I've spent a lot of time trying to figure out this financial bailout, but the banking community's schemes to rid us of our money have been so convoluted that it's hard to get a handle on whether they're telling us the truth about the immediate severity of the problem or not. But there's one thing that I do have a handle on, and it sends a flaming red quilt all the way up the flagpole.

The Bush administration–the very same people who have mismanaged everything they've touch for the past seven and a half years, and who have gouged, corrupted, and claimed to have literally "lost" billions of dollars of taxpayer funds in Iraq–is now asking that we give them full control over the way they spend 700 billion dollars to resolve this financial crisis–and with the warning that even taking the time to think about it is dangerously imprudent.

Section Eight of the Bush bailout plan reads as follows:

Oh, really?

The arrogance of the Bush administration is so absolutely astounding that the only thing that could possibly explain it is if they think the American people are completely stupid–which is quite possible, considering what we've allowed them to get away with in the past–or the administration itself is completely out of touch with reality. Do they really expect us to give a lame-duck president with an approval rating of 19, with three months left in office, a record of never seeing a crony he didn't want to enrich, and only stumbling inadvertently over the truth in the past two terms, 700 billions dollars–and with the stipulation that his discretion is non-reviewable by any agency or court of law? Could they possibly be serious?

Could this be the October surprise? Could it be that the Bush administration sees the writing on the wall, and recognize that their time at the troff is over, so they want to make one last super big score before leaving office?

Consider the fact that with the stipulation that the secretary's authority is "non-reviewable", Paulson has the right to hire and fire. That would allow Bush to his put cronies in place throughout the banking community, and thereby, effectively control our entire financial system. In fact, they might have already started playing politics with the system. If they already knew that a possible bailout was in the works, why did they allow Lehman Brothers to go under? Could that have been political? That needs to be investigated.

And while I'm not an attorney, I would also be concerned that Bush could establish an independent agency, and fill it with his cronies, that would be beyond the reach of the next administration–and with the current Supreme Court, he just might prevail with such an arrangement.

So needless to say, section eight of the bailout proposal should be dismissed out of hand. And congress should insist on the American people owning equity, and receiving annual dividends from the gross profits of any structured group that participates in whatever bailout plan that is agreed upon. If the situation is as dire as they say, the banks should be eager to except such an agreement. If they're not, we'll then know that they're crying wolf.

The only way the American people can be sure that we're not being manipulated, and won't be manipulated in the future, is to set a precedent assuring that the financial community pays a stiff price for the assistance that they're requesting.

Therefore, I suggest that the various corporations participating in the bailout should be consolidated into one group. The corporations within the group itself would be responsible for determining, and substantiating, the amount of bailout money the group would require to remain viable. The government will then gain a 50% inactive share of each company participating in the bailout as collateral, to be returned to the company once the public debt has been paid, and every company participating in the bailout will be held individually responsible for the group debt as a whole.

The government would then negotiate an open-ended loan at the prevailing rate, but a rate that would escalate at assigned periods, based on the percentage of the debt remaining at that point. The group would then pay off the debt by setting up a trust fund in which the group must contribute a percentage of their annual gross profits, with the group itself determining a formula for which the various companies would contribute to the fund, based on what percentage of the bailout fund they required to remain solvent.

The government would then establish a formula to determine what percentage of the groups annual gross profits would go into this trust fund. The formula would take the following indices into account in the taxpayer's favor: The prevailing minimum wage, the cost of living, and the level of disparity between the average salary of a middle class worker and the compensation of top tier corporate executives.

This is no time to negotiate. The conservatives have shoved their fiscal philosophy down our throats for years, so now the Democrats should simply say, "Here's what we can do for you–take it or leave it. And beyond that, were tacking on to any bill we sign a 20 year mandatory prison sentence for anyone convicted of profiteering from the bailout agreement."

Anything less would be socialist, and we can't have that–can we?

Eric L. Wattree

wattree.blogspot.com

BENEATH THE SPIN • ERIC L. WATTREE

It’s Time for American to Step Up to the Plate

So here they come--all the corporate fascists, hat-in-hand, wanting the American taxpayer to bail them out. These, the very same arrogant, and compassionless social terrorists who demonized as "socialist" anyone who even implied that maybe a crumb should be set aside for the poor or middle class. "Deregulate. Let the market work. Free us from the nuisance of social protectionism, and we’ll make America great!" But now that their greedy excesses have worked against them, all of a sudden socialism doesn’t look all that bad. In fact, it looks better with every day that passes--as long as we remember to privatize the profit, and only socialize loss.

Yes--here they come en mass before the great unwashed, the American taxpayer, and without a bit of shame, asking for 700 billion dollars as casually as kid asking for a candy bar. And beyond that, they say that it is a must that we accommodate them--and immediately!--if we hope to save ourselves. They say that we can’t even afford the luxury of thinking about it, because time is of the essence. But while they insists that there’s no time to waste, maybe this financial crisis is a blessing in disguise, because it gives the American taxpayer a rare opportunity to leverage his economic clout.

The business community has preached ad nauseam the evils of helping the poor and suffering. They said it was a socialist concept, and un-American! So if it’s bad for us, it’s certainly just as bad for them. So, maybe American people should take their advice and handle this matter like capitalists--social capitalist. After all, money is a commodity, so why should the American taxpayer simply hand over 700 billion dollars for free–the banking community certainly doesn’t do business that way. When the average American is in a financial pinch, the banks don’t just give us money, they make us pay for it–dearly. So why shouldn’t we?

Maybe we should give them an open-ended loan at the prevailing rate. Then allow them to pay off the loan by setting up a trust fund in which the banking community must contribute a percentage (to be determined) of their annual gross profits (That’s right, gross profits–we want ours off the top). We could then use that money to help subsidize social security, universal healthcare, and other programs that benefit the American people. And the beauty of it is, since it’s a business transaction, we can both benefit the American people, while at the same time, avoid the "evils" socialism. After all, we’ll be taking their money in the very best capitalist tradition.

And we must be sure to use our leveraged position to its full advantage. Therefore, as part of the formula that determines how much of their profits must go into this trust fund, we should take into account the minimum wage, the cost of living, and the level of disparity between the average worker and the compensation of top tier corporate executives (after all, if corporations can afford to pay their CEOs exorbitant salaries and benefits, certainly they should be able to contribute more towards their public debt).

And speaking of demagogues, while we’re at it, we need to also take another look at the way we compensate our politicians and government officials. One of the primary problems that we have in this nation is that we’ve allowed politicians to boost their salary and benefits so high that they can no longer identify with the people they represent. So, members of congress, government executives, and judges should be compensated at a rate that is commensurate with the median income of a middle class worker. By tying the compensation and benefits of politicians to middle class Americans, it will not only serve to keep them in touch with the realities of a middle class life, but also give them a vested interest in legislating with an eye towards what’s in the best interest of the poor and middle class.

Combined with the above legislation, it will also be necessary to close the revolving door between government and big business. It should be made strictly illegal for any former politician to either be employed by, or gain benefit or assistance of any kind, from any person or corporation who has had business or any "intimate legislative contact" with that politician for a period of seven years.

Admittedly, in our current political environment it would be next to impossible to get legislators to legislate against themselves. But if we truly want change in Washington, we must also change, just to get their attention.

The primary obstacle to changing the political environment in this country is our misplaced loyalty to our own particular representatives. As a result, while most of us are less than happy with the job that congress is doing as a whole, most of us continue to support our own representatives. Therefore, we need to set an objective standard by which we can assess all politicians, including our own. One way of doing that is by pressing our particular party, and congress, to set clearly defined legislative agendas every year. Then we can begin to assess our representatives, strictly, based on how closely they adhere to that agenda.

But in order for that to work, we must use the Internet and aggressive grassroots organizing to educate the public on how important it is to bring this system under control. We’ve got to stop allowing ourselves to be manipulated, and start to take control of our lives, and the institutions that affect our lives. We’ve also got to let radio, television, the entertainment industry, and their sponsors know that they’re going to have to become more responsive to our needs, rather than trying to feed us a false sense of security. And most importantly, we’re going to have to let our politicians know that it’s going to take more than a pretty smile and a snappy campaign ad to be elected, or re-elected to office.

Let us hope that this financial crisis serves as a wake-up call for America. After all, it is nothing less than, yet, another Katrina moment, but this time the winds are blowing down Wall Street. Yet again, Bush has been asleep at the switch–and let there be no doubt about it, the American people are in severe peril as a direct result.

Bush has allowed the United States to become weaker than we’ve ever been in our history. We’re in heavy debt to China, and our military readiness has been all but destroyed due to our foolhardy excursion into Iraq. Ret. Lt. General Ricardo Sanchez, Bush’s top military commander in Iraq in 2003 said, "A critical, objective assessment of our nation's ability to execute our national security strategy must be conducted. If we are objective and honest, the results will be surprising to all Americans. There is unacceptable strategic risk."

So America’s problems go much farther than just a financial crisis. Russian bombers have been spotted flying near the Alaskan border for the first time since the end of the Cold War (obviously Putin is not impressed by bull dogs, wearing lipstick or otherwise). It was has also been reported that Russia is developing a new nuclear missile system that can defeat the U. S. defense shield. Where are we going to get the money to counter that initiative? If the Russians are successful, we're completely vulnerable--our nuclear capability will have been neutralized, and our military won't have the capability to repel a conventional attack. According to General Sanchez, "America must understand that it will take the army at least a decade to fix the damage that has been done to its full spectrum readiness" in Iraq.

In addition, as we spend 10 billion dollars a month in Iraq, and now, hand over 700 billion dollars to corporate demagogues, The People’s Republic of China is literally buying America. And as this nation was literally being bought out from under us, we also allowed ourselves to be blind-sided by Katrina, and now blind-sided by this financial crisis. Thus, it is clear that this nation has not had an adult at the wheel in close to eight years. So it’s about time for somebody to accept responsibility, and according to the founders, that somebody is you.

Eric L. Wattree

wattree.blogspot.com

I take great pride in being the product of adversity, because having simply survived, provides me with unassailable credentials.