Key Lawmaker Eyes Bailout Bill Changes

Rep. Barney Frank Expects Conditions To Be Imposed On Funds To Benefit Struggling Homeowners

(CBS/AP)  A key lawmaker said Friday he expects the House to act soon to impose conditions on any new release of the second $350 billion in federal bailout funds, with a mandate that between $40 billion and $100 billion go to help struggling borrowers avoid foreclosure.

Rep. Barney Frank, who heads the House Financial Services Committee, issued an outline of his proposal to attach strings to spending of the money by either the Bush administration or the incoming Obama government. It also slaps strict limits on executive compensation - both for companies receiving new federal money and those that already have - including a ban on any bonuses for the 25 highest paid executives.

The banning of some bonuses, and relinquishing of private jets, would be applied to all banks and other institutions receiving bailout money, as they were in the loan agreements with General Motors Corp. and Chrysler LLC last month.

The new conditions also would include a better method for the government to track whether banks are using the money to boost lending.

"We will trust but verify," Frank told reporters on Capitol Hill.

In addition, the Treasury Department would be required to quickly make funds available for smaller community banks, which Frank says have gotten short shrift under the federal program.

For months, Democrats in Congress have lashed out at the Bush administration's mortgage aid programs, saying the government needs to do more to help tens of thousands of home borrowers avert foreclosure. Rather than just spending more billions to inject capital into banks, they have argued, the federal rescue dollars also should be channeled into programs for modifying mortgages into more affordable loans.

Frank, D-Mass., said Friday that President-elect Barack Obama's team had indicated to him they planned to retain Sheila Bair as chairman of the Federal Deposit Insurance Corp. Bair, a Bush appointee, also had criticized as insufficient the administration's mortgage programs. Frank's proposal would expand the role of the FDIC in overseeing the government programs.

Frank said his bill could be voted on by the House as soon as next week.

Acknowledging that the proposal may not clear the hurdle of Senate adoption or be accepted by the Bush White House, Frank said that if it passed the House with a large majority, he'd be willing to accept the word of the Obama team "that they will act as if it were law."

Obama's team is broadening the mission of the $700 billion financial rescue, aiming to unfreeze credit for homeowners, consumers, small businesses and local governments.

The Bush administration hasn't asked for the second $350 billion, which it would legally be unable to spend in the 11 days remaining before leaving office, Frank noted.

In a memo to House members this week, Frank said conditions on the money were needed "because there has been widespread unhappiness with the failure of this administration to use any of the first $350 billion for mitigation of foreclosures and because money given to banks under this program flowed with virtually no strings attached."

Earlier Friday, Elizabeth Warren, the head of a congressional panel overseeing the Treasury's $700 billion bailout program, said lawmakers need to "take a very hard look" at how banks have used the money.

CBS News correspondent Sharyl Attkisson reports that Warren's panel asked the Treasury Department 45 questions but says Treasury "did not provide complete answers" and "failed to address a number of questions at all."

---

Click here to view the Treasury Dept.'s December bailout report.

---

Therefore, Attkisson reports, more than three months into the bailout, the panel "still does not know what the banks are doing with taxpayer money."

"I'm shocked that we have to ask these questions," said Warren, who is a Harvard law professor. "But what I will say is that I'm not giving up on this. The best news is that these questions have gotten a lot of attention and a lot of people are demanding answers and when a lot of people demand answers, things start to change."

[payasyougo]

Take a good look at the photo w/ this article.

That is Barney Frank.

Head of the House Financial Services Committee. That is the committee that is charged w/ making sure what has happened, doesn''t happen.

It happened on Barney Frank''s watch.

Barney Frank is the poster boy for incompetent government.

[misha128-2009]

... Why didn''''t this financial genius think to impose conditions on the FIRST $350,000,000,000 given away to banks with no accountability. ...


Posted by jbrown88881 at 09:18 AM : Jan 10, 2009

Right idea wrong target -- Bush threatened to veto the law if it did not have the loophole Paulson subsequently used. Paulson negotiated the deals (sweetheart deals when compared to those the Brits provided their banks) and Paulson circumvented the provisions in the law using the loophole demanded by BUSH or by ignoring them (ie the transparency / disclosure requirements). None of the preceding deals with the IG''s investigation that shows the Treasury Department cannot account for what it has done with significant portions of the funds and/or the terms under which they were disbursed. (Sounds like the ingredients for potential criminal prosecutions in the future).

[wardoglrs]

Folks, it''s simple.

1. Bernie Madoff starts a pyramid scheme which succeeds in generating vast sums of profit for its early investors for almost 15 years.

2. Many of Madoff''s investors are pro-Israel foundations and PACs, or individuals who donate to pro-Israel foundations and PACs.

3. The pro-Israel foundations and PACs donate heavily to the campaigns of those candidates willing to sell their souls to Israel for campaign cash.

4. THEREFORE, those pro-Israel politicians in Congress won their seats in part using stolen money.

5. THEREFORE, the Madoff pyramid, until it collapsed, was a major funding mechanism that allowed the Israeli lobby to buy the US Government for the benefit of Israel and to the detriment of the American people.

[misha128-2009]

Funny unlike you I do believe in the Constitution and clearly understand the Bush administration''''''''s attempts to subvert the Constitution for which even the Supreme Court has rebuked this administration repeatedly. Habeas Corpus for one applies to the detainees at GITMO per the Supreme Court because the Bushies arrogantly transported them to US Soil and ignored the legal consequences. Even this week the administration lost another case about keeping visitor logs private.

Posted by misha128 at 10:40 PM : Jan 09, 2009

Habaes corpus applies to US CITIZENS, it does not apply to foreign enemy combatantants!!!


Posted by TexHillGirl at 10:43 PM : Jan 09, 2009

Denying the authority of the Supreme Court and the Constitution you claim to support. Clearly you are with Bush in his attempts to subvert the Constitution.

[misha128-2009]

Posted by TexHillGirl at 10:41 PM : Jan 09, 2009

Doubtful -- as Bush has pointed out HE is the DECIDER and HE is the COMMANDER-IN-CHIEF, The orders and strategy to execute the war (different from the authorizations the war) was not shared with Congress. This administration repeatedly confirmed on numerous occasions during the Bush years that that separation was absolute.

[misha128-2009]

You see, Misha, there ARE people in this country that care about the Constitution of the United States...

Posted by TexHillGirl at 10:33 PM : Jan 09, 2009


Funny unlike you I do believe in the Constitution and clearly understand the Bush administration''s attempts to subvert the Constitution for which even the Supreme Court has rebuked this administration repeatedly. Habeas Corpus for one applies to the detainees at GITMO per the Supreme Court because the Bushies arrogantly transported them to US Soil and ignored the legal consequences. Even this week the administration lost another case about keeping visitor logs private.

[misha128-2009]

I bet you missed Congressman Conyer''s comments today, that there could be prosecution for the last 8 years in the international court. Interesting concept as Presidential pardons only are binding in the US courts.

[misha128-2009]

t''''s ok, Misha,

Posted by TexHillGirl at 10:22 PM : Jan 09, 2009

PS Those that are screeching (your preferred term) insults and providing no confirmed or confirmable information are those that are out of control.

[misha128-2009]

the USSC keep looking at the cases...

Posted by TexHillGirl at 10:22 PM : Jan 09, 2009

Cases not reported out on Friday are generally announced as NOT ACCEPTED by the court for Oral Arguments on Monday. The next case is not scheduled for hearing until Jan 23rd -- three days after the Inauguration. You knowledge of the operations of SCOTUS seems to be as limited as your understanding of most other subjects.

[misha128-2009]

Plus the California case against the electoral vote is coming up...

Posted by TexHillGirl at 07:29 PM : Jan 09, 2009

A couple of problems with that case -- *** Cheney and the Senate counted the certified electoral votes already -- And despite DJ''''''''s prediction no senator or congressman objected and stopped the proceedings. The electoral vote has been completed.

Posted by misha128

nothing can prevent obam''''s mother in law from moving into the white house

Posted by jgg00005 at 10:17 PM : Jan 09, 2009

I have no problem with that and neither apparently do those that really count (the only ones that count) in this decision -- The Obama''s.