WASHINGTON, Jan. 9, 2009
Key Lawmaker Eyes Bailout Bill Changes
Rep. Barney Frank Expects Conditions To Be Imposed On Funds To Benefit Struggling Homeowners
-
Rep. Barney Frank (www.house.gov)
-
In-Depth Meltdown Primer Questions and answers regarding various aspects of the current economic crisis.
-
Timeline Financial Meltdown Track major events that lead to one of the most tumultuous times in Wall Street's history.
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."
Therefore, Attkisson reports, more than three months into the bailout, the panel "still does not know what the banks are doing with taxpayer money."Click here to view the Treasury Dept.'s December bailout report.
"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."
© MMIX, CBS Interactive Inc. All Rights Reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten, or redistributed. The Associated Press contributed to this report.
More From U.S.
Best-selling author Mitch Albom on his first nonfiction work since "Tuesdays with Morrie."
- 1
- 2
- 3
- 4
- 5
- next
See all 82 CommentsThat 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.
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).
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.
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.
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.
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.
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.
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.
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.
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.
More blatant lies --- Bush isn''''''''''''''''t getting the second half of the TARP and we will see what it was supposed to be used for.
----------------------------------
--------------------------------------
--
------
Posted by misha128 at 09:57 PM : Jan 09, 2009
You mean the imperial commie WE! ...
Posted by TexHillGirl at 10:02 PM : Jan 09, 2009
NO --- WE THE PEOPLE
Time ti sing for Rowdy
Here a COMMIE
... There a COMMIE
...... Everywhere a COMMIE COMMIE
Posted by TexHillGirl at 09:53 PM : Jan 09, 2009
Bush acted to protect the world -- wrong -- the loads bought by the world are still toxic. the only beneficiaries so far are the banks. Even those grocery stores are not getting loans from the banks because Paulson and Bush made the worst deal in the free world with the Banks -- The Brits required much more of the banks including a higher rate of return.
More blatant lies --- Bush isn''t getting the second half of the TARP and we will see what it was supposed to be used for.
Posted by TexHillGirl at 08:15 PM : Jan 09, 2009
Actually Bush isn''t getting the second half of the tarp funds he spent all he has -- and Bernacke is unlikely to be an accomplice as he will still be in office after Bush leaves --
Ta! Ta! Laters...
Posted by TexHillGirl
************************
Dinner date? OMG, what did you do kidnapp the pizza delivery guy?
Posted by DebinOK1 at 08:25 PM : Jan 09, 2009
Never mind that, when the heck did she have time to get ready for a dinner date?
Posted by TexHillGirl at 07:54 PM : Jan 09, 2009
Wrong again -- cases that do not make the list have a tendency to be announced as denied on Monday --
---"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."---
I thought how it went down was that Paulson was ideologically opposed to giving money with the Government overseeing its use, such that the banks were discouraged but not forbidden from spending it on themselves, and encouraged but not required to lend it out - and instead some of them have used it to acquire smaller banks and some don''t seem to have done anything with it.
If the stock market''s stagnant and they''re not lending it, real estate is flat, development projects and venture capital is flat, they must still have the money unless they''ve spent it on themselves, right?
There''s kind of like this outrage because the promise was that if they got bailout money, the stock market wouldn''t tank and credit would thaw, but neither has happened. It''s sort of that thing that Ali Velshi is talking about where people are saying like Gimme My Money Back, like there''s been a fraud perpetrated on the public or something.
Maybe the reality isn''t that sinister though - like wasn''t the idea underpinning the bailout that this recession is analogous to the Great Depression and that the GD could have been avoided with an injection of liquidity? That liquidity didn''t actually solve the problem, doesn''t that instead indicate that illiquidity is maybe but a symptom of the illness rather than the illness itself?
I think that''s going to be happening a lot with the stimulus package - like it may be unavoidable, just like the way sometimes doctors can''t sometimes find out what''s wrong except by process of elimination (?)
- 1
- 2
- 3
- 4
- 5
- next
See all 82 Comments