.
September 29th, 2008
09:00 PM ET

Evening Buzz: Bailout Rejected

Republican leaders speak to reporters on Monday after the bailout bill failed to pass.

Republican leaders speak to reporters on Monday after the bailout bill failed to pass.
Maureen Miller
AC360° Writer

Whoa! My advice: Don't check the 401K plan. Stocks sank 778 points today, the worst single-day point loss ever. Here's another tough reality: investors lost $1.2 trillion, the most ever in one day. The deep decline came after the House rejected the $700 billion bank bailout plan.
 
How did it get this bad? It depends on who you ask.

Republicans and Democrats are pointing fingers at one another.

It's sorta like when you ask your kids, "Who broke the lamp?" And, each child blames the other.
But, in this case, trillions of dollars are at risk.

Here's some of the blame game for you.

House Republican leaders say Nancy Pelosi, the Democratic speaker of the House, caused the vote to fail. "The Speaker had to give a partisan speech... that poisoned our caucus," said Rep. John Boehner, the House minority leader in a news conference after the vote.

The number-two Democrat in the House, Rep. Steny Hoyer, rejected that accusation as "absurd."

Rep. Barney Frank, the House Democrats' main negotiator on the bill, was even more critical.

"Because somebody hurt their feelings, they decided to punish the country?" Frank demanded, saying the explanation was an excuse. "I don't believe they had the votes. They are covering up the fact that
they don't have the votes," he said.

Do you think the House should have approved the bailout or did it take the right step?
We'd love to hear your thoughts.

Tonight, we'll have all the angles on this ugly day on Wall Street. From the politics to your pocketbook, find out what this means for you and America's economy.

Hope you join us at 10pm ET.


Filed under: Maureen Miller • The Buzz
soundoff (202 Responses)
  1. John

    Greetings,

    Perhaps it would be educational if we clearly explained (in specific details and with examples) of what are the possible outcomes if the bailout passes or fails ... we need more than conjuctures of what could happen and statements like it will be the end of the world if it fails ....

    Why are we not inviting academics in economy & social studies to have a debate on your program about this ... why are we not requesting the unbiased subject matter experts to publically brainstorm, to debate, and to come up with several options ... and explain them in words we can understand?

    Best Regards
    J.

    September 30, 2008 at 12:01 am |
  2. NICK

    Nothing was established to deal with regulating Fannie and Freddie. No regulatory commission additional oversight, nothing to stop the main contributor to this fiscal crisis. In 2003 and 2004 congressional hearings heard testimony from Mr. Star About the problems with Fannie and Freddie and sub prime loans. My own party members, Democrats, wave their hands saying nothing was wrong. Well there was and is something wrong. Why did you not listen? Now you want to put the same people who got us in this mess on a commission to oversee this. With all due respect, there were wrong then and not addressing it now,
    During the savings and loan debacle, the RTC regulated the process, why not the same for Fannie and Freddie. I will not support any legislation that does not put tighter regulations on the two quasi-public entities. Why should we trust Paulson, Bernanke and Cox when they closed their eyes to this problem for so many years? Franklin D. Rains should be in jail!!!! Not be giving economic advice to a campaign.

    How come you don't focus on Freddie and Fannie?

    September 29, 2008 at 11:59 pm |
  3. Jeri Berry

    Hi,
    I was told by my financial advisor that fixed annuities at Midland Nat'l ins are protected not by fdic but because they are regulated by the government and have to set aside a doller for each one you have invested with them, making your annuity safe. Is this true according to what is happening today?

    September 29, 2008 at 11:58 pm |
  4. Tom B.

    FDIC says that they will guarantee deposits up to $100,000. There is not enough money in the world to secure our deposits. Tell the people the truth, that the banks will all close for a while and withdrawals will be limited with no ATM use. We won't be able to get our money.
    Tom
    Bensalem,PA

    September 29, 2008 at 11:56 pm |
  5. Edna Griffin

    Give the people yhe money to pay all of their bills, say 100 thousand each. And the economy could fix itself. People can go on with their daily activities, pay bills,invest , which will bring our economy up.Trust the people for a change.
    epgee

    September 29, 2008 at 11:54 pm |
  6. Jo Ann

    Barney Frank should be the last one to point fingers at the Republicans. Not only did ninety-five of Democrats vote against this bailout, but even though Frank is the chairman of the House Banking Committee, members of his own committee voted against it!

    The House was right to vote against this bailout. The failure had nothing to do with Pelosi’s stupid remarks it failed because the constituents called their senators and congresspeople and told them to vote against it because the executives responsible were going to walk away with their “golden parachutes” unpunished.

    I think the members of Congress, like Chris Dodd who received $133, 900, John Kerry who received $111, 000, and Barack Obama who received $105, 849 from Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac, are trying to protect their friends in these organizations and not the American people.

    It was Chris Dodd who put a stop to "The Federal Housing Enterprise Regulatory Reform Act of 2005" (S.190) co-sponsored by John McCain that would have put tighter regulations on Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac.

    Jo Ann
    North Royalton, Ohio

    September 29, 2008 at 11:47 pm |
  7. MAG

    I am a democrat. After today I am sorry that I am. If it is not too late I will change to an independent for this election.I thought both democrats & republicans were trying to work together in a bipartisan way!!! Before the vote Nancy Pelosi makes those comments. If you ask me she is definitely playing poltics with my money. Please Nancy shut up!!!

    September 29, 2008 at 11:46 pm |
  8. Carl

    What good does restraining the arsonist do if you're burned alive in the house? Any regulation to fix "greedy executives" is all well and good, but if the economy fails to function, no one will have to worry about it because the executives along with the thousands of people they employ won't have jobs.

    September 29, 2008 at 11:45 pm |
  9. Jack

    I am not Republican nor Democrat and looking from a neutral position cannot understand all the finger pointing. 228 Representatives voted against the bailout. 95 Democrats and 133 Republicans. Those 228 have decided to put our Country's economic strength at risk of complete colapse. When all types of companys start filing bankrupcy and the average American worker who does not have money invested in Wall Street lose the jobs, we can all sit back and be Monday morning quarterbacks. By then it will be to late.

    It's not Republican or Democrat, it's 228 people determing the fate of the Nation and a total of 434 people that would rather take a holiday than save our Country. If your family needed you to work on any holiday to save your life savings, make your house payment, pay medical needs to name a few, I know what you would do.

    It.s at the point of utter embarassment that we have Representatives that are so concerned with re-election and partisanship that they would let our great Country and its great citizens to the brink of financial destruction. 95 Democrats and 133 Republicans (not Pelosi or 12 Republicans)

    September 29, 2008 at 11:45 pm |
  10. Jason

    I'm just wondering what will happen if no bail out is adopted and the markets dip much further, what will happen to social security? Will it remain seperate or will it be devoured to pay for the war as Americas debt abounds toward 20 trillion in the next 5 years?

    September 29, 2008 at 11:44 pm |
  11. David Mynheer

    Why can't the American Gov. just loan the financial industry the money instead of giving it to them? Banks are unforgiving so why should the money be free without recourse. Loan them the money as needed but suspend all bonuses to CEOs and all dividends until the loans are repaid. That should inspire them to get back on track. I am sure the American People (me included) would not mind that as much as just giving them the money. It's no wonder we have lost our faith in our governments ability to watch out for all of it's people. Too often, businesses are first and foremost. People are sick of all the same old stories from both parties and the current bailout is just more of the same.

    September 29, 2008 at 11:43 pm |
  12. John

    Can we post the names of the bug-eyed zealots and gutless wonders who voted against this measure and cost us $1.2 trillion (and counting). The right wing zealots who played russian roulette with your life savings, and mine, should be punished at the ballot box. Left and right wing zealots got us in this mess – but it is clearly the right wing variety that just cost us all $1.2 trillion based on either partisan politics or ideology. In either case I'd like to wring their necks – but at least I can toss them out on their ear. (Cancel the debates – McCain just lost my vote and my guess is he'll get about 218 right wing nut votes out of Congress.)

    September 29, 2008 at 11:42 pm |
  13. gabriela salazar barrantes

    We moved to Costa Rica a year ago and we thought it was a good move then, do think it was agood move and how bad do you think this bad economy will affect Central America?

    September 29, 2008 at 11:41 pm |
  14. Leslie Taylor

    I have to comment about Sarah Palin's whining about "gotcha journalism". If she can't distinguish between a voter and a journalist then she is far too under-qualified to serve as Vice President...ever.

    September 29, 2008 at 11:41 pm |
  15. Ryan

    Why are the republicans being blamed? Why are the democrates being blamed? The whole reason why this failed is because the American people are finally fed up with the way this country is being ran. The American people are standing up for themselves. That bill was a quick fix. I and many other Americans feel like we/they can do better.

    Why is the governement even buying these assets in the first place? Why don't they just insure these subprime loans? Or even just change some the accounting rule to a more conservative measure, like historical cost, instead of mark to market?

    The point is the government should not be this involved in our economy! There is no need for more regulation on the market. The only additional regulation needed is over the FED. Did you know we can't even audit the FED's books but yet they have so much control over our economy. One of the most powerful men in the world, Ben Bernanke isn't even elected by the people. What a joke!!! We are being told time and time again just let them take care of it, they know better. We have been doing this for too long!!!! The new question is "Do they really know better?"

    September 29, 2008 at 11:40 pm |
  16. Mickey Jetpur

    Hey Anderson, Ali Velshi and you should stop promoting the bailout. We,the public are against making the fat cats any fatter! Perhaps,the 700 billion can be divided with the American ctizens,with the condition that they can only buy anything that is made in America! Watch the Banks and Wall St Spiral upwards then.Infuse 700 billion into the people not the greedy CEO'S on Wall St.
    Mickey.CA.

    September 29, 2008 at 11:36 pm |
  17. kim

    The ill gotten mortgages are still worth something just not as much as they were before and not at the ridiculus interest rates or balloon payment packages they were purchased under. Why don't the mortgage companies allow those not able to pay the exorberant payment, let the owners return the deed in lieu of foreclosure and reasonably rent the homes to the former purchasers if they can afford it at the reasonable market rent rate per area. I am sure people would stay in the homes rather than hitting the streets looking for a new palce to rent. Ths does two things it keeps money flowing and gves the market time to readjust. Right now people are just letting the companies foreclose and getting a total free ride for months because no one is in charge. Plus some former owners are just as unscrupulus as the lenders by stripping the homes, because of bad or uneducated financial decisions.

    September 29, 2008 at 11:36 pm |
  18. jason

    paulson came forward saying things were broken and he had a way to fix it, and if we didn't the sky would fall, then bush made his speach that the sky was falling and this bill was going to hold up the whole sky.. what if paulson, hadn't come forward with this plan, the markets wouldn't be looking for the savior, and things would have kept going, yell things would be turbulant, more banks would fail, but someone is always there to pick up the pieces at a bargain. couldn't paulson and the president just come forward with a so so plan, saying, things aren't good, but we can make it a little better. We the usa can't save the world,

    September 29, 2008 at 11:35 pm |
  19. Stoltz

    Why not turn this BAILOUT into a longterm STIMULUS package for Main Street and Wall Street.. Where are the big ideas?? Why not have the treasury buy 60 month (or so) term share certificates in the various financial institutions in equal amount and under the name of each and every American taxpayer amounting to the 700 billion... Giving the institutions the short term capital they need and at the end of the term the Treasury can recover the original funds and the taxpayers will receive the long-term dividend in the form of a stimulus payment and as thanks for doing their part in (hopefully) righting the ship....??

    September 29, 2008 at 11:34 pm |
  20. Marcia Blank

    I am watching AC360 and have yet to hear mention that 93 Democrats voted against the "bailout". If Nancy thought this was so important she wouldn't have given permission to her committee chairs to vote no. My last illusions that government could serve me have gone up in smoke.

    September 29, 2008 at 11:33 pm |
  21. Bonnie

    I read the perfect solution to the baleoutproblem. today in the editoral.
    This person suggested that they take the $700 billion and give back to the people . Any one over 18 years old. That would be approximately 200 million people, divided by 700 billion, that would give each person aprox. 3.5 Million dollars each. We all could pay off our mortgages and credit card debt and pay taxes back to the government and still have plenty left to retire on. It would also boost our economy through the roof. Each person should have enough to reitire on, therefore the government could eliminate social securty. What a concept!

    September 29, 2008 at 11:32 pm |
  22. elle hayes

    I'm retired from the Phone Company..lost my stocks in 2000-registered Independent.
    anyhow I don't understand why, if the present "Bailout" proposal isn't a good one, it isn't rewritten to make it workable.
    Why stick to what everyone is saying isn't a good policy and leave more of a mess for the next president and congress to have to deal with.

    September 29, 2008 at 11:31 pm |
  23. Frank Weiss

    I think we should see right through the blame game – it's just political posturing. I also think we should be skeptical when the media decries the House's vote as "irresponsible". The media appears to assume the bailout is in the country's best interest, while the people calling in to their HR representatives think it's a very bad deal!

    September 29, 2008 at 11:31 pm |
  24. mike

    -ac- W. hasn't even thought of putting safety and guard/ aka riot
    protection in place ?

    September 29, 2008 at 11:31 pm |
  25. Leroy Parker

    I want to know if if the lobbist are doing what lobbist do regarding the bail-out bill. Are they involoved in the way to bill is being written.

    September 29, 2008 at 11:29 pm |
  26. P. Tacoronte

    Deb why didn't the President act on Fannie Ma and Freddie Mac when he had the house and Senate? Sorry you cannot have it both ways. You need to act if you have the votes from the Congress if you truly felt that this was a problem.

    September 29, 2008 at 11:25 pm |
  27. Markus

    Bailout??? And they leave? I love all Christians, Jews and Muslims, but what happened to separation of church and state??? Is this NOT important enough? I don't get it!
    What happened here??
    Markus
    Pacific Palisades, CA

    September 29, 2008 at 11:25 pm |
  28. Leslie Taylor

    I have continued to barrage my Congressional representatives, regardless of party affiliation, with my opinion and directives for any suggested bail out. I really don't care who they want to blame – I already know that the fault lies with greed and excess. Ali Velshi likes to pontificate that this is about "credit". Well, American's have been overburdened by predatory credit companies, and those predators have been allowed to feed freely upon us without regulation. Sorry fellas, the dining room is now closed...permanently!

    September 29, 2008 at 11:24 pm |
  29. eric mills

    i just wanted to know. me and my fiance are getting married in may but we also want to buy a house. together we have about 6 thousand dollars of debt. we are both under the age of 26. our planned wedding will cost us around four thousand dollars. should we use that money for a house, to pay of debt or keep with the wedding plan?? please help.

    September 29, 2008 at 11:24 pm |
  30. Alex Kramer

    I keep hearing guests on 360 saying that people don't understand the bailout/'rescue plan' bill, and saying that is why it was rejected. That, however, simply isn't true- we understand enough. We understand that $700,000,000,000.00 is a LOT of money, and that a part of the bailout/'rescue plan' bill entailed giving Treasury Secretary Henry Paulson the ability to use this money without letting anyone – including the courts – review what he would do with it.

    It's quite simple, really – no oversight means it's a no-go.

    September 29, 2008 at 11:23 pm |
  31. P. Tacoronte

    Deb in AZ. I see McCain was unable to persuade you. His lack of Leadership is obvious. By the way we are a representative Republic not a democracy. We elect capable people to do the right thing for the country. Maybe all the people who lost money deserved it but I don't think so.

    September 29, 2008 at 11:22 pm |
  32. Jeri

    What if the government (us the people) gave a set amount to all americans to apply to their own mortgage. This could possibly pay off some mortgages and reduce others. You could also give a set amount to individual who are renting towards the purchase of a new or used home, this would help stimulate the housing market with new purchases and also help off set the individuals who pay off or pay down their current mortgages. This will also allow people to spend their mortgage monies back into the ecomony making purchases with monies that used to be paid to their mtg lender. Face it... if we give this as bailout money, it will find away to be misused for large bonuses, etc..... This is just a thought from concerned citizen. Thank you

    September 29, 2008 at 11:22 pm |
  33. Sam

    None of my savings is in the stock market. I learned a painful lesson after the dotcom bubble – the little guy can't win in stocks. Let the market correct. The US Constitution doesn't list credit as an inalienable right. If you can't pay cash for it, you can't afford it. I could go to the bank tomorrow and they would loan me money because I have the means to pay it back and colateral. I am against any bailout because it raises government debt, decreasing the chance I will ever recover my social security dollars. I am also against it because I'm willing to go through 6 months of depression to avoid a prolonged recession. Responsible Americans are ready to hunker down and let the crooks fall.
    NO BAILOUT BY TAXPAYERS – period

    September 29, 2008 at 11:22 pm |
  34. Matthew Priester

    ALL the Congress Members that voted NO should not be re-elected, and HALF of the PAY taken. For not getting there act together. They don't even understand Country and Team. On this day then going home, PLEASE what do I elect them for what do I the taxpayer pay them for!!!!!!!!!

    September 29, 2008 at 11:21 pm |
  35. Patricia

    Suze,
    I am a 55 year old registered nurse with a 401k approximately $200,000 investment in one of my retirement accounts.

    With investments going down the tube, would it be better to cash-in my investments -before I lose it all, and be willing to pay the penalities.

    Should I take the money out before I lose it all?

    September 29, 2008 at 11:21 pm |
  36. Irma

    I want to ask Suze Ormon about debt consolidation companies, which to trust, and questions to ask.

    Thanks, a lot. A lost soul, Irma

    September 29, 2008 at 11:21 pm |
  37. Willie

    As an Independent voter, I am happy the bailout failed in the House. My 401K tanked by $2000 over the course of a week. If the Bailout does not directly help those consumers who are in need of an interest rate break or a restructuring of the loan to save their homes, then my loss is well worth the cause. I'm not due to retire for another 25 years so, I have time to regain my losses.

    September 29, 2008 at 11:20 pm |
  38. Leslie Taylor

    @Keith S. – Well stated. At what point in time did Las Vegas come to the average American family and tell us that we needed to bail out habitual gamblers? They never did because it is ludicrous to presume that anyone other than the gambler with the problem bears responsibility. Let's take back all those bonuses, cars, homes and other assets the fat cats still have and liquidate them to finance any allegedly necessary bail out.

    September 29, 2008 at 11:18 pm |
  39. Ruby Scalera

    This is just insane. Imagine growing up in a country that's supposed to be wealthy and prosperous, and here I am sitting at the TV wondering about our bank's stability with my parents. The main thing is, that nobody really knows what's going on. I mean, yes, I'll spit the facts back to you, we're losing 3 million a minute on wall street. We're trillions in debt right now, we're owning money to places like China and Saudi Arabia. But I honestly have no idea what any of it means. Stop giving us the numbers, stop blaming each other. It's time Obama, McCain and George W. Bush, give us the facts. It's only fair, since it's OUR money.

    September 29, 2008 at 11:18 pm |
  40. P. Tacoronte

    I can't belive McCain gave the Mission Accomplished to the bail out just before it went down in flames. He does not have the support of his party yet. He should have had Palin come forward and endorse the plan. She obviously has more pull amonst the failthful.

    September 29, 2008 at 11:18 pm |
  41. WBPrice

    How do you stop a runaway train? You can't! Personally I think this was all inevitable. Looking deeply at the issue- it is a problem of human nature (Greed, Excess) it’s in us all and unfortunately our country has become blind to it. Politicians, Wall Street, and the People, we are all to blame. With freedom comes responsibility. I agree we have irresponsible leaders and the government has grown so much it is difficult to hold anyone accountable b/c of a lack of transparency. This is going to hurt and I’m prepared for it. We need stiff consequences. We need to wake up United States of America! What signal does a bailout send to everyone? First it sends a signal to the irresponsible that it is ok to live out of our means b/c good all Uncle Sam will bail us out. Second, to the responsible it says why be responsible- I did the right thing and now I’m paying for others mistakes. If it crashes it crashes- stiff consequences create GENUINE CHANGE- I may not have faith in politicians but I do have faith in the principles we founded our country upon, the resiliency of capitalism, and most importantly the resiliency of the American people. Let’s stand up- we are supposed to have a balance of power in this country between the people, gov., and business- it is obvious where the power has shifted. We have to take the power back!

    September 29, 2008 at 11:17 pm |
  42. Keith Goza

    People are seeming to look past the 95 Democrats that also voted against the bailout plan. It was 60% Republicans and 40% Democrats so why is this being blamed on the Republicans? Who knows right.

    I also see the blame on the Republican party for the past 8 years in the White House. But this economic problem started within the past 2 years. So who controlled Washington for the past 2 years?? Democrats have. This shouldn't be blamed solely on Republicans.

    September 29, 2008 at 11:14 pm |
  43. Frank O

    It was a sad day in America, what the terrorists could not do on 9-11, Congress did with a handful of votes; bring the country to its knees. Wow. Shame on the Oval office for not taking the lead and communicating the issues and the fix clearly to the American people. Shame on Congress for not putting the country first, instead of their elections.
    By the way, shame on the media as well for calling it a “$700B Bailout” for its shock value. It should not cost anything close to $700B, nor is it a bailout. You know better.
    Instead, today alone it has cost $1.2T. Wait until tomorrow.
    It’s time for all of us to be America first, and everything else second.

    September 29, 2008 at 11:14 pm |
  44. Maria Bright

    My husband and I are home owners, and we just put our house on the market 10 days ago. The only reason we are selling our home is because we will be relocating to another state in less than a month with plans to purchase a house over there and do not want the burden of having two mortgages. My question is should we pull our house out of the market and just have our home rented out. I am 29 years old with a bachelor’s degree and my husband is 28 years old and an E-7 in the U.S. Army. Our credit score is well above 700. Is it a wise choice to sale our home at this time in regards to the recent Bailout failure?
    Maria

    September 29, 2008 at 11:12 pm |
  45. Rick Dallas, TX

    Congress needs to get back to work in the morning like the majority of their constituants.

    September 29, 2008 at 11:12 pm |
  46. M. Shah

    I can't believe they get to go home for the Jewish holidays. I'm a newly-graduated physician. After years of studying, hundreds of thousands in student loan debt and long (sometimes thankless) hours in hospital call-rooms, I wonder if I can just say "Too bad, Sick Patient, you may be dying, but I have the right to go home for the holidays!". The average citizen is not guaranteed time off to practice their faith - why should congress?

    September 29, 2008 at 11:11 pm |
  47. Paul

    I am retired and have my investments in Vanguard. The hard truth is that my investments increased in value by $1,000 today and I'm ready to jump back into the stock market when it turns around, and it will. The key is to have some clue as to how to handle your investments and, if you don't, find help.

    The 1.2 trillion lost in the market today is paper which will come back. The 700 billion that our Government wants to spend are real dollars that, once committed, will increase an already staggering level of debt on this country that will be borne by our children and grandchildren.

    I firmly believe that "Main Street" can get through this without the bailout and the country will be stronger for it. What would really help is the media not trying to scare the hell out of everyone to sell papers and draw eyeballs.

    September 29, 2008 at 11:11 pm |
  48. Maggie

    Why doesn't the Sec of the Treasury contact the third world reknown economists featured on Lou Dobbs and get some ideas on how to attack the problem, re-write the bill and get on with it!

    get some advice from people who know what they're talking about and quit expecting the politians to agree (they won't and we're going to suffer regardless)

    get moving

    September 29, 2008 at 11:11 pm |
  49. Patrick Miller

    Boy. If you look at the history of Fannie and Freddie... go to 2004 and all of the hearings are available. The Dems blocked legislation and lamblasted republicans for trying to get additional regulations. Now Pelosi and the top Dem thugs point fingers when they could have voted it in themselves. Everyone out there is to blame. So, as usual they will enjoy thier salaries, vote themselves raises, let us take the hit, and try to make us swallow that they are working for us. I am just sick.

    September 29, 2008 at 11:08 pm |
  50. Christina

    I am most worried about the older Americans like my folks who turn 71 in January and will be forced to start drawing from their retirement accounts while they are at their lowest point. Why doesn't anyone make an effort to protect this at risk group? Simply suspending the tax requirement to draw from their account will keep them from having to lose everything they worked their whole lives for. It would give them a chance to try and wait this stock crisis out. It would also help the market if they left their money in.

    September 29, 2008 at 11:07 pm |
1 2 3 4 5