Couric & Co.
September 29, 2008 7:22 PM

Sticks, Carrots And A Failed Bailout

By
Jill Jackson
Topics
Capitol Notes
Jill Jackson is a Capitol Hill field producer for CBS News.
Early this morning, members of the House were starting to think they might actually pass an economic rescue package hammered out in late night negotiations over the weekend. But democrats and republicans were not going to take any vote for granted – especially when the bill would commit up to $700 billion of taxpayer money. Plus, it's an election year and members are getting hundreds of calls and e-mails from constituents urging their congressmen to vote "no."

Both democratic and republican leadership committed their support to the final package. But everyone knew the vote would be tight. And that's why there are whips in the House – members of leadership who count the votes and use carrots and sticks to get members to vote a certain way. Sometimes it's arm-twisting. And sometimes they just a promise of a favor down the line. Sometimes it's an appeal to party unity.

After three hours of debate on the bailout, it was time for a 15-minute vote. Members were keenly aware that voting one way could cause more trouble in the economy, perhaps even a deep recession. Vote the other way and it's a Wall Street bailout. Republican Congressman Chip Pickering of Texas called it a "legacy vote."

As the clock started to tick down, republican minority whip Roy Blunt made the rounds on the republican side of the chamber. He would casually walk around and sit with a member or two, whisper something in their ear and then get back up. His deputy whip Eric Cantor did the same.

On the democrats' side of the chamber, Majority Whip Steny Hoyer and conference chair Rahm Emanuel ran around trying to manage their party's vote since they did not want democrats to vote overwhelmingly for the package. Speaker Nancy Pelosi's made clear that this bailout, or economic recovery package, had to pass with both democrats and republicans.

The vote moved slowly. Pelosi and Minority Leader John Boehner had one quick exchange in the front of the chamber. The Speaker looked like she wanted folks to vote faster. Boehner just shrugged.

And then, the vote froze at 207 yeas to 226 nays. The clock had run out, but democrats kept the vote open hoping enough republicans would change their votes. The tension spiked when it was clear that votes would change, but only by two votes over to the nay category.

Members stared grimly up at the tallies. Democrats, along with Pelosi and Rep. Barney Frank, crowded around the leadership and committee tables and stayed pretty stationary. Hoyer crossed over to Blunt on the republican side to get a read on if there was any hope left.

When it was clear the whips could whip no more. The vote was closed. Final vote: 205 yeas to 228 nays.

Add a Comment See all 27 Comments
by stormyhailey October 2, 2008 6:06 PM EDT
No to bail out! The gov taught us in school, USA is a capitalist country, it is all about the mighty dollar you make it any way you can. The Fannie/Freddie need to lower interest rates n stop doing the floating interest rates to set people up for failure. Recall as many foreclosures as possible n refinance the houses the honest right way, for once. Products n services should be valued for what they really are, instead of valued for greed. The gov should stop lending money out to other countries as if we got it to give. My mom always said to take care of home first. That should be the first law for USA to live by. The following should occur: CEO, etc. should invest their paycheck n 35 mil bonus that they receive every quarter back into their co. Their personal items, jets, condos, homes, etc. should be put up as collateral. Families that are in foreclosure homes should be evaluated at the correct cost-n taxes should be lowered, put what they are behind at end of note, n start them afresh on a 4.9 fixed rate for the next 15 years. Stop overpricing these matchbox homes that only cost 20 to 44 thousand to build. When I applied for a credit card, these same banks deny others n me because of credit score. I AM SORRY STOCK MARKET - I AS A TAX PAYING CITIZEN DON''T CONSIDER YOU A GOOD INVESTMENT FOR MY TAX MONEY - APPLICATION DENIED - SEE US TAX PAYERS WHEN YOU GET YOUR CREDIT n ETHICS SCORE UP. THERE IS NO APPEAL PROCESS.
Reply to this comment
by hieroweb October 1, 2008 12:09 AM EDT
So we should be okay with a government that comes out and tells us this bill needs to be passed right NOW without any checks and balances in place? Does anyone have any idea why a government would come out and make such an unbelievable request? Why are they trying to shove this down the throat of every American? Could it be that Paulson wants to take care of his own base? Paulson who is an ex Chairman and Chief Executive Officer of Goldman Sachs with ties to AIG and other recently taken over companies. Is the man pulling the strings? It seems that the hurry to get this bill approved is more about not finding out certain details about Paulson%u2019s past and his affiliations to big business then it is about helping our country. This administration has never been up front with the American people so why would they start now. Americans should be in an UPROAR over what is going on right now! If this isn''t proof that Bush stands for BIG BUSINESS then what the hell does?
Reply to this comment
by dennaberri September 30, 2008 6:47 PM EDT
OMG - I am so sorry my post was added so many times. This is a glitch and I only meant for it to be posted once.
I apologize!
Reply to this comment
by dennaberri September 30, 2008 5:37 PM EDT
Ensuring "Main Street" is protected
Here''s my bailout proposal...
The Federal government should take the tax payers money to pay off the tax payers high risk mortgages.
The money - current market value of home - would still go to the financial institution where the mortgage is held, which will help them out of their situations.
The Fed. Government could then put a Fed "lien" on the property - again based on current market value. Tax payers could pay off the "lien" every year as an addition to their property taxes. Instead of making 2 payments a year, we could make 4, two of which would go the Fed. Gov.
When the property is sold, the buyer could have the choice of taking over "lien" or taking out a conventional mortgage which would pay off the Fed. %u201Clien%u201D. The seller would only be entitled to the equity.
This bailout would put cash in the hands of the consumer, thereby sparking the economy and hopefully lifting the hiring freeze. CEO%u2019s will not get large bonuses from the checks the government writes and the government will still eventually %u201Cget most, if not all%u201D of the money back.
Reply to this comment
by dennaberri September 30, 2008 4:46 PM EDT
Ensuring "Main Street" is protected
Here''s my bailout proposal...
The Federal government should take the tax payers money to pay off the tax payers high risk mortgages.
The money - current market value of home - would still go to the financial institution where the mortgage is held, which will help them out of their situations.
The Fed. Government could then put a Fed "lien" on the property - again based on current market value. Tax payers could pay off the "lien" every year as an addition to their property taxes. Instead of making 2 payments a year, we could make 4, two of which would go the Fed. Gov.
When the property is sold, the buyer could have the choice of taking over "lien" or taking out a conventional mortgage which would pay off the Fed. %u201Clien%u201D. The seller would only be entitled to the equity.
This bailout would put cash in the hands of the consumer, thereby sparking the economy and hopefully lifting the hiring freeze. CEO%u2019s will not get large bonuses from the checks the government writes and the government will still eventually %u201Cget most, if not all%u201D of the money back.
Reply to this comment
by khhammerle September 30, 2008 4:30 PM EDT
Where is Pelosi''s resignation. In most other countries She would have submitted it this morning as the first order of business. Of course acceptance of personal responsibility for failure in not in her or the liberals of either parties list of proper behavior.
Reply to this comment
by khhammerle September 30, 2008 4:25 PM EDT
The so-called leaders of both parties are not in touch with the real people out there. That is the people who did not make or take buydown or subprime loans, their house reflected its real value as a home when purchased and are still able to pay their bills because they did not overextend themselves. Any thing that transfers money from these people to the gamblers and unqualified borrowers is morally and ethicaly wrong approaching the level of felony fraud even if imposed by the government. They made their bed and should be made to lie in it. No ammount of the Chicken Little chant the sky is falling, the sky is falling by self-serving politicians and media talking heads can change the truth. The groups advocating a goverment bailout gambled and don''t want to accept their losses.
Reply to this comment
by dennaberri September 30, 2008 4:19 PM EDT
Ensuring "Main Street" is protected
Here''s my bailout proposal...
The Federal government should take the tax payers money to pay off the tax payers high risk mortgages.
The money - current market value of home - would still go to the financial institution where the mortgage is held, which will help them out of their situations.
The Fed. Government could then put a Fed "lien" on the property - again based on current market value. Tax payers could pay off the "lien" every year as an addition to their property taxes. Instead of making 2 payments a year, we could make 4, two of which would go the Fed. Gov.
When the property is sold, the buyer could have the choice of taking over "lien" or taking out a conventional mortgage which would pay off the Fed. %u201Clien%u201D. The seller would only be entitled to the equity.
This bailout would put cash in the hands of the consumer, thereby sparking the economy and hopefully lifting the hiring freeze. CEO%u2019s will not get large bonuses from the checks the government writes and the government will still eventually %u201Cget most, if not all%u201D of the money back.
Reply to this comment
by dennaberri September 30, 2008 4:09 PM EDT
Ensuring "Main Street" is protected
Here''s my bailout proposal...
The Federal government should take the tax payers money to pay off the tax payers high risk mortgages.
The money - current market value of home - would still go to the financial institution where the mortgage is held, which will help them out of their situations.
The Fed. Government could then put a Fed "lien" on the property - again based on current market value. Tax payers could pay off the "lien" every year as an addition to their property taxes. Instead of making 2 payments a year, we could make 4, two of which would go the Fed. Gov.
When the property is sold, the buyer could have the choice of taking over "lien" or taking out a conventional mortgage which would pay off the Fed. %u201Clien%u201D. The seller would only be entitled to the equity.
This bailout would put cash in the hands of the consumer, thereby sparking the economy and hopefully lifting the hiring freeze. CEO%u2019s will not get large bonuses from the checks the government writes and the government will still eventually %u201Cget most, if not all%u201D of the money back.
Reply to this comment
by dennaberri September 30, 2008 4:09 PM EDT
Ensuring "Main Street" is protected
Here''s my bailout proposal...
The Federal government should take the tax payers money to pay off the tax payers high risk mortgages.
The money - current market value of home - would still go to the financial institution where the mortgage is held, which will help them out of their situations.
The Fed. Government could then put a Fed "lien" on the property - again based on current market value. Tax payers could pay off the "lien" every year as an addition to their property taxes. Instead of making 2 payments a year, we could make 4, two of which would go the Fed. Gov.
When the property is sold, the buyer could have the choice of taking over "lien" or taking out a conventional mortgage which would pay off the Fed. %u201Clien%u201D. The seller would only be entitled to the equity.
This bailout would put cash in the hands of the consumer, thereby sparking the economy and hopefully lifting the hiring freeze. CEO%u2019s will not get large bonuses from the checks the government writes and the government will still eventually %u201Cget most, if not all%u201D of the money back.
Reply to this comment
See all 27 Comments
.

Follow Couric & Co.

Scroll Left
Scroll Right More »
CBS News on Facebook