October 2nd, 2008
01:45 PM ET

Steny Hoyer on bailout vote

[cnn-photo-caption image=http://i2.cdn.turner.com/cnn/2008/images/10/02/art.stenyhoyer.jpg caption="House Majority Leader Steny Hoyer, speaks to the press in his office on the financial market turmoil on Capitol Hill, Wednesday."]Deirdre Walsh
CNN Capitol Hill Producer

House Majority Leader Steny Hoyer, D-Md, told reporters "on our side I think we're not losing substantial votes."

He said Republicans are still trying to add votes and "we're now assessing where members are."

He was clearly still unhappy about the process of having the Senate force this package on the House, but blamed Senate Republicans. "I deeply regret that the Senate refused to pass this. This was largely, I understand from Senator Reid, the refusal by Republicans to pay for tax cuts."

Hoyer expected "minimal" losses from conservative House Democrats known as "blue dogs." Hoyer pointed out that 25 of the 44 blue dogs voted for the bailout on Monday and do have concerns about the tax piece. "They don't like and I don't like the fact that the Senate jammed us, and put it on this bill in the end." But Hoyer added, he believes these blue dogs who already voted for it will still support the package.

Hoyer backed away from his statement yesterday that 100 Republican votes are needed (65 Rs voted for it on Mon). "We need a significantly greater number of Republicans. In other words, I don't want to put an arbitrary number on it." But Hoyer added quickly, "we may lose people and I've informed the Republican leadership that that may be the case."

He reiterated his pledge from yesterday about not proceeding before they have the votes. "I'm going to be pretty confident that we have sufficient votes to pass this before we put this on the floor."

Asked about the odds of the House taking up the bailout bill tonight, Hoyer said "I don't think very large." [note – House Rules Committee will meet at 4pm to set rule for debate and vote for Friday consideration on the House floor so this is still heading for Friday vote]

On calls to his office -before the vote on Monday it was 6-1 against the bailout. Since Monday he said the calls have shifted to 3-1 against. “I think people saw Monday it had a direct impact on them.”

Filed under: 360° Radar • Bailout Turmoil • Deirdre Walsh • Economy
soundoff (20 Responses)
  1. Annie Kate

    I hope the house will pass the bailout. I don't think anyone really wants a depression and everyone I see commenting seems to believe life will not change for them if the bailout is not passed – but it could in the form of unemployment. Then there is just that many more people in the sad shape the people being foreclosed on are in. Let's stop the bleeding and then fix the system.

    Annie Kate
    Birmingham AL

    October 2, 2008 at 9:54 pm |
  2. Ken

    I do not need any more than the two credit cards I presently have. I have been vigorously trying to pay them down and need not apply for any more. I own older vehicles which still run well and are paid off. I do not need to go into debt to satisfy my social standing in the neighborhood, regardless of the new neighbors that moved in with two beemers and a home now in foreclosure. I do not have one hundred thousand dollars in the bank in any way shape or form so raising the FDIC ins. limit is a joke to me and my constituents. I manage my household economy to the best of my ability and do not look outside of my home for help when times get tough. I simply cut back spending and increase revenue in the form of hours worked (when available). Funny how that works for me huh? Sooooo..call me crazy but bailing out a banking system and fat cat bankers and their buddies whom have been trying to pick my pockets with sneaky fees for the past twenty years, who by the way have been making money on my money seems ludicrous!! Especially with a bill full of pork! Remove the pork and MAYBE we will think about it!

    October 2, 2008 at 9:40 pm |
  3. pete

    I say no to bailout of wallstreet, It will not do much for ecomony .

    The average American well still not be able to spend money on any thing but bills that they have and the gas, their mortages and food , untlies ..Amercian people have no extra money to spend and the bail out does nothing for that. so money is not going move and well still be at same place that we are now.


    October 2, 2008 at 6:30 pm |
  4. Ryan

    Screw the bailout!!!! Here is the real deal of what is going on. Remember back in the 90's when we were really prosperous?? Well these greedy CEO's let banks give out these high mortgages that people shouldn't have been able to afford?? That's all coming back and hitting their multi-million CEO bonus's. I DO NOT want my tax money to bail out these greedy biggets because of some unwise business decisions they made. Let them fail, let them fall, because when they do some other company (whom is more financially stable and responsible) is going to buy them up. Thus the economy will stablize because someone with sound financial planning will be in charge. This is called a "Market Correction"

    October 2, 2008 at 6:22 pm |
  5. SW in MI

    Tallk about greed!!! Does this bailout do anything about the big oil companies that are screwing us? If gas was $1.50 a gallon this ecomony would turn around in a second! Instead of paying more than $600 a month on gas, people might be able to make their mortgage payments.

    Also, what's the point of raising the FDIC insurance limits to $250,000? The only people who have that kind of money are on Wall Street, the CEO's with "golden parachutes" and the fat cats in Washington. I'm with Larry-screw the bailout!!!!

    October 2, 2008 at 6:05 pm |
  6. Mike in WI

    NO bail out. This doesn't do anything to stop it from happening again. When my business (truck owner operator) went in the toilet because of fuel prices and the inability to pass on cost NOBODY bailed me out. They just continued to pass bills that made it worse. IE Ultra low sulfur diesel. AMT. self-employment tax. Yes I grossed 95k last year BUT it cost me 78k and I still have to pay 14% of the gross for social security. How is it that the fat cats on capital hill think that I'm the wealthy?

    October 2, 2008 at 5:36 pm |
  7. Dawn

    America...think twice before you vote for either John McSame or Barack Nobama. They have both threatened our futures by supporting the Robbery Bill. They both love to preach to us about change and helping the struggling American, but both are offering more of the same failed Buchenomics. Vote Nader and vote for the People.

    October 2, 2008 at 5:27 pm |
  8. Annette Bellock

    I think that all the CEOs and people who who made millions benefiting from these mortgage loans, etc. need to come together and put their millions together to bail the economy out! Why should we have to pay for the greedy whao made millions on these loans.

    October 2, 2008 at 3:57 pm |
  9. Lisa

    So much for caring about Main Street. Wall Street, on the other hand ...
    Not a one of them on Capitol Hill can be trusted to care about millions of people they represent ... just the millions of dollars of a handful. Adding additions to a – as a previous poster called it "wealthfare" bailout bill meant specifically for financial institutions is a slap in the face to those of us on Main Street. And it still doesn't address from what I've gathered CEO golden parachutes. So how much more is this "wealthfare" actually going to cost us ... who will need welfare as a result.

    October 2, 2008 at 3:25 pm |
  10. larry

    Please!! No $$ going to that supposed mecca of community organizers known as ACORN; they are just a source of $$ and henchmen for obama.

    October 2, 2008 at 3:20 pm |
  11. Bruce Callen

    I think the bailout bill should be known as the "Wealthfare" bill....intended to keep the wealthy from falling into the lowly middle class bracket. It's too bad the impoverished couldn't get this much attention.

    October 2, 2008 at 3:14 pm |
  12. miles

    For each Member of the House of Representatives: before you vote on what the Senate passed, why doesn't your leadership tell us taxpayers just where these billions are coming from? – – – like in an invoice each taxpayer will receive in the mail?; or by shifting dollars from other government run and backed programs: or merely by printing the money? Also, how can any of our representatives vote on a bill that contains millions for, for example, distilleries in the Caribbean, etc (as is contained in the Senate passed version)? I'm ready for a new set of elected officials all the way around come 11-4.

    October 2, 2008 at 3:00 pm |
  13. Larry Masterson

    I have been unable to reach my congressman over the internet. I believe this lack of access is a story worth reporting on.

    October 2, 2008 at 2:52 pm |
  14. FJ Martinez

    Part of me says let the "Sodom and Gomorrah of Wall Street take the hit."

    October 2, 2008 at 2:42 pm |
  15. Jay from Ga.

    During the previous six years, the Bush administration, as well as Sen. McCain and others, warned of a potential financial crisis if Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac weren't reigned in from their very liberal lending policies. But those warnings were met with visceral attacks from leading Democrats such as Barney Frank, who suggested that managing Fannie and Freddie responsibly amounted to being against poor people. It’s no wonder they defended government involvement in the private mortgage business so vociferously: Fannie and Freddie were heavily subsidizing the re-election campaigns of Rep. Frank and Sens Christopher Dodd and Barack Obama and others. But even worse, since the scandal broke it has been revealed that former Clinton administration officials such as Franklin Raines and Jamie Gorelick were paid tens of millions of dollars for holding executive positions at Fannie and Freddie. So in addition to providing a campaign war chest for House and Senate Democrats, it also was used as a personal piggy bank for former Clinton administration officials needing a soft landing. This is business as usual in fascist totalitarian governments around the world. Cronies of the government's leadership get rich off the nation’s treasury while its citizens share what is left. And in those corrupt nations, just as it was
    in the case of Fannie and Freddie, it’s all done in the name of helping the poor.

    October 2, 2008 at 2:17 pm |
  16. Sharon Kitchen

    When those that are elected to make laws ,oversee wrongs agianst laws and hold hearings of wrongs committed by whoever committs them,then go out and decide to give companys corporate welfare so that those company CEO can be called "fat cats"(some call it the Golden Parachute), off the general Amercian worker -who does not become rich........it is time to realy wonder who to vote for next.
    If this is what comes to us as the "bail out" alot of people will need to take the time to go over the "new" "wonderful-not" plan and then think long and hard about all the decissions they make.Where to buy groceries, if to purchase a new vehicle,or keep the very old one running,by clothing ar keep patching the old stuff of go dumpster diving in the wealthy neighborhoods,apt. or live all together in a house with several families,so that at least there is a roof over everyones head.in otherwords how desperate is this government going to make the vast majority of Americans feel.We know the wealthy will only get wealthier...One real good question would be, what does this government mean to me?Before everything went south I imagine the answer would be alot different.I've heard it said that folks think if it gets bad enough they will move into Alaska or Canada. Time to move yet...........

    October 2, 2008 at 2:13 pm |
  17. Sandy, Arkansas

    I am still againist it and get more so with all the additions (pork barrel spending) tacked onto this bill. No one who voted fro this in the Senate could have read the almost 500 pages. Why not pass a clean bill or no bill at all. We need leaders who do not try to force unconnected issues into bills. We need a line item veto and a President with a steady hand and guts enough to say enough is enough and we are going to balance the budget...just as all our citizens need to do in their own lives. That is not what we get...we just get more reckless spending and more debt.

    October 2, 2008 at 1:59 pm |
  18. Cindy

    How can Steny blame the republicans when the dems run congress? If they did their job and got all of their members behind the bill then they wouldn't have even needed the republican vote. They look the other way on that don't they? 95 dems voted against it, almost as many as the reps who voted against it. No use pointing fingers when they failed too.


    October 2, 2008 at 1:59 pm |
  19. larry

    Screw the bailout!!

    October 2, 2008 at 1:58 pm |
  20. Carlos

    Why does the government regulate how credit card companies charge interest rates on credit cards. 12%, 21, 28 %. It is highway robbery.

    October 2, 2008 at 1:53 pm |