public hearings, appropriate controls passed into law, and measures taken to provide relief to middle class taxpayers and those facing foreclosure. Obviously all of this cannot happen in one week."

Pay for bailout by taxing traders

The philosophy of the past decade has been to give the wealthiest lavish policies and to pay for it on the backs of the poor and middle class. In addition to the tax breaks, no-bid war spending, bankruptcy law written by the credit card lobby, and numerous other pro-corporate policies, the national debt is ballooning and causing inflation which may also be seen as a form of regressive taxation. Now after the financial institutions have had years of reckless partying the administration is saying we citizens will have to pick up the tab. "Trust us" they say, "we know best".

The price tag of $700,000,000,000 should be paid for by taxing trading in stock and financial markets. The tax would be ultra-small, pro-rated to equal $700 billion after 10 years. This would not impact the market significantly, and enable the ones whose recklessness caused the global disaster to effectively borrow money against their future profits to pay for it. It would also reduce some of the volatility in the stock market as traders would chose to trade less impulsively. Furthermore, by shifting the tax burden slightly from consumers, small businesses, and industries that produce actual tangible goods, the standard of living and economy would benefit broadly. Common sense would support the idea of having those responsible for the global banking disaster be responsible for the price tag.

I was told about this article after I left a message at another blog that reflected similar sentiments.

I then expanded on my earlier comments and posted them to my blog with a link to here, because I felt you covered the ideas in finer detail.

We have to do something about this mess, but I think the money the companies pay back should be spent on improving our schools and crumbling infrastructure. That would create jobs that circulates more money back into the economy.

If we have to spend the money anyway, let's do it in a way that has long-term benefits.