The bad bill passes the Senate,but what about the alternatives?

Ian Welsh’s piece on Firedoglake raises legitimate questions about the plan being approved, 75-24 in the Senate as I write this, while asking voters to go out and demand that Congress consider the alternatives being proposed by members of the House Progressive Caucus.

Here is his brief, but on-the-mark critique on the bailout:

On the substance of the matter at hand, of course, it isn’t much changed. Increasing how much the FDIC insures is good, but something the FDIC could have done itself at Presidential order, it has the authority (and IRAs were already insured to $250,000). As “concessions” go, that’s very very little since Obama or Bush could have just said “make it so”. Adding in letting the FDIC borrow infinitely from treasury is also good, but it’s an administrative detail, the guarantee was already there.

There’s still no bankruptcy protection for ordinary people. The treasury secretary can still spend money on any asset he wants, pay whatever he wants, sell it for whatever he wants and doesn’t have to take an equity or bond share if he does, and if does do it can’t take voting stock but must take non-voting stock. Executive compensation restrictions are a joke, just “pay a little bit more tax on your pay” and overall there’s nothing in here, nothing at all, which would stop banks from continuing to engage in the same practices as got them here. That’s insane. This isn’t even closing the barn door once the horses are all out, this is buying new horses and deliberately leaving the barn door open.

Bottom line: a bad bill which has been larded up with various legislators pet bills to get the votes necessary to pass. Everything I’m hearing says it will easily make it through the Senate. The real fight remains in the house.

As for the alternatives, he says this:

There are currently two bills being worked on in the House as alternatives to the Paulson-Obama bill. The first is the DeFazio bill, which is intended to fix the banking system by providing, not a bailout, but insolvency relief. The second is being put together by Rep. David Scott and Rep. Doggett, with the aid of economist James K. Galbraith, and is intended to help ordinary people by creating a modern version of the Home Owner’s Loan Corporation (HOLC) to take over mortgages and keep people in their homes with reasonable serviceable mortgages. Also working to turn
these bills into something that helps all Americans are Rep. Elijah Cummings and Rep. Lloyd Doggett.

Each bill by itself is incomplete, together with some work they could make a good, complete, humane solution to financial and economic meltdown which is also acceptable to enough Republicans to pass.

I want to mention the coverage of the deliberations, which has left the alternatives out of the discussion and has spent most of its time talking about the politics, the process, the game of partisan manuevering. Even liberal TV personalities like Keith Olbermann and Rachel Maddow have lost sight — to some degree — of what this bailout really is and have ceased asking whether the alternatives might work better.

Democratic critics

Donald Payne, the Democrat from Newark and one of the House of Representatives most progressive members, outlines what he thinks needs to be included in a bailout plan. According to PolitickerNJ, Payne, who voted against the $700 billion package joining 94 other Democrats, said

he would need to see significant changes benefiting low income Americans
and workers before he could support it on a second pass.

“We have not extended unemployment benefits or mortgage relief,” Payne said
moments ago in an appearance on MSNBC.

The veteran congressman acknowledged there is no question the economy is in
crisis mode, but insisted on seeing stronger bottom up measures.

“This is still in progress,” he said.

The comments from plan opponents like Payne and U.S. Reps. Peter DeFazio, of Oregon, Marcy Kaptur, of Ohio, and Steve Rothman, of Bergen County, make it clear that the supposed concensus did not break down only because of concerns from conservatives. Any bailout needs to be structured so that the prime beneficiaries are average folk.

I wish I could afford the ticket

This is a show and a half — no, more than that, much more than that:

Billy Joel and Bruce Springsteen will do a benefit concert for Senator Barack Obama’s campaign and the Democratic National Committee next month at the Hammerstein Ballroom in New York City on Oct. 16.

Mr. Obama will be appearing on stage as well for the event, which is set for the day after his debate with Senator John McCain at Hofstra University on Long Island.

The concert was being billed by Obama fund-raisers as the first joint concert for Mr. Joel and Mr. Springsteen, although they have appeared together on stage at least once before in 1987 during a benefit concert for homeless children at Madison Square Garden with Paul Simon, among others.

Tickets for the fund-raiser, which is slated to be Mr. Obama’s last in the New York area, are not cheap. Balcony seats are going for $500; a “premiere seat” costs $2,500; and a “lounge ticket” is $10,000.

Detour to remain until December

I took this picture this morning with my cell phone (I pulled over to the side of the road) before I came into work and then made a quick call to the Middlesex County Engineering Department to find out what was happening with the bridge replacement. I take this route everyday — like so many in town — and thought it was time to offer an update. Here is the update, which will run in Thursday’s paper:

Drivers on Ridge Road in Monmouth Junction will face another three months of detours while Middlesex County finishes work on the bridge over a small stream.

Ron Sensor, of the county Engineering Department, said Lucas Bros. of Manalapan is making progress on the $580,980 project that began during the summer.

The project includes replacing brick arch, widening the roadway from 27 feet to 32 feet and adding a sidewalk across the span.